Why so many classes of bike licence?

[raphael]

now then know japan is 4 class based, thanks for the info:thumb:

[Constructicon]

Originally posted by misterbean@Jun 5 2005, 03:20 PM

Base on existing structure, my personal opinion is that 2A is a waste of time and $ ... so 2 classes is enough

 

If it has to be 3 classes, at least bring the class 2A up to 600cc ... just my humble opinion ... cheers

I was thinking about this issue when I saw this thread.

 

The main concern is the time, $$$ spent on the license, and also the money when "forced" to upgrade.

 

Just by increasing the motorocycle by 2B to 250ccc, 2A to 600cc and 2 to >600cc, we have a large choice of bikes to choose from.

As we all know, the bikes we see on SG roads are the same boring Kips, NSRs,Super 4s. Everywhere.

 

But what are the chances of increasing the cc ratings? Not high, given the accident rate we see in the papers daily.

[scooterer]

That's exactly right.

 

Reminds me of the story of the hawker who was selling crabs in the wet market. The basket was open and the crabs were not tied up. A buyer asked the hawker, "aren't you afraid that they will run away like that?" Hawker answers "No problem, these are Singapore crabs, as soon a one tries to climb up the rest will pull him back down".

 

Unless Singapore bikers, as a whole get their act together and lower the overall accident and death rates, we will never have anything but clamping down on us by the authorities. You can say that its a few (and I would argue its more than a few) bad eggs that are spoiling it for the rest of us, but in the end it will still be seen as the collective fault of bikers in Singapore.

[Darth Goondu]

The majority of accidents and fatalities on the road are attributed to young riders on 2B bikes. It's a statistical fact that 2A/2 bikers do not contribute significantly to the figures. This could be to the experience and maturity obtained prior to the class upgrade.

 

Unless people get their act together and refrain from dangerous riding, there's no hope of any class being merged or removed.

[misterbean]

Originally posted by Constructicon@Jun 11 2005, 09:47 AM

But what are the chances of increasing the cc ratings? Not high

this i agree ... then again i think we are just giving our own opinion here ... nobody has mentioned about any petition to the authorities based on the results here

 

like the casino issue lor ... everyone can have their own opinions, but its only the gahment opinion that will count eventually

[boofeng]

Originally posted by sloth@Jun 8 2005, 05:58 PM

I think its better to peg licence qualification to advanced training (defensive riding and such), instead of going through the same test at different capacities. Its not realistic. Just my opinion.

yeah i kindof agree with that. defensive (and other technique-oriented) riding lessons are a better way to ensure riders are skilled than just going round the circuit with the relevant cc bikes. i passed my 2A but am still clueless about lots of riding techniques. think i'll sign up for the defensive riding classes soon, for my own safety.

 

i suppose this isn't implemented because it's too expensive. many singaporeans just want a bike to get on the road for transport, without paying too much. and perhaps restrictions in cc, and the long waiting time between licences, are meant to compensate for non-rigorous (and less expensive) training.

 

i'm more in favour of tougher and more comprehensive (and expensive i guess) training, which produces more able and responsible riders, who will then be allowed to ride bigger cc bikes, with less categories to go through (e.g. as proposed by people above, 400/>400, 250/600/>600) and/or less waiting time between licences. but that's not very feasible i guess, because there are many people who take a bike licence for simple transport (and do ride safely within the limits of their skills), and won't want to spend that kind of money for 'extra' skills they won't 'need'.

[Scorpion69]

I totally agreed with Constructicon!!!

 

Hai~ like I also mention b4 long ago 3 class/stage is fine but why can’t follow international law starting 2B lic. with at least a max of 250cc and so on. Have they every think for 2B bike rider safety? Like wat Superbike say small bike is more prone to accident because lack of power in split second decision. Partly also because 2B bike are lighter not like bigger bike which weight is not a consent.

 

Anyway Singapore is small don’t see the need to ride a bigger bike unless is of your own interest. Looking at the newer naked 2B bike Comet n Roadwin, they are as big as Super 4 today. So why they still keeps saying 2A lic. is for the purpose of handling a bigger bike? Does that sound logic?

