The Binary Circumstance

After spending two days in the Motorcycle Safety Foundation (MSF) Basic RiderCourse® (BRC), I can’t give it the glowing reviews that others have given it.

After taking the class, I can say that much of what I learned about riding a motorcycle I knew before I took the class or learned on the Internet on the night between the two days of class. Much of what I learned on the written portion I already knew from taking the WA state written test to get my learner’s permit.

I found the course poorly structured. Some of the material that the instructor spent a lot of time trying to drive into our heads is done by other skilled motorcyclists in other ways and was not part of the state’s written license test. So why spend so much time on it?

Much of the early instruction was devoted to things that are not a primary cause of accidents for motrocyclists.

The biggest problem with the class was that the first six-hour course training on the parking lot involved a lot of turning. I was having trouble with making my turns tight and fast enough as were some other novice riders. I got barked at a lot by the instructor. She kept telling me to “roll on the throttle through the turn.” I couldn’t do that because I felt like centrifugal force was going to pull me over or make me go wide.

When I came home, after a long day in class, I did some research on turning a motorcycle and learned a lot, much more than I’d learned in the class. This was the best explanation for how to turn a motorcycle that I found, far superior to anything I got from the BRC materials or the instructor.

In order to go faster through a turn you must shift the center of gravity by leaning. You cause the lean by countersteering, or “out tracking,” terms I first learned on the Internet after spending a frustrating afternoon of trying to do turns in the class with the instructor not able to articulate to me exactly what my problem was.

Andy Townsend explains this so well:

Any turn produces centrifugal force on the motorcycle, tending to make the bike lean to the outside of the turn. To balance this centrifugal force the Center of Gravity must be offset toward the inside of the turn. A left hand turn requires a lean to the left. A right hand turn requires a lean to the right. This applies to all turns, fast or slow.

[…]

…For example, if while riding the bike straight ahead, we press on the left bar the front wheel points to the right. The front wheel tracks to the right (sometimes called “out tracking”). So the weight of bike and rider is now to the LEFT of it’s “support” on the ground, the tire contact patches. Because the weight is to the left, the bike leans to the left. It is important to note, for a LEFT turn, we initiate a lean to the left by pressing on the left bar, turning the front wheel to the RIGHT. This is often referred to as COUNTERSTEERING: a turn to the left initiated by turning the front wheel to the right.

The harder you press the quicker the lean; the longer you press, the further the lean angle.

The next day, the BRC included countersteering in the instruction and it made all of us turn much better. The class (which cost $225) never explained it as well as what I found on the Internet for free. It’s ridiculous that we spent all that time doing drills on the first day involving a lot of turns which we had not been adequately prepared for until the second day.

This is from the MSF Basic RiderRourse® Rider Handbook (7.0, page 32):

Crash studies show that running off the road, usually a curve, accounts for over 40 percent of total motorcycle fatalities. This is the primary situation in which motorcyclists have single-vehicle crashes.

If it’s a primary cause of accidents, why wasn’t it introduced earlier in the class to that students could use it in all the turns they practiced? Why have students spend their first day on the range doing turns before they are given detailed instruction on how to make turns? That is a waste of half the time spent on riding skills and it fails to address a big problem that many motorcyclists obviously have.

Another problem with the class is that you rarely get beyond second gear or above 15-17mph. These are not exactly real-world conditions. It’s a good thing to start in such an environment but it can only take you so far.

The first afternoon on the range was six-hours (Noon-6PM) and there were two or three short five-minute breaks. Then we got a 30 minute break at about 4:20 which lasted until 5:50. For me, the longer break came so late in the day that I wasn’t much good.

The classroom we were in for the morning classroom work was very, very cold due to a window that would not close. Cold enough that people wore their jackets throughout the entire class. That did not make for a confortable learning environment.

Many seats in these courses are subsidized by the State of Washington. That is code saying that the taxpayers are forced to pay for them at the point of a gun. (I’m informed by Steve Stewart who works with WA State’s Rider Education program that the subsidies come from fee that motorcyclists pay for the motocycle endorsement on their driver’s license. While the taxpayers in general are not forced to subsidize the program, motorcyclists are. So what I’ve said in this article about problems arrising from forced subsidies still applies.)

While many people might think that such subsidies are a good thing, I do not. Why? The short answer is that forced subsidies are based on irrational, unscientific premises, forcing individuals to divorce their minds from reality to some degree in order to function in the marketplace. Having irrational people determine values can only create problems, not solve them.

The longer answer is that it puts the government in bed with a private enterprise and defeats the role that competition plays in improving the quality of products. Subsidies may allow more people to take the class, but what good is that if the quality of the class is reduced by a lack of competition? All those people are getting are getting less than they could be getting otherwise.

Without the subsidies, companies that wish to offer motorcycle training have a level field of competition and those course that offer the best training for the lowest price will automatically become the favorites. There is no incentive to improve the course when there is little or no competition and the state will pay a portion of the tuition, even if the student doesn’t complete the course because of some emergency.

Let me Devil’s advocate for a minute: If they’re going to give out subsidies, why not give them to the people who do the best job of explaining countersteering? Wouldn’t that do more to reduce motorcycle fatalities from missed turns than subsidizing a class that doesn’t focus on that skill until hours after students have been turning?

Turning with countersteering is so fundamental and so important, it should come right after teaching the basics of, starting, stopping, and going straight, and it should be a THE primary focus of the class, right after the cautions against alcohol and drug use, which are the other major cause of motorcycle fatalities.

Having said all that, I’m certainly not worse off for having taken this course, even though I think it could have been much better. Having the time to practice on a parking lot does help to make a rider feel more confident on the bike which should ultimately translate into a better motorcycle rider.

