hotleadsingerguy

I'd reach out, yes. I had the same issue when they were re-doing parts of 90 awhile back. It's obnoxious, and it usually means I have to make a hard jump from far-end to far-end of the lanes to cross the barrier quickly.

If the Jacket fits you correctly then you will stop noticing the armor after your second ride...I am a believer in the armor.

This. My jacket has armor all over, but as soon as I'm 30ft from home I don't even think of it anymore.

I'd put it toward a BMW S1000RR. I love my 2013 ZX6R (great size and weight), but BMW makes a phenomenal bike.

I don't wave at trikes... or motorcycles/scooters with training wheels.

 

Not just out of spite (because they aren't REALLY motorcycles), but god forbid they try to wave back and can't manage the multitasking, wrecking in some fiery crash... I'd feel terrible.

This. I generally don't wave to can-am and scooters because most of them are barely staying on the bike as-is. Adding waving to their list of things to do means there's a good chance they're going to cross the line and run into me.

I don't think I've done anything really embarrassing on my bike, but the only time I almost dropped a bike was in a parking lot. I was getting to the end of an aisle and a guy decided to jet out of another aisle *far* too quickly for the parking lot. I slammed on my brakes as I was making the turn and almost high-sided. Threw down my left leg in front of the bike to keep it from hitting the pavement, and immediately regretted it. A 400lbs bike and a 160lbs man being stopped by my one leg...it wasn't comfortable. Luckily, I kept it at a high enough angle to keep it off the ground, but it hurt.

He said he "acted out" and was "in a rage"...  I'm sorry, these are words used by bad parents to dismiss the bad behavior of their young children.  I'm not an advocate of "beating" children, but I do believe in the adage "spare the rod, spoil the child".  Junior is on a fast track to being a permanent guest of the state.

This. It's obvious he was kind of "created" to be the way he is.

Two things:

1) People coming *off* anti-anxiety or anti-depression medication are generally far more unstable than people that have never taken them. My ex, who was a fairly put-together woman, took anti-anxiety medication in college because she'd have panic attacks before almost every test. She stopped taking them after we graduated and for the next 3 months she was *all* over the charts. She'd break down in Macy's when she'd see a child crying, she'd laugh like a maniac over dumb jokes, and sometimes she'd just get depressed for a few hours and couldn't figure out why. It took awhile for her to even back out.

2) I'm surprised the Harley took that much damage. They're made with the idea in mind that their owners will probably drop them many times, being Harley riders 

Why should people be banned from a forum for considering insurance fraud? I don't see any relation there.

Because all it does is propagate the idea that it's acceptable.

If you have motorcycle money you have insurance money.  Grow up.

This.

I mean no offense, but you won't get sympathy from me on this, OP. You were driving without insurance and hit somebody. If things happened the way you said, then the "issues" she found probably weren't even from the accident (she's probably hit other things), but you not having insurance and then attempting insurance fraud to pay for any damages means I hope you don't get off easily.

1) You can't blame your wife, you're right. It's your fault for not checking up on it and making sure you have insurance on a vehicle before you drive it around. Literally, the insurance card should tell you what vehicle is covered.

2) You hit somebody. It makes no difference whether there was ice and snow on the ground. Failure to Control or Assure Safe Following Distance -- pick one.

The fact that people don't get banned on this forum for considering insurance fraud is crazy to me.

BTW I'm not condoning truck drivers crossing lanes and driving all over the place...I'm not condoning *anyone* from driving/riding unsafely.

But trying to keep trucks off the road is ludicrous. It's just as bad as truck drivers saying "Motorcycles shouldn't be allowed here". I'd say there are more accidents or problems caused by new riders going down there and trying to run it at speeds they shouldn't.

First you quoted something from 2011.

 

Second have you been there? 

I have been there. And yes, I rode it at speeds I shouldn't have, but it was awhile ago. Importantly, I've learned a lot since then.

I didn't know the post was from 2011, but the topic was at the top of the list as new posts and I hadn't seen it before, so I think it's unfair to blame me for not reading the entire thread and responding to the point of it.

Maybe the legal question is will you sign the petitions? Copied from another forum.

Ikes law is aimed at keeping large and over sized vehicles off 129 because of the roads dangerous curves and large population of motorcyclists who ride on it. The obvious issue is discussed at length on the other forum, riders need to slow down, be aware of possible obstacles that could be in their path.

LOL I absolutely will not sign this. This is coming from someone that has ridden sportbikes almost exclusively since I turned 16 (over 13 years ago).

It's a public road...and the petition is basically saying "Sportbike riders want to ride the dragon's fail beyond legal speeds, and trucks are bad for that".

The problem isn't that trucks are driving on the road...the problem is that most squids don't have enough self-control to keep from going way too fast.

