Most motorcycle deaths, age 50+

[Rogue Hawk]

This is interesting. conventional wisdom would suggest the highest motility rate would be among the 20 something\Sportbike\Hair on Fire types.

But no, its the 50+ crowd. Why? Well, this is my theory. I see many cursers and interstate bikes are peopled by 50+. At least here in IL, helmets are not cool with the cruisers. And interstate bikes, I see helmets, but mostly open face with big comm units attached. The sport bikers often wear helmets but not much else. My guess is they are emulating there Moto GP hero's with the helmets. Its cool to wear a Lorenzo or Marquez replica.

http://www.iihs.org/iihs/topics/t/motorcycles/fatalityfacts/motorcycles#Age-and-gender

 

[wyliec]

I say decreased reaction time plays a part. That can probably be traced back to a lack of exercise, which leads to less mobility, and decreased reaction to events.

 

[ARtraveler]

POINT: How about the fact that there are more in the over 50 crowd riding than there are in the 20 crowd? It takes a lot of money these days to drive big iron, and the over 50 crowd has more of it for the big toys.

COUNTERPOINT: Don't think it has to do with safety issues though. I would also venture to say that the "average" 50 year plus driver is probably more safety minded than the 20 year olds. Think back on this one. :roflblack: I drive very different than I did when I was 20.

 

[MRH]

Motorcycles are largely a sport for the over 50 crowd. The meaningful statistic would be number of deaths per X miles driven in a given age range.

This is very much like saying that most gymnastics injuries occur to young women.

 

[Bob Denman]

:agree: Plus you must remember: the "20-something" from 1975 is now one of us! :shocked:

 

[Chupaca]

Here's the thing..!!

I would like to see the percentages rather than the numbers...how many fatalities are there in the 50+ out of the total 50+ riders.
If 100 cars are in a race...50 are Toyotas, 20 are Nissan, 20 are Chevy and 10 are Fords...what are the odds that toyotas will win and place..?? :roflblack: why the sudden interest in mortality of the aged spyder ryder...?? :roflblack:

 

[Fatcycledaddy]

How about miles ridden?

How about the fact that most of the younger riders only ride around the areas that they live with an occasional weekend trip. Most people 50 and older are able to take longer trip for extended periods of time.
Now you have two things coming into play, older riders can afford the bikes, and have the time to ride them for extended periods of time.

It would be cool to see the number of accidents per miles ridden by each age group.

Sounds to me like something an insurance group would use to justify raising the over 50 riders insurance rates. :shocked:

 

[Sccar]

Many factors to consider

Resilience? The body of a 20 year old could take a lot more abuse and survive than a 50+

other health factors may contribute to death.

slower reaction time.

feeling that they have been riding for so long they know it all, seen it all

....imho

 

[TommyBwell]

That really surprises me. I have slowed down so much in my later years. I am more medicated than in my thirties and forties but less than in my twenties. There is a hangout as you are getting up into the north Georgia mountains and there are a lot of 50+ guys in full leathers pretending they are still in their twenties. I imagine they help the statistics.

 

[Bob Denman]

Sounds to me like something an insurance group would use to justify raising the over 50 riders insurance rates. :shocked:

Insurance Companies have to live under the burden of actuarial science. This deals not just with the numbers; but the rate of incidence within a grouping of similar riders...
Raw numbers are meaningless...:banghead:

 

[Rogue Hawk]

:agree: Plus you must remember: the "20-something" from 1975 is now one of us! :shocked:

That is a good point. The 20 somethings in 75 with the 80% rate are now the 50+ers today. Maybe it was all that weed they where smoking back then

 

[r1100rider]

How about the fact that most of the younger riders only ride around the areas that they live with an occasional weekend trip. Most people 50 and older are able to take longer trip for extended periods of time.
Now you have two things coming into play, older riders can afford the bikes, and have the time to ride them for extended periods of time.

It would be cool to see the number of accidents per miles ridden by each age group.

