Wanker Street
Biggus the Great
Went for a drive down to see the Tazzie ferry today from Beaumaris end
of the coast road (laughin too much to see the name!). and Talk about
Wannabee City... 95% of riders in shorts and singlets/T-Shirts!
What a pack of wanks... obviously never had gravel rash, or seen
anyone go thru it. or had skin grafts.....
Oh and the girlfriend in bikini top and bike pants with thongs on.....
That would make a nice mess....
TL1000R's are now offically wank bikes, dozens of them with Gino with
singlet and thongs, and shorts going up and down (in big wogs out of
work accent) "with the Yoshi on the moit".. 10 grand in first so
everyone looks at them... big 3 rev wheelies going about 20 ft wih the
wheel 8 in off the road... Then look around to say hey man Im kewl....
Shitcatis, never seen so much shit in one place with square tires. One
wog was offended when we laughed at his tires, They were SQUARE... as
were most of them.... never been on a side stand angle on the road I
dont think..
R1's, not one there could ride them... again square tires, and all in
their safety thongs and shorts.. BUT they did have their sunnys on! oh
yes, that will protect them from flying skin getting in their eyes
It was worth the price of admission to laugh!
Wank in a shop with an Aprillia on a race stand on foot path lined so
everyone going past can see it.....
Oh the boat is big too!
CBRMan
"Charlie" <cdriver**remove_this**@bigpond.net.au> wrote in message
news:3DD796A2...@bigpond.net.au...
> so people who choose to participate in a rather dangerous form of
> transport / sport (as opposed to so called 'normal' ones) are fine, but
> the ones who do so a little more dangerously than the norm are utter
> wankers. Did I get that right?
No. I think he's talking about the guys who do their L's, then P's on
borrowed mates bikes, wait a year and then buy a TLR or Duc, then ride it
with no experience. These guys just ride to 'be seen', only ride when
theres no chance of rain and only ride down to the beach, lygon st or chapel
st. Each to their own. I don't mind these guys too much because: (1)
They are buying m/c stuff, which increases the amount sold, increasing the
amount made, making manufacturing costs cheaper and consequently lowering
the price I pay for shit. and (2) I can buy their pristine, never been
leant more than 15 degrees, 2500km, 1 year old bike off them when the
colour scheme is no longer 'shit hot maaaaate'.
--
Stuart
ZZR600E9 - London
CBR600F3 - Melbourne
Biggus the Great
understand.....
> but the ones who do so a little more dangerously than the norm are utter wankers.
They are the ones that crash, and put healthcare rates up, and fuck it
for others.. Ahhhh but they are the ones that "IT WILL NEVER HAPPEN TO
ME".... trust me thats all crap.......
> Did I get that right?
So you think its kewl to ride in Singlet and Shorts??
ever had a skin graft???
Charlie
the ones who do so a little more dangerously than the norm are utter
Charlie
Nev..
> Went for a drive down to see the Tazzie ferry today from Beaumaris end
>
> TL1000R's are now offically wank bikes, dozens of them with Gino with
> singlet and thongs, and shorts going up and down
Couldn't have been today... Gino was down at PI with the rest of us
safety nazis sweating it out in our full protective gear.
Nev..
'02 CBR1100XX #2
paulh
Great) wrote:
>Well Ive never seen so many wankers in one spot. EVER.....
>
>Went for a drive down to see the Tazzie ferry today
wow..... exciting day...
paulh
Zebee Johnstone
Biggus the Great <NOSPAMTHA...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>so people who choose to participate in a rather dangerous form of transport / sport (as opposed to so called 'normal' ones) are fine,
>huh? You ride a bike you wear the right stuff, it aint that hard to
>understand.....
>
>> but the ones who do so a little more dangerously than the norm are utter wankers.
>They are the ones that crash, and put healthcare rates up, and fuck it
They are?
How come? They aren't going fast or riding much according to you.
News to me that wearing t-shirt makes you crash...
Zebee
triffid
Skipper
CBRMan wrote:
>
> No. I think he's talking about the guys who do their L's, then P's on
> borrowed mates bikes, wait a year and then buy a TLR or Duc, then ride it
> with no experience. These guys just ride to 'be seen', only ride when
> theres no chance of rain and only ride down to the beach, lygon st or chapel
> st. Each to their own. I don't mind these guys too much because: (1)
> They are buying m/c stuff, which increases the amount sold, increasing the
> amount made, making manufacturing costs cheaper and consequently lowering
> the price I pay for shit. and (2) I can buy their pristine, never been
> leant more than 15 degrees, 2500km, 1 year old bike off them when the
> colour scheme is no longer 'shit hot maaaaate'.
>
It's nice to see someone putting a positive spin on a bad situation, I
must admit I hadn't thought of it in those terms before. :-)
Despite agreeing with you Stuart I also agree with the notion that these
people are ultimately a hazard to motorcycling as a whole as Biggus said
due to the increased representation in stats etc.
Doug.
Zebee Johnstone
Skipper <skip...@optushome.com.au> wrote:
>
>
>Despite agreeing with you Stuart I also agree with the notion that these
>people are ultimately a hazard to motorcycling as a whole as Biggus said
>due to the increased representation in stats etc.
But are they over-represented in the stats?
Saying it doesn't make it so.
If Biggus can give me the source of his info, quote the documents and
stats, I'll be impressed.
I'll be impressed cos the accident reports don't usually state "this
guy was one of the ones Biggus saw that day"...
The clothing thing is irrelevant as far as stats are concerned. The
only study that's been done on it shows that if someone makes it as
far as the stats, makes it as far as listed as "accident involving
injury" then they have worse injuries than gravel rash.
Desides, hands up all those who ride in normal jeans. You do realise
that those are next to useless in preventing gravel rash don't you?
That they tear up instantly, and while they may make a not-very-bad
rash into a pretty-small-really one, they certainly won't make
"hospital time and skin grafts" into "oh a bit of dettol will fix it".
Zebee
sharkey
>
> ever had a skin graft???
Nope. Have you? Really? So how does the jacket help then?
-----sharks
kiwipete
they do they are worse off... and that puts rates up... according to what I
perceive your stance to be teeshirts mean they crash less.... The truth is
if the accident rate is the same... the damage higher... the net result is
rates up!
kiwipete
"Zebee Johnstone" <ze...@zip.com.au> wrote in > News to me that wearing
smee
> for others.
Didn't YOU crash wearing all that protective gear?
Aren't we all still paying for your injuries?
Pot kettle black.
>
> > Did I get that right?
> So you think its kewl to ride in Singlet and Shorts??
It would be cheaper for a funeral than a crash wouldn't it?
Last Saturday i witnessed many Anglo's wearing singlets and shorts doing the same.
Why don't you write about them too?
Sometimes biggus you are spot on at other times you can be a right plonker.
Charlie
>
> Maybe they don't Zebee... but they have as much chance as anyone and when
> they do they are worse off... and that puts rates up... according to what I
> perceive your stance to be teeshirts mean they crash less.... The truth is
> if the accident rate is the same... the damage higher... the net result is
> rates up!
yeah, just like all the motorcyclists put rates up... whats the big
deal?
