FIRST PERSON/OPINION Via e-mail: Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain (Subtitle: Danforth’s legacy lives on) Re: ~https://www.roadracingworld.com/news/article/?article=30203~ It’s galling when corporations take statistics and twist them up to suit their agenda. It’s especially so when the agenda is to nail those of us who ride sportbikes. Thankfully, they’re usually transparent enough to catch at it … Overall motorcycle registrations increased 51%. Overall fatalities increased 58% … while helmet use dropped from 71% to 51%. Duhhhhh — big surprise … how many of those increased fatalities are the new, inexperienced riders trying/dying to look cool? And the major thrust of the article — that supersports bikes are deadly missiles that are becoming even deadlier — totally ignores the fact that of the four groups noted (Supersports, sport & unclad sport, cruisers/standards, and touring) the supersports had the second LOWEST increase in deaths … as a percentage AND in actual numbers … even though their increase in registrations was higher than all the other groups! And deaths per 10,000 riders of sport and unclad sports actually DECREASED in the measured 5-year period of ’00-’05. So forget the fact that more of the riders of the two largest demographic groups (cruisers and standards, and touring bikes) are dying, or that (proportionally and numerically) more of them hit the sauce and then dump their bike. Instead, start your press release by concentrating on the 9% of riders that cost the funders of your study the most money, paint them as irresponsible, and talk about banning or handicapping their machines. Smoke and mirrors, folks; smoke and mirrors. If I were to use the same tactic as the IIHS, after reading this press release I’d ask why aren’t they suggesting banning touring bikes? Or alcohol? B.J. Worsham LRRS #31 Old Westbury, New York FIRST PERSON/OPINION Via e-mail: ~http://seniorjournal.com/NEWS/SeniorStats/4-09-02Bikes.htm~ ~http://healthlink.mcw.edu/article/1031002245.html~ The above articles and several others reference the DOT/NHTSA reports that specify OLDER riders on CRUISERS are the majority and fastest growing segment of accidents. Also, alcohol played a part in 40% of the fatalities for the report. (I work in the insurance industry consequently and I ride street and track). The stats on alcohol use are eye opening. Perhaps the insurance industry should go after the brew makers since they seem to be the biggest factor across the board. From the The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration- ~http://www.nhtsa.dot.gov/people/injury/pedbimot/motorcycle/motorcycle03/recent.htm~ “A recent analysis of age trends shows that over the past 10 years, fatalities in the 20 to 29 year old age group, the group with consistently the highest annual number of motorcycle fatalities, decreased, while fatalities in the 40 and over age groups increased. During this time, however, there were more driving age individuals in the 40 and over age group in the United States.” Old data or not, you be the judge? Phillip Williamson Sanford, Florida More, from a press release issued by the AMA: Conclusions misleading in new IIHS report, AMA says The American Motorcyclist Association has expressed serious reservations about the conclusions reached in a report of motorcycle fatalities released by the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety this week. The IIHS report purports to show that sport-styled motorcycles are considerably more dangerous than other types of bikes. But an AMA analysis of the report notes that the methodology used in the research makes it difficult to determine whether that’s a valid conclusion. “The synopsis released by the IIHS claims that it has data showing a much higher fatality rate among so-called ‘supersport’ motorcycles,” noted Ed Moreland, AMA Vice President for Government Relations. “But that is by no means clear, based on this report.” The IIHS report is not a new study. Instead, it’s an analysis of existing data from the national Fatal Accident Reporting System. The methodology consists of a comparison of fatalities for different styles of motorcycles based on a rate per 10,000 registrations. But that approach ignores a number of key factors, like the number of miles the bike was ridden, the traffic environment in which it was used, along with the age and experience of the rider, among others. “Those factors are so significant that they could easily change the results the IIHS has reported,” said Moreland. “For instance, the IIHS has made no attempt to determine whether bikes in its ‘supersport’ category are ridden more miles than bikes in the ‘cruiser/standard’ category. Nor has it attempted to determine whether they are used more often in urban areas that represent a more dangerous environment than the rural interstates