 

If the rule has make 2B to max 250cc n 2A to max 600cc than most ppl may ride example a street bike hornet 250cc than to taking class 2B lic. for super 4, am I right? Or may be ppl will think is more justifiable to go for 2A lic. Like I say Singapore is a small country, we just want to get a descent street bike to ride to work. Because of the restriction of 200cc we ended up riding a light n powerless bike that may cause hurt to ourselves.

 

Just my own point of view, thanks!!!

[Constructicon]

Originally posted by Hornet69@Jun 12 2005, 04:07 AM

I totally agreed with Constructicon!!!

 

Hai~ like I also mention b4 long ago 3 class/stage is fine but why can’t follow international law starting 2B lic. with at least a max of 250cc and so on. Have they every think for 2B bike rider safety? Like wat Superbike say small bike is more prone to accident because lack of power in split second decision. Partly also because 2B bike are lighter not like bigger bike which weight is not a consent.

 

Anyway Singapore is small don’t see the need to ride a bigger bike unless is of your own interest. Looking at the newer naked 2B bike Comet n Roadwin, they are as big as Super 4 today. So why they still keeps saying 2A lic. is for the purpose of handling a bigger bike? Does that sound logic?

 

If the rule has make 2B to max 250cc n 2A to max 600cc than most ppl may ride example a street bike hornet 250cc than to taking class 2B lic. for super 4, am I right? Or may be ppl will think is more justifiable to go for 2A lic. Like I say Singapore is a small country, we just want to get a descent street bike to ride to work. Because of the restriction of 200cc we ended up riding a light n powerless bike that may cause hurt to ourselves.

 

Just my own point of view, thanks!!!

Just a few days ago, a lorry whack into my lane, and my SP barely have enough 'power' to propel me out of the danger zone.

 

The main reason I'm upgrading is becos of this safety issue. It's worse when u r carrying a pillion on a under-powered bike, restricted by the 200cc cap.

 

Accidents rates due to bikers's own recklessness, we cannot argue. But accidents due to fact the the bike is not able to get u out of danger zone is a life wasted, for no logic reasons.

We are not asking for 400cc rockets for 2B, but city traffic like here, I suppose a 250cc traffic buster is much better than a 150cc or less 'sports' bike.

 

I encounter peak hour traffic everyday, and if u r me,you will relish the extra power, presence and stopping ability of a bigger bike.

FYI, I don't get myself into dangerous situations for fun.

 

When I got my 2A, the feeling is that ,'damn, it's finally over. Over with that stupid waiting lesson time for the next prac,...etc just so that I can get myself a decent bik, not the underpowered SP.'

[yctradingsg]

at first i was thinking the same.....where need there be 3 classes for bikes....wat a waste of time and money....i tot that all bikes are the same...

but think about it.....A 18yr old gets his cl2a licence and buys a 400cc 4stroke bike...will he be able to control the power as well as the weight of the vehicle? most prob not....If there were onli 1 or 2 classes of bikes.....there will be a sudden surge in deaths in Singapore....even across the custom, they have the classes system. So i guess, It's for safety reasons as well as for the companies to earn money la.....

[boofeng]

i think it's mainly a compromise between safety (youngsters and big bikes? nono), pleasing the majority (docile bikers, see all the uncle bikes and scooters around), and ensuring access to riding for everyone (even, or especially, for poorer people who use motorbiking as cheap transport).

 

don't think money is an issue when the gahmen makes policies such as these. everytime taxes (or fees going to the gahmen) go up, for reasons of public good (e.g. alcohol, cigarette, road-use-related tax/fees), the people complain that the gahmen wants more money. they're so rich already i don't think it's money. they're just manipulating behaviour, by hitting where it hurts. ;p

 

also, i don't understand the "need more power" argument. i've been riding for 1.5 years on a small bike, and never had the need to speed my way out of danger (ok fine, that's probably becoz of me being damn humji). but i think if people ride defensively (appropriate speed for your bike power) and don't get into dangerous situations their bike can't handle, then it's fine isn't it? if your bike doesn't have the acceleration, don't get into a situation where you need to respond (even to others' mistakes) with it. if your bike doesn't have braking power, don't ride so quickly or tailgate too closely.