Charlie
John Olive
pants on a really well built young lady!
John Olive
"kiwipete" <chat...@NOSPAMclear.net.nz> wrote in message
news:3dd8...@clear.net.nz...
paulh
wrote:
>>>> but the ones who do so a little more dangerously than the norm are utter wankers.
>>>They are the ones that crash, and put healthcare rates up, and fuck it
>
>
>>They are?
>>
>>How come? They aren't going fast or riding much according to you.
>>
>>News to me that wearing t-shirt makes you crash...
>>
>>Zebee
>
>
>and lack of experience does make you crash ?
I've worn a tshirt on abike.. I'm experienced.
(mind you.. only ever worn it once for any distance beyond the shopping centre..
that was a bit freaky..)
paulh
paulh
wrote:
>Maybe they don't Zebee... but they have as much chance as anyone and when
>they do they are worse off... and that puts rates up... according to what I
>perceive your stance to be teeshirts mean they crash less.... The truth is
>if the accident rate is the same... the damage higher... the net result is
>rates up!
well no... cos people with tshirts may take more care due to an innate perceived
vulnerability.
Do you have any facts...or are we just gonna argue based on opinions.
I note that the general M/C community gripes about external control of our life
but first chance we get we gripe about some other bikers choice of actions.
paulh
kiwipete
news:slrnatg1dj...@zipperii.zip.com.au...
> In aus.motorcycles on Mon, 18 Nov 2002 05:14:30 +1000
> Skipper <skip...@optushome.com.au> wrote:
> >
> >
> >Despite agreeing with you Stuart I also agree with the notion that these
> >people are ultimately a hazard to motorcycling as a whole as Biggus said
> >due to the increased representation in stats etc.
>
> But are they over-represented in the stats?
>
> Saying it doesn't make it so.
They are at chance of increased injury and therefore are over
represented.... or do you believe its unnecessary to wear safety gear??
> If Biggus can give me the source of his info, quote the documents and
> stats, I'll be impressed.
>
Its called common sense
> I'll be impressed cos the accident reports don't usually state "this
> guy was one of the ones Biggus saw that day"...
>
> The clothing thing is irrelevant as far as stats are concerned. The
> only study that's been done on it shows that if someone makes it as
> far as the stats, makes it as far as listed as "accident involving
> injury" then they have worse injuries than gravel rash.
What about impact injurys, soft tissue injurys etc....?
> Desides, hands up all those who ride in normal jeans. You do realise
> that those are next to useless in preventing gravel rash don't you?
Why focus on gravel rash as being the only soft tissue injury...
> That they tear up instantly, and while they may make a not-very-bad
> rash into a pretty-small-really one, they certainly won't make
> "hospital time and skin grafts" into "oh a bit of dettol will fix it".
>
> Zebee
To sum up Zebee, injurys involving impact can be gravel rash, bone or soft
tissue apart from abrasions... doesn't plain common sense tell us to dress
approprately?
kiwipete
paulh
wrote:
>> But are they over-represented in the stats?
>>
>> Saying it doesn't make it so.
>
>They are at chance of increased injury and therefore are over
>represented....
CAN YOU PROVE THIS?
> or do you believe its unnecessary to wear safety gear??
Its their choice. I'd rather that than forcing it on them.
I can live with them doing what they want.
>> The clothing thing is irrelevant as far as stats are concerned. The
>> only study that's been done on it shows that if someone makes it as
>> far as the stats, makes it as far as listed as "accident involving
>> injury" then they have worse injuries than gravel rash.
>
>What about impact injurys, soft tissue injurys etc....?
curiously most of my accidents have involved very little or no scrapage of my
leathers.. it was all impact damage or whiplash damage. I dont see how my
leathers helped anything much, except my boots helped my ankle in one.
>To sum up Zebee, injurys involving impact can be gravel rash, bone or soft
>tissue apart from abrasions... doesn't plain common sense tell us to dress
>approprately?
and who decides what is 'appropriate'..
paulh
kiwipete
abike.. I'm experienced.
> (mind you.. only ever worn it once for any distance beyond the shopping
centre..
> that was a bit freaky..)
>
> paulh
Why freaky Paul? Maybe because you knew it increased your risk of injury??
kp
kiwipete
> On Mon, 18 Nov 2002 11:26:48 +1300, "kiwipete"
<chat...@NOSPAMclear.net.nz>
> wrote:
>
> >Maybe they don't Zebee... but they have as much chance as anyone and when
> >they do they are worse off... and that puts rates up... according to what
I
> >perceive your stance to be teeshirts mean they crash less.... The truth
is
> >if the accident rate is the same... the damage higher... the net result
is
> >rates up!
>
> well no... cos people with tshirts may take more care due to an innate
perceived
> vulnerability.
> Do you have any facts...or are we just gonna argue based on opinions.
Its my opinion and would be hard to quantify on facts but common sense would
agree with me on this one Paul...
> I note that the general M/C community gripes about external control of our
life
> but first chance we get we gripe about some other bikers choice of
actions.
>
> paulh
Yes... when it affects others...
kiwipete
kiwipete
> On Mon, 18 Nov 2002 11:31:29 +1300, "kiwipete"
<chat...@NOSPAMclear.net.nz>
> wrote:
> >> But are they over-represented in the stats?
> >>
> >> Saying it doesn't make it so.
> >
> >They are at chance of increased injury and therefore are over
> >represented....
>
> CAN YOU PROVE THIS?
Yes.... lets both ride old bikes... we don't care crashing... and fall
off... I'll lay good odds on the fact that I will be better off with the
appropriate safety gear...
kp
Burnie M
Will you accept that a t-shirt is an indicator of lack of experience
and lack of experience does make you crash ?
Burnie M
Zebee Johnstone
Burnie M <burniem...@ozemail.com.au> wrote:
>On 17 Nov 2002 17:43:54 GMT, ze...@zip.com.au (Zebee Johnstone) wrote:
>
>>
>>News to me that wearing t-shirt makes you crash...
>>
>
>and lack of experience does make you crash ?
>
Nope. I've had a lot of experience, and I have been known to ride in
a t-shirt.
The only time I've crashed while not wearing a jacket was on oil at a
set of lights.
No damage to me at all, not even a bruise.
Zeee
sharkey
>
> Will you accept that a t-shirt is an indicator of lack of experience
> and lack of experience does make you crash ?
Nope. Not unless it's a Wiggles t-shirt anyway.
-----sharks (... anyway, experienced riders wear Hawaiian shirts
or flannies ...)
Zekt
> Well Ive never seen so many wankers in one spot. EVER.....
Went for a ride down to the beach last night as I wanted to
see if some mates were still down at the London hotel...
It took me three seconds to realise I'be better take another
way after some tosspot in a rented Ford Falcon did an overtaking
move around me that just about took my right leg with the car.
> Wank in a shop with an Aprillia on a race stand on foot path lined so
> everyone going past can see it.....
That's the guy that owns cafe racer. If you go in there there's a
stack of motorbike memorabilia, signed photos, etc. Needless to
say, the business owns the Mille, and he gets to ride it...
the lucky bastard :-)
Jase
ZR250
FuTAnT
a jacket. Scares the shit out of me. Suddenly you focus on how gritty and
abrasive the road must be if I fall off. It's just something you get used to
when you ride with full leathers, or a jacket at a minimum etc. It's quite
an odd sensation to go out without it.
