So what does the future hold for motorcycles? One of the guys on a forum I frequent brought up the topic of government intervention in the motorcycle world. Basically, at some point in the future will our lovely nanny state step forward to either ban motorcycles altogether or place huge restrictions on them.
I’m not particularly good at predicting the future. Hell, I can’t even predict what I’ll have for dinner in six hours and I have complete control over that. So my opinion is pretty useless here, but it does give me the opportunity to indulge in playing grey beard prognosticator. Here we go.
Most likely the government won’t get much more involved than it is now. Technological advancement and market dynamics are likely to play greater roles than government regulation. Specifically the engines today are freaking awesome. A 600cc I4 engine today produces anywhere from 100HP all the way to 115HP! That is from the factory before it has been tuned with aftermarket stuff like new ECU fuel and timing maps and aftermarket exhaust. Tuners can lighten the bikes and make them produce more power.
Tires are also something to consider. The tires I put on my bike are like having spider man’s hands for wheels. I can lean the bike way over and go around turns like I’m glued to the ground. No slippage. They even deal with wet weather really well.
Finally and as a segue in to the market place – both of my bikes get great fuel mileage. My old ZX6 is getting around 45Mpg. My EX500 gets about 55mpg. My ZX6 is my toy for playing around on the track or on club rides. My EX500 is the commuter. With a bank bag I can carry all my stuff to work and home. Even better – I get to use the HOV lanes and I have a toll tag so I can use toll roads. The thing about the bike is that I can get to work quicker (HOV lanes and toll roads) than people in their cages. I can get there quicker without braking the law. No propensity for velocity, no lane sharing, just normal riding. This brings me to the market thing.
I see more bikes on the road in the morning on my way to work. Early adopters are starting to ditch their SUV w/ its 18mpg for a cruiser, tourer or sport bike so they can enjoy better fuel economy.
On weekends it seems like everybody and their dog has a bike. Its like Sturgis in every neighborhood across the country. Frankly I think it is pretty cool. Yeah I wish they would wear gear or at least a real helmet. But at least they are on a bike so maybe they’ll be more aware when they are in their car.
But the thing is more people are getting on motorcycles. Regardless of the reason the statistics are there. More riders. This does cause problems because more riders means more motorcycle accidents. If it gets out of hand then yeah the nanny state decides it has to step in and ‘fix’ the problem.
What fixes would a government likely use in that situation? Possibilities are: restrictions on the displacement of engines, additional ‘safety features’ on the bike, restrictors on how fast bikes go, tiered licensing programs. The only fix likely to make any difference would be the tiered license though.
Restricting the size of a bike’s engine won’t really make a big difference. Remember the whole technological advancement thing? Tell Kawasaki, Suzuki, Honda, et al that they can only go up to 800ccs and guess what happens? You start getting 800cc superbikes that make 150hp just like the liter bikes do now. For reference the MotoGP bikes are now 800cc and produce over 200hp. Restrictions in that form will be addressed by the application of additional technology. If you counter with something like “max 100hp” then the manufacturer will detune the engine via the ECU. Then tuners will just remap the engine afterward restoring it to how it should be. Simply put this won’t be a winning strategy. Worse, like home land security, it just puts a fresh coat of paint over the problem. The riders aren’t having problems because the bike produces too much power. Riders on 50Hp machines can get in to trouble.
Safety features like ABS and traction control also won’t make a big impact on the problem. First, in cases where it isn’t desired the owner will remove or deactivate it. Second in the case of traction control you have the opportunity to tune it. What is your goal – greater performance or more safety? You can tune for either – guess what a squid like me would tune for? Greater performance might provide a little additional safety but not really. Transaction control in that case would be all about getting more of the power to the ground while limiting wheel spin which means some wheel spin would still occur. Safety tuning would aim to eliminate all wheel spin by reducing power.
Limiting top speed is also useless. Most accidents occur at ‘normal’ traffic speeds. If most accidents were occurring at 100+ MPH then sure do like the French and restrict top speed to 99MPH. However, most accidents are not due to excessive speed. Further the users would address this in a heart beat if they were so inclined. Top speed is usually governed by the ECU and it is a setting. You go in and change it just like changing the screen saver on your laptop. But again even with bikes that max out at 100+ mph you aren’t really accomplishing much. I know from personal experience you can get pretty screwed up doing 3mph.
The only thing likely to make any significant impact on motorcycle safety is improving the motorcycle rider. Most people do not bother to take a class. Those that do typically stop with the MSF class. Look at drivers. Beyond maybe doing drivers education in high school most people never bother to improve their driving skills. Some people will take a defensive driving class to avoid having a ticket on their record, but beyond simply reviewing the laws and some general safety tips these things do nothing to actually improve the driver.
The best way to improve things would be a tiered licensing program (frankly it should apply to cars as well). Instead of allowing a person who has never been on a motorcycle to jump on a 100+ HP motorcycle require that they spend some time learning on something with maybe 50+ HP. Require a certain number of hours of both classroom and on road instruction before graduating to the next level. Also require continuing education in order to keep your license at whatever level you have attained.
Improving both riders and drivers is the best possible way to make the roads safer. Making cars or motorcycles safer is simply painting over the problem without actually solving the problem (amazing yes – a technologist saying the technology doesn’t solve everything). Take the safest car in the world with its ABS, air bags, collision warning system and OnStar – put a jackass behind the wheel and see how many people can be killed. Happens everyday. Until the car can drive itself (even that won’t entirely fix the problem) you have to fix the jackass.
I strongly believe tiered licensing would make things much better on the road. It would save lives. But in many cases are these lives society really needs to save? Some jackass who hops on his HOG, rides to the bar, ties one on then proceeds to ride his hog off a cliff. Or the 18 year old whose parents hand him the keys to a supersport (100+ HP sport bike) even though he has never ridden a motorcycle before. He hops on rides around and slams in to an SUV killing himself (not sure about the poor people in the SUV). Do we really need people saved who lack the intelligence to make good choices without the assistance of the nanny state? Life is precious. A gift from god. But would we really be better off having avoided the sorrow? Maybe Darwin awards really do serve a purpose and need to be handed out.
Luckily human ingenuity would still win out even with a tiered program some people will still manage to win themselves a Darwin award. The difference would be that the skill level displayed would be much higher. Maybe some smart people who just go in over the heads would be saved. The upside though would be to the market place.
Safer streets for riders would hopefully lead to more riders. The tiered program could be used to create new segments in the market and a steady churn of people trading up. Manufacturers would have more opportunity to sell new designs.
The question of whether or not and how the government would get involved doesn’t really have any real answers. We can only speculate and perhaps hope. Most solutions, the easy ones, really don’t address the real problem (the riders and drivers). The greatest hope would be changes to the way riders and drivers are licensed and the education requirements that should be added. Is a tiered program likely? I honestly doubt it.