Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

My quest to make motorcycle riding that tad bit safer

gill.net.in

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

361–370 of 390 posts

Re: My quest to make motorcycle riding that tad bit safer

#361

Post by henearkr »

AdrianB1 wrote: post #237
ElijahLynn wrote: post #233

Where's the quest to make motorcycles a huge bit quieter? I am so fed up with all the loud motorcycles in my city. Seems pretty arrogant of people with loud vehicles to think that we all want to hear them.

This is an old problem that was solved and not solved. Most motorcycles in the past 25 years are decently quiet, unless you rev it up at night and everyone will hear it. But it is the same with the cars. At the same time, there is a significant number of motorcycles with non-street legal mufflers that add some decibels, you hear those even during the day at low revs. I have 2 bikes, both stock exhaust, both quiet. Th…

Alternatively, just switch to electric bikes maybe?

So that, even if they want to try and be noisy, they cannot really? (except with loud music maybe, but that's completely different, wayyyy less stressful for people around, and it's already possible so that would not add a new problem)

Re: My quest to make motorcycle riding that tad bit safer

#362

Post by actionfromafar »

nemacol wrote: post #360
markbnj wrote: post #178

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As an almost-daily motorcyclist with 15k miles on my current machine (Suzuki DL650), I absolutely agree that the increased proportion of pickup trucks on the road increases the risks for riders, however I suspect it is mainly because the larger, heavier vehicles aggravate the effects of a general deterioration in driving skills and attitudes. One thing about riding a motorcycle is that you are, unless you have a deat…

> a general deterioration in driving skills Is that a measured observation? Not trying to nitpick - genuinely curious if this is your observation from experience or there are some studies that you are referring to.

My gut feel is that people drove very badly in the before-times but often also very slowly and cautiously at the same time. Speed felt dangerous in old vehicles. Modern computers with wheels are like living rooms with great acceleration and decelaration. Maneuvers which would had taken great skill to perform with an old rear-wheel drive car with bad tires, are now executed routinely like it's nothing, thanks to antispin, traction control etc etc.

Cars are much safer now, especially on the inside, but when you get hit on the outside by a several tonne projectile, it's about the same as it ever were.

Re: My quest to make motorcycle riding that tad bit safer

#363

Post by illiac786 »

d_k_f wrote: post #353
Arch-TK wrote: post #342

Brake lights should be activated whenever the vehicle is significantly slowing down regardless of whether the brakes are being used or not. And this should be standard across _all_ vehicles, not just motorcycles. I would say brakes should also override any automated method too, just in case of malfunction. This is just (I am not trying to trivialise the incredible amount of effort required to take a hardware project,…

I'm with you, and at least here in Germany this is already the law, though it is only required if your deceleration rate is greater or equal to 1.3m/s² (it is allowed starting at a rate of 0.7 m/s²). There are already voices against this, as the recuperation functionality of electric vehicles can repeatedly trigger this feature if the driver lets go of the gas pedal for a short time.

I don’t understand the voices against it: even if it’s recuperating, the car _is_ decelerating, which is why it triggers (and it should). What’s the problem according to them?

Re: My quest to make motorcycle riding that tad bit safer

#364

Post by illiac786 »

SilkRoadie wrote: post #344
rossng wrote: post #333

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Easy to say when you don't live next to a road frequented by drivers with ridiculous modified exhausts.

MOTs already have a decibel limit. I don't understand how these vehicles can be road worthy considering how loud they are. This technology feels like an engineers solution to a trivial legal issue.

What would be a better solution in your view?

Re: My quest to make motorcycle riding that tad bit safer

#365

Post by LordHeini »

earnestinger wrote: post #205

If only somebody would make motorcycles less noisy.. I dream of the day where there are neither mosquitos nor motorcycle noise. Two most annoying things during the summer.

Sadly noise sells.

I can totally understand that bikers like to hear the engine and exhaust of their bike but physics and the design of motorcycles is not very accommodating to that.

My bike has the manufacturers default 94db idle exhaust.

It is 94db because anything louder than that is not allowed on certain nice Austrian roads, so the manufacturer set it to 94.

While driving i hear the wind noise on the helmet, the airbox, the drive train and a bit of the engine. I usually wear ear protection.

To be clear 94db is a lot and it is way more if you pull on the gas and i don't have one of those stupid valve controlled exhausts.

I am always astonished how freaking loud that thing is, when i hear it's exhaust echoing over open fields or while going through a tunnel at full tilt.

It just comes down to physics, the exhaust points not at the biker, so the noise is directed into the environment.

There is no engine bay covering the engine and gearbox so that is comparatively loud, also chaindrives are rather noisy as well.

For the exhaust to compete it must be incredibly loud, which of course is obnoxious.

Some modern (sports) cars play engine sounds via the stereo system, maybe someone can build something similar for bikers.