Cam
'96 ZX6R
"kiwipete" <chat...@NOSPAMclear.net.nz> wrote in message
news:3dd8...@clear.net.nz...
John Olive
"paulh" <pa...@fahncahn.com> >
> and who decides what is 'appropriate'..
>
> paulh
The Appropriate Police of course, but you knew that!
John Olive
Wear a t-Shirt, jox or a g-String on your bike I really dont care, well
maybe if Clem were wearing a G-String and riding near me I would care?
Uglytim
from that cultural back ground carrying on like a bunch of sun gods who'd
got too much sun. To be honest I find them very funny, entertaining and
without their antics would have nothing to bitch about over my latte. I do
think it can be unfortunate when one sub culture starts bagging another sub
culture within its ranks. They ride, they are passionate about their bikes
and they have their own internal value sets about what's important. I might
never understand what they think is important. I don't fully get the Harley
scene either, but hey who'd say they were not legit bikers. So try to
sticking with taking the piss out of their antics than becoming judgemental,
most people I know from that background , just love a good "Such a Wog"
story.
Otherwise we'd all better start writing our Wanker St stories for The Flouro
Boys, Back of Bourke Chook Chasers Society, Hers and Hers matching leathers
Pty Ltd, It's not a pudding bowl that's my helmet Gang, etc etc.....
UT
"Biggus the Great" <NOSPAMTHA...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:3de3903e...@news.optusnet.com.au...
> Well Ive never seen so many wankers in one spot. EVER.....
>
> Went for a drive down to see the Tazzie ferry today from Beaumaris end
Zebee Johnstone
kiwipete <chat...@NOSPAMclear.net.nz> wrote:
>"Zebee Johnstone" <ze...@zip.com.au> wrote in message
>news:slrnatg1dj...@zipperii.zip.com.au...
>> In aus.motorcycles on Mon, 18 Nov 2002 05:14:30 +1000
>> Skipper <skip...@optushome.com.au> wrote:
>> >
>> >
>> >Despite agreeing with you Stuart I also agree with the notion that these
>> >people are ultimately a hazard to motorcycling as a whole as Biggus said
>> >due to the increased representation in stats etc.
>>
>> But are they over-represented in the stats?
>>
>> Saying it doesn't make it so.
>
>They are at chance of increased injury and therefore are over
>represented.... or do you believe its unnecessary to wear safety gear??
I think that jeans are not "safety gear".
I think that jackets cen help, but that for most crashes if it gets as
far as hospital and therefore into the stats, then the hospital visit
is for more than gravel rash.
>
>> If Biggus can give me the source of his info, quote the documents and
>> stats, I'll be impressed.
>>
>Its called common sense
I don't think so. See above.
>> The clothing thing is irrelevant as far as stats are concerned. The
>> only study that's been done on it shows that if someone makes it as
>> far as the stats, makes it as far as listed as "accident involving
>> injury" then they have worse injuries than gravel rash.
>
>What about impact injurys, soft tissue injurys etc....?
And jeans and a leather jacket help?
No, they don't.
Fully armoured leathers might, although I've been injured *through*
leather and *through* armour so I dunno,
However, if you are talking that kind of injury then I presume you are
adding those who wear anything but fully armoured leather top and
bottom to your list of evil people?
>> Desides, hands up all those who ride in normal jeans. You do realise
>> that those are next to useless in preventing gravel rash don't you?
>
>Why focus on gravel rash as being the only soft tissue injury...
Becauset that's the one people talk about, and that's the only one
that leather will save you from.
If you cop a handlebar in the gut, a leather jacket, even an armoured
one won't help.
>
>
>To sum up Zebee, injurys involving impact can be gravel rash, bone or soft
>tissue apart from abrasions... doesn't plain common sense tell us to dress
>approprately?
>
And jeans and a leather jacket won't save you from those.
So are you saying that those who wear such clothes are evil?
I've had a lot of getoffs. The ones that sent me to hospital were *in
spite* of the gear I was wearing. Broken bones, puncture injuries
through leather, cuts in spite of (or perhaps because of) armour, and
so on.
What saves you is not the gear. It's not falling off. If you think
that you'll be OK cos you wear leathers, I think you are foolish.
They will almost certainly help with minor injuries. They won't help
with the ones that get you in hospital, because those are from hitting
solid objects - things racers don't have to contend with and when
they do, they go to hospital too.
Wearing something to protect you from the cold and rain and insects
and hot bike seats is sensible. Wearing something to protect you from
minor injury is also sensible - non-hospital-level gravel rash is
still a week or two of pain and annoyance.
But it is very unlikely to keep you out of hospital if you have a
crash that's more than minor.
Meaning that the people who wear t-shirts aren't showing up in the
stats because of the gear. Which was the basis of the complaint.
Zebee
sharkey
> "paulh" <pa...@fahncahn.com> wrote:
> >
> > I've worn a tshirt on abike.. I'm experienced.
> > (mind you.. only ever worn it once for any distance beyond
> > the shopping centre.. that was a bit freaky..)
>
> of injury??
No, freaky because he'd never usually get that far from
the shopping centre, and his Double Moccachino spilt.
Fortunately, he was wearing leather pants, thus saving
himself from TERRIBLE INJURIES!
-----sharks
stef
> everyone going past can see it.....
You must be referring to Cafe Racer ... the bike is always out the front
(along with a newish scooter).
John Littler
news:d110779a.02111...@posting.google.com......snip...
> Sometimes biggus you are spot on at other times you can be a right
plonker.
Really ? He's been spot on ? When did that happen ? I must have missed it...
JL
John Littler
> that those are next to useless in preventing gravel rash don't you?
> That they tear up instantly, and while they may make a not-very-bad
> rash into a pretty-small-really one, they certainly won't make
> "hospital time and skin grafts" into "oh a bit of dettol will fix it".
That's actually not true, somewhere on the net (and I'm sure it's been
posted to ausmoto several times) is the resistance to abrasion of a number
of materials - worn jeans are actually better than new ones from memory and
the abrasion resistance isn't that bad.
From personal experience while jeans do wear through they're reasonably OK
at preventing gravel rash becoming skin grafts (at less than 100Ks anyway).
JL
Just Al
--
Al Gardner
Gardners(nospam)@ihug.com.au
1980 CX500 "Amelia"
MC: Are you sure there's not a Moto Guzzi hidden in there?
Nev.. <id...@mindless.com> wrote in message
news:3DD7A8C6...@mindless.com...
> Couldn't have been today... Gino was down at PI with the rest of us
> safety nazis sweating it out in our full protective gear.
michael
and preach about the merits of safety gears? it's so easy to be a
chicken shit and post up an article in this newsgroup.
btw. what's wrong with some guy showing off his TLR? hey i'ld prefer the
loud bikes than fluoro Nissan Skyline GTRs with loud crappy eurotrash
Scooter crap.
Biggus the Great wrote:
> Well Ive never seen so many wankers in one spot. EVER.....