Sounds to me like something an insurance group would use to justify raising the over 50 riders insurance rates. :shocked:

how about the fact that the 50 something's that now can afford a bike and go out and buy the biggest loaded bager and have never ridden before in there life I get people that come up to me all the time and I'm going to get a Harley and start touring I ask if they ever rode before and they say no it's just something I've always wanted to do ,I'll usually tell them I wouldn't recommend starting out mid life on a big road bike if you have never rode before either start on a small dirt bike or get a spyder 50 is to old to feel the hurt of the learning curve of a road bike

 

[Bob Denman]

:agree: If you're waiting until you're in your fifties to start riding; you might have missed the boat! :shocked:
Too much bike; is actually way worse than not enough. nojoke

 

[Bob Denman]

That is a good point. The 20 somethings in 75 with the 80% rate are now the 50+ers today. Maybe it was all that weed they where smoking back then

:shocked:

 

[asp125]

There is some reason that the "boomers" are more at risk. Some of them are what we call "re-entry" bikers; who decided to take up riding after the kids have grown and they have more disposable income. But age and declining reflexes, coupled with often big cruiser bikes, equals higher risk of crashing. Sure they might ride slower than the "crotch rocket" types, but decreased reaction times and generally weaker physical condition means any crash has more serious consequences for life threatening injuries.

 

[Bob Denman]

So just exactly what is it, that you're trying to say?

 

[MouthPiece]

[h=2]I find this to be interesting.

Chris


Helmet use[/h]
In 2013, 59 percent of fatally injured motorcycle drivers were helmeted. Helmet use was lower, at 49 percent, for people killed as passengers on motorcycles.



[TABLE="width: 668"]
[TR]
[TH="class: table-title, colspan: 9"]Helmet use of fatally injured motorcycle drivers and passengers, 2013[/TH]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TH="class: first-column, colspan: 1, align: left"][/TH]
[TH="colspan: 2"]Helmet[/TH]
[TH="colspan: 2"]No helmet[/TH]
[TH="colspan: 2"]Unknown[/TH]
[TH="colspan: 2"]Total[/TH]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TH="colspan: 1"]Number[/TH]
[TH="colspan: 1"]%[/TH]
[TH="colspan: 1"]Number[/TH]
[TH="colspan: 1"]%[/TH]
[TH="colspan: 1"]Number[/TH]
[TH="colspan: 1"]%[/TH]
[TH="colspan: 1"]Number[/TH]
[TH="colspan: 1"]%[/TH]
[/TR]
[TR="class: odd"]
[TH="class: first-column, colspan: 1, align: left"]Driver[/TH]
[TD="colspan: 1"]2,435[/TD]
[TD="colspan: 1"]59[/TD]
[TD="colspan: 1"]1,558[/TD]
[TD="colspan: 1"]38[/TD]
[TD="colspan: 1"]133[/TD]
[TD="colspan: 1"]3[/TD]
[TD="colspan: 1"]4,126[/TD]
[TD="colspan: 1"]100[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR="class: even"]
[TH="class: first-column, colspan: 1, align: left"]Passenger[/TH]
[TD="colspan: 1"]124[/TD]
[TD="colspan: 1"]49[/TD]
[TD="colspan: 1"]120[/TD]
[TD="colspan: 1"]47[/TD]
[TD="colspan: 1"]9[/TD]
[TD="colspan: 1"]3[/TD]
[TD="colspan: 1"]253[/TD]
[TD="colspan: 1"]100[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR="class: odd"]
[TH="class: first-column, colspan: 1, align: left"]Total*[/TH]
[TD="colspan: 1"]2,559[/TD]
[TD="colspan: 1"]58[/TD]
[TD="colspan: 1"]1,678[/TD]
[TD="colspan: 1"]38[/TD]
[TD="colspan: 1"]144[/TD]
[TD="colspan: 1"]3[/TD]
[TD="colspan: 1"]4,381[/TD]
[TD="colspan: 1"]100[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD="class: table-footer, bgcolor: #F2F2F2, colspan: 9, align: left"]*Total includes other and/or unknowns[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]

 

[IdahoMtnSpyder]

I find this to be interesting.

Chris


Helmet use


In 2013, 59 percent of fatally injured motorcycle drivers were helmeted. Helmet use was lower, at 49 percent, for people killed as passengers on motorcycles.