It looks very KTM-ish.

 

79bhp (crank) and 353 lbs wet would be all kinds of fun

I was also thinking KTM when I saw it. It was the first thing that came to mind.

As for the hp and weight...I don't know. I thought about a Ducati, but who knows.

You don't need to go to a lake just come up to cleveland and ride on I-71 if you want to ice race I got to do it for two hours yesterday on my ride home from work. Even in my soobie I was having a hard time keeping any speed up without shifting sideways. 

This lol I live in Cleveland and it's been fun.

You should probably reread your first sentence in that block I quoted...

 

I specifically pointed to several crashes I've personally taken where my head never struck anything..

 

Helmets are great, I wear one most of the time when I ride my XX, but I'm not a proponent of laws intended to protect one from themselves.

Err...what? My post said "If you get in an accident and land on your head without a helmet...", to further explain the first sentence. Did you seriously stop at the first sentence, and then form a reply?

My insurance is pretty inexpensive. You may look into that again. Chances are your rates are so high because you're...

 

A. Young

B. Male and Young

C. High Risk For a Crash (read: Male and Young on a Supersport)

D. Not Very Smart, Hence the Overpayment on Insurance

 

Also, I'd like to know how taxes are affected by my lack of safety gear.

I actually never said my insurance rates were high...I said insurance rates and taxes (as a whole, not mine) are higher than they should be because of things like this. Seriously, I'm trying not to be offensive, but it's like you're reading a few words or a sentence out of each of my posts and replying with a smartass response.

1) I'm 30, so "young" no-longer pertains to my age

2) I'm male, but since we have that in common it would have no effect on any perceived difference in our insurance costs (perceived, because you have no idea what I pay)

3) High risk for a crash -- anyone with a sportbike is classified as this to the insurance companies

4) Not very smart? Good one lol I have multiple graduate degrees and make a fairly good amount of money. I was also special operations in the air force, which is one of the hardest positions in the military to achieve and then succeed in (physically, sure, but mentally, as well).

Taxes are affected by the lack of proper riding gear because everyone that is severely injured or killed while operating any type of vehicle on public roads increases the need (according to the government) for a "rehabilitation pocket" fund. These funds are basically where the money comes from that contributes to the government assistance people in those situations are afforded. As the need for those funds increases, the pot that contains those funds is necessarily grown.

It's not a linear relationship, but it's a fact that tax rates are increased because of higher motor vehicle accident rates. Some states even have "financial responsibility" laws, which directly increase the amount of taxes or payments required when operating certain types of vehicles, because of the accident rates. Texas is a huge proponent, which collects more money for registration because of those rates.

Guaranteed to kill me? then i must be dead...

 

I have dropped motorcycles several times and i can tell you that most crashes did not involve my head... most of them involved my shoulder, and my back... mostly cause i'm screwing around in the yard trying to get better at wheelies (during which i don't wear a helmet)

 

In fact, the only time i do wear a helmet is when i plan to ride my bike faster than 40 mph... 

 

Also, whether my car has seat belts or airbags is none of your business either. 

You should *probably* re-read the post you quoted. I, specifically, pointed to accidents where the rider's head had an impact.

My lack of safety gear doesn't have shit to do with you, brother. Keep your greasy, do-gooder hands away from me and my property.

Oh...man I wish I had realized idiots not wearing recommended gear *WASN'T* one of the reasons insurance rates and taxes were so high.

That's sarcasm. It *is* one of the reasons those two things are higher than they should be. Fools get in accidents without gear and exorbitant health costs raise both insurance and taxes.

So ya, it *does* have shit to do with me.

So why stop there? 

If helmets are mandated, why not mandate leather jackets, leather gloves, back protectors, goggles, leather pants, boots, a cup, heated jacket liner, ABS system, and an airbag?

 

Especially for children's motorcycles 

This is almost a joke post...I can't tell if you're kidding. Of that entire list, only one thing will guaranteed kill you if you don't have it: Helmet.

If you get in an accident and land on your head without a helmet, there's an extremely high chance you'll be dead (or in *very* bad shape*). Lacking the rest of your list might hurt you (break some bones, hurt your eyes, protect your nuts, provide more comfort, or general overall safety), but only one thing will kill you if overlooked: A helmet.

Don't get dramatic...anyone riding a bike *should* be forced to wear a helmet. It's the same reason seat belts and airbags are mandatory in cars now...without those two things any kind of serious accident will most-likely kill (again, because your *HEAD* will hit something).

Your freedom to make choices about your health and well being was relinquished when Obama was voted into office.  It is time to admit that the sheeple have spoken and now we all must reap the benefits of this.  Enjoy your self made nanny state with forced healthcare and the government telling you how to run your life. 

 

Thank you.

 

This is a stupid post, sorry.