>
> Went for a drive down to see the Tazzie ferry today from Beaumaris end
> of the coast road (laughin too much to see the name!). and Talk about
> Wannabee City... 95% of riders in shorts and singlets/T-Shirts!
> What a pack of wanks... obviously never had gravel rash, or seen
> anyone go thru it. or had skin grafts.....
>
> Oh and the girlfriend in bikini top and bike pants with thongs on.....
> That would make a nice mess....
>
> TL1000R's are now offically wank bikes, dozens of them with Gino with
> singlet and thongs, and shorts going up and down (in big wogs out of
> work accent) "with the Yoshi on the moit".. 10 grand in first so
> everyone looks at them... big 3 rev wheelies going about 20 ft wih the
> wheel 8 in off the road... Then look around to say hey man Im kewl....
>
> Shitcatis, never seen so much shit in one place with square tires. One
> wog was offended when we laughed at his tires, They were SQUARE... as
> were most of them.... never been on a side stand angle on the road I
> dont think..
>
> R1's, not one there could ride them... again square tires, and all in
> their safety thongs and shorts.. BUT they did have their sunnys on! oh
> yes, that will protect them from flying skin getting in their eyes
>
> It was worth the price of admission to laugh!
>
> Wank in a shop with an Aprillia on a race stand on foot path lined so
> everyone going past can see it.....
>
>
> Oh the boat is big too!
>
Zebee Johnstone
John Littler <johnl...@iprimus.com.au> wrote:
>"Zebee Johnstone" <ze...@zip.com.au> wrote in message
>news:slrnatg1dj...@zipperii.zip.com.au...
>> Desides, hands up all those who ride in normal jeans. You do realise
>> that those are next to useless in preventing gravel rash don't you?
>> That they tear up instantly, and while they may make a not-very-bad
>> rash into a pretty-small-really one, they certainly won't make
>> "hospital time and skin grafts" into "oh a bit of dettol will fix it".
>
>That's actually not true, somewhere on the net (and I'm sure it's been
>posted to ausmoto several times) is the resistance to abrasion of a number
>of materials - worn jeans are actually better than new ones from memory and
>the abrasion resistance isn't that bad.
>
I am basing it on a test carried out by a Yank mag.
Very simple - sandbag, material, drag behind a car.
The jeans shredded in an instant.
Zebee
**Cameron MkII
<snip>
> I note that the general M/C community gripes about external control of our life
> but first chance we get we gripe about some other bikers choice of actions.
Interesting, ain't it?
regards,
CrazyCam
sharkey
>
> Empirical evidence from your's truly's kneecaps (on account of I've
> never landed on my arse...) is that jeans are useless at 25kmh....
Mine have held on at higher that that ...
> Stitches once, doctor's visits 3 other times.
... skinned my knee anyway, though.
-----sharks
John Littler
Fair enough, if I get past inertia, I'll put some effort into finding the
report in question - it was from some suitably august body peopled by
boffins with lots of acronyms after their names.
Empirical evidence from yours truly's butt suggests that in medium speed
prangs (40-80/90K) denim jeans provide adequate abrasion resistance (ie in
the couple of get offs in the last 20 odd years all wearing jeans the
protection provided has meant no more than scabs and dettol resulting,
including 2 which gave broken bones)
JL
conehead
news:3de3903e...@news.optusnet.com.au...
>
> Went for a drive down to see the Tazzie ferry today from Beaumaris end
> of the coast road (laughin too much to see the name!). and Talk about
> Wannabee City... 95% of riders in shorts and singlets/T-Shirts!
> What a pack of wanks...
Sounds like a cheap day's entertainment, biggus. I nominate this in advance
for the 'next big thread' title, and I can picture the responses and the
respondees.
You old troller, you.
--
Conehead
I don't care, I don't have to
glitch1
Beautiful Sunday in Wank-town, eh??
Did they wear the 30+ :) ?
In case you didn't know, that's enuff protection...
Love it
cheers
pete
PS can't get square hoops for the Peg :(
:)
**Cameron MkII
<snip>
> Wear a t-Shirt, jox or a g-String on your bike I really dont care, well
> maybe if Clem were wearing a G-String and riding near me I would care?
Clem, would you consider doing that for money?
If so, how much per hour?
regards,
CrazyCam
conehead
> In aus.motorcycles on Mon, 18 Nov 2002 15:11:05 +1100
> never landed on my arse...) is that jeans are useless at 25kmh....
>
>
My heavy levi's lasted two feet when they hit the nice smooth bitumen with
my kneecaps in them at 40/50kmh. You could see the mark made by the jeans,
then the stripe of flesh & blood for about eight feet until I flipped over.
Kneecap itself didn't make any noticeable mark on the road.
Zebee Johnstone
Empirical evidence from your's truly's kneecaps (on account of I've
Skipper
numbers of us who present at A and E with gravel rash etc. The staff
take details on how the injury occured and forward that to Dept of
Health to provide explanations on where their $ have gone, this is one
of the reasons why Dr's get up in arms about why m/c are so dangerous,
not really because of the numbers of fatalities (which are too many but
probably not as bad as Pollies who have a drum to beat make out) but
based on the amount of the Healthcare budget that is spent on patching
up motorcycle related injuries as a whole.
I stand corrected in the way I put it, thanks Z.
Doug.
Zebee Johnstone wrote:
> In aus.motorcycles on Mon, 18 Nov 2002 05:14:30 +1000
> Skipper <skip...@optushome.com.au> wrote:
>
>>
>>Despite agreeing with you Stuart I also agree with the notion that these
>>people are ultimately a hazard to motorcycling as a whole as Biggus said
>>due to the increased representation in stats etc.
>>
>
> But are they over-represented in the stats?
>
> Saying it doesn't make it so.
>
>-----snipped-----
> Zebee
>
paulh
wrote:
>>
>> well no... cos people with tshirts may take more care due to an innate
>perceived
>> vulnerability.
>> Do you have any facts...or are we just gonna argue based on opinions.
>
>Its my opinion and would be hard to quantify on facts but common sense would
>agree with me on this one Paul...
well why can't he fucking post for himself...
>> but first chance we get we gripe about some other bikers choice of
>actions.
>>
>> paulh
>
>Yes... when it affects others...
well everything I do outside of the sanctity of my own bedroom can 'affect'
others in some esoteric way or other.
I hereby demand that ALL motorcyclists should henceforth never do ANYTHING that
may affect me in any way whatsoever.
paulh
Skipper
starting to sound a little like safety Nazis by implying that people who
didn't wear safety gear would be more likely to suffer an injury than
those who do and I suppose she is correct, whether you do or don't wear
safety gear makes no difference in the % of likelyhood of you having a
prang, it makes a hell of a lot of difference in the end result though.
This was my intended point and I stuffed it up, that's all.
Doug.
kiwipete wrote:
>
>>
>
> To sum up Zebee, injurys involving impact can be gravel rash, bone or soft
> tissue apart from abrasions... doesn't plain common sense tell us to dress
> approprately?
>
> kiwipete
>
>
>
Skipper
kiwipete wrote:
> "paulh" <pa...@fahncahn.com> wrote in message > I've worn a tshirt on
> abike.. I'm experienced.