Re: My quest to make motorcycle riding that tad bit safer

#366

Post by nkrisc »

markbnj wrote: post #178
beloch wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Motorcycle fatality rates have been trending upwards, not downwards[1]. Brake lights on helmets may illuminate one of the culprits: An ever increasing number of American trucks with poor visibility. Sitting on a bike, you're even shorter than a pedestrian and more likely to be completely out of sight. Perhaps its time to start regulating for better visibility, as Europe has done. [1] https://www.iii.org/fact-statisti…

As an almost-daily motorcyclist with 15k miles on my current machine (Suzuki DL650), I absolutely agree that the increased proportion of pickup trucks on the road increases the risks for riders, however I suspect it is mainly because the larger, heavier vehicles aggravate the effects of a general deterioration in driving skills and attitudes. One thing about riding a motorcycle is that you are, unless you have a deat…

I am not a motorcyclist but I have to agree with your assessment based on my personal experience driving. The risks that morons take while driving is absurd, but I've seen how it affects motorcyclists more. I once saw a motorcyclist nearly get hit because they were being tailgated by a driver and another driver want to pass the tailgater, thinking they were just a slow driver. So the other driver speeds up and attempts to cut off the tailgater, only to realize at the last moment there was a motorcycle there.

After see that, I make sure to give any motorcycle I'm behind an extra buffer of space to make sure I'm not obstructing anyone's view of them.

Yes, driving has become a necessity for everyday life in most places, but we need to pump the brakes and remind everyone it is a privilege, not a right.

Re: My quest to make motorcycle riding that tad bit safer

#367

Post by naming_the_user »

rkangel wrote: post #351
NegativeLatency wrote: post #199

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's a really complicated issue, but you might find some of stuff related to Strong Towns, 15 minute cities, and sorta general modern urbanist things interesting. If we had better transit, more connected communities etc, people who are less interested in driving and driving well would have other options than hours long commutes.

[Answer scope limited to the US] The problem is that these people want to drive, and don't care about it. They want to drive for sociological reasons - driving is seen as a symbol of American independence and financial stability. Look at the people who get weird reactions because they chose to walk to work, or schools that object on spurious grounds when they walk their kid to school. The car is seen as an assumption…

I don't think this is limited to the US, I have exactly the same viewpoint as a Brit and so do many people I know.

People like walking to work and like taking the tube after a night out, but ultimately, the car is just vastly more convenient and comfortable for such a large amount of stuff.

You may as well ask me to give up running water because technically I could just carry it from the well.

Realistically if public transport advocates want progress they need to demonstrate that they also understand the utility of cars because otherwise they come across as simply being wilfully ignorant.

Re: My quest to make motorcycle riding that tad bit safer

#368

Post by mtreis86 »

SilkRoadie wrote: post #344
rossng wrote: post #333

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Easy to say when you don't live next to a road frequented by drivers with ridiculous modified exhausts.

MOTs already have a decibel limit. I don't understand how these vehicles can be road worthy considering how loud they are. This technology feels like an engineers solution to a trivial legal issue.

Motorcycle exhausts are easy to swap out so people could easily take the MOT with the stock exhaust then swap the loud exhaust into place when they get home.

Re: My quest to make motorcycle riding that tad bit safer

#369

Post by mech9879876 »

illiac786 wrote: post #363
d_k_f wrote: post #353

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm with you, and at least here in Germany this is already the law, though it is only required if your deceleration rate is greater or equal to 1.3m/s² (it is allowed starting at a rate of 0.7 m/s²). There are already voices against this, as the recuperation functionality of electric vehicles can repeatedly trigger this feature if the driver lets go of the gas pedal for a short time.

I don’t understand the voices against it: even if it’s recuperating, the car _is_ decelerating, which is why it triggers (and it should). What’s the problem according to them?

The threshold can be a problem- you don't want the threshold to be too low, or else the brake lights come on when even slight deceleration is occurring. This would give an annoyingly too-common signal that would possibly be disregarded/ not be an effective form of visual communication.

Re: My quest to make motorcycle riding that tad bit safer

#370

Post by rkangel »

naming_the_user wrote: post #367
rkangel wrote: post #351

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[Answer scope limited to the US] The problem is that these people want to drive, and don't care about it. They want to drive for sociological reasons - driving is seen as a symbol of American independence and financial stability. Look at the people who get weird reactions because they chose to walk to work, or schools that object on spurious grounds when they walk their kid to school. The car is seen as an assumption…

I don't think this is limited to the US, I have exactly the same viewpoint as a Brit and so do many people I know. People like walking to work and like taking the tube after a night out, but ultimately, the car is just vastly more convenient and comfortable for such a large amount of stuff. You may as well ask me to give up running water because technically I could just carry it from the well. Realistically if public…

I think there are two different things though, and in the UK the bar is (mostly) just a practical one.

Lots of my colleagues cycle to work, because the cycling infrastructure is great (both from Cambridge City, and from my employer). For those along the Guided Busway corridor, quite a few get to work like that because it is convenient.

Step 1 is to make the public transport good enough so that it is at least as good as taking a car. But the US has Step 2 - convince people that they aren't looking poverty stricken if they take a bus.

Post reply on HN