Motorcycles – A Friend to All Commuters
Does anyone who doesn’t ride a motorcycle really spend any time thinking about
them? Most people probably don’t. Motorcycle riders are something of a unique subculture.
Think about it: there’s got to be something pretty different about a person who decides to hit
the road forgoing any sort of protective enclosure, risking life and limb and exposure to all the
harsh elements. Getting caught in torrential rain, frigid cold, and even snow is all a typical
part of being a motorcycle rider. Some people choose to ride motorcycles for reasons of sheer
practicality, because motorcycles usually get better gas mileage, are allowed in HOV (high
occupancy vehicle) lanes, cost less for insurance, take up less parking space, or any number of
other reasons. Many motorcycle riders (myself included) choose their bikes out of a sense of
passion, and carry their love of motorcycles to extremes that most car drivers wouldn’t
consider such as parking their motorcycles right in the kitchen and planning family vacations
around motorcycle related events. As different as motorcycle riders often are from
mainstream drivers, their chosen form of transportation is even more different. A motorcycle
is almost the exact opposite of a car, truck, or sport utility vehicle. There are such extreme
differences between cars and motorcycles that motorcycles should not necessarily be subject
to all of the same traffic laws, specifically maximum highway speed limit laws and lane
splitting laws.
I have come to the conclusion, after a lot of research and a lifetime of being involved
in the motorcycle industry, that motorcyclists’ safety and the flow of all traffic would improve
if some of the fundamental traffic laws regulating motorcycle travel were finally changed. I
was born into a family of motorcycle riders. My grandfather rode motorcycles; he even had
his own motocross course where my cousins and I would ride. My father rides motorcycles
1
and he would pick me up from school and take me on rides when I was very small. I’ve
ridden motorcycles all across this country, and spent years working as the lead mechanic in a
motorcycle shop. As a lifelong member of the motorcycling subculture I’d like to offer a
different perspective to the car drivers on the road. I would even like my ideas to reach the
lawmakers of our state and perhaps influence them to encourage more motorcycle commuting
through changing the laws that apply to motorcycles. If different laws were applied to
motorcycles, it would create safer driving conditions for motorcyclists and as a result all
drivers. This might lead to more people seeing motorcycles as a safe, viable and alternate
means of transportation which, with lots of quick and size-efficient motorcycles commuting
on our highways would lead to less overall traffic congestion.
It’s not hard to tell that motorcycles are very different from the cars and trucks on the
road. Some of the obvious differences are the number of wheels – two for motorcycles, at
least four on cars and light trucks, and sixteen or more on tractor-trailers. Overall size is
another major difference – motorcycles are smaller in all dimensions than even the smallest of
new cars, for example the Mini-Cooper weighing in at 2,524 pounds(MiniUSA). Table 1 in
the appendix shows two average cars and two average motorcycles, and the weight
differences between them can easily be as much as 2,500 to 3,000 pounds. The tractor-trailers
hauling freight on our highways have more variable weight, and handling statistics depending
on the load they’re carrying, but unloaded the triple axle, eight wheeled tractor portion alone
can weigh as much as 15,000 pounds. Basic safety design parameters are another key
difference between motorcycles and the other vehicles. Cars sport utility vehicles, and the rest
are all designed with safety roll cages, side impact protection, bumpers, airbags and more.
2
Motorcycles are not. These safety innovations cannot feasibly be applied to motorcycles, and
if they were it would likely decrease safety.
There are many less obvious but equally important differences that set apart
motorcycles from other vehicles. In all fifty states motorcyclists are required to undergo
additional motorcycle-specific training and testing to obtain a motorcycle drivers license,
before they may legally drive a motorcycle even if they’re licensed to drive a car(NHTSANAMS p54). There is also necessarily a large difference in motorcyclists’ driving attitude and
attention while on the road. I can tell you from personal experience that a person riding a
motorcycle is very unlikely to be brushing her hair, changing the radio station, eating her
breakfast or participating in any number of other distracting tasks while driving along, if for
no other reason than the fact that she really can’t. What a person riding a motorcycle is most
likely to be doing is devoting one hundred percent of her attention to the task at hand –
scanning for potential hazards, watching out for the other drivers etc.