>
>>(mind you.. only ever worn it once for any distance beyond the shopping
>>
> centre..
>
>>that was a bit freaky..)
>>
>>paulh
>>
>
> Why freaky Paul? Maybe because you knew it increased your risk of injury??
>
> kp
>
>
>
Nah, I find it freaky too, I am so used to riding in boots, jacket,
jeans, and helmet that if I'm not wearing any of the above I always feel
self-concious.
Doug.
Zebee Johnstone
Skipper <skip...@optushome.com.au> wrote:
>Actually Pete, I think Zebee was making the point that Biggus and I were
>starting to sound a little like safety Nazis by implying that people who
>didn't wear safety gear would be more likely to suffer an injury than
>those who do and I suppose she is correct, whether you do or don't wear
>safety gear makes no difference in the % of likelyhood of you having a
>prang, it makes a hell of a lot of difference in the end result though.
>This was my intended point and I stuffed it up, that's all.
Yeah, but *does* it?
That's my point.
Sure, people think it does, but does it?
Does wearing jeans make a difference between hospital or no?
Not in my experience.
Will someone wearing a t-shirt end up in hospital with worse injuries
than someone in a leather jacket?
That's harder, but as I've been hurt through leather and it was
*those* injuries that got me on the stats list, I don't know.
The only study I know of backs me up. They defined "proper gear" as
jeans, jacket, gloves, boots, and found that the ones who went to
hospital were sometimes wearing that lot, sometimes not. That the
gear didn't maek the difference because the injuries the ones in
hospital were suffering were not *just* from lack of gear.
In other words, there just isn't that much serious gravel rash
happening, compared to broken bones, puncture wounds, head injury,
internal injury.
Zebee
Smee
melbourne imho.
--
Look beyond the window, don't just focus on your own reflection.
Remove nickers to reply for email.
ab...@spamcop.net
for all spam.
Smee
--
Skipper
Zebee Johnstone wrote:
> In aus.motorcycles on Mon, 18 Nov 2002 15:37:31 +1000
> Skipper <skip...@optushome.com.au> wrote:
>
>>Actually Pete, I think Zebee was making the point that Biggus and I were
>>starting to sound a little like safety Nazis by implying that people who
>>didn't wear safety gear would be more likely to suffer an injury than
>>those who do and I suppose she is correct, whether you do or don't wear
>>safety gear makes no difference in the % of likelyhood of you having a
>>prang, it makes a hell of a lot of difference in the end result though.
>>This was my intended point and I stuffed it up, that's all.
>>
>
> Yeah, but *does* it?
>
> That's my point.
>
yeah whatever, I know that when I teach people I teach them to wear a
"minimum" (and please remember the use of that word ok?) of gloves,
jacket, boots, jeans, and helmet around town but I recommend they get
leather pants too esp. if they are going to do highway speeds as we all
tend to do sooner rather than later.
> Sure, people think it does, but does it?
>
> Does wearing jeans make a difference between hospital or no?
>
> Not in my experience.
>
Ahhh, but does that make it so?? Just because that is your experience
does that make it gospel? no.
> Will someone wearing a t-shirt end up in hospital with worse injuries
> than someone in a leather jacket?
more than likely but not necessarily.
While it is true that wearing full leathers may not stop you getting
injured in a very high % of accidents it will reduce the severity of the
injuries you sustain significantly. And for that reason alone I deem it
worth my while to gear up. And yes, it is everyones free choice to wear
whatever they like on the bike but it's also equally our free choice to
disagree with their choice.
Nathan Smith
>
> Nope. Have you? Really? So how does the jacket help then?
You have to take it off first! :)
Nathan
Nathan Smith
Nathan
"**Cameron MkII" <craz...@ar.com.au> wrote in message
news:3DD865D...@ar.com.au...
paulh
But only one a freeway once ..didnt like it.
paulh
On Mon, 18 Nov 2002 11:53:39 +1100, "FuTAnT" <desm...@optushome.com.au> wrote:
>I've done that before, did a short ride up to the shops or something without
>a jacket. Scares the shit out of me. Suddenly you focus on how gritty and
>abrasive the road must be if I fall off. It's just something you get used to
>when you ride with full leathers, or a jacket at a minimum etc. It's quite
>an odd sensation to go out without it.
>
>Cam
>'96 ZX6R
>
>"kiwipete" <chat...@NOSPAMclear.net.nz> wrote in message
>news:3dd8...@clear.net.nz...
Iain Chalmers
Skipper <skip...@optushome.com.au> wrote:
> whether you do or don't wear
> safety gear makes no difference in the % of likelyhood of you having a
> prang
I'm not so sure about that. I pretty much always ride in either a
leather jacket or a dri rider jacket, gloves jeans and boots (and a
helmet). Occasionally, I've ridden without the jacket, just in a
t-shirt. I'm _way_ more paranoid without the jacket on. I dont
lanesplit, I tend to sit in the traffic rather than weave through it -
I'm _much_ less likely to crash, I reckon. At least, much less likely to
have a crash thats my fault.
> it makes a hell of a lot of difference in the end result though.
Yeah, and thats _why_ I'm more careful...
Its interesting, I see a lot of officeworker types commuting into the
city and back in skirts and high heels on scooters. We don't have
hospitals overflowing with skin graft cases from them, I'll bet its
because they aren't the sort of riders who wonder if they can get round
that 35kmh bend at 80kmh...
big
Zebee Johnstone
Nathan Smith <seve...@spammebaby.optusnet.com.au> wrote:
>> Empirical evidence from your's truly's kneecaps (on account of I've
>> never landed on my arse...) is that jeans are useless at 25kmh....
>>
>> Stitches once, doctor's visits 3 other times.
>
>
>few materials last long like that... arse sliding is a different story....
>
But in a long and varied career of falling off motorcycles... I've
never slid like that!
And I bet that most of the people you see in shorts wouldn't either,
their crashes won't be of that kind.
Zebee
paulh
wrote:
>"paulh" <pa...@fahncahn.com> wrote in message > I've worn a tshirt on
>abike.. I'm experienced.
>> (mind you.. only ever worn it once for any distance beyond the shopping
>centre..
>> that was a bit freaky..)
>>
>> paulh
>
>Why freaky Paul? Maybe because you knew it increased your risk of injury??
Cos doing 160kmh (the minimum speed a Hayabusa will do in first gear at idle) in
a tshirt is..well... freaky...
paulh
paulh
wrote:
>
>"paulh" <pa...@fahncahn.com> wrote in message
>news:12agtu8d43v9oikut...@4ax.com...
>> On Mon, 18 Nov 2002 11:31:29 +1300, "kiwipete"
><chat...@NOSPAMclear.net.nz>
>> wrote:
>> >> But are they over-represented in the stats?
>> >>
>> >> Saying it doesn't make it so.
>> >
>> >They are at chance of increased injury and therefore are over
>> >represented....
>>
>> CAN YOU PROVE THIS?
