Just failed the CA DMV motorcycle popsicle test (and I thought Ihad passed)

This comes as a surprise to you?

No, I did it on a Honda VFR800FI: a relatively chunky and
top-heavy sportbike designed for optimal speeds of around
100 MPH rather than 5. It also featured Honda's then new
fuel-injection system that made the throttle response more
of an on-off switch than anything else: yet I passed on my
very first try.

Q: Do you suppose that could be because I knew more or
less what I was doing *before* I took the test?

http://www.flickr.com/photos/33885727@N03/8450187988/in/photostream

Sigh. Did you really imagine that Reeky hasn't seen
previous iterations of the "You're lying because you say
you did something that I couldn't." cliche'?

Fact is, I'm not all that skilled a rider; and I know that
because I've ridden with and known a number of riders
who I have no problems admitting are far better than I
ever was. So if *I* could pass the silly popsicle test on
the first try what does that say about the guys who
couldn't?

The other fact is that plenty of riders -including a fair
sprinkling of beginners (which I wasn't)- pass the popsicle
test with no problems, and it's only the ones who *don't*
who come here to piss and moan about the unfairness
of life in general and motorcycle lisencing tests in
particular.

 

What you'll also want to know (if you actually really want to know
what it going on; and there is no indication so far that that is the
case, at all):

1. How many of the ADULT students (21 or older) who took the CMSP BRC
class had any knowledge that it is possible to take the written and
riding test at the California DMV and get a license without taking a
class.

2. (a) Of those, how many thought it was BETTER to get some training
before they got a motorcycle endorsement on their license.

2. (b.) Of those, how many actually owned their own motorcycle at the
time of taking the CMSP BRC class, or had access to a motorcycle to
learn on and practice on and to take the California DMV riding test
on?

3. Of those, how many TOOK the California DMV written and riding test
and FAILED prior to enrolling in the CMSP BRC class?

4. How much better were the novice riders who took the CMSP BRC class
when compared to novice riders who took and failed the California DMV
written and riding test?

5. How much money does it take to set up and operate a CMSP BRC class?

 

tomorrow wrote on Mon, 04 Mar 2013 11:00:04 -0800:

I will answer you in detail because out of the dozen or so posters
to this thread, you're 1 of about 3 who actually think & speak
with reason.

I disagree - but you'll see that I'll be sticking only to bare facts
so that we 'can' come to some understanding as to what is happening.

We know way more than 90% of California bikers are NOT taking
the DMV test- that is sure. It's likely around 95% (but we don't
know the exact figures until we get pass/fail stats from the DMV).

Nice to know. But I really think that will be impossible because
the CMSP hasn't even called me back yet in my quest to find a simple
number of how many riders passed and failed in 2012.

I'm going to try to get bone-dry bare facts from them first.

 

tomorrow wrote on Mon, 04 Mar 2013 09:34:40 -0800:

Hi tomorrow,
You're the rare voice of reason on this forum, so, I will respond
in detail.

You are correct in that I initially confused the two (MSF & CMSP).

Everything I had said about the MSF I 'meant' to say about the CMSP,
so, take only my statements moving FORWARD to be correctly focused.

I think we've already established that the MSF has very little
(almost nothing it appears) to do with the CMSP program, which is
CHP "administered" by law.

We've also determined together that the actual "profit" status of
the CMSP class is nearly meaningless from the perspective of the
student taking the class. It only has meaning later, when we have
the bare-bone facts, and can begin to calculate the costs (since
"non-profit" organizations have markedly lower costs than for-profit
businesses).

But, I'm staying totally away from money right now because we
don't even have the bare bones facts yet.

All we know, at this time, is that something like 95% of the
209,297 M1 licenses issued in 2012 were NOT from the DMV
riding test.

That means that only about 1 out of 20 riders who got their
license did so by the free CA DMV keyhole test. The other 19
took the CMSP class.

Those numbers are the first real datapoints that this newsgroup
has ever had, to my knowledge, as a window into what is really
going on.

Note: I still need to hone those numbers though because we
don't know the pass/fail statistics of the DMV, nor the bike
sizes used.

 

tomorrow wrote on Mon, 04 Mar 2013 09:37:11 -0800:

I apologize. I had confused the MSF with the CMSP. I was wrong.

 

Twibil wrote on Mon, 04 Mar 2013 01:04:02 -0800:

As soon as I figure out killfiles, I won't have to
see what you write anymore because it adds no value.