Some of the best safety advantages motorcyclists have are their attentive driving style,
and the quick acceleration, short stopping distances, and exceptionally nimble handing
characteristics of their chosen vehicle. On Table 1 in the appendix you can also note that an
average car and an average motorcycle are not in the same league when it come to
acceleration times and stopping distances. Someone who has spent a little money on an
average motorcycle has actually bought themselves the handling characteristics of a Ferrari.
What this means in practical application is that a motorcyclists’ foremost safety protection is
not steel cages and airbags, it is attentiveness in staying away from the other vehicles on the
road and nimble quickness in foreseeing, dodging and avoiding the other, heavier vehicles.
3
Occasional accidents do happen. From a mathematical stand point, at any speed a
motorcycle due to its light weight is going to carry a lot less momentum than a car or truck,
resulting in much less property damage inflicted on others should a motorcycle be involved in
a collision. From personal experience, and from writing hundreds of motorcycle wreck
estimates, I can say when a motorcyclist is involved in an accident, no matter who is at fault,
most of the damage is usually to the bike and rider, not the other involved vehicles. With this
in mind – who would you rather drive in front of on the highway: a 5,000 pound sport utility
vehicle who’s driver might be finishing up her breakfast, a tractor-trailer hauling anything, or
an attentive motorcyclist who is mainly putting herself at risk?
SPEED LIMITS
The maximum highway speed limit law’s application to motorcycles is one of the laws
I would like to see abolished, or at least changed to a reasonable prima facie absolute
maximum. Prima facie is a Latin legal term with translates to “first duty” and is usually used
to mean self-evident, or self-regulating (Merriam-Webster). I feel that this is a sensible and
reasonable idea because of the inherent differences of motorcycles from the other vehicles on
the road, and because it will ultimately enhance the safety of a group of commuters who lack
a lot of the other safety measures other drivers take for granted (seat-belts, airbags etc.) With
my theory in effect motorcyclists on the highway would be allowed to drive at any speed.
They would use their own judgment to govern their driving, always because of human nature
having safety and self-preservation in mind. My personal technique is to drive fast enough to
keep most of the obstacles and potential hazards coming at me from the front where I can
more easily see them (therefore I’m going slightly faster than the average traffic), but not so
4
fast as to overtake the other drivers rapidly. Motorcyclists would be far from lawless under
these new driving circumstances. They would be subject to rigorous enforcement of all
sensible laws already on the books such as: reckless driving, following too closely, failure to
use signals, improper passing etc. These are in my opinion are a better measure than speeding
of driving unsafely when applied to all drivers.
There is already precedence in this country for different types of vehicles having
different highway speed limits. Has anyone not seen a speed limit sign that says - SPEED
LIMIT 65; TRUCKS - BUSSES - CARS WITH TRAILERS 55; MINIMUM SPEED 45?
Tractor-trailer trucks have lower speed limits posted in ten states (Fight the 55) due to their
huge mass, and lack of maneuverability at highway speeds. The light, space-efficient, and
nimble motorcycle can easily use a reversal of this legal logic to allow them to travel at higher
highway speeds.
Speed limits in our country have a more complex history than one might think. What
this shows is that speed limits, for various political, scientific, and legal reasons, do and
should change and evolve. Though speed limits don’t necessarily keep up with the times, and
they’re not always posted based on the latest safety findings. In 1974 the national maximum
speed limit of 55 miles per hour was made into law. Before that time a 70 miles per hour
speed limit was the norm on rural portions of interstate highways (DOT 55). According to the
United States Department of Transportation “The 55 mile per hour limit was imposed as a
national response to a national problem – energy conservation.” (DOT 55) In 1995 the oil
crisis was less of an issue because modern vehicles that got better gas mileage were available.
The 55 miles per hour speed limit was rescinded, and states were allowed to set their own
maximum speed limits.
