roadrash
Well-known member
Isn't that the same as asking what if you don't have a bike ? I was in this situation, so I rented a highway capable one.
|
|
|
RTI M2X Course, Test without highway portion
- Thread starter roadrash
- Start date
roadrash
Well-known member
Borrow a friend's, rent wherever it's available and ride to the test center, take the test where you can rent a highway capable bike etc etc ... I don't want to argue about this specific rental issue. Riding is an expensive hobby and not a requirement. If someone can't afford it or is too lazy to deal with rental, theres always driving or the transit.
Edit: I live in Newmarket, but rental was only available in North York. So I travelled and took the test in Downsview. Of course it's not the same in terms of distance from North Bay ... but there's always a way.
Last edited:
Then they should be granted a speed limited / moped licence (an ML class), not given a full M that they didn’t earn because of a technically, but then allows them (in the future) to go own/rent/ride any motorcycle under the sun, and ride it anywhere.
They don’t give you a class A licence if you don’t, can’t, or won’t fulfil the road test requirements, and that’s the way it SHOULD be. There used to be a loophole long ago that allowed people to get a full class A tractor trailer licence using a pickup truck and horse trailer for the road test, but when people started getting killed by the resulting idiots that ended up behind the wheel of semis with no business being there (because this loophole existed and was being exploited) it was rightfully closed.
This IMHO, should be treated no differently. Can’t fulfil the requirements, don’t get the full M, get an ML instead. The end.
ricplayer
Well-known member
My point is the system allows for this to happen, so why is everyone so critical of people who take advantage of it.
I don’t disagree with the point that riders should learn to ride on a 400 series highway. But some people won’t ride on highway. I don’t get all the chastising of the OP’s wife. People who live in remote areas can’t do the test because the highway could be 2 hours away.
The suggestion some else made of pulling RTI’s right to offer the low speed M2 exit test is asinine.
I don’t disagree with the point that riders should learn to ride on a 400 series highway. But some people won’t ride on highway. I don’t get all the chastising of the OP’s wife. People who live in remote areas can’t do the test because the highway could be 2 hours away.
The suggestion some else made of pulling RTI’s right to offer the low speed M2 exit test is asinine.
ricplayer
Well-known member
ML is for 50cc or less.
Talk to your MPP if you don’t like the system.
That’s all I have to say on this.
Last edited:
I will be doing my M2 Exit in a few weeks and also not very comfortable with the hwy portion they test you on but will be riding it. My question to anyone that would know would be IF you fail the hwy portion and do well with the rest would you still pass to a full M?
Trials
Well-known member
How bad of a fail are we talking here?
Relax, going fast really is easier then going slow, the roads are straighter and the bike simply reacts more quickly. Key is to be comfortable in your ability to handle the motorcycle well, then you just need to deal with cars getting in your way
and impress the tester that you can ride with confidence <- they are really looking for that.
If you fail get over it book another test and fix what you did wrong. Simple as that. Why people are so worried about taking a road test is beyond me. If you fail you are not put up against a wall and shot you go home and do it again, simple.
I laugh at riders with their M2 and panicking because they are at the end of their 5 years and if they don't pass they have no time left to re-test and will have to start over again. Why not take your full M test after the 21 month minimum and get it over with?
Maybe my 16 years of being an instructor have jaded me but people always seem to make everything difficult when it need not be.
I laugh at riders with their M2 and panicking because they are at the end of their 5 years and if they don't pass they have no time left to re-test and will have to start over again. Why not take your full M test after the 21 month minimum and get it over with?
Maybe my 16 years of being an instructor have jaded me but people always seem to make everything difficult when it need not be.
JD_PICKLE
Well-known member
Going back even further, 1973, yes I'm old, if you earned a living driving, you needed a chauffeurs licence. I was to drive a 1//2 van for deliveries.
Written test and I'm good to go. No road test, never even sat in a truck. Now I can drive a taxi right up to tractor trailer. It was up to the company to make sure you were trained properly.
Was grandfathered into a 'A' licence and then a 'Z' endorsement. Never did do a driving test.
But I agree, test center closest to your postal code, and ride/drive the roads in that area.
BigEvilDoer
Well-known member
I really don't understand people who are terrified of riding on the 400 series highways. It's not a big deal at all. If you're so panicked by it, why not arrange some practice times? Have 2 friends or family members act as blockers for you on the highway. Car in front, car behind. Get to speed. Make a lane change, move back again, and then leave the highway at first exit. You're on it for a very short amount of time.
As for "failing" the highway section -- there is no such thing. Get a copy of the M test and you'll see.
You're allowed 25 demerits total. Period. If you nail the "in-city" part, you'll have lots of demerits available for the highway.
There's really only a few minor things you need to know about the highway.
