Where can we get statistics of which BIKES pass the California DMVriding test?

*DING!* Yup. "Afraid of the facts". That must be it! Just as poor
Hen3ry says we're all "afraid of the facts" because we don't believe
that the Mossad and Bush/Cheney blew up the World Trade Center.

 

Let me ask you a question please....

If you don't have a clue as to the answer ... why did you bother to
respond?

 

Hi Rob,
Thank you for your reply explaining things as you see them.

I have my license and have had it for decades. I passed the test in the
east coast three decades ago (although that test was merely a dual set of
figure 8's of almost rider-determined size in a DMV parking lot shifting
through the gears and braking smoothly).

When I moved to California, I took both the California riding test & the
MSF class test. I practiced on the DMV lollipop for weeks on a brand new
K1200LT. I watched rider after rider fail for days. I watched some big
bikes go down trying (it was so sad because the damages were more than
the MSF bribe). And I strategically gave up after the second DMV
lollipop, yet easily laughed all the way through the MSF class, scoring a
perfect 100 on the written test at the end of day 1 (don't congratulate
me, it was a veritable joke) and I forget how many points out of 20 on
the MSF test (it was NOT perfect, which surprised me, considering how
trivially simple it was ... I think they dinged me for not turning my
helmet far enough, in their opinion, in the cornering test, and for not
shifting back to neutral in the emergency braking ... yet, interestingly,
the laughably simple u-turn box, as compared to the DMV lollipop, earned
me full points for that).

BTW, I MUST commend the MSF "coaches"; they are stellar people. They are
merely cogs in the big-bucks wheel, but, they TRULY wish the rider the
best skills, and, while their grading on the riding test is almost comic
(e.g., I watched people pass who missed the u-turn box by six feet!),
they at least test RELEVANT skills (starting, stopping, swerving,
cornering, etc.).

Interestingly, I took the test in the parking lot of Leigh High School on
an empty weekend, which is huge and secluded compared to the busy 9-5
atmosphere of the DMV lollipop, where cars (realistically) swerve right
next to you while you're taking the test, as they speed to the rare open
parking spots before someone else gets to them. (In an ironic sort of
way, the DMV test is in this one instance, actually more realistic than
the MSF test because any rider must contend with traffic dangerously
close while he performs what amounts to circus-act maneuvers in the DMV
parking lot.)

I've ridden about 50,000 miles on bikes, and, my latest group ride was
the range of light, which is always an interesting experience and I've
worn out one Aerostitch suit yet I still have my riding boots from a
decade ago.

When it comes to the DMV lollipop, I've found that anyone who grades
themselves grades too leniently; they can only be graded by a buddy who
allows ZERO failures in any given day. That's right, zero. Only one test
per day.

What I'm hearing is that people "can" pass the DMV lollipop on their
K1200LT. I can too. Maybe three or four times out of ten even.

But that's not good enough!

What I see people doing, all the time, is take the loop over and over
again, and, say, out of ten tries, they ace it two or four times. They
think they can pass the test.

Guess what. That's not good enough. You only get one test in any given
day. And you only get three tries. (You can practice all you want when
nobody is looking but when it comes time for the test, you get ONE test
per day and ZERO failures, very unlike the MSF test, which is one test
but lots and lots and lots of failures are accepted and you still pass).

Anyway, on a big-bore bike, you have a lower chance of passing that test
on your ONE chance in ONE day than on a smaller bore bike. So, guess what
most intelligent people do? Yup. They take the test on someone elses'
bike. Just like they do with the MSF class. They use "toy bikes" the size
of the type I rode when I was fifteen. Anyone can pass either test on
those toy bikes; but the test results are almost meaningless.

I'll bet if we compare the statistics of the bikes on the road compared
to the bikes on the test course, and we weed out those that failed, and
we accounted for the cumulative effect of new licensees, that we'd get a
disproportionate result that would be laughable in terms of realistic
testing.

In fact, the results would be very interesting.

I, for one, am not afraid of the what the results might show us.

Regarding your thread whoring explanation, while, as you say, I get to
ask the question, nobody has to answer the question I asked, as you so
eloquently stated it... but that doesn't stop me from having the optimism
in the usenet that someone out there actually knows the answer to the
question.

I'm not afraid of the answer. Are you?

QUESTION I'm hoping someone in the United States has an answer to:
- Where are the statistics of which bikes pass ANY state's motorcycle
test and which bikes fail most often?

 

It was?

I just looked. And, well, Tim, I don't see the answer.

Would you be so kind as to show me where the answer is?

It should be a Yes or No answer (backed up with some kind of reference).

Tim: Where is that answer to the question:
- Did Arnold pass the CA DMV riding test or the MSF riding test?

 

Thanks Tim,
I was hoping for something more concrete but this is the first start we
have so I'll go with the motion since I want to find the answer for the
edification of not only myself, but everyone.

I'll dig up the names/addresses (and publish them so others can pitch in
as I expect it to be a long hard crooked road) of the following:

1. DMV
2. Senator
3. State's Riders Rights Organization
4. AMA
5. FOIA

If I don't publish back with these addresses, then it's ok for Rob and
Twibil to lambaste me!

