... and bikes have seriously increased in power over that time. Plus
better tyres, frames, etc mean that its the riders ability thats the
limiting factor now, rather than the bike. In the past it was
possible for your average fast street rider to approach the bikes
limits, but if the rider chases that now they will reach their
(riders) limit well before they reach the bikes limit.

My father is in his late 60's and still has a bike license (doesnt
cost anything on top of his car license), despite not having ridden
for over 40 years. When he road bikes his 500's etc (AJS, Norton,
BSA etc) and my uncles race bikes put out less HP than a ?gpx250?
Can you imagine him jumping on my GSXR1000!?!

Sean

--- In bikers_anon@..., K6 Dave <ozzak@y...> wrote:
>
> not only all that but some stats have shown that over 40's have
been absent from motorcycles for a number of years before deciding
to get back on two wheels again - and in some cases its been a lack
of familiarity with the bike they only just purchased that's caused
their crash - in other words, lack of riding experience between when
they stopped and started riding again say 20 years later contributes
to crashes.
>
>
> Sean Hawley <sean_hawley@y...> wrote: Crash data indicates that
over 40's are the most common crashers
> (but not necessarily the highest risk - more riders). They also
tend
> to ride larger capacity bikes, which also are typically more
> expensive if written off. Younger riders are more likely to ride
> lower capacity bikes, are often not insured (due to cost) and
have
> bikes that are a cheaper write off for the insurance company. You
> can buy several CBR250RR's for the price of a Cruiser or
MV/Ducati
> 999/Benelli ... or even an R1/gsxr100.
>
> Insurance isnt just about crash risk, there is all sorts of
> financial juggling going on to come up with exclusions and
premuiums.
>
> Sean
>
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>