5
States now have a wide range of maximum speed limits varying in type and maximum
posting. There are three basic types of speed limits: absolute maximum speed limits, prima
facie speed limits, and a mix of the two types. One example of the absolute maximum speed
limit is the 65 miles per hour limit that we have here in Virginia. This means that any driving
over 65 miles per hour is illegal, for what ever reason, and can be prosecuted and sentenced as
such to the varying amount of miles per hour over 65. People who are otherwise law abiding
citizens can be sent to jail in Virginia for driving at speeds that are legal in other states, such
as 70 miles per hour in our neighboring North Carolina. Some states have an absolute
maximum speed limit, such as a national high of 85 miles per hour in Arizona with prima
facie enforcement of the posted maximums of 75 miles per hour. This essentially means that
someone who is cited for speeding up to 85 miles per hour on a highway can be found not
guilty in a court of law regardless of the posted speed if it is proven that it was done in a safe
and prudent manner (Carr). There is only one recent example of a solely prima facie state
speed limit, and that had a notably unexpected result. It was in Montana from 1995-1999.
During that time frame Montana had no numerical speed limit (Dornsife 2001). “Reasonable
and prudent” was the law of the land. Essentially this left the decision to issue a speeding
ticket up to the opinion of law enforcement. If an officer observed someone driving at a speed
they felt was too fast for the current road conditions – keeping in mind weather, traffic
conditions, visibility etc., then they could issue a speeding ticket.
There was an exception to this during a five-month period in 1999, which was brought
about by the case of Rudy Stanko vs. The State of Montana. Mr. Stanko a fifty-year-old
Montana resident was ticketed for driving 85 miles per hour in his new Camaro during clear
daylight conditions on an almost deserted highway (Montana Supreme Court p9). Mr. Stanko,
6
in fighting what he felt was an opinionated and unjust ticket, fought the charge all the way to
the state Supreme Court. The Montana Supreme Court found “reasonable and prudent” to be
too vague for enforcement (Montana Supreme Court p25) and the ruling left the state with no
enforceable speed limit for five months, until lawmakers in their inherently questionable
wisdom passed the current numerical speed limit of 75 miles per hour, 65 for large trucks.
The Montana speed limit legal anomaly has been the subject of much study by traffic
engineers, and their findings are somewhat surprising. During the period of time when the
speed limit was defined as reasonable and prudent, 2.6 fatalities per month was the average
rate for major highways. After the Supreme Court case threw out reasonable and prudent
speed limits, and there was no enforceable speed limit, the five-month average for major
highway fatalities was a record low of 2.2 per month. The nineteen months following the
reinstatement of a numerical speed limit found traffic fatalities to be at a modern high
averaging four per month. (Dornsife 2001). Some of the possible reasons for this
phenomenon are increased lane courtesy (i.e. slow traffic staying right, proper passing),
increased seatbelt usage, more attentive driving, and no radical increase in most motorists’
actual average speeds (Dornsife 2001). This is one clear example that debunks the old theory
held by many insurance, and enforcement propagandists that “Speed Kills.”
What does all of this speed limit history mean to motorcyclists? It shows that speed
limits can be very political, and not necessarily based on the needs of motorists’ safety. It is
true that the history of speed limits can be used to argue for increases in limits for most
vehicles. Motorcycles in particular are my concern. Due to the lack of many safety advantages
that would be utterly impractical (such as airbags) on motorcycles, they should be allowed to
7
take particular advantage of any safer driving techniques, such as driving faster on highways
when conditions warrant.
Everyone should be allowed to drive at the safest speed. But most of all I’d like
motorcyclists not to be punished for taking advantage of driving styles that may actually lead
to our increased safety. National law states that highway signage and safety laws are to be put
in place based only on a safety engineering study, not due to court case results, or from heavy
lobbing from insurance and enforcement interests, or even from a need to maintain a high
level of state speeding ticket revenues. The Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices,
known as the M.U.T.C.D., published by the Federal Highway Administration specifically
states, “After an engineering study has been made…the speed limit sign (R2-1) shall display
the limit established by law” (DOT-FHA sec 2B-11). Federal Policy mandates that the
M.U.T.C.D. is the standard for all traffic control devices (DOT-FHA 23CFR sec 655.603).
Similar information is found on individual state’s Department of Transportation (DOT)
websites, for example this quote taken from the West Virginia DOT page:
Legal speed limits…may be changed only when justified by an engineering
study. There is a common belief among laymen and even some elected
officials that merely posting signs can lower traffic speeds. This is not true.