where touring bikes are likely to be used.” When it comes to age and riding experience, the IIHS does indicate that motorcycles in its “supersport” category are ridden by the youngest riders, averaging 27 years of age. In fact, its rankings of the average ages of riders killed on various styles of bikes coincides closely with the fatality rate it reports on that style of motorcycle. “In other words,” said Moreland, “it’s entirely possible this report actually demonstrates that younger, less-experienced riders are more prone to crash than older riders, regardless of the type of bike they’re riding. And that’s true for all types of motor vehicles–cars, trucks or motorcycles.” Making any interpretation of the IIHS report even more difficult is the classification system the group used in dividing motorcycles. It includes some unfamiliar categories, like “unclad sport” motorcycles, and leaves out well-established categories, like the sport-touring class. In an attempt to sort through this confusion, the AMA requested a copy of the classification system the IIHS used in its analysis and found several significant anomalies. For instance, although the IIHS report focuses on speed and acceleration as the factors that make its “supersport” category so dangerous, the two most powerful motorcycles you can buy in the United States, Kawasaki’s ZX-14 and Suzuki’s Hayabusa, are placed in the Sport category, which is rated considerably less dangerous. And they share that category with Honda’s ST1300 and Yamaha’s FJR1300, two bikes that define the sport-touring class. “No matter what name you put on it, the Hayabusa and the ST1300 are simply not in the same class of motorcycles,” Moreland said. “And if you’re claiming to rank fatality rates by category of motorcycle, it’s hard to get meaningful results when you lump those very different machines together and declare them to be in the same class.” The timing of the IIHS report is also unusual. Just this week, the National Transportation Safety Board specifically asked the Federal Highway Administration to work with states to develop uniform data-collection procedures that will result in better information about the number of miles traveled by motorcycles, one of the most important factors in evaluating crash statistics. As a result, this could be one of the final reports to use registration data exclusively, which is less accurate in reflecting actual motorcycle use. This new IIHS report is remarkably similar to a study the group financed 20 years ago that also purported to show higher fatality rates among sportbikes. At that time, the IIHS used its study as the springboard for a well-orchestrated campaign that included ready-made news footage it fed to TV news operations across the country. That campaign culminated in the introduction of a bill in the U.S. Senate to impose a horsepower limit on all motorcycles sold in the U.S. The current IIHS research has plenty of echoes of that era in the late 1980s. In fact, the final sentence of the IIHS “Status Report” on the subject, published Sept. 11, says, “Short of banning supersport and sport motorcycles from public roadways, capping the speed of these street-legal racing machines at the factory might be one way to reduce their risk.” In response to that previous attempt by the IIHS to ban sportbikes, the AMA conducted an analysis of the study and raised questions that the Association submitted to Harry Hurt, lead researcher on the most comprehensive study of motorcycle crashes ever conducted. Hurt reviewed the research and declared it “fatally flawed” for exactly the kind of methodology problems seen in the new IIHS report. The Association then coordinated a campaign among motorcyclists across the country that eventually led the senator to withdraw his proposed legislation. Ironically, the new IIHS report comes out just as the AMA and the motorcycling community have been successful in getting federal funding for the first comprehensive motorcycle safety study since the Hurt Report all those years ago. And thanks to funding from the industry, through the Motorcycle Safety Council, along with the AMA and individual riders, that study will begin this fall. “We look forward to getting the results of actual, in-the-field research that won’t just compare fatalities to some hypothetical class of motorcycle, but will pin down the actual factors involved in motorcycle crashes,” Moreland said. “That will be much more useful in helping save lives on the highway.” The American Motorcyclist Association: rights. riding. racing. Founded in 1924, the AMA is a non-profit organization with more than 280,000 members. The Association’s purpose is to pursue, protect and promote the interests of motorcyclists, while serving the needs of its members. For more information, visit the AMA website at www.AMADirectlink.com.