 

I've ridden about 100,000 on my current bike and less
than that on previous bikes. If you did the Range
of Light, perhaps we even talked to each other.

If you do the '49er, perhaps you might take a shot
at the slow race. Requires much the same skills.

I did do the Ca. DMV test after I moved out from NYC
in the '70s. A serious test would include high speed
braking, obstacle avoidance and maybe a skid pan.
Lacking that for obvious reasons, there needs to be a
proxy.

I know two people who died in their bike crashes and
another who spent the last three or four decades of
his life in a wheelchair. I'm not real happy watching
some of the riders I see out on the road, especially
in mid summer. I always wonder when I'm going to
see an unskilled rider coming at me straight across
the center line of a curve.

I'm not enthusiastic about making tests easier. If you
can suggest a better test, more power to you.

I suspect it's more the rider than the bike. What did
you take the DMV test on ?

 

That's the whole point!

There is already an easier test.

It's the $200 MSF test. It's almost trivial to pass the $200 MSF test. In
my class, we had about 24 riders in the class on those toy bikes, 12 at a
time on the course. Guess how many passed this $200 test. Yup. All 24,
some of which wouldn't last a year on the road alive after having passed
that $200 MSF test.

I'm sure "some" people fail the $200 MSF test (it would be interesting to
see the statistics), but out of 24, how many do you think typically fail?
Do you think it's 12 out of 24?

The reason they all passed is the $200 MSF riding test, while realistic,
is LENIENT as all hell in scoring. I watched a guy miss the u-turn box by
six feet and another knock the cones out of whack on the cornering. All
passed.

Take an arbitrary sample of 24 riders and give them the free California
lollipop DMV riding test on their own bikes. Let them practice all they
want, but, give them ONE CHANCE (per day, for three days) with ZERO
errors allowed on this free Ca DMV riding test.

Do you think 24 out of 24 would pass? Do you think 12 out of 24 would
pass? It would be interesting (and enlightening) to see the statistics.

If you guys are right, then all the big-bore bikers would pass on their
own bikes. I'd be glad to be wrong. Where are the statistics proving
either of our assumptions?

All I'm asking for is fact. Not opinion. Pure hard fact.

QUESTION (opened slightly so as to get an answer):
For any state in the nation, do we have statistics of the pass/fail
figures based on the SIZE of the motorcycles taking the riding tests?

 

Darn, and I was all set to congratulate you, too. You are obviously a
finer rider than anyone *I* ever saw take the MSF riding test.

 

Perhaps you failed to notice that there is more to the Basic Rider
Course than the test. Perhaps you failed to hear the rider coaches
telling the BRC graduates that the course did NOT make them into
experienced riders and that they were just at the BEGINNING of the
learning curve.

Perhaps your arrogant disdain and contempt for the MSF is what kept a
perfect rider like you from getting a perfect score on their trivial
and simple riding test.

 

How selfless of you!























I can't *wait* to be edified.

 

Wouldn't that be which bikes were ridden when the rider passed the test? Or
is it that the DMV carry out another type of test at the same time, as
opposed to simply logging what the rider used? I can't imagine why anyone
would want to actually log the type of bike for analysis.

 

Re-read what I said. The MSF riding test is REALISTIC but LENIENT. The
California DMV test is not realistic and it's Draconian.

You're confusing arrogance with intellect.

 

To compare the two tests with respect to realism and leniency:

A) Free MV written test (from memory):
- About 20 questions, some of which are purely whacko, graded rather
easily (I think something like a 70% is a pass), and if you read the
manual, all the questions are in the manual and sample tests online.
Certainty of passing: Almost 100% on the 1st try.

B) $200 MSF written test (from memory):
- About 50 questions, none of which are whacko, some of which you won't
agree with if you're an experienced rider but all of which are covered in
class. I'm not sure what is a percentage pass, but if you can stay awake
long enough in the class to suffer through endless diaribes (like the
never-ending counter-steering arguments for the pregnant moms or weight-
transfer discussions for the young kids, none of which will edify an
experienced rider). Certainty of passing: Almost 100% on the 1st try.

A) Free DMV riding test (from memory):
- First of all, it's not even close to realistic. Secondly, it's graded
on a Draconian one-mistake-you're-out scale. Worse yet, you get one try,
(per day, for three days). That means (and listen up all you self-
proclaimed "experts"), that means you have to pass it 100% of the time;
otherwise you're trusting your one-test to luck. So, those who say 'I can
do it" (and I can too), must be able to do it 100% of the time (I can't).
The point is that the free test is designed for you not to take it (see
contrast with the $200 alternative below).

B) $200 MSF riding test (from memory):
- First of all, it's wholly realistic, covering starting, stopping,
shifting, cornering, emergency stops and swerves, and yes, parking-lot
maneuvers. Where it differs from the DMV class (and, mind you, this is
the entire purpose, whether you understand that or not), is that it
passes everyone who couldn't pass the DMV test (otherwise there would be
a mutiny in California amongst all the new riders). It's the "way out".
You pay your money; you pass. Simple as that. You do only get one try,
but, the grading is so lenient that you'd have to practically drop the
bike to fail, and, I doubt that, in and of itself, would fail you if you
did everything else right.

To those of you who have taken BOTH tests, is anything I said NOT correct?

 

The sheep must be led.

If you only knew the statistics, even you, yes, even you, would let out a
sigh.

 

Maybe that is your *opinion* of the purpose of the test in
California.

Hell, maybe that is actually the way California runs its rider
training program, although if it is, it is cetainly news to me.

However, I can *assure* you from standpoint of KNOWING (not guessing,
not opinion) that that is not the case for the Virginia Rider Trainig
Program's classes that utilize the MSF curriculum.

Having taught approximately 4,500 students over a 14-year period of
time, I know that the concept of "You pay your money; you pass. Simple
as that" would quickly get you fired from the program. Nor was it,
in fact, remotely the case. The failure rate in the MSF-curriculum
BRC class in Virginia when I was teaching the course was just under
10%.

And no, you were not permitted to come back and "try again" at some
later time or date. Not unless you took the complete class over
again.

There is no "DMV class" in Virginia, so when you refer to the
California "DMV class", I have no clue what you are talking about.

 

I was told by my MSF coach of a similar failure rate, but he said it was
mostly given to people who came late the second day.

While the MSF allows lots and lots of mistakes during the test, they do
have an admirably DMV-like strictness when it comes to arriving to class
on time.

You arrive late, even five minutes late to the early-morning class, and
you fail the MSF class.

Look at it from their standpoint ... they have to fail somebody because I
was in that class, and they didn't fail people who knocked over cones and
strayed six feet outside the boxes.

 

That differs from my experience. I would say that the percentage of
students who completed the first day of training who missed or were
late on the second day was significantly under 1/2 of one percent.

The MSF (in Virginia) doesn't run the classes. The Virginia Rider
Training Program runs the classes, and is part of the DMV. They
simply use the MSF curriculum. The MSF curriculum for the basic rider
course assumes no knowledge of motorcycling whatsoever, which it must,
since many of the student of the course have no knowledge of
motorcycling at all. The curriculum is based on building blocks of
knowledge, from the ground up, and all building blocks subsequent to
motorcycle controls operation REQUIRE particiapation in and knowledge
of the motorcycle controls operation building blocks. This being an
extremely litigious society, the Virginia Rider Training Program did
not want (reasonably enough, in my opinion) an injured student to
relate to his or her lawyer that they "started riding a motorcycle"
with no training on how to operate the controls. Therefore, if the
class has already started learning how to operate the controls on a
motorcycle, a tardy student would not be permitted to take his or her
seat.

Now, of course, your personal experience with your class my well have
differed, since there is variation from state to state in how
individual rider training programs are conducted, even among those
programs that make use of the MSF curriculum. That is the perogative
of the authority conducting the classes. But what you describe is not
characteristic of the VRTP program, although disgruntled late arrivals
may well have their own axes to grind, even in Virginia.

This sounds like a sour grapes comment more than anything else.

 

There's no "DMV class" in California, either. He either thinks the
DMV and the MSF are parts of the same entity, he's trying to imply
that that's the case, or he's simply ignorant.

The California MSF courses are given by a wide variety of entities,
including for-profit private enterprise schools, motorcyle dealers,
the Honda corporation, various community and state colleges, and the
military; including both the Marine Corps and the Air Force.

All of them fall under the administrative umbrella of the CHP, but the
CHP merely checks to be sure all the schools teach the same standard
MSF curriculum and have qualified teachers: they don't teach the
courses themselves or set the rates; which explains why the rates vary
from one provider to the next.

 

IOW, the system is similar to that in Virginia, and the MSF is not
directly involved at all; it merely provides the nationally
standardized curriculum and standardized training for the riding
coaches..

Thanks, Pete.

 

Your opinion. Note this, too - a test to qualify you for a license
doesn't NEED to be "realistic" in terms of being built solely on
real-world conditions and scenarios. It's SUPPOSED to be about
the rider demonstrating a sufficient level of skill re the ability to
control their bike. You will probably never have to endlessly
circle 20-foot-radius loops in the real world. But you should have
enough skill in handling your machine to be ABLE to do it.

To bring in an analogous example from another field, re demonstrating
control-of-your-machine skills: there's a maneuver any student pilot
learns that's called "turns around a point," and the examiner may very
well call upon you to demonstrate that if you're going for your pilot's
certificate. It's not because some air-traffic control type is ever going
to ask you to "circle that silo down there" - it's because the ABILITY
to do it demonstrates the you can apply a certain amount of several
skills, simultaneously, to the degree that would be expected of one
who meets the minimum-acceptable level re the operation of the aircraft.
In short, if you CAN'T do it - whether or not you'd ever actually do it
in normal flying - the FAA is not going to consider you a person they'd
want flying around without adult supervision. And rightly so.

Bob M.