 

i mean, i understand that a bigger bike would be so much easier (i'd like it that way too), but saying that it's a risk to ride small bikes isn't valid. it's only a risk when you ride a small bike as if it's a big bike.

 

i might be all wrong, of course. just my thoughts about this.

[Scorpione_phantom]

Originally posted by Hornet69@Jun 12 2005, 04:07 AM

I totally agreed with Constructicon!!!

 

Hai~ like I also mention b4 long ago 3 class/stage is fine but why can’t follow international law starting 2B lic. with at least a max of 250cc and so on. Have they every think for 2B bike rider safety? Like wat Superbike say small bike is more prone to accident because lack of power in split second decision. Partly also because 2B bike are lighter not like bigger bike which weight is not a consent.

 

Anyway Singapore is small don’t see the need to ride a bigger bike unless is of your own interest. Looking at the newer naked 2B bike Comet n Roadwin, they are as big as Super 4 today. So why they still keeps saying 2A lic. is for the purpose of handling a bigger bike? Does that sound logic?

 

If the rule has make 2B to max 250cc n 2A to max 600cc than most ppl may ride example a street bike hornet 250cc than to taking class 2B lic. for super 4, am I right? Or may be ppl will think is more justifiable to go for 2A lic. Like I say Singapore is a small country, we just want to get a descent street bike to ride to work. Because of the restriction of 200cc we ended up riding a light n powerless bike that may cause hurt to ourselves.

 

Just my own point of view, thanks!!!

I feel 400cc and 600cc has a big difference in terms of power wise and handling. they shouldn't be classified under the same class..600cc has to go into the cl2 category.

 

Stock 59BHP ( which MOST 400cc don't REALLI have) vs a 100 BHP 600cc . That's double the power.

[rhema83]

We assume that new riders cannot handle the power of a 400cc or 600cc. But we must remember that they are trained on a very small and underpowered 4-stroke bike.

 

Starting out with 600cc is possible if the riders are trained on the circuit with big bikes. I mean, they can bang tires and get the hang of balancing the bike using small bikes, but once they can ride comfortably around the circuit, they can start training with progressively bigger bikes. The riding course may be slightly longer as a result, but it will prepare them better for riding more powerful bikes.

 

In the USA, their "training bikes" are middleweights around 600cc, eg SV650, FZ6 and Hornet 600. CBR600F4 and the older GSXR600 are considered "beginner bikes". I don't see their death toll astronomically high.

 

Personally I advocate 2 economically viable classes: 250 and unlimited. Only a small handful of 400cc bikes are being produced and it will sooner or later be phased out. Do you think the Japanese manufacturers will accomodate us just because we have this 3-tier system?

 

Or we can have a horsepower-rated system and use the manufacturer's specifications (they never understate the power, anyway). We can then, say, have a sub-75BHP class and an open class. That will include open-class street bikes (like Bandit S, SV, Hornet, FZ) but exclude the "dangerous" 600cc sports (like CBR, GSXR and ZXR).

[boofeng]

Originally posted by rhema83@Jun 17 2005, 07:16 AM

We assume that new riders cannot handle the power of a 400cc or 600cc. But we must remember that they are trained on a very small and underpowered 4-stroke bike.

 

Starting out with 600cc is possible if the riders are trained on the circuit with big bikes. I mean, they can bang tires and get the hang of balancing the bike using small bikes, but once they can ride comfortably around the circuit, they can start training with progressively bigger bikes. The riding course may be slightly longer as a result, but it will prepare them better for riding more powerful bikes.

 

In the USA, their "training bikes" are middleweights around 600cc, eg SV650, FZ6 and Hornet 600. CBR600F4 and the older GSXR600 are considered "beginner bikes". I don't see their death toll astronomically high.

 

Personally I advocate 2 economically viable classes: 250 and unlimited. Only a small handful of 400cc bikes are being produced and it will sooner or later be phased out. Do you think the Japanese manufacturers will accomodate us just because we have this 3-tier system?

