old peeps on bikes | Page 2 | GTAMotorcycle.com

old peeps on bikes

Forum Sponsor
LePhillou said:
While you make a valid point, you can't say that you and your father represent the average 57 and 87 y old.

My father is 77, still salsa dances at salsa gatherings, has no problems walking for miles, going to the gym etc.

But i know that he isnt also representative of most 77 y olds in general.

Which is maybe why noobie might've clumsily put 50+ in the same geriatric bracket. So i get what he's saying. Definitely not at your peak at that age from a general "human lifespan" stand point
Click to expand...

ok, but who's insurance is cheaper? a person in their twenties, or a person in their 50's given similsr driving records. Im certain insurance companies have statistically analyzed this risk untold times. They know the risks.
 
The article makes a lot of assumptions about the statistics. It's undeniable that more older people dying, but to assume that's because they are bad riders is unscientific. The tale only truly gets told when accidents per miles travelled are calculated. Ask yourself who has more time to ride? Someone semi-retired who is over 60? Or someone in their 20s who works every day? Over the past 20 years motorcycle accidents have been at historic lows. It's only in recent years that there has been an average increase. The last two years in particular have been worse than the 20-year average in spite of better bikes, helmets and protective gear. It's all in the Ontario Road Safety Annual Report. The NHTSA has good numbers on it too. Beware of articles casting a pall of doom and gloom. There's usually a financial or legislative agenda behind them.
 
Over a lifetime a rider has a 1/3 chance of an accident. That means 2/3s never experience anything serious at all.
If you pulled squid deaths and serious injury from the stats it would point very differently.

ABS alone has safed many injuries.
 
boyoboy said:
Im 57, my father 87. We both ride and can make shoulder checks. My father also skis at mount washington every winter.
as for vision - you pass the eye test or you dont.
and anyone over 50 has psyc problems?
and old people in cages just cause crashes?
prescription drugs will turn accidents into fatal crashes?


EDIT
I don't know where you get your "thoughts", but you need to learn to speak for yourself rather than gloom and doom 50 + older folks. No different an attitude from those who say all sport bike riders are hooligans....

Im pretty sure there are plenty of 50+ riders who could embarrass you at the race track. My father at 87, has never been involved in a motor vehicle accident ...EVER. car or bike. How about you young guys, have you got 65+ years riding and driving w/o ever being in an accident? and that is 37 years at 50 over. My mother once recalled to me my fathers first car in sudbury....it had a hand crank on the front of the car for starting, my mother would have to ask someone strong enough to crank start the engine for her when alone.....As a youngster myself (pre teens, teens) my father always had a vette in the driveway - I remember the 62 convertible, the 68 with a 3 carbs 400hp 427 4 speed convertible, and a couple 70's vettes. Just in case you think my father has never got in an accident because he rode/drove like a grand pa (pun intended). My mother did spin and hit a telephone pole rear end first (lakeshore in oakville) ...with one of the 70's. My mom was under 50 at the time.

Bash on, makes me smile.
Click to expand...

Read the first sentence.

The plus aged returner has a number of possible medical problems.

I was referring to factors that might affect some riders. If it's not you don't wear the shirt.

Even if a rider has some of the issues they can use their intelligence and or experience to offset the conditions. Experience usually beats youthful exuberance.

BTW the vision test is a "meet the minimum requirement" test. When you were four years old and I was applying for my driver's licence I vaguely recall a wall chart checkout with no peripheral or night vision tests. Has that changed?

I didn't say everyone over 50 has arthritis.

When I was on blood thinners I was advised not to ride because in the event of a crash they might not be able to control bleeding.

Older drivers only causing crashes. Sorry I meant to use the humour font.

I picture your dad something like my ex-neighbour who at 87 looked like a 57 and walked like 27.
 
LePhillou said:
While you make a valid point, you can't say that you and your father represent the average 57 and 87 y old.