Artificially low speed limits invite violations by responsible drivers….(WVDOT)
The Department of Transportation has made urgent appeals for more studies to be
done on motorcyclists’ safety and accident causality. One of the main points put forth in the
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration’s publication National Agenda for
Motorcycle Safety is that there is a drastic need for more study (NHTSA-NAMS p. 7). The
8
most comprehensive study on motorcyclist safety that has been done in this country, the “Hurt
report” is over twenty years old. Motorcycles have changed drastically over that period of
time in both their styling and performance characteristics, as have the driving conditions and
vehicles for all motorists. So the laws that govern motorcyclists in effect shouldn’t apply to
motorcyclists, as they have not been studied adequately enough.
The speed limit cannot legally be changed without transportation engineering studies,
but as was the case in Montana can revert back to a prima facie default. What I would like to
see happen is the abolishment of highway speed limits for motorcycles, which would allow
motorcycles to drive at the safest – 85th percentile speed (Warren). The 85th percentile is a
variable number and is what separates the slower 85% of drivers from the fastest 15%. It is
the speed where drivers are involved in the fewest amount of accidents (NMA-OH). The exact
85th percentile speed is determined during a traffic engineering study where the speeds of
free-flowing traffic are measured and charted (NMA). It is similar in concept to the mean or
average speed but is expanded to include the flow rate at which the least accidents occur. As
anyone who has driven the I95 corridor knows the average speeds are usually a great deal
above 65 mile per hour. It would seem that it is time for another traffic engineering study to
determine it the speed limits are still set at the safest speed. See the graph attached in the
appendix for an illumination of how the 85th percentile speed correlates to the rate of traffic
accidents.
LANE SPLITTING
When a motorcyclist drives between two slow or stopped lanes of traffic that are
moving in the same direction it is known as lane splitting. In Europe this practice is known as
9
filtering, and is common and even expected of motorcycle and scooter drivers (Werner).
However, in this country the only state where lane splitting is legal is California. It is noted on
the California Highway Patrol’s official website “Lane-splitting by motorcycles is permissible
but must be done in a safe and prudent manner” (CHP).
I have lived in California, and I have practiced lane splitting. It is a terrific and
efficient means of maneuvering through clogged commuter traffic. Everyone who watches
T.V. knows southern California in particular has some of the busiest, most congested
freeways in the world. Faced with the choice of sitting in interminable traffic in a car or
slicing through stopped traffic in the narrow (about 3-4 foot wide) “mini-lane” between the
grid locked cars, I always chose to hop on my motorcycle. California is a virtual motorcycle
mecca of hundreds of thousands of people who made that same choice. These people are
enjoying one of their favorite pastimes while lightening the overall traffic load on the
California highway system. Motorcyclists are cleanly slicing through the congestion, without
disturbing or slowing the overall progress of those who choose to take their commute sitting
in a car. It might even be reasonable to say that motorcyclists can be more productive
members of the community, due to their wasting significantly less of their day on a commute.
It is difficult adjustment to move back to a state where motorcyclists are not allowed
the freedom to lane split. Besides the practicality of lessening traffic congestion, and
shortening personal commute time, there is a large amount of discomfort that goes along with
not being allowed to lane split. Without lane splitting there is a constant fear of being rearended by an inattentive car driver who might not notice the smaller rear area of a motorcycle,
especially at night. Additionally, an average safety conscious motorcyclist wears about 8-15
pounds of hot, heavy protective gear that was not designed to be worn while sitting around.
10
Those who sit in cars with radios, bumpers and air conditioning are, I’m sure, unaware of the
fear and misery that goes along with sitting in stop and go traffic on a hot motorcycle on a hot
day in heavy leather gear while you worry about getting rear ended, melt, and suck in exhaust
fumes. It is truly enough to make you want to not ride a motorcycle, or if you are already out
on a ride and get stuck in bad traffic to risk the hefty ticket and lane split anyway.