 

Or we can have a horsepower-rated system and use the manufacturer's specifications (they never understate the power, anyway). We can then, say, have a sub-75BHP class and an open class. That will include open-class street bikes (like Bandit S, SV, Hornet, FZ) but exclude the "dangerous" 600cc sports (like CBR, GSXR and ZXR).

yes, and perhaps we can also include a category for 125cc (or whatever hp) and below, for which training will be simpler, shorter and cheaper, to cater to those who only wish to use bikes as an economical means of transport. this category will not be a prerequisite for the 250cc licence, so anyone can start off on the 250cc licence, but the 250cc licence (and one year waiting time) should be prerequisite for the 600cc one.

 

this should meet the requirements of the "transport" bikers and the more, well, serious ones. not so different from having manual/auto driving licences.

 

it seems however that the govt is basically using class 2A as a deterrent to motorcycling in general, especially by young persons; it effectively increases the minimum age for a "big" bike by two years. which implies something about their perception of the ability of youths to take care of themselves and the people around them, and beg the questions: "is motorcycling on the same level of (public and personal) danger as smoking and alcohol consumption? and the same level of (public) responsibility as voting?"

[rhema83]

I seriously think that motorcycling carries a lot of responsibility. You are not just responsible for your own life, but your pillion's, and other road users'. You must also maintain your vehicle and keep the financial aspects in check. It is essentially the same as owning a car.

 

It certainly is on the same, if not higher, public and personal "danger level" as smoking and alcohol consumption. It does not carry the responsibility of voting, but it gives you the power to kill another person (and yourself) if you are not careful.

 

I am against 125cc class, though, because the number of 125cc bikes is very limited. Wave sales will jump through the roof, and the ever-popular RXZ (and RXK) will not be available to new riders. Not to forget the 150cc 2-stroke sport bikes and the 200cc scramblers.

 

250cc and open OR sub-75BHP and open. That's the best I can think of.

[StingRhea]

i doubt a fresh rider out of a 2b lesson can ride a haya immd. if 2b is till 250cc and 2a is till 600, nobody will get class 2. not say nobody but a handful.

 

govt also wan to "tan jia" and gah ment si "tan dua jia".

[boofeng]

edited: rhema, agree with you about cleaner 4 strokes. should certainly move in that direction =) some other interesting ideas too.

also, deleted a bunch of crap i wrote in the early morning too. =x [bunch of crap] will PM you instead, i guess, after some sleep. =)

[reddy]

k first; i dont think a guy who jus passed his riding license would go out and buy a hayabusa or r1... lets have or already have a rule kerbing this, lets say damm bloody expensive insurance for less experience rider if they really wanna get one. cos i dont think u will swim across an ocean when u just got ya bronze swimming cert r just learnt swimming ... its all up to each individual to gauge themselve. imagine the ol timers back in the 60s or 70s with only one license and riding a scooter etc etc then get unlimited class when they converted the license. why issit possible? isnt the power difference to the old bike to the present on are huge.

if u compare this to class 3, a p plate driver could buy a ferrari or a lambo. i personally saw this myself and im sure u read it in the news some time ago. imagine u training with a 100+ bhp car and accelerate avg 12 sec to 100 km and then when u passed, drive a 400+ 500 + bhp sports car which accelerate to less than 4 sec to 100km. why issit possible?? im sure car would create more damage than bike in an accident.

wat i agree is the 2 tier license. beginner license and advance license. the capacity is limit to 250 or 400 for beginner than we be more accustomed to the bigger bike when we upgrade.... after all u could just ride a rxk when u still have 2 b, get 2a and still ride rxk get class 2 and ride hayabusa.....wats the point???

i would welcome inputs from u all and this is just my humble opnion. u may beg to differ. cheers!

