Limit cars license too?

[R3sistor]

Sorry guys, know this has been discuss a little in mechwira's thread.

Maybe we could concentrate on this a little.

As we all know, there's three classes in riding motorcycles

2B, 2A and 2. We have to slowly upgrade to a bigger bike.

Whereas Car drivers, one class 3, is enough for them to straight away buy a 2Litre car or even more.

I know there's a issue on those young riders not being able to handle it, will ride and kill themselves.

But what about those young drivers, who drives a 2L sports car straight away after they pass, Can we say that they are equally good at handling it?

Would love to hear some views on this issue, what you guys think about it?

Why do you think TP don't want to limit car license just like what they did for motorcycles?

[rAjOaNa]

No offense to car drivers but i think they should. $$ is not a issue for some, any car they can buy. But can $$ give them the skills to handle, No its only exprience(understanding yar vehicle), road awareness and resposibility(mature driver).

 

So i think there are too many cars in sg rite. Mostly are more then 1.3 or 1.5L. Why not we divide into 2 categories. I m not quite sure of the statistics of cars but maybe something like eg.class 3A less then 1000-1500kg encouraging ppl to drive smaller cars just for transport. Hence reduce their COe n Rd Tax(these cars which i m refering to maybe are not more then eg1200cc engine or maybe lesser.

 

After a 2 yrs probation, Eligible to enrol for class 3. Eg nt exceeding 2500kg. This is for bigger cars for luxury. So COe, Rd tax can be abt the same as now or higher.

 

No dobut bikes are ever cheaper but onces we have our own family, we can't pillion everyone rite...so small family cars ard 1000cc?

[fleaz]

So i think there are too many cars in sg rite. Mostly are more then 1.3 or 1.5L. Why not we divide into 2 categories. I m not quite sure of the statistics of cars but maybe something like eg.class 3A less then 1000-1500kg encouraging ppl to drive smaller cars just for transport. Hence reduce their COe n Rd Tax(these cars which i m refering to maybe are not more then eg1200cc engine or maybe lesser.

 

Cars are expensive, at least 5,6 times the price of a bike. It is impractical to impose the same system for class 3 license.

 

After a 2 yrs probation, Eligible to enrol for class 3. Eg nt exceeding 2500kg. This is for bigger cars for luxury. So COe, Rd tax can be abt the same as now or higher.

 

It is expensive enough to take it once, I do not think people will appreciate having to take it twice.

[X-ilED]

Originally posted by fleaz@Jun 2 2004, 10:45 PM

Cars are expensive, at least 5,6 times the price of a bike. It is impractical to impose the same system for class 3 license.

 

 

 

It is expensive enough to take it once, I do not think people will appreciate having to take it twice.

actually i agree... this is definately one area which the govt will not respond to us.. too many pressure frm various sectors to resist this change. think about it... unlike bikes... alot of us ride for the passion.. we crave for the big bikes.. but its not so for cars.. to most, a car is jus a transport as long as it can accomodate 4 ppl and it moves, it serves its purpose... imagine the market for cars if limits were to be set... most ppl will jus stop at the highest cc they can drive with tat first lic,.. this would mean that the big cars are left to rot in the showrooms... car dealers would cry foul man... the govt wouldn't make such a risk.

 

bottom line is, we ride because we WANT to... they drive bcos they HAVE to.. if there is a 3b, 3a , 3 system... i think most ppl will stop at 3b lor...

 

yups.. my pt of view lar.. sorry if i offended anyone in the process ah..

[Tyrian]

i would agree that the licence of cars be divided into 2 or more sections if possible...

 

To be fair, since motorcyclist need to go 3 rounds of TPs to ride any bike they want, why not drivers? Does that mean drivers are more skilled to handle any car given to them?

 

So what if dividing it makes it expensive? Divide the class 2 licence oso expensive but we riders aren't complaining... so why drivers wan to complain? are they poorer than us yet still wanna own a car?

 

If price is an issue, they can jolly well take public transport... thats what my parents do... my father only own a bike, no money to buy car... so take public transport loh... why muz use car? ar bo use taxi oso can what...

 

if troublesome is an issue, we riders aren't complaining... so why drivers muz complain?

 

if dealers wanna cry foul, big bike makers like harly davidson would have done that long ago... since harly isn't doing it, why the rest would?

 

if drivers wanna say "we also got 3-tier system... class 3, 4 and 5 not 3-tier system meh?"... just shoot them back n say "find a real car that weight 7501kg for me..."

 

you give me a thousand and one reason for me why it should not be divded and i'll give u a thousand and one reason why they should instead...

[aalphaa]

IMHO, it all boils down to the amount of money the govt can make out of all the changes (if there were any)...