I was looking around YouTube for videos of the Ninja 250 motorcycle and I found a few.

Swope Park Ride (08:03): Gives a good sense of what it looks like from the driver’s seat.

My Last Ride on My Baby (01:16): Driver’s view while doing curves on a twisty canyon road.

The Other Side of Town (12:56): Made by the same guy who did “Swope Park Ride,” this video is long but tells a story which made it interesting. I got tired of the rider’s apologies for being cautious and a “sissy” on the bike when the other riders were being careless. Also don’t understand why he thought he would deserve to get his butt kicked in a black neighborhood. Feeling guilty? For what? Venturing outside his element?

His adventure on the bike worked well as a visual metaphor for the story, though.

I think it will be a long time (maybe never) for me to feel comfortable going 90mph on a Ninja 250R on a freeway. Hell, I’ve never gone that fast in a car.

The videos give me a good sense of what it feels like to ride, though. Thanks, YouTube and Dave.

There’s some more Ninja 250 videos up there that I didn’t look at yet.

After doing my research, I’m leaning toward buying a Kawasaki Ninja 250R for my first motorcycle.

Wikipedia has a write-up on the bike that summarizes many of my own conclusions:

The 250R is light for a motorcycle, weighing just over 300 lb (135 kg) dry. Its 250 cc displacement, counterbalanced, water cooled four stroke engine is smooth for a twin-cylinder, and though not exceptionally powerful with 36 hp (27 kW) at best, it can easily maintain speeds in excess of 80 mph (130 km/h) while consuming fuel (87 octane) at 55 to 75 miles per gallon US (22 to 30 km/L) from its 4.8 US gallon (18 L) tank, and has a top speed of about 100 mph (160 km/h).

The Ninja 250 faces very little direct competition within its class inside the United States. The main competitors are the other 250cc “beginner bikes” priced around $3,000, namely Honda’s Rebel 250 and Nighthawk 250, the Suzuki GZ250, and the Yamaha Virago 250. With the exception of the Nighthawk (a standard), these bikes are all cruisers. The disparity in style between a crusier, a standard, and a sportbike is frequently the buyer’s deciding factor, given that one’s choice in bike is often as much about self-image as objective features. None of these bikes can match the Ninja 250’s much greater power, 14,000 rpm redline, 6-speed gearbox, tachometer, and centerstand, nor do they offer both front and rear disc brakes. All of them have an advantage over the stock Ninja with their rear suspension preload adjustability, although the Kawasaki “Uni-Trak®” system is more advanced and may be upgraded. The cruisers also offer relatively low seat heights in the 26-27 inch range, an issue for some riders.

None of these US models, including the Ninja, have changed much in recent years, but outside the United States there are many exciting advances in small-displacement, lightweight, and/or low-cost motorcycles, including several four-cylinder, sixteen-valve 250’s. That being said, the Ninja 250 enjoys a modest following among riders who appreciate its light weight and nimble handling as an amusing “track bike”. The very fact that it hasn’t changed much since 1988 means parts are plentiful and inexpensive.

Here’s a picture from the Kawasaki site. I’ve seen a couple that I like, one is red and the other silver.

I was checking out motorcycle helmets yesterday and learned a thing or two.

The store where I was browsing had a sign by the helmets which said something like “Ask for assistance in trying on helmets. If you drop it, you bought it.”

I thought that was a rather strange given that helmets are, well, supposed to be durable and impact resistant.

The saleswoman explained that helmets are in some ways similar to airbags in cars. They are designed to absorb a heavy impact ONCE. Once they’ve done their job, they’re toast and you need a new one.

Helmets are also marked as Department of Transportation (DOT) approved. Others also have the Snell approval. This article explains the difference and has some surprising (well, maybe not) things to say about the DOT stamp of approval.

The DOT performs a straight forward impact test. Using a simulated head placed inside a helmet, testers drop the helmet from a height of ten feet. The head cannot receive more than 400 G-force units on impact. A G-force unit measures the force of gravity exerted against an object in motion.

Now here’s the kicker with DOT rated helmets–manufacturers don’t need to test their helmets in order to claim a DOT rating! A helmet manufacturer simply needs to feel that a helmet is meeting the DOT specifications to brand it as “DOT rated.” The DOT might occasionally pull helmets to perform testing, but the majority of helmets sold as DOT certified do not undergo any level of testing.

I wonder what the DOT does if they test a helmet and it doesn’t pass.

The Snell certification stands in rigorous contrast to DOT specifications. Helmet manufacturers voluntarily submit their products to the Snell evaluation service and pay for the testing procedures. These procedures are extensive and include seven test types, from impact to shell penetration tests to flame resistance testing. The type and degree of testing is dependent on the type of helmet and its application.

Snell cites the following areas as critical in helmet safety:

* Impact management: how well the helmet protects against collisions with large objects;
* Helmet positional stability: whether the helmet will be in place, on the head, when it’s needed;
* Retention system strength: whether the chin straps are sufficiently strong enough to hold the helmet throughout a head impact; and
* Extent of protection: the area of the head protected by the helmet.

Snell Memorial Foundation, Inc. ( 2005). 2005 Standard for Protective Headgear, 4.

In short, Snell offers the highest certification standards regarding helmet safety. But a buyer will pay a higher price for Snell certified helmets, as the added costs of production and testing add to the overall value of the helmet.

See also: Snell Memorial Foundation and
Wikipedia entry, which explains how Snell operates. It’s a great example of a private foundation doing a much better job of policing standards than the government has done.

Pharmaceuticals should be handled the same way.

Motorcycle helmets are available from Amazon.com through the store. But fit is very important in a helmet so it is wise to know which model fits before you buy online.