>
>Yes.... lets both ride old bikes... we don't care crashing... and fall
>off... I'll lay good odds on the fact that I will be better off with the
>appropriate safety gear...
ah now.. you've got it wrong.. your 'test' just proves that safety stuff saves
you from more injury than no safety gear. this is NOT what you said NOR what I
am saying. You said that people without safety gear ARE over represented in the
stats.. do you have proof of this? Cos my contention is that people without any
safety gear MAY take more precautions and ride more carefully than when they DO
have safety gear on. And the best way to reduce injury levels is not to fall off
in the first place.
So.. as accidents are not caused by the lack of safety gear but by other factors
you may find that people with safety gear on may be MORE represented in the
'stats' than people who ride 1/2 naked.
the bastards...
paulh
Gerry
>I note that the general M/C community gripes about external control of our life
>but first chance we get we gripe about some other bikers choice of actions.
Bravo! Bravo!! Encore!! Encore!!
Gerry
R80
email: gbi...@yourfinger.austarnet.com.au
(please remove "yourfinger")
Hamish Alker-Jones
<sha...@zoic.org> decided to come out from under the bed and slurred:
> Mine have held on at higher that that ...
>
>> Stitches once, doctor's visits 3 other times.
>
> ... skinned my knee anyway, though.
>
> -----sharks
Ummmmmmmm, was that with or with out Kevlar "protection"?
Hammo (innocent look)
paulh
>
>"paulh" <pa...@fahncahn.com> >
>> and who decides what is 'appropriate'..
>>
>> paulh
>
>The Appropriate Police of course, but you knew that!
The Appropriate Police, they live inside of my head.
The Appropriate Police, they come to me in my bed.
The Appropriate Police, they're coming to arrest me, oooooh nooooooooooo.
>John Olive
>
>Wear a t-Shirt, jox or a g-String on your bike I really dont care, well
>maybe if Clem were wearing a G-String and riding near me I would care?
I would care very much...
paulh
paulh
>well biggus, the next time you spot these guys - why don't you stop them
>and preach about the merits of safety gears? it's so easy to be a
>chicken shit and post up an article in this newsgroup.
yeah...he'll jump out of his car and give them a lecture on responsible
motorcycling.
>btw. what's wrong with some guy showing off his TLR?
cos Biggus doesnt have one..
paulh
Nathan Smith
> never landed on my arse...) is that jeans are useless at 25kmh....
>
> Stitches once, doctor's visits 3 other times.
yeah but thats when you are putting all ya weight on a small patch.... very
few materials last long like that... arse sliding is a different story....
Nathan
Gerry
(Biggus the Great) wrote:
>Well Ive never seen so many wankers in one spot. EVER.....
Take a good look around aus.moto. Take a good look at yourself.
>Talk about Wannabee City... 95% of riders in shorts and singlets/T-Shirts!
>What a pack of wanks... obviously never had gravel rash,
>
>Oh and the girlfriend in bikini top and bike pants with thongs on.....
>That would make a nice mess....
[anti-wog, ugly okker racist shit deleted]
>his tires, They were SQUARE... as were most of them....
D'uh, Diccus Minimus, THAT'S why they can _safely_ wear shorts,
singlets, bikinis etc.
Not everyone has to burn the edges of their tyres, ya bloody racist
hoon idiot!!! Grow a brain. Starting point: Grow your first brain
cell. What a novel idea!!
glitch1
>
> Does wearing jeans make a difference between hospital or no?
>
> Not in my experience.
Yup, that's my experience
>
> Will someone wearing a t-shirt end up in hospital with worse injuries
> than someone in a leather jacket?
Sometimes not, but mostly YES, absolutely
>
> That's harder, but as I've been hurt through leather and it was
> *those* injuries that got me on the stats list, I don't know.
Who cares what list, just imagine the same prang without the leathers...
>
> The only study I know of backs me up. They defined "proper gear" as
> jeans, jacket, gloves, boots, and found that the ones who went to
> hospital were sometimes wearing that lot, sometimes not. That the
> gear didn't maek the difference because the injuries the ones in
> hospital were suffering were not *just* from lack of gear.
Perhaps not just, how about: additionally ?
>
> In other words, there just isn't that much serious gravel rash
> happening, compared to broken bones, puncture wounds, head injury,
> internal injury.
>
> Zebee
...will someone with helmet have worse injuries than the one without?
You ski, you wear the gear.
You rollerskate, you wear the gear.
You work in construction, you wear steelcapped boots and hardhat.
You work with plastics, you wear the masks...
What's the problem with it?
Whatever minimizes risk of pain and injury is fine with me.
Yesterdays episode with the "flying bed" could've turned nasty, I was happy
with the protective gear and armour despite the the 30C plus.
I feel responsible to the rest of the family and myself, that alone is
reason enough to wear all this stuff
Rather sweat glueing the leathers to the skin than blood glueing the
remnants of the jeans to whatever is left underneath.
Too gory? For me too !
There will ALWAYS be situations where even the best gear won't do the job,
but they're no yardstick.
The old thing still stands; prevention is better than cure, less costly,
less painful, less intrusive.
Safety nazi? I'd rather call it Common Sense.
pete
Skipper
glitch1 wrote:
shit yeah, BUT, if someone chooses not to exercise the aforemetioned
commonsense, they don't have to, BUT, I think it relects badly on the
rest of us in the eyes of the general public. yeah yeah, I know, who
gives a shit about the general public, well the pollies do, if enough
dramas are caused by the publics' perception of motorcyclists nasty
things will start to happen, look at this Front Numberplate shit, and
that won't be the end of it either, you can bet your bottom dollar that
if they get that up and running then something else will come along too.
Blah, the way i see it we all should do the most we can to do the right
thing in the publics eyes, in the long term it may alleviate some of the
political pressure from us.
Doug.
>
sharkey
>
Pshaw! Protection? It was like having a cheesegrater down
me trousers, but not in a good way. The denim didn't even
wear through. Also, it was in the dirt, and I was doing
considerably more that 25km/h, or I would never have
got away from Stuart on his Suzuki Geland/Strasse.
> Hammo (innocent look)
Ha! Pull the other one, it live in a tree-pod.
-----sharks
sharkey
>
> But in a long and varied career of falling off motorcycles... I've
> never slid like that!
(you're going to get sick of me doing this, eh?!)
I did once! Thanks to my leather pants I only got a small
scratch on my bum. On the other hand, I broke my wrist and
was rather concussed. It wasn't the scratch that put me
in hospital!
-----sharks
Zebee Johnstone
Skipper <skip...@optushome.com.au> wrote:
>
>
>shit yeah, BUT, if someone chooses not to exercise the aforemetioned
>commonsense, they don't have to, BUT, I think it relects badly on the
>rest of us in the eyes of the general public. yeah yeah, I know, who
And you have reaosn to believe that the general public cares about
what people wear compared to lanesplitting, tailgating, footpath
parking, and loud pipes?
Somehow I think if you listed
- wear t-shirt while riding
- lanesplit stationary traffic to get to the front of the
queue
- lanesplit moving traffic
- ride much faster than traffic
- park on footpaths and other places that are illegal
- tailgate and then pass suddenly
- ride in blindspots
and asked the "general public" which ones piss them off the most, I
don't think "ride in t-shirts" would get a look in.
Zebee
Zebee Johnstone
glitch1 <gli...@optushome.com.au> wrote:
>
>>
>> Does wearing jeans make a difference between hospital or no?
>>
>> Not in my experience.
>
>Yup, that's my experience
Hoa can you be sure?
Did you crash the same way without the gear? That's the only way you
can know.
>>
>> Will someone wearing a t-shirt end up in hospital with worse injuries
>> than someone in a leather jacket?
>
>Sometimes not, but mostly YES, absolutely
SO you say.
I disagree.
In some crashes, maybe. IN other ones, maybe not.
>> That's harder, but as I've been hurt through leather and it was
>> *those* injuries that got me on the stats list, I don't know.
>
>Who cares what list, just imagine the same prang without the leathers...
I have. I don't think I'd have been any worse off.
1) footpeg through leather boot. The leather might have slowed it
down some, but considering the angle and such, I don't think it would
have made much difference if it had been sneakers.
2) cut on the arm which appears to have been made *by* the armour.
IN that crash I had gravel rash on the knee (through jeans) but little
to no marking elsewhere.
So haveing imagined it, it doesn't change my mind.
especially as I've crashes twice in a t-shirt.
Once, on oil at lights. About 5kmh, no damage to me at all.
Once when I was on L plates, failing to negotiate a roundabout (target
fixation.) No gravel rash. Dislocated shoulder though. Leathers
wouldn't have helped with that.
>> The only study I know of backs me up. They defined "proper gear" as
>> jeans, jacket, gloves, boots, and found that the ones who went to
>> hospital were sometimes wearing that lot, sometimes not. That the
>> gear didn't maek the difference because the injuries the ones in
>> hospital were suffering were not *just* from lack of gear.
>
>Perhaps not just, how about: additionally ?
BUt it's about who is in the stats.
Meaning that the addition of gravel rash doesn't make a difference to
the stats.
Nor has anyone (including me) come up with any information about how
many serious gravel rash incidents there are. HOw many of these
people in t-shirts are going to hospital with gravelrash?
If you don't know, then you are just guessing.
That's what annoys me - the only info available says "it doesn't make
a difference to the stats", but people keep on and on about gravel
rash.
Which is unpleasant, painful, and *serious* gravel rash is apparently
uncommon. IN the people everyone is complaining about, the ones in
t-shirts.
>...will someone with helmet have worse injuries than the one without?
Helmets were not made compulsory until there was solid proof. When
you have more than a gut instinct, let me know.
All you are saying is "I feel better with it on" which is no problem.
It's when yo usay "and anyone who doesn't agree with my feelings is a
bad person" that there is a problem.
I prefer to wear gear for a number of reasons. There are times I
don't.
My choice, and that's how it should stay.
>What's the problem with it?
>Whatever minimizes risk of pain and injury is fine with me.
So you will give up bikes then?
You will fit leg-protectors? The kind people at the TRRL have shown
that leg protectors are a good thing.
I await the photos with interest.
Zebee
sharkey
>
> yeah whatever, I know that when I teach people I teach them to wear a
> "minimum" (and please remember the use of that word ok?) of gloves,
Oh, yeah, me too. Life's full of contradictions, eh? :-)
> While it is true that wearing full leathers may not stop you getting
> injured in a very high % of accidents it will reduce the severity of the
> injuries you sustain significantly.
Zebee is on another call right now :-) but when she gets back
she'll pull you up on "significantly".
> > In other words, there just isn't that much serious gravel rash
> > happening, compared to broken bones, puncture wounds, head injury,
> > internal injury.
Oh, she already did!
-----sharks
sharkey
> On Mon, 18 Nov 2002 10:37:17 +1100, paulh <pa...@fahncahn.com> wrote:
>
> > I note that the general M/C community gripes about external
> > control of our life but first chance we get we gripe about
> > some other bikers choice of actions.
>
> Bravo! Bravo!! Encore!! Encore!!
Encore!! Unless you'd rather not! Whatever you'd rather! Whatever!
-----sharks
sharkey
> - wear t-shirt while riding
> - lanesplit stationary traffic to get to the front of the
> queue
> - lanesplit moving traffic
> - ride much faster than traffic
> - park on footpaths and other places that are illegal
> - tailgate and then pass suddenly
> - ride in blindspots
- having a jolly good time while we're in the car with the family.
- stone's green ginger wine.
Hey, it'd be a fairer poll.
-----sharks
Deevo
news:3dd89f95...@news.austarnet.com.au...
> On Sun, 17 Nov 2002 13:00:56 GMT, NOSPAMTHA...@hotmail.com
> (Biggus the Great) wrote:
>
> >Well Ive never seen so many wankers in one spot. EVER.....
>
> Not everyone has to burn the edges of their tyres, ya bloody racist
> hoon idiot!!! Grow a brain. Starting point: Grow your first brain
> cell. What a novel idea!!
And somewhere in the middle lies the truth.
--
Deevo
Geraldton WA
www.wn.com.au/mckenzie
Biggus the Great
http://bird.users.fl.net.au/injuries.htm
http://bird.users.fl.net.au/pics/out_r_calf.jpg
See the red square at the top, thats where the skin thats in the red
gash on my leg came from......
>Nope. Have you? Really? So how does the jacket help then?
Dumber than a box of rocks.... arent you? nice try to be intelligent.
but then you would be one of the morons that wears Leather jacket,
shorts thongs and GLOVES......
paulh
Great) wrote:
>>Cos doing 160kmh (the minimum speed a Hayabusa will do in first gear at idle) in a tshirt is..well... freaky...
>
>Thats cause its trying to get away from its own uglyness... Fuck them
>things are ugly!
ah yes.. but at least its a bike and I get to ride it..
paulh
Biggus the Great
Biggus the Great
ZB thought you would have more common sense on the subject, then again
lights on are dangerous in your book....
Biggus the Great
>> If Biggus can give me the source of his info, quote the documents and
>> stats, I'll be impressed.
>>
>Its called common sense
I love you Kiwi... :)
>To sum up Zebee, injurys involving impact can be gravel rash, bone or soft issue apart from abrasions... doesn't plain common sense tell us to dress approprately?
Thats my point....... Common sense is involved, but missing on the
roads...
Biggus the Great
Crap...... So the only time you go to hospital is if you have severe
broken bone injuries?
I saw a wanker come off an XJ600 once and slide down the road on his
back.... T Shirt lifted, and No skin left, no broken bones.. So your
saying he shouldnt go to hospital?
>I don't think so. See above.
I do See above.
Biggus the Great
Leathers, which would you rather be... T shirt would do NOTHING,
leather jacket would....
Brings another point up, jackets that dont join the pants are also not
as good as those that do.. How? I came off at Oran at ~220(flat out
worked KR1S). Slide for ages, front back etc, not one injury.
Concussion was it. I loaded the ute, dont rememebr a thing!
>The only study I know of backs me up. They defined "proper gear" as jeans, jacket, gloves, boots, and found that the ones who went to hospital were sometimes wearing that lot, sometimes not.
So that shows that "THEY" dont know shit. jeans are not proper gear...
So theres your stats and proven theorys out the shithouse window!
Smee
John Littler wrote:
>
> Not really - you have matter and anti matter, and then you have Hatz and
> Biggus - you could just consider him the anti - Hatz - he makes about as
> much sense. His only saving grace is that unlike Hatz he actually rides.
>
> JL
> Ducati - that's Italian for Harley Davidson isn't it ?
>
Unfortunately due to a crash biggus suffered a while back he doesnt anymore.
Hatz doesnt ride period.
--
Look beyond the window, don't just focus on your own reflection.
Remove nickers to reply for email.
ab...@spamcop.net
for all spam.
Biggus the Great
>How come? They aren't going fast or riding much according to you.
>News to me that wearing t-shirt makes you crash...
Never said it did, its the after affects of the crash in a T shirt,
you obviously never wore half a tit away on gravel have you?
paulh
Great) wrote:
>So you can attack it Paul, I have no data, but 10 people fall off at
>100kph, 5 in leathers and boots and gloves 5 in thongs, singlet and
>shorts...
>
>Which 5 would you rather be in?
once again you fail to understand the issue.
>>Do you have any facts...or are we just gonna argue based on opinions.
>
>You dont use common sense when you think do you?
No I use logic. Common sense is for when logic is not enough.
paulh
Biggus the Great
Biggus the Great
>>Well Ive never seen so many wankers in one spot. EVER.....
>Take a good look around aus.moto.
Thanks for pointing it out.
Biggus the Great
Biggus the Great
No their not, once the R1/Blade Mate is out of fashion its SOLD....
Thats not passion, thats just wankerism trendyness....
Biggus the Great
Aus.moto fashion, only about .01% got what I was on about!
>You old troller, you.
Biggus the Great
Id rather something comfortable, not a wank bike......
>>btw. what's wrong with some guy showing off his TLR?
>cos Biggus doesnt have one..
John Littler
news:3DD8D84E...@ihug.com.au...
>
>
> John Littler wrote:
> >
> > Not really - you have matter and anti matter, and then you have Hatz and
> > Biggus - you could just consider him the anti - Hatz - he makes about as
> > much sense. His only saving grace is that unlike Hatz he actually rides.
> >
> > JL
> > Ducati - that's Italian for Harley Davidson isn't it ?
> >
>
> Unfortunately due to a crash biggus suffered a while back he doesnt
anymore.
> Hatz doesnt ride period.
<shrug> Used to is better than never did
Biggus the Great
WRONG..... not the ones I saw, and they are the ones Im commenting
on... Wheelies in shorts and thongs? thats taking more precautions????
didnt think so.....
> And the best way to reduce injury levels is not to fall off in the first place.
You think?
>So.. as accidents are not caused by the lack of safety gear but by other factors you may find that people with safety gear on may be MORE represented in the'stats' than people who ride 1/2 naked.the bastards...
Ive never said that lack of safety gear causes accidents. Not once
have I said this. Im sayin that 1/2 naked bastards are going to be a
lot more hurt than someone in the same sort of slide as someone in
leathers and boots.
John Littler
news:slrnath3rq...@zipperii.zip.com.au...
> In aus.motorcycles on Mon, 18 Nov 2002 17:55:03 +1100
> Nathan Smith <seve...@spammebaby.optusnet.com.au> wrote:
> >> Empirical evidence from your's truly's kneecaps (on account of I've
> >> never landed on my arse...) is that jeans are useless at 25kmh....
> >>
> >> Stitches once, doctor's visits 3 other times.
> >
> >
> >yeah but thats when you are putting all ya weight on a small patch....
very
> >few materials last long like that... arse sliding is a different
story....
> >
>
> But in a long and varied career of falling off motorcycles... I've
> never slid like that!
>
> their crashes won't be of that kind.
Well if you lowside you're going to slide on your side or back (usually with
the frigging bike sitting on your foot,hence wearing decent boots is more
important than wearing a jacket - as per that british study - don't ask me
how I know this to be true :-) You have to highside to end up on your
knees - from what I've witnessed over the years you're about twice as likely
to lowside as highside.
JL
giraffe
You really know how to stir up a crowd ... :)
Biggus the Great
one foot I have no control over sorta fucks it up. an arm that dont
straighten sorta makes cornering a problem....
But I do own a KTM still... ONE DAY!!!!!!
I was reading this US web site a bloke over there no control over his
legs AT ALL from waist down, was racing! Had a lot of mods and
framework to help him..
he wasnt there to make up numbers either, he was winning races...
Fuckin top stuff!
There were a few sites, and links (this was when accident first
happened and I was researching the thing)....
Knobdoodle
Clem
(Of course; if all they do is park, pose and putter-about [wearing their
tyres square], why on earth would they require "protective" gear!??!)
~
"Biggus the Great" <NOSPAMTHA...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:3de3903e...@news.optusnet.com.au...
> Well Ive never seen so many wankers in one spot. EVER.....
>
> Went for a drive down to see the Tazzie ferry today from Beaumaris end
> of the coast road (laughin too much to see the name!). and Talk about
> Wannabee City... 95% of riders in shorts and singlets/T-Shirts!
> What a pack of wanks... obviously never had gravel rash, or seen
> anyone go thru it. or had skin grafts.....
>
> Oh and the girlfriend in bikini top and bike pants with thongs on.....
> That would make a nice mess....
>
> TL1000R's are now offically wank bikes, dozens of them with Gino with
> singlet and thongs, and shorts going up and down (in big wogs out of
> work accent) "with the Yoshi on the moit".. 10 grand in first so
> everyone looks at them... big 3 rev wheelies going about 20 ft wih the
> wheel 8 in off the road... Then look around to say hey man Im kewl....
>
> Shitcatis, never seen so much shit in one place with square tires. One
> wog was offended when we laughed at his tires, They were SQUARE... as
> were most of them.... never been on a side stand angle on the road I
> dont think..
>
> R1's, not one there could ride them... again square tires, and all in
> their safety thongs and shorts.. BUT they did have their sunnys on! oh
> yes, that will protect them from flying skin getting in their eyes
>
> It was worth the price of admission to laugh!
>
> Wank in a shop with an Aprillia on a race stand on foot path lined so
> everyone going past can see it.....
>
>
> Oh the boat is big too!
>
Biggus the Great
100kph, 5 in leathers and boots and gloves 5 in thongs, singlet and
shorts...
Which 5 would you rather be in?
>Do you have any facts...or are we just gonna argue based on opinions.
Knobdoodle
"**Cameron MkII" <craz...@ar.com.au> wrote;
> John Olive wrote:
~
> > Wear a t-Shirt, jox or a g-String on your bike I really dont care, well
> > maybe if Clem were wearing a G-String and riding near me I would care?
>
>
> Clem, would you consider doing that for money?
~
For FREE Cam, for FREE!!
I've got the nuggets out, the helmet polished (it takes a lot of elbow
grease!) and the crack, back and sack waxed!!
I've got a half tank of petrol [with a quarter-tank of water!], a Haynes
BMW-boxers manual, a butyl repair kit and close-on 6 imperial ounces of pure
beef dripping I'm A' RARIN' TO PARTY!!!
Clem