A brief comparison of motorcyclist fatality statistics between California and the other
49 states doesn’t offer definitive proof that lane splitting is the safer alternative for
motorcyclists, but it does seem to point in that direction. A study of motorcycle fatality rates
done by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration in 1993 has the results
categorized by state. The national average of motorcyclist fatalities per 10,000 registered
vehicles was 6.9, and California’s average was a moderate 5.1. In fact, only 15 states had
lower fatality averages, including Alaska, Maine, North Dakota, Minnesota, and eleven other
northern states (NHTSA 93). It is well known that there are fewer average miles travels per
registered motorcycle in the cold northern climates, as compared to sunny California. What
this indicates is that California; the state that has by far the most registered motorcycles and
most miles traveled per motorcycle (NHTSA 93) is one of the safest states in which a
motorcyclist can ride.
The venerable six year study, completed in 1981, done by Harry Hurt of the
University of Southern California “Motorcycle Accident Cause Factors and Identification of
Countermeasures” known as the “Hurt report” found that lane splitting produced a slight
reduction in crash frequency when compared to the lack of lane splitting (NHTSA-NAMS
p.51). One possible reason for this reduction in crashes is due to a decreased chance of the
lane splitting motorcycle being rear-ended by a car, as they are unable to follow directly
11
behind motorcycles in the “mini-lane.” Another reason for increased safety with this style of
motorcycle riding is a shift in motorcyclists’ innate lane perception. If traffic comes to a
screeching halt in front of a habitual lane splitting motorcyclist they are conditioned to seeing
the tiny paths between stopped cars as a safe place to ride and thus they have more areas for
retreat should traffic get really ugly around them. Further study will most likely find a direct
correlation of the availability of lane splitting to this increased safety for motorcyclists.
Even in states where a specific law does not prohibit lane splitting, such as Texas, a
main obstacle to motorcyclists being able to lane split safely is the attitude of law enforcement
and other motorists on the road. Due to the belief of many drivers and officers of the law that
lane splitting is unsafe, many members of Texas law enforcement admit they would cite a
lane splitting motorcyclist for “Reckless driving” or any number of other offences
(Gundlatch). Additionally, the act of lane splitting has been know to incite “road rage” in
other Texas motorists, who then may try to deliberately hit the passing motorcyclist
(Gundlatch). To me this is inexplicable – I can see no reason at all why a car driver who has
been passed by a motorcyclist using a “lane” that a car does not fit into would be upset – and
inexcusable. Deliberately trying to hit a passing motorcyclist should be the grounds for the
offending car driver to be charged with attempted vehicular manslaughter. Ignorance of safety
study findings, personal beliefs of chief law enforcement officials, and the illegal “road rage”
of other drivers is apparently keeping motorcyclists in Texas from exercising what is in some
other places considered to be a preferred and safe traffic maneuver. In essence these things
boil down to a form of discrimination.
Discrimination of this sort is commonplace to motorcyclists, as are many other
intentional and unintentional forms of discrimination. For example, Virginia was the last state
12
in the country to open up the HOV lanes to motorcyclists, even though one motorcycle with
one rider is 50% occupied which equates to HOV2, and motorcycles are eco and commute
friendly. Opening up the HOV lanes to motorcyclists is one step closer to allowing lane
splitting, and encouraging more motorcycle commuting in general.
Motorcycle riders are often unfairly stereotyped as law breaking ruffians, when in
actuality they come from all walks of life and are more likely to be affluent, educated, and to
donate money to charity (Youngblood). I also consider it a more abstract form of
discrimination when fellow motorcyclists are killed due to car driver’s inattention. One of the
leading causes of accidents and deaths for motorcyclists is failure of a car driver to see us.
There’s really no excuse for not being attentive and checking for all potential obstacles on the
road. Even if some of them are small.
Riding a motorcycle is a freedom that many good people choose to enjoy in this
country, knowing full well that there are more inherent risks involved with riding a
motorcycle than driving a car. There is an acceptable level of risk, but not included in that are
additional risks imposed by lack of study devoted to motorcycle safety, an ignorant “road
rage” influenced attitude, and legislation that places the motorcycle rider at increased risk
through artificially low speed limits and prohibition of lane splitting. When the safety of some
on the highway is increased the safety of all on the highway is ultimately increased. When
there are more motorcyclists safely commuting and traveling it lightens up the overall load on
today’s overcrowded highways. With a few changes in highway traffic laws I feel that
motorcyclists and all drivers can benefit.