 

So... you couldn't pass with the same bike today...?

I would've taken it as "CHP officers have no problem on Harleys. If
you want to believe it's your bike that's the problem, go get one more
appropriate to your skill level".

Yeah, well, riding without the benefit of gyroscopic effect of rapidly
spinning wheels is different, and more clearly reveals skill beyond
those of a 6 year old on their bike.

A "beginning rider" is by definition not ready to test. The class may
not include the test simply because the instructors can't demonstrate
it, assuming the same standard of truck driver training, or any other
discipline of teaching. You don't ask the student to do what you
can't, and can't do well, every fucking time. You'd have no
credibility.

Actually, it needs less. The conclusion is assumed in the premise.

A reasonable theory would begin with a reasonable assumption: "Some
riders pass and some fail. Why?" and proceed from there.

It would not take off on a hypothetical tangent when the data showed
more riders on larger bikes failed, on the reasonable assumption that
it's harder to control larger bikes.

 

You have not established that the CMSP is non-profit, Al.

 

1.) You don't have to see it anyway unless you're telling us
that you have no control over your own actions. All you
have to do is skip the posts you don't like. Have you no
will of your own?

2.) The fact that you don't like something doesn't mean "it
adds no value". It only means you don't like it.

 

No. I think I posted earlier in the thread that there was a known
problem that was fixed afterwards, but still, those big carbs had no
setting for a rational speed around the circle. I sold the bike a few
years ago, I was certainly a better rider 30 years ago.

Well, my point was it wasn't my skill level. I was perfectly able to
do it on a bike that had a throttle setting appropriate for doing
that. I was by no means a novice, having by then had a number of
bikes from mo-ped to Cushman to various dirt bikes to Honda 350 to
Honda CB750 to the then-new Vision.

What? I had a Raleigh Competition I used to ride from Santa Barbara
to LA and back. If you've never done that, know that you have to ride
on the freeway.

I wasn't a beginning rider. I had somehow managed not to renew my M1
and didn't notice it until I bought the new bike. Never was quite
sure how that happened, whether I didn't check some box on a form or
the DMV fucked up. I still have CM1, so assume the DMV fucked up in
the '70s. It happens.

Depends how scientific you want to be about it. Full on statistical
analysis is math. Barbie tells me that's hard. You have to control
variables and stuff.

jg

 

So, you would argue literally no one passed the test on the same year,
make and model bike?

Uh, didn't you just purport "I could do plenty of show-off riding
maneuvers I wouldn't even attempt on a road bike, including a lot more
circles than the test required"...?

Seems vague, but reasonable.

Yeah, I got that.

And that was a larger bike?

Experience doesn't mean dick.

Apparently that was easier than the keyhole test, so I fail to see the
relevance.

No math is required to deduce the obvious. Few things are more
obvious than the vast majority of motorists grossly overestimate their
motoring skills, and will make leaps and bounds of logic and
rationalize to maintain the illusion. All you're doing is punctuating
that which is already known.

If you drive like the vast majority, you're doing it wrong.

 

Heh. Or "Because I cannot confirm it myself". Seen that a few times.

 

tomorrow wrote on Mon, 04 Mar 2013 21:38:10 +0000:

Auuurgh. It doesn't matter. Why do you constantly bring this up?

We can't accurately deal with the money until/unless we have
the numbers first, specifically the pass/fail statistics
at the DMV and at the CMSP BRC.

Besides, from the standpoint of the user, it makes absolutely
no practical difference if the business they are paying for a
service is for profit or not.

The only effect it has is on costs incurred by the "business".

Anyway, here's what we know about the CMSP (in 2009):
http://www.examiner.com/article/california-motorcyclist-safety-program-launches-new-website

Relevant quotes from that article follow below:
The CMSP is a motorcyclist-funded, state-operated program
administered by the Motorcycle Safety Foundation (MSF) under
contract with the California Highway Patrol (CHP).

The California Motorcyclist Safety Program trained 70,469
students in 2008, an 11 percent increase over 2007, setting
what is believed to be the record for most students trained
in a year by any state program.

Under contract with the California Highway Patrol, the MSF
initially assumed the administration of the CMSP on January
1, 2004. In September 2007 MSF was again selected by CHP to
administer the CMSP for 2008 and 2009.

