Limit cars license too?

[none]

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.

This is not true to certain extent.

Riders could also get other people (pedestrians, other riders & drivers, and their pillions) killed too.

 

It's not just rider bang driver or driver bang rider.

[none]

Doesn't matter whether you got CL3 or not, just comment logically.

 

Anyway should I also curse and swear too? cos my next door uncle took just a simple bike test many many moons ago that qualify him to ride any class of bike now.

 

No I don't, times changes, just accept that.

[R3sistor]

Originally posted by mechwira@Jul 16 2004, 03:53 PM

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.

Really? Seriously i feel, if the TP had chosen to let us learn from 400 cc bike onwards. Then we can do away with 2B.

I don't think anyone mind having more training sessions but you get a 2A license instead.

[mechwira]

Originally posted by none@Jul 16 2004, 04:44 PM

This is not true to certain extent.

Riders could also get other people (pedestrians, other riders & drivers, and their pillions) killed too.

sure, but it goes both ways. not as if nobody has died inside a car before.

 

comparatively, rider has higher damage potential to himself, lower to others; whereas driver is opposite. i mean comparatively. my point is, the danger is there for both of them, its just a matter of how that danger is portioned out.

[mechwira]

Originally posted by R3sistor@Jul 16 2004, 07:00 PM

Really? Seriously i feel, if the TP had chosen to let us learn from 400 cc bike onwards. Then we can do away with 2B.

I don't think anyone mind having more training sessions but you get a 2A license instead.

well, yah, if u followed my thread, you'll know wat i mean. riders themselves were shooting down my idea of letting learners train on 250/400cc. go ahead and see. but the thread is stale now, ever since i sent my proposal up to authorities and got their reply. intersting read still tho heh

 

but i suppose end of the day, even if we are both correct in that it is safe for learners to train on 250/400cc (which i still think we are), i have to concede that its safer to limit to

[comics00]

we all know the fact, if the govt got nothing to gain from it, no changes will be done. imagine the amount of tax $$$ they will lost if less people upgrade to biggier cars. just c the no. of class 2b, 2a & 2 holder, if we have class 3b, 3a & 3 most ppl will stop at 3b.

 

a bigger cc car with OMV of say ~$24,000 means (110% tax mimus 50% scrab) ~$14,000 of earning for the govt!!!

 

don't think the reason u have will convice the lta to "endenger" their tax, by the millions yearly, & thus risking their annual bonus:sian:

[hohosaint]

I smell trouble and anti subject.

[R3sistor]

One last thing.. if anyone knows.. last time when you learn bikes, do they train u on only 150cc or 125 cc bike even though, when u passed, u get to ride all class(2,2A,2B) ??

[sloth]

Isn't the crux of the issue on the "ability" of the driver to handle a "powerful"(so-called) car? There is obviously something nagging when someone says "I passed my class 3 and will get a WRX tmrw". Doesn't that naturally make you feel uncomfortable?

 

FYI, I also passed both cl 2b/2a/2 and cl3 already, but I would rather a similar restriction to the 3 bike tests put in place for cars. With cl3 I could drive anything except a bus! How does learning to drive in a, say, corolla (typical training car) qualify me to pilot a minibus, or an sti, or a ferrari? All the visual angles are different in a van, dimensions of the body, power/acceleration/braking... Nobody has really explained this.

[R3sistor]

Good point there.

I was pondering over this too. At driving school, they learn to drive using a 1.6 Litre engine(i think its 1.6? correct me if i'm wrong)?

However, i believe most of them upon passing, drives a 2.4 L, some even 3L(the richer ones). There's also a big difference in power here, why isn't it restricted? Can we safely say, once you'r wrapped in metals, means you are safe from accident? Thus not restricting or dividing the driving license?

[Metalfyre]

Originally posted by R3sistor@Jul 26 2004, 02:47 PM

One last thing.. if anyone knows.. last time when you learn bikes, do they train u on only 150cc or 125 cc bike even though, when u passed, u get to ride all class(2,2A,2B) ??

in the past they just went for the test....no lessons...