[Darth Goondu]

Originally posted by reddy@Jun 19 2005, 02:59 PM

k first; i dont think a guy who jus passed his riding license would go out and buy a hayabusa or r1... lets have or already have a rule kerbing this, lets say damm bloody expensive insurance for less experience rider if they really wanna get one. cos i dont think u will swim across an ocean when u just got ya bronze swimming cert r just learnt swimming ... its all up to each individual to gauge themselve. imagine the ol timers back in the 60s or 70s with only one license and riding a scooter etc etc then get unlimited class when they converted the license. why issit possible? isnt the power difference to the old bike to the present on are huge.

if u compare this to class 3, a p plate driver could buy a ferrari or a lambo. i personally saw this myself and im sure u read it in the news some time ago. imagine u training with a 100+ bhp car and accelerate avg 12 sec to 100 km and then when u passed, drive a 400+ 500 + bhp sports car which accelerate to less than 4 sec to 100km. why issit possible?? im sure car would create more damage than bike in an accident.

wat i agree is the 2 tier license. beginner license and advance license. the capacity is limit to 250 or 400 for beginner than we be more accustomed to the bigger bike when we upgrade.... after all u could just ride a rxk when u still have 2 b, get 2a and still ride rxk get class 2 and ride hayabusa.....wats the point???

i would welcome inputs from u all and this is just my humble opnion. u may beg to differ. cheers!

People would start with smaller bikes in an ideal world, unfortunately, we live in a less than ideal one, that's why we have bikers on the road thinking they are Valentino Rossi on TZRs / LCs etc.

 

The most significant difference bet a rider getting a huge bike and a driver getting a big cap car is that the fatality rate for the rider is significantly higher...

[reddy]

den i guess thats just their luck....u should asked yaself first before buying a big bike.. if they dont know themselves den let em know it the hard way.

[mechwira]

similar thread in rally point

 

i would like to bring to your attention to this page also:

 

page wif TP reply

 

not because i dam proud i got reply, but just so ppl interested can read wat tp had to say.

 

~cheers

 

btw, no need direct the "TP wont bother about me/us" statements at me personally, i sian those statements already.

[boofeng]

Originally posted by mechwira@Jun 20 2005, 11:50 AM

similar thread in rally point

 

i would like to bring to your attention to this page also:

 

page wif TP reply

 

not because i dam proud i got reply, but just so ppl interested can read wat tp had to say.

 

~cheers

 

btw, no need direct the "TP wont bother about me/us" statements at me personally, i sian those statements already.

ah... so it's all been discussed before. thanks for linking =)

yeah all the apathetic and simplistic responses are so duh..

 

mechwira i PMed you =)

[mechwira]

Originally posted by boofeng@Jun 20 2005, 04:10 PM

ah... so it's all been discussed before. thanks for linking =)

yeah all the apathetic and simplistic responses are so duh..

 

mechwira i PMed you =)

oh and btw, if you feel strongly enough about it and wanna start your own petition or whatever, i strongly support becoz i think you shd, whatever proposla you come up with even if very different from mine. i wont put my name again because i feel will be better for tp to see a completely different set of names asking for something similar, then they might get the idea that my letter wasn't some 'isolated sentiment' among bikers.

 

unfortunately, from what i gather in my own rally point thread and this thread here, bikers seem to be split roughly 50/50 on the issue. i certainly admit the 'anti-change' camp has valid points regarding rider ability thereby insisting on the status quo. my only counter-point has been that cannot deny 2a category of bikes worldwide is obsolete, regardless of its relevance to safety. but no need for me get into it again, i talked about it a lot in other threads already heh.

 

not counting those whose sentiments are limited to 'gahment wont care, no point', which i do not take into consideration in any way whatsoever.

[ang3lxx]

aiya s'pore bull crap only la 2 class enough liao lor. Not like 2b and 2a easy pass like tat. One prac already freaking cost u 23.80 fer 2b. U ask me. i find it real screwed.

[ang3lxx]

And consider our selves suay to stay in tis era lorx. My lecturer last time take one license can chiong 200cc above bikes liao wif one Class2b. Now change so much. Class 2b can only take 200cc below. Crap lor

[rhema83]

There is one thing that the US does to ensure that new riders can handle their bikes. They take their riding tests with their own bikes. So if a newbie buys a R1 with his learner's permit, he better be able to control it during the test. (Figure 8 and tight u-turns with an R1, anyone?) The chances of a tester passing him on a big powerful sports bike is also lower, because the tester will know better than to let a newbie who can barely control his R1 in 3rd gear onto the road alone.