 

Plenty? I'd say 5% is not plenty. It's a very select few.

 

What actually comes as a shock to me is that you write
like an adolescent, but in that picture, you actually
look like a real adult.

 

Please provide the source for your claim that 95% of riders who take the CA
DMV motorcycle riding test fail it?

 

I brought it up in specific response to YOUR assertion (which you
snipped in your quote of my response) that:

If you don't want to talk about the profit status of the entity that
is providing the training, then please stop bringing it up yourself.
I didn't bring it up. I'm simply responding to your assertions.

Also, please don't say "we've also determined together," as that is
not the case.

In Virginia, there is a HUGE difference between the cost to the
student for the non-profit Virginia Rider Training Program classes
(which are subsidized by state rider training funding from a surcharge
on motorcycle registration fees) and the cost to the student from a
FOR PROFIT class such as Harley-Davidson's state-approved "Rider's
Edge" class.

So I have never determined - with you or anyone else - that the "for
profit" or "not for profit" status of the CMSP is not germane to the
student.

Why is that?

Sure it does. It costs a student $150 to take the VRTP BRC through my
local community college in a class that is administered by the state-
run (hint: not for profit) VRTP. The same class, with the exact same
MSF (and Virginia DMV) approved curriculum costs $429 at my local
harley-Davidson dealer through their for-profit "Rider's Edge"
class. The exact SAME class, using the exact same MSF (and Virginia
DMV) approved curriculum costs $349 through Apex Cycle Education, a
for-profit motorcycle training company that conducts classes locally.

Demonstrably untrue. If the for-profit entity has to PAY for a large
paved parking lot and a classroom facility and motorcycles that a not-
for-profit entity has DONATED to it by a local non-for-profit
educational facility, then the savings for the not-for-profit entity
can be passed on to the student, and the costs incurred by the for-
profit entity will most assuredly be passed on to the students.

 

tomorrow wrote on Tue, 05 Mar 2013 05:09:58 -0800:

And I'm simply responding to yours!
It seems we're in a circuitous loop neither of us wants to be in.
I'll try to break it by NOT mentioning that status in this post!

On a different note, that PDF you supplied was fantastic!
It was a wealth of good information!

I wish we had MORE of that type of statistical information so
that we could better UNDERSTAND what is going on.

 

No, I have no clue whether anyone else did that. I do know that when
I bought it, there had been a sudden recession that particularly
affected new motorcycles, so there were warehouses full of these
specific bikes in crates. So I got a great deal - actually, I was
happy to trade an unsaleable VW van in on it (the dealer donated it to
a charity or something, I assume for a profitable writeoff). Now
these bikes are considered a cult bike, the fellow I sold it to had
several, including one he bought new. He slapped some carbs on that
he had laying around and is happy too. When I asked him about the
carb issue from when they were new, he didn't remember any such
thing. So maybe not every one had the issue, or maybe it was a dealer
prep problem, I have no idea. I do distinctly recall I wasn't the
only one with the problem - the dealer had a warranty fix - but hey,
it was 30 years ago. I do find it easier to remember problems than
lack of problems.

OK, now you're being a dumb-ass. The bike I had issues with was a new
road bike. The bike I could show off on was a DP bike I had been
riding for 10 years. Capiche? And I've posted elsewhere about how
dirt riding experience saved my ass on the road bike, such as hitting
gravel mid-turn. I was certainly not the worlds best rider (my motoX
friends would dust me on dirt), but far from novice or otherwise
incapable.

No, a smaller bike.

How can you even say that? Fine and coarse muscle control, balance,
coordination and visual perception all are affected by experience, and
they all affect whether you can keep a wheel between two lines in a
dynamic situation.

Minor correction: I had a Kawasaki 350.

Get sucked into the draft of an 18 wheeler on the freeway and you
might see some gyroscopic effects of rapidly spinning wheels. A
little hard to tell, but I think this is the spot: http://goo.gl/maps/cir9A

Well, in spite of any self-evaluation error effects, I do have a big
honkin' autocross trophy. And before people start blabbing on about
racing experience means you are doing it wrong on the street, I must
point out the purpose of autocrossing is to demonstrate exceptional
accuracy and control of a vehicle. So no, I don't drive like the vast
majority.

Though every day, I sure see plenty of well below average driving.
Pickup trucks towing trailers running stop signs this morning. Note
the plural.

jg

 

Says the guy in his adolescent post.