There's no "freedom of choice". You're using public roads, which means you have to abide by whatever rules exist for those roads. I don't see everybody complaining that all cars have to have two headlights, or working taillights, or exhaust systems that don't deafen the neighborhood, etc...

Again, there's no such thing as freedom of choice. Letting people ride without helmets shouldn't be allowed anyway.

I'm generally for the government staying out of the "choice" area, but in this case I'm all for it. It's not the government or insurance companies that suffer for people getting in accidents when not wearing a helmet...it's the taxpayers. The government funds end up picking up a lot of that junk, and we're the one that pay for it.

On top of it, nobody wants their 16 year old kid to have to see a fool not wearing a helmet get his skull blasted in half because they got in a simple accident. Generally, the people that don't wear a helmet are also the ones that aren't as careful about their riding. 1 stupid stunt and that person's face is smashed in half on the back of an SUV.

California's been doing it for years. They only rent cruisers and a few sport-cruisers, but the prices are around $150 for 2 days, including gear. If you bring your own gear it's like $120 for 2 days or so.

It's not Enterprise, but there are a bunch of companies that do it.

More news

 

http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/10/07/20850173-fourth-biker-charged-in-new-york-suv-chase-cops-seek-two-more

 

All down for charging this guy, but gang assault? I might be overly cautious, but I'm a bit worried about that charge.

I guess you don't know what Gang Assault is...

Gang Assault 2nd Degree -- A person is guilty of gang assault in the second degree when, with

intent to cause physical injury to another person and when aided by two

or more other persons actually present, he causes serious physical

injury to such person or to a third person.

Gang Assault 1st Degree -- A person is guilty of gang assault in the first degree when, with

intent to cause serious physical injury to another person and when aided

by two or more other persons actually present, he causes serious

physical injury to such person or to a third person.

Yup...that about perfectly sums up what happened. I'd say he should be charged with 1st degree gang assault.

Ah the starboyz.......what a pack of idiots. I met a few of them, my cousin used to ride with some of them and do stupid, squiddy shit. The few I met were complete dicks. Plenty good at stunting but no actual useful riding skill. Just out there making the rest of us look bad.

This. I knew a few in college and couldn't agree more...even the ones I considered friends were still complete idiots when it came to riding. Flying around the straight ends of 90 and 480 at 120-150mph stunting is idiotic and dangerous.

You do understand that the US models very well could have a different map than what is found on the Euro bikes, right?  Just because in Peru they have a recall, doesn't mean the US bikes are having the same issue.  All US bikes come with what they call CA specs and can be different...

 

There was a recall on the voltage regulators for 09-12s I remember, but nothing on ECUs...  And trust me, Kawasaki USA isn't oblivious.  You make it sound like Kaw USA is in the dark.  Silly...

Maybe you should read the links before you post anymore about this topic, because there are hundreds of people on other websites complaining about this issue and having it resolved ENTIRELY by getting an ECU replacement. The ECU Kawasaki is replacing it with has a different serial than the one that comes from the factory and solves the issues completely. Dealerships around the country are trying to get the ECUs replaced in this model bike, but Kawasaki still hasn't announced a recall.

Obviously different sectors have different mappings...but it's not the mappings that are at fault here. It's a hardware issue, as confirmed by multiple Kawasaki divisions around the world (and the ECUs are, for the most part, only assembled in Japan, USA, and the Philippines...but using the same parts, so this will affect almost all models built in that time period). If it weren't, a firmware update could be pumped to every market and fix the issue instantly.

The 09-12 models are different from the 13. The ECU is a different version (it's more closely related to the ECU in the Ninja 300). Problems in the 09-12 would have virtually no effect on the iteration in the 13.

You can think whatever you want. Kawasaki America is denying there are any issues for right now, which is most-likely marketing but screams ignorance. I knew from the beginning what the issue was and you spent a good deal of time and effort inferring I was an idiot and didn't know what I was talking about.

I thought you said yours was.  I can't see the original thread anymore.  Sorry for any confusion. 

No I said my bike has the starting issue and it's because the ECU is bad (according to a myriad of other websites as well as a Kawasaki recall in a few countries). The problem is that while some dealerships are more than happy to replace the ECU and charge it to the warranty, many will not because they're not certain if the warranty will cover it and apparently Kawasaki America has no idea this is an issue.

Read some of the links I put up at the beginning of the thread though...it's an issue all over the place with these models and everyone that's had their ECU replaced with the newer iteration has had 0 issues.

The recall in Australia and Peru both said that a firmware update is not possible, as there's a hardware component at fault. The only fix is replacing the ECU.

I need a suppressor for it "one of these days", the neighbors might freak a bit otherwise. 

Heck...you might even be able to use an MC helmet AS a suppressor lol