 

A better way of classifying cl3 license would be by hp rather than weight or cc

[StingRhea]

I somehow feel that it is because of the price difference of the cost of a car compared to a bike ( most bikes i mean don't tell me ducati or moto guzzi ) and the difference in costs in taking a motorbike license~

 

Govt whether wan to make change depends alot on money issue. But it would be nice classifying class 3 by the car's horsepower.

[Tyrian]

why gahment cannot make money?

 

dividing the system = more TP test = more money loh

[A3roSmith]

Originally posted by X-ilED@Jun 3 2004, 12:04 AM

as long as it can accomodate 4 ppl and it moves, it serves its purpose...

 

bottom line is, we ride because we WANT to... they drive bcos they HAVE to.. if there is a 3b, 3a , 3 system... i think most ppl will stop at 3b lor...

errrrm if pple really thought so, i wouldn't b seeing so many mercs n lexus n bmw on the road... i would b seein corolla, honda civic, all the small small cars...

 

it all boils down to ego... competitiveness.. keeping up w the jones'... if pple really just needed a form of transportation, wouldn't they just get a bike (for singles) or small family car (for family man)? i know i chose for myself a bike to move around... not to show off...

[A3roSmith]

Originally posted by X-ilED@Jun 3 2004, 12:04 AM

imagine the market for cars if limits were to be set... most ppl will jus stop at the highest cc they can drive with tat first lic,.. this would mean that the big cars are left to rot in the showrooms...

tts a good thing in my opinion... the govt should have encourage us all right from the start to buy smaller, more efficient n economical cars instead of splurgin on luxury vehicles... especially considering our small size (no space for roads)... if they had been smart enuff to foresee this in the past, mayb today there would b no need for erp, no need for coe, no need to squeeze thru jam on expressway n risk my life everyday...

 

a divided class 3 licence system would do more to discourage pple from taking up driving than any COE system would... this would really do something abt all those traffic jams...

[R3sistor]

I do agree on the point that it would be too costly to upgrade for vehicle if there should be a limit on class 3.

Ever wondered why the TP wanted to divide the motorcycles license up? And when did they started this?

As far as i know, long time ago, according to my dad, he got his 2b, 2a, 2 in just one TP..

So, maybe someone who knows about this can share it with us? Then we will really know why?

[floppy]

Originally posted by R3sistor@Jun 3 2004, 10:24 PM

I do agree on the point that it would be too costly to upgrade for vehicle if there should be a limit on class 3.

Ever wondered why the TP wanted to divide the motorcycles license up? And when did they started this?

As far as i know, long time ago, according to my dad, he got his 2b, 2a, 2 in just one TP..

So, maybe someone who knows about this can share it with us? Then we will really know why?

got this from another thread, Revision of Class 2 license system, perhaps better this way?

 

While we will always strive to factor in greater convenience to the

motoring public, be it drivers or riders, in our testing and licensing

systems, convenience cannot and must not be our sole consideration. Road

safety and driver/rider competency are. The 3-tier motorcycle licensing

system was introduced in the early 80s to arrest the alarmingly high fatal

accident rates among young and inexperienced riders with high capacity

motorcycles. The aim was to make sure motorcyclists, especially the young

riders, have a reasonable amount of interval between licences to gain

accumulative skills and experience. This move had gained much success in

reducing the number of fatal motorcycle accidents.

 

sadly, accidents involving motorcycle remains high and a large proportion involves young riders.

[hohosaint]

Personally, this is a good approach which requires more detailed information to persue for a change in system by controlling their Capacity than Tonnage. I do personally hopes that this can be decomposed into 3 tier system too. Drivers nowadays are getting out of control. If you know what I'm talking about.

 

Furthermore with the open-market of car rental business in Singapore. Getting a car is nevertheless easier than getting a bike. Procedures were trumendously reduced apparently, including the fees. Endangering definately will be higher because of the status of the car utimately belongs not to the private but, to the rental company (Bo Chap).

[R3sistor]

I wonder if the TP did research on drivers causing accidents too. Many times i've personally met drivers who would not care about us, squeezing us out of lane ? Do they contribute to the high number of accident rate? Sorry i'm a little off topic.

[sloth]

I don't think you can just divide class 3 into either 1) Capacity or 2) HP

Because, there are ways to get around this and ppl will do it. For example,

 

1) Divide by capacity

Problem imposed by licence: User restricted to cars

Solution: User looks for turbocharger to maximise car's potential

 

2) Divide by horsepower

Problem: User registers a car with 150bhp, but finds it too slow

Solution: As above, and easy to circumvent this regulation (nobody knows how many horse u have EXACTLY until they dyno u after bringing you in for having a blow-off valve)

 

Now I'm not saying this applies to every potentially limited driver, but I guess its just not really that feasible to divide by HP. Dividing by capacity seems a better bet. If you divide by HP, you might get many over powerful but uncontrollable kancils OTR. Divide by capacity, you might also increase the complexity of licensing.