[Metalfyre]

Originally posted by R3sistor@Jul 16 2004, 03:38 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.

that is not true..

 

they train you on those cute little scooters first....

[paulder]

last time (donkey years ago) only got class 2.. no 2a or 2b.. one test pass you can ride all kinds of bikes..

 

hmm remember those who set the rules will not want to make life difficult for themselves.. how many of these top people actually ride bikes? but i'm pretty sure they all drive!

[STi]

Supercars in SIngapore:- Zondas, Ferraris (Rare)

 

Superbikes in Singapore :- R1, GSXk4, ZX10, ZX12, Hayabusa, CBR1000 (like cockroaches and ants)

 

Biggger cars have safty devices like Anti Skid, 4WD, LSD, TCS, Bla Bla which when u drive a 2.4L car u feel safer then a 1.0 car. Only danger cars face is Skidding, overturn...

 

Bigger bikes? None. Dangers? Tank slap, wheel lock, high slid due to engine brake, skidding.

 

Weight of the car does not affect any danger in driving for the driver but weight of the bike DOES affect the riders capabilities.

 

No of super bikes able to hit 0-100 in 3s and 200+km/h on the roads are like cockroaches onthe road unlike cars most common are the rexs 0-100 in 5s? Top speed of such big cars are still lesser then a super bike.

 

Dangers of a superbike hurting himself AND THE PILLON not to mention other road users is VERy MUCH HIGHER than a big car.

 

Bigger cars have more safty like Crumple Zones, Side impact beams to protect the driver and his passengers BUT NON for big bikes...

 

Reason for cl 2b to 2 is handling a 1000 cc sports bike is NOT easy as most of u should know esp now bikes like the R!s are power to weight 1:1

BUT

Handling of a big car like a Rex or even a ferrari is Child's play due to modern technology.....

 

just my 2 cents worth

[rhema83]

I serious don't think handling a 280bhp WRX or Evo is "child's play". If the novice driver panicks, he is a 280bhp monster let loose on the road. I would want to stay away from him no matter if I'm driving or riding because he can still kill me! (A bike can't really kill a driver who's inside his car.)

 

I don't really support the plan of staggered class 3 because the cost involved in buying and upgrading cars is huge. However, I hope the authorities will make drivers who intend to buy sports cars go for some kind of extra training. For example, I must go for a 1-day driving techniques course before I can drive my WRX.

[Keynes]

If we put away time, effort and troublesome aside, getting classes 2B, 2A and 2 together costs abt THE SAME as getting a class 3 alone.

 

Class 2B = $700

Class 2A = $280

Class 2 = $200

 

Total = $1,180

 

Class 3 = abt $1200

 

On a positive side, having a chance to go for training 3 times (as against 1 time) make u a safer rd user. How many of u has not forgetten ur 7 basic riding postures when u went back to take ur 2A n 2?

 

Of course if u talk abt principle, it is a different issue. My opinion is we shd not limit class 3 licence( my reasons is

a) very ex to upgrade car, really very ex; avg ppl change cars 3 - 5 yrs, avg ppl change bike 1 - 2 yrs;

b) the increase in danger for big cc cars is not much as compared to big cc bikes;

c) for very heavy 4-wheelers, they have already been taken care of by class 4 n 5;

 

But for sports cars, yes, a refresher course or advance training is essential.

 

As for m/cycles, I still support limitation of licence, but perhaps 2 classes is enough, Class 2A and 2. Maybe 2A up to 250cc, and 2 from 251 cc onwards. That's how most bikes r made.

[syaiguy]

Originally posted by Keynes@Apr 12 2005, 10:48 AM

As for m/cycles, I still support limitation of licence, but perhaps 2 classes is enough, Class 2A and 2. Maybe 2A up to 250cc, and 2 from 251 cc onwards. That's how most bikes r made.

hey... i like ur idea... nice one

[xb84]

Originally posted by sloth@Aug 3 2004, 12:17 PM

Isn't the crux of the issue on the "ability" of the driver to handle a "powerful"(so-called) car? There is obviously something nagging when someone says "I passed my class 3 and will get a WRX tmrw". Doesn't that naturally make you feel uncomfortable?