1) Merge with traffic at traffic speed. Very important. If the cars behind you need to apply their brakes because you're too slow, it's an automatic fail. You've committed a dangerous act.
2) Turn your signal on when you can see traffic on the highway. If you can see them, they can see you.
3) Proper lane blocking position.
That's it.
Thanks for the advice. Will be getting out some more for some practice runs.
FLSTC
Well-known member
I bet there weren't any students from Kapuskasing or North Bay.
RTI is pandering to riders that want an easier test.
ricplayer
Well-known member
I don’t see it as pandering, I see it as offering a service for riders that own bikes that aren’t capable of hitting highway speed.
You are entitled to your opinion obviously, but I would like to hear your solution to the gap in the system.
ML is for 50cc bikes, but there is lots of bikes larger in displacement that can’t hit safe highway speeds.
How do you suggest this situation is dealt with under the current laws?
You are entitled to your opinion obviously, but I would like to hear your solution to the gap in the system.
ML is for 50cc bikes, but there is lots of bikes larger in displacement that can’t hit safe highway speeds.
How do you suggest this situation is dealt with under the current laws?
wonderings
Well-known member
What are you nervous about with the hwy portion of the test? The speed? Being around cars at that speed?
When I did my M2 exit years ago I failed the first time around. I do blame it on the person watching... or not watching me ride. They had me get on the highway in Kitchener, I accelerated to speed and a car came up beside me matching my speed and did not move over. Car behind and did not want to slow down to enter the highway below the speed limit I gave some gas and pulled ahead and merged. Not sure if this alone failed me, don't remember anything else negative from the test other then my disappointment. I remember taping the top of my helmet to have them repeat an instruction as they told me to do and not getting a reply back, they were not paying attention. Anyways, I complained to a manager after, he was sympathetic and booked me for the road test again a few days later. I went from fail to perfect. Nerves were about equal between the two times so think it was the one thing that they failed me for.
If you are that nervous about the highway you could look at doing your M2 exit in a smaller town with smaller highways like Kitchener. Nowhere near the traffic as the 401.
The only issue I have with the highway portion of the test is merging - it's too vague and you really need to ask the examiner for clarification/their interpretation before you start.
"merge at traffic speed" - this is the common answer but it ignores the fact that most traffic is doing 120+ even in the rightmost lane.
AFAIK exceeding the posted limit is a guaranteed fail. So if someone doesn't want to let you in you either have to cut them off while doing 100km/h or speed. I have heard that the correct answer to give when they request the lane change is to say there was not a safe opportunity to do so.
As others has stated the test takes place in a perfect world where you can ride in a tire track without hitting potholes and where everyone drives the limit or less.
"merge at traffic speed" - this is the common answer but it ignores the fact that most traffic is doing 120+ even in the rightmost lane.
AFAIK exceeding the posted limit is a guaranteed fail. So if someone doesn't want to let you in you either have to cut them off while doing 100km/h or speed. I have heard that the correct answer to give when they request the lane change is to say there was not a safe opportunity to do so.
As others has stated the test takes place in a perfect world where you can ride in a tire track without hitting potholes and where everyone drives the limit or less.
Exceeding the speed limit is not an automatic failure.
IF the traffic in the merging lane was indeed speeding - every single vehicle - then the rider would have to exceed the speed limit to merge, then gradually and smoothly reduce speed to a more reasonable rate. If the traffic is dense, it's slower. If it's sparse, but fast, there's more room move in - ahead or behind a speeding vehicle. I've done hundreds of tests, and can't recall one where the rider NEEDED to go over about 110 to merge smoothly. Even then, they've been able to continue around 105 to 110 along the highway. While we're looking for lane changes, the rider has to determine if it's safe to do them in the limited time they have. If they can't do them without speeding up considerably, it's not worth the risk and they will motor along at that traffic speed in the right lane. More than 90% of the time they're able to blend speed and make the lane changes without issue or excessive speed.
Historically, I see far more speed errors for going to slowly than for speeding.
IF the traffic in the merging lane was indeed speeding - every single vehicle - then the rider would have to exceed the speed limit to merge, then gradually and smoothly reduce speed to a more reasonable rate. If the traffic is dense, it's slower. If it's sparse, but fast, there's more room move in - ahead or behind a speeding vehicle. I've done hundreds of tests, and can't recall one where the rider NEEDED to go over about 110 to merge smoothly. Even then, they've been able to continue around 105 to 110 along the highway. While we're looking for lane changes, the rider has to determine if it's safe to do them in the limited time they have. If they can't do them without speeding up considerably, it's not worth the risk and they will motor along at that traffic speed in the right lane. More than 90% of the time they're able to blend speed and make the lane changes without issue or excessive speed.
Historically, I see far more speed errors for going to slowly than for speeding.
|
|
|
|
|