My father is 77, still salsa dances at salsa gatherings, has no problems walking for miles, going to the gym etc.

But i know that he isnt also representative of most 77 y olds in general.

Which is maybe why noobie might've clumsily put 50+ in the same geriatric bracket. So i get what he's saying. Definitely not at your peak at that age from a general "human lifespan" stand point
Click to expand...

I never said 50+ I said plus aged. For different activities it means different things.

What's "Plus aged " at a Justin Beiber concert? 16?

That said if an 80 YO gets moving and grooving to a JB tune more power to them.
 
nobbie48 said:
Read the first sentence.

The plus aged returner has a number of possible medical problems.

I was referring to factors that might affect some riders. If it's not you don't wear the shirt.

Even if a rider has some of the issues they can use their intelligence and or experience to offset the conditions. Experience usually beats youthful exuberance.

BTW the vision test is a "meet the minimum requirement" test. When you were four years old and I was applying for my driver's licence I vaguely recall a wall chart checkout with no peripheral or night vision tests. Has that changed?

I didn't say everyone over 50 has arthritis.

When I was on blood thinners I was advised not to ride because in the event of a crash they might not be able to control bleeding.

Older drivers only causing crashes. Sorry I meant to use the humour font.

I picture your dad something like my ex-neighbour who at 87 looked like a 57 and walked like 27.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure if you'd call the new thing for older drivers, a "vision" test, but God willing, you'll be doing it soon enough.
 
Im 57, my father 87. We both ride and can make shoulder checks. My father also skis at mount washington every winter.
as for vision - you pass the eye test or you dont.
and anyone over 50 has psyc problems?
and old people in cages just cause crashes?
prescription drugs will turn accidents into fatal crashes?


EDIT
I don't know where you get your "thoughts", but you need to learn to speak for yourself rather than gloom and doom 50 + older folks. No different an attitude from those who say all sport bike riders are hooligans....

Im pretty sure there are plenty of 50+ riders who could embarrass you at the race track. My father at 87, has never been involved in a motor vehicle accident ...EVER. car or bike. How about you young guys, have you got 65+ years riding and driving w/o ever being in an accident? and that is 37 years at 50 over. My mother once recalled to me my fathers first car in sudbury....it had a hand crank on the front of the car for starting, my mother would have to ask someone strong enough to crank start the engine for her when alone.....As a youngster myself (pre teens, teens) my father always had a vette in the driveway - I remember the 62 convertible, the 68 with a 3 carbs 400hp 427 4 speed convertible, and a couple 70's vettes. Just in case you think my father has never got in an accident because he rode/drove like a grand pa (pun intended). My mother did spin and hit a telephone pole rear end first (lakeshore in oakville) ...with one of the 70's. My mom was under 50 at the time.

Bash on, makes me smile.

I envy you that you can still share life with your father, he sounds like a terrific man and you a good son.
 
As alluded to by others, the stats in the article are from the U.S. Others opine the fact that even with these stats, we still get low insurance rates due to our age. I'm sure here in Ontario that when what is shown in the article becomes common here, the insurance rates for the over (whatever age they choose) will go up, and it will be independent of experience, because that's the way they can make the most money.
 
boyoboy said:
ok, but who's insurance is cheaper? a person in their twenties, or a person in their 50's given similsr driving records. Im certain insurance companies have statistically analyzed this risk untold times. They know the risks.
Click to expand...

Lyndsay said:
As alluded to by others, the stats in the article are from the U.S. Others opine the fact that even with these stats, we still get low insurance rates due to our age. I'm sure here in Ontario that when what is shown in the article becomes common here, the insurance rates for the over (whatever age they choose) will go up, and it will be independent of experience, because that's the way they can make the most money.
Click to expand...

Stats are taken over a longer period of time. The boomer wave is starting to age more and more stats are coming in more and more but its not instantaneous that it changes as Lyndsay said...