 

FYI, I also passed both cl 2b/2a/2 and cl3 already, but I would rather a similar restriction to the 3 bike tests put in place for cars. With cl3 I could drive anything except a bus! How does learning to drive in a, say, corolla (typical training car) qualify me to pilot a minibus, or an sti, or a ferrari? All the visual angles are different in a van, dimensions of the body, power/acceleration/braking... Nobody has really explained this.

although i've already gotten my class2b and class3..

 

nooo.. pls dont put restriction to class3..

 

its damn sian waiting for class2a and eventually class2..

thought i have already gotten my license i dont want ppl to suffer the same fate @ class3..

[ghost04]

Originally posted by syaiguy@Apr 12 2005, 12:23 PM

hey... i like ur idea... nice one

i also like this idea. isn't it better if we learn on a 250cc bike then upon passing we can ride any cc and optional lessons on 750cc bike so tat we can experience how its like on a big bike.

[mechwira]

well then two of you (and all the rest fo us of coz) can keep on waiting. the mata say they will look into it. i donno if will happen anot. at least they said they willing to think about it.

[Grave65]

Originally posted by STi@Apr 11 2005, 03:06 PM

Supercars in SIngapore:- Zondas, Ferraris (Rare)

 

Superbikes in Singapore :- R1, GSXk4, ZX10, ZX12, Hayabusa, CBR1000 (like cockroaches and ants)

 

Biggger cars have safty devices like Anti Skid, 4WD, LSD, TCS, Bla Bla which when u drive a 2.4L car u feel safer then a 1.0 car. Only danger cars face is Skidding, overturn...

 

Bigger bikes? None. Dangers? Tank slap, wheel lock, high slid due to engine brake, skidding.

 

Weight of the car does not affect any danger in driving for the driver but weight of the bike DOES affect the riders capabilities.

 

.....

 

just my 2 cents worth

true ... agree no more ...

 

only improvement i can tink off to the class 3 or motorcycle system is ..

changes in the demerit pt sys.

 

in aus

P-plate drivers or riders have minimal pt system

like ZERO alcohol levels

 

in addition i tink insurance system is also rather unfair ... in terms of named driver etc

[wait4me]

drink driving

straight away kan tong for life

[Zhu_Tou_Rider]

Originally posted by wait4me@Feb 20 2006, 04:45 AM

drink driving

straight away kan tong for life

tat y ""if u drink dun drive""

[myxilplix]

Just chiming in to say that in motorsports turbocharged and supercharged vehicles have their cc multiplied to ensure more equal classes.

 

eg turbo = cc x 1.7

so a 1 litre daihatsu charade turbo would run in the same class as 1600-2000cc cars as it's considered a 1700cc by the formula.

 

if my memory serves me correct, supercharged cars are multiplied by 1.3.

 

this could work in overcoming the small cc+turbo/sc issue.

[Axxis]

Originally posted by R3sistor@May 27 2004, 09:12 PM

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?

People in other countries like Australia can drive 5L and even bigger cars straight away.

 

A normal 1.6L car might have around 100HP and weight 1.2 tonne or more... 1:11 ratio. (HP/kg)

 

A 2L car normally has about 150-200HP only and weighs 1.5 tonne or so.

Maybe 1:7 or so... And this is considered a high performance car.

 

 

The power to weight ratio is nothing like a 180HP motorbike that weighs 170kg. It's VERY different. More than 1:1!!!

 

Even a 70HP bike that weighs 140kgs (RS250) has 1:2...

a 400cc with 60HP bike weighing say 180kgs is 1:3!

 

A cub with 10HP and weighing 100kgs is 1:10 and even that is better than a "standard" car.

 

You don't require the same amount of skill and control to ensure your safety while driving a car and even if you do have an accident you are less likely to kill yourself.