[TABLE="width: 668"]
[TR]
[TH="class: table-title, colspan: 9"]Helmet use of fatally injured motorcycle drivers and passengers, 2013[/TH]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TH="class: first-column, align: left"][/TH]
[TH="colspan: 2"]Helmet[/TH]
[TH="colspan: 2"]No helmet[/TH]
[TH="colspan: 2"]Unknown[/TH]
[TH="colspan: 2"]Total[/TH]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TH]Number[/TH]
[TH]%[/TH]
[TH]Number[/TH]
[TH]%[/TH]
[TH]Number[/TH]
[TH]%[/TH]
[TH]Number[/TH]
[TH]%[/TH]
[/TR]
[TR="class: odd"]
[TH="class: first-column, align: left"]Driver[/TH]
[TD]2,435[/TD]
[TD]59[/TD]
[TD]1,558[/TD]
[TD]38[/TD]
[TD]133[/TD]
[TD]3[/TD]
[TD]4,126[/TD]
[TD]100[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR="class: even"]
[TH="class: first-column, align: left"]Passenger[/TH]
[TD]124[/TD]
[TD]49[/TD]
[TD]120[/TD]
[TD]47[/TD]
[TD]9[/TD]
[TD]3[/TD]
[TD]253[/TD]
[TD]100[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR="class: odd"]
[TH="class: first-column, align: left"]Total*[/TH]
[TD]2,559[/TD]
[TD]58[/TD]
[TD]1,678[/TD]
[TD]38[/TD]
[TD]144[/TD]
[TD]3[/TD]
[TD]4,381[/TD]
[TD]100[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD="class: table-footer, bgcolor: #F2F2F2, colspan: 9, align: left"]*Total includes other and/or unknowns[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]

What is not shown is what percentage overall of riders wear helmets. If 85% of riders wear helmets, and 15% don't, and those 15% represent 38% of all fatalities, that is not good. We need both sets of numbers to do any meaningful interpretation of the numbers.

 

[Rogue Hawk]

I find this to be interesting.

Chris


Helmet use


In 2013, 59 percent of fatally injured motorcycle drivers were helmeted. Helmet use was lower, at 49 percent, for people killed as passengers on motorcycles.



[TABLE="width: 668"]
[TR]
[TH="class: table-title, colspan: 9"]Helmet use of fatally injured motorcycle drivers and passengers, 2013
[/TH]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TH="class: first-column, align: left"][/TH]
[TH="colspan: 2"]Helmet
[/TH]
[TH="colspan: 2"]No helmet
[/TH]
[TH="colspan: 2"]Unknown
[/TH]
[TH="colspan: 2"]Total
[/TH]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TH]Number
[/TH]
[TH]%
[/TH]
[TH]Number
[/TH]
[TH]%
[/TH]
[TH]Number
[/TH]
[TH]%
[/TH]
[TH]Number
[/TH]
[TH]%
[/TH]
[/TR]
[TR="class: odd"]
[TH="class: first-column, align: left"]Driver
[/TH]
[TD]2,435
[/TD]
[TD]59
[/TD]
[TD]1,558
[/TD]
[TD]38
[/TD]
[TD]133
[/TD]
[TD]3
[/TD]
[TD]4,126
[/TD]
[TD]100
[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR="class: even"]
[TH="class: first-column, align: left"]Passenger
[/TH]
[TD]124
[/TD]
[TD]49
[/TD]
[TD]120
[/TD]
[TD]47
[/TD]
[TD]9
[/TD]
[TD]3
[/TD]
[TD]253
[/TD]
[TD]100
[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR="class: odd"]
[TH="class: first-column, align: left"]Total*
[/TH]
[TD]2,559
[/TD]
[TD]58
[/TD]
[TD]1,678
[/TD]
[TD]38
[/TD]
[TD]144
[/TD]
[TD]3
[/TD]
[TD]4,381
[/TD]
[TD]100
[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD="class: table-footer, bgcolor: #F2F2F2, colspan: 9, align: left"]*Total includes other and/or unknowns
[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]

Helmets are one factor in deaths, another is internal injuries. The number of riders without back and chest protectors is likely even higher than without helmets.
I wear both, a CE certified level 2 chest and back protector. It can be a bitch in summer, so sometimes I have to omit the chest protector to get more airflow.

 

[IdahoMtnSpyder]

I just sent an email to Idaho STAR asking if they can provide more information with regard to the statistics I posted here, http://www.spyderlovers.com/forums/...Syder-Ryders&p=1045508&viewfull=1#post1045508. Specifically, I asked if they can relate the numbers to the demographics of riders and to miles ridden. Will be interesting to see what they come back with.