Obviously a 20y old is gonna always be more expensive as 20 y olds are always gonna be full of hormones and wired to be less safe than people who have already gone through that "thrill" stage. So definitely a constant higher risk. But it seems that the trend is going upwards for another segment which will eventually drive rates slightly higher than what it historically has been at. :)
 
Flywheel said:
Didn't distracted (cellphone) driving accidents surpass impaired driving accidents in Ontario 2-3 years ago? Not sure about the fatality rates though.
Click to expand...

The interesting thing about that comparison is that there is a huge number of text / phone users on the road compared to the number of DUI drivers. The cell phone drivers only slightly outperform the DUIs in the demolition derby but have a much greater population.

In a one on one situation you are safer with the texters. Texters outvote the DUIs by a huge margin so the corrective measures can't be too severe or someone doesn't get re-elected. DUI is a criminal offense. That will never happen to the cell phone drivers.
 
hack said:
'not fat, but... Being old has its advantages as far as insurance goes.

I never hear anyone in my cohort of riders speaking desperately about bike insurance.
So... Enjoy your little 300cc ninja or whatever whilst i go on vacation on my whatever size/style bike i damn well please...

Mind you... Riding is one of my few joys seeing as i can't stay up too late and half the time i want it to my willie don't work.
So... Enjoy your 300cc bike and your boners.
Click to expand...

lmfao!!!
 
Roadghost nailed it - these articles don't take into consideration the number of miles traveled.

The young crowd with the sport bikes might travel 3000-5000 km in a good season, where as the older financially secure / retired guys might ride 20,000+.

It should be needless to say that the person riding four times the mileage (or possibly much, much more) is at a much higher risk of an accident, but that doesn't mean that they are somehow unsafe or unskilled.

Insurance rates speak for themselves.
 
My insurance at 25 was the same as my dads at 50. Clean record AZ, Liscened/insures M for 34 years. I was a liscenced/insured since 16.
 
dricked said:
My insurance at 25 was the same as my dads at 50. Clean record AZ, Liscened/insures M for 34 years. I was a liscenced/insured since 16.
Click to expand...
Do you and your dad ride the same bikes?

I'm my son is 25, licenced at 18. My ins is $950 on a 1300SS -- as an occasional rider on my policy the cheapest I could get him was $5600! So we bought him a Ninja 250 and he pays under $700 for insurance.

He is free to ride my bikes because he's fully insured on his own bike.
 
Mad Mike said:
Do you and your dad ride the same bikes?

I'm my son is 25, licenced at 18. My ins is $950 on a 1300SS -- as an occasional rider on my policy the cheapest I could get him was $5600! So we bought him a Ninja 250 and he pays under $700 for insurance.

He is free to ride my bikes because he's fully insured on his own bike.
Click to expand...

That was for me to own my 04 Zx10 as principal rider not living under the same roof. My dad had a zrx1200 but he previously owned the Zx10 and paid the same rate. It might have actually been cheaper for me by a few dollars.
 
Last edited:
I suspect the average older rider rides as few km as the average younger rider. There will, of course, be outliers.

Equating mileage to anything is not a good measure. It is much safer/easier to ride many kilometers on the highway or empty back roads then to ride them on city streets. I remember meeting a rider many years ago that rode 40000km a year. I was very impressed and figured he would be a very skilled rider. Turns out that pointing your motorcycle down an interstate and riding all day did not equate to skill.... :) Go figure....

I can hear the insurance rates speak.. they are saying "lies, damn lies then statistics..." :)


PrivatePilot said:
Roadghost nailed it - these articles don't take into consideration the number of miles traveled.

The young crowd with the sport bikes might travel 3000-5000 km in a good season, where as the older financially secure / retired guys might ride 20,000+.

It should be needless to say that the person riding four times the mileage (or possibly much, much more) is at a much higher risk of an accident, but that doesn't mean that they are somehow unsafe or unskilled.

Insurance rates speak for themselves.
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom