Any data to back up this opinion?

 

It is not really about the bike, but the maturity of the rider and their ability to keep from going too fast, or riding beyond their abilities. All motorcycles are dangerous. I'd imagine you could get in a heap more trouble going faster as opposed to slower, but sportbikes have incredible brakes as well as you know if you have ridden any. Really, vehicle doesn't make that much of a difference, it is the way the rider handles and uses that vehicle.

 

I think that mechanically cruisers are less safe than sportbikes. The don't handle, brake, or accelerate as well. OTOH cruisers don't tempt you to travel at the speed of heat like sportbikes do, but that has less to do with the bikes performance than the riders actions.

-Hugh

 

I'll second anubisss, and I'm sure some of the LE types on the forums could back it up with statistics, but the only thing that makes a bike safe is the rider.

Just like the saying goes, Guns don't kill people, people do. Well, bikes don't cause accidents, people do.

 

anubisss summed it up....!

 

Exactly. You could use statistics to prove that sportbikes are more dangerous that cruisers, if all you did was include the type of motorcycles involved in accidents.

If you do your analysis correctly tho, and include the sex, age, and experience level of the rider however, I would be the results would still show that more sportbikes are involved in accidents, than cruisers.

Here is a real world example: In the past 4 yrs, I have worked 3 fatality motorcycle wrecks. Two were sportbikes, one was a Harley. Does that mean that you are twice as likely to die on a sportbike as you are on a Harley?

Add to the statistical info: Of those three fatals:

One rider was inexperienced, unhelmeted, ,andonly owned his CBR900RR for exactly thirty days before blowing a red light at 60+ and hitting the side of a pickup.

The second had about 3 yrs experience, but rode unhelmeted, and drove like a moron. He crashed, when while riding a wheelie, the bike ahead of him braked, to turn left.

The third (the HD rider) was unhelmeted, ,and drunk, when he hit a curb, going over the bars, and splitting his head open.

So...using THOSE stats, if you ride unhelmeted, and are in a wreck, you will die.

You can skew stats to make em say whatever you want them to.

 

I agree 100%, sport bikes are mechanically more safe then a cruiser. I used to race motorcycles professionally (28 years ago) and the bikes definitely had the ability to be safer. There is no way I could manuever or brake my RoadKing to avoid an accident they way I could on a sport bike. But, I ride my RoadKing much different because of it.

I am certain that if you look at the accicents causedBY amotorcycle, not a cager hitting a bike, you will find a higher rate caused by RIDERS on sport bikes. That is the RIDER, not the BIKE. I very seldom see someone on a cruiser dragging their knee on a twistie mountain road, but I do see this being done by wanna-be-racers on a sport bike every Sunday. And when was the last time you saw a guy on an UltraClassic leaving a stop light on one wheel???

 

What's a cruiser?

 

A sport bike would be deadly in my hands. So for me, sportbikes are more dangerous than cruisers.

 

Excellent input. However all things being equal, in terms of a biker's interaction with cagers...can a cruiser not be thought of as "safer" in the sense that they're much more noticable? A Harley's exhaust note notifies motorists when and where the rider is pretty much at all times, whereas a sportbike is smaller, much quieter and more conspicuous.

Is that not something to consider?