13
TABLE 1
Vehicle
Make
0-60mph
Acceleration
0-100mph
Acceleration
Braking
Distance
¼ mile time
And speed
Curb
Weight
Horsepower
Citation
’03 Volkswagen
Beetle
GLS convertible
12.4 sec.
’03 Honda
Element
EX
8.7 sec.
’03 Suzuki
SV650
’03 Ducati
999
3.3 sec.
2.7 sec.
5.9 sec.
51.5 sec.
28.4 sec.
8.9 sec.
70-0 mph
177ft.
18.9 sec.
@ 73 mph
70-0 mph
187 ft.
16.6 sec.
@ 83 mph
60-0 mph
108 ft.
11.93 sec.
@ 110.6
mph
400 lbs.
60-0 mph
119 ft.
10.39 sec.
@133.3 mph
116 bhp
@ 9500
RPM
C.W. v42 no1
3,194 lbs.
3,344 lbs.
115 bhp
@ 5400 RPM
160 bhp
@ 5500 RPM
71 bhp
@ 9250 RPM
Car & Driver v48
C.W. v42 no7
Car & Driver v48 no8
14
442 lbs.
Works Cited
California Highway Patrol – Safety Service. Answers to Most Frequently Asked Questions.
May 27, 2003 <http://www.chp.ca.gov/html/answeres.html>
Cernicky, Mike. “Suzuki SV650.” Cycle World. July 2003: 42.
Dornsife, Chad. Fatal Accidents Double on Montana’s Interstates. May 10, 2001.
<http://www.hwysafety.com/hwy_montana_2001.htm>.
Edwards, Dave. “Ducati 999.” Cycle World. January 2003: 40.
Gundlach, Jason. Lane Splitting Laws in Texas.
<http://www.phuzzygnu.com/lanesplitting.htm>. February 28, 2001.
Kiino, Ron. “Honda Element EX.” Car and Driver. February 2003: 75.
MiniUSA. Features and Specs. 2003. <http://www.miniusa.com/link/ourcars/features/
minicooper/specifications>. August 2003.
Merriam-Webster Dictionary Online. 2003. <http://www.m-w.com/home.htm>. December
2003.
Montana. State Supreme Court. “State of Montana v. Rudy Stanko” Case no. 97-486. 1998.
<http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=MT&vol97&invol=486>
National Motorists Association. “The NMA’s Modle Speed Zoning Law.” 2003.
<http://www.Ibiblio.org/rdu/nma-zone.html>. December 2003.
Ohio National Motorists Association. 85th Percentile Speed. <http://www.dma.org/ ganotedp/
85th.htm>. June 4, 1997.
Pund, Daniel. “Volkswagen New Beetle GLS 2.0 Convertible.” Car and Driver.
February 2003: 43.
United States. Department of Transportation. 55 Judge for Yourself. U.S. Government
Printing Office, June 1979.
United States. Department of Transportation. Federal Highway Administration. Federal Aid
Policy Guide. 23 CFR 655F. <http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/legsregs/directives/
fapg/cfr0655f.htm> January 31, 2002.
United States. Department of Transportation. Federal Highway Administration. Manual on
Uniform Traffic Control Devices. <http://www.mutcd.dot.gov/kno-milleneum
_12.28.01.htm>. December 28, 2001.
15
United States. Department of Transportation. National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration, and Motorcycle Safety Foundation. National Agenda for Motorcycle
Safety. DOT HS 809 156, November 2000.
Unknown. Fight the 55. <http://www.fightthe55.com/map_of_truck_speeds.htm>.
September 28, 2003.
Warren, Davey. Nevada Speed Management Workshop. Federal Highway Administration.
Office of Safety and Traffic Operations R & D. April 4, 1996.
West Virginia. Department of Transportation. Safety tips: Speed Limits. <http://www.wvdot.
Com/6%5Fmotorists/6%5Fspeedlimits.htm>. 2003.
Werner, Mike. “Riding Motorcycles in France.” Bikes in the Fast Lane – Motorcycle News.
<http://blogs.motorbiker.org/mikewerner/Blog.nsf/dx/RidingInFrance.htm> July 1, 03.
Youngblood Ed. “Who we are.” American Motorcyclist. October 2002: 12.
16