 

I suppose those with transport needs won't bother too much and would just stop at the lowest tier, but definitely something needs to be done.

 

Anyone remember the P-Plate Murchielago? 18 years old father buy for him. Isn't that a ridiculous situation, however rare?

 

Perhaps a system that divides by capacity, but requires owners to take advanced driving/refresher courses when they register a car in their own name that exceeds their licence limit. For example, say I pass a CL3A and can drive 2.0L car, so when I buy a 3.0L I would be required to pass a refresher similar to CL2A/2 lessons?

[1.37boost]

whether u divide by bhp or capacity or power-to-weight, after-market turbochargers are illegal. so while it's "easy to circumvent" for the driver should the regulation be adopted, it's also $500 at LTA.

 

but i can see how it can be a problem with stock cars tho: P-plate driver can control a 2l NA car, no problem. but the 2l TC version?

 

ultimately there are juz too many variables. dun tink the authorities ready to pull this one on us, there'll be too much resistance, and the variables means it's hard to be fair (not that being fair is very high on their list of priorities...)

[seven7sin]

1.3 litres car also have twin turbo version

[none]

I hope the discussion of this topic does not relate from the unfairness of bikers having to take 3 test in order to ride all classes of bikes to drivers having to take 1 test to drive all classes of cars.

 

I think the main difference between riding and driving is more towards physical handling of the vehicle as it gets more powerful.

 

Biking is a more physical thing, needs coordination of both hands and legs.

As bikes engine CC increases, they get heavier and more powerful for an individual to handle. Bikers need to be able to control the weight, manoeuvrablility, balancing (inclusive of pillion), power (by a twist of throttle) and braking on 2 wheels more than what drivers need to do on their vehicles.

 

Moreover the availability of getting a supersports bike is more easy than getting a sports car. There are more riders owning R1/busa than drivers owning ferrari/skyline.

 

Think about it, imagine both a first day average P plate rider and driver on their favourite super vehicles (busa/ferrari). Who will get injured or die first?

 

Thats why I think why the gov wants 3 classes of tests for bikes.

[mechwira]

Originally posted by none@Jul 16 2004, 11:38 AM

Think about it, imagine both a first day average P plate rider and driver on their favourite super vehicles (busa/ferrari). Who will get injured or die first?

the busa rider is likely to injure/kill himself first. the ferrari driver is likely to injure/kill others first.

[Guest stanboy81]

pls do not comment if u have taken and pass ur class 3.... there are plenty out there who have not taken class 3.... if such rule implement, those who dun have class 3 will swear and curse

[1.37boost]

Originally posted by stanboy81@Jul 16 2004, 01:08 PM

pls do not comment if u have taken and pass ur class 3.... there are plenty out there who have not taken class 3.... if such rule implement, those who dun have class 3 will swear and curse

u have a point there.

 

best not to "spoil market" for those who haven't taken class 3, regardless of how unfair the rule is for class 2 vis-avis class 3

[mechwira]

my opinion is, this is a good idea, but not a feasible idea. costs is what makes it unfeasible. u'll need to find a solution which can address the costs issue.

[R3sistor]

One thing i don't understand...

Say now you sign up to be a traffic police, completely NO RIDING EXPERIENCE. But they train you straight on Class 2 bikes.

The idea is, why can't they train us on a 400 CC bikes. Perharps, giving out more practical lessons required before you can sign up for your traffic police test.

I mean, the reason why we learn to drive or ride is to learn to handle them.

[mechwira]

Originally posted by R3sistor@Jul 16 2004, 03:23 PM

One thing i don't understand...

Say now you sign up to be a traffic police, completely NO RIDING EXPERIENCE. But they train you straight on Class 2 bikes.

The idea is, why can't they train us on a 400 CC bikes. Perharps, giving out more practical lessons required before you can sign up for your traffic police test.

I mean, the reason why we learn to drive or ride is to learn to handle them.

already discussed on the other thread started by me

 

i agree wif u, but i'm surprised at how many riders themselves disagree at allowing riders to start wif 400cc. ah well.

[william_liu]

Originally posted by mechwira@Jul 16 2004, 11:45 AM

the busa rider is likely to injure/kill himself first. the ferrari driver is likely to injure/kill others first.

Very good point, something should always be pointed out.

 

The irresponsible rider often gets himself killed.

 

The irresponsible driver often gets others killed.