Devon TRF Group Forum

wackyracer · Powermonger!!

"King of stealth"

jt · Powermonger!!

Well my Honda is far more stealthy than the Katoom - so that's a good start smile

Will be out in full on 'stealth mode' tomorrow with just one other rider wink - on lanes few others ride.....

Albert · Clubman A

I see this sort of thing again and again though, residents complaints about antisocial ROW use by vehicles....

I sympathise with locals over noise, noise is annoying especially if you have a big group of poorly silenced dirt bikes revving outside your house, but when does that ever happen?

Im lucky enough to live very close to a greenlane, just outside of bideford. Its pretty damn close to me, i can see it out of my kitchen window, and i actually notice a vehicle on it at most once a week, i know for a fact it gets a lot more use than i hear because i see the tracks all over it whenever im on there myself. I cant even hear them, never mind being disturbed by it! I think your house would literally have to be immediately adjacent to a lane to hear users of it at any volume, in which case how is it that different from living by a metalled road?

Also, when did these people move into these houses anyway? My understanding is that the lanes have been legal vehicle routes for a pretty long time, as in more than a lifetime, so if these people dislike greenlanes so much why did they move next to one? I used to live next a dual carriageway in London, pretty unpleasant and potentially dangerous, but i don't recall writing angry letters trying to get it shut down for my convenience.

It seems to me that all of the main complaints there really don't apply to us, as the TRF are already encouraging members not to behave badly out on the lanes, we really can't do anything about antisocial lane use by others short of riding around in vigilante gangs

Sneaking about unseen in absolute stealth is i think not a great solution, that means that every bike these unhappy locals notice will be one behaving antisocially, rather than them being the minority where most encounters are with a noticeable but friendly and polite biker.

As for the dangers of meeting a vehicle on a lane, they are not any different from a country road. If people are concerned about meeting a vehicle they have plenty of other places to go, unlike us. Has there ever been an actually accident between a vehicle and other party on a greenlane, ive never heard of one.

RichT4 · Champion

I agree with what your saying Albert - I also don't think we should be cowering away from society like some under class.

Problem is this is an un-winnable situation.

An argument I hear often is that the lanes are legal to ride so instead of closing the lanes the Police should Police them - well they can't so they will either recommend they are closed and blocked to traffic or widen & developed to make them easier to Police. It's a lot easy for them to determine what is illegal use if all motor traffic is illegal use.

I think the best way forward would be to differentiate trail users from illegal users, not easy since the influx for Enduro machines & riders wearing MX gear. The only real difference is in rider attitude & behaviour, unfortunately a typical 'NIMBY' would not recognise this (or want to recognise this) so that kind of puts us back the square 1.

I personally think mass organised Political pressure is the way forward, it's our countryside too!

Pete · Devon's Best

I have seen several groups stop inconsiderately at the end of a lane outside someones house while waiting for the rest of the group to catch up. The run leader ought to have the common sense to stop at a convenient point to gather his group, perhaps a gateway, or a road junction, or within the lane away from properties, but not directly outside someones house as it antisocial really to inflict the sound of several machines for several minutes on someone in their home. Just because we have right to do something doesn't make it right.

Planning runs so as to avoid passing through the centre of villages and heavily populated areas is just common sense really. Riding through the same village more than once is piss poor planning.

('Common sense' is a misnomer, unfortunately, as it really is not that common).

A bloke came out and took a swing at me once at the end of 192-116 because he had heard my group riding down the next valley along 192-114 and, thanks to one rider on an unreasonably loud WR400 who lied to me by promising to put his baffle in, he had had time to get very wound up worrying about his wife who had set off in that direction along 192-240 on her horse a few minutes previously. I saw the lady about fifty yards away down 240 as we passed the junction of 114/240 and waved and she smiled and waved back. Had the bloke not heard us coming there would have been no incident whatsoever.

Albert · Clubman A

I suppose the levels of sound escaping really depends a lot on the particulars of the terrain around a lane. Unbaffled 4t bikes are hideously loud, but thankfully seem to be pretty rare on the lanes. The lane by me is directly across a small valley and would transmit noise quite well across to me i would have thought, but perhaps the bank/hedgerow along it is blocking the sound well?

It seems like having a low tolerance to very loud machines on group rides would be a smart way to go, although in reality turning people away from a group ride is going to be pretty tough.

It is quite easy to get an idea of the sound output of a bike using a smartphone these days, perhaps some clear guidelines on how to test your bikes sound output, and a clear statement that over loud bikes will be turned away would be a help? Still this would only effect TRF riders. Likewise there should probably be clear advice to groupleaders on smart places to rest/regroup.

Common sense is a lot easier to have in hindsight at a PC than it is to have on the trail where you have a large number of distractions, training/clear advice is the solution to that.

Perhaps the TRF should be looking more at opening up lanes in areas where people won't notice or care about the traffic and in return letting a few in built up/controversial areas go? I know this is very against the general "death grip on every lane" ethos of the TRF, but this approach might see us ending up with a better network of lanes easily reached on our bikes but well away from most other users? It would also help that the vehicle traffic would be the main thing keeping those lanes passable, as seems to be the case for a lot of the out-of-the-way lanes. If it is a small percentage of our lanes we are battling in court for and are causing all the upset we might be better letting them go and focusing on demonstrating rights in areas where anti's care less?

Just a thought, maybe its impractical in reality, but it would be nice to end up in a situation where we can work with the other user groups to build a network that is best for everyone rather than throwing money down the drain in courts all the time fighting each other. That money could be spent on some helpful signage and better drainage for damaged lanes....

-- Edited by Albert on Sunday 29th of June 2014 10:33:44 AM

Jerry atterick · Expert

None of the arguments are flawed.
General perspective, bikers, any form, are further down the food change.
I had a Nimby move in a couple of years, "I didnt spend £500,000 on a home and then have to put up with MX bikes chasing round a field!"
Wrong!
Environment Agency were the best ally, believe it or not.
Spend £600,000 and buy a place that isnt next to MX track.
Luckily that is what happened and the new, relatively, neighbour is well and truly into bikes, so happy ending.
Bigger picture, Obama was elected for all the right reasons, mostly, cant do anything because "Money speaks", nothing new there.
As is widely reported the wealth divide in the UK is getting wider, read next generation with more money.
So although the arguments arent flawed, the conclusion will not be the result of a step by step approach to legitimate process.
Money, or those that have it, will win. (Present liability concerns point in case, who has shares in the Insurance Companies?)
You dont have to look very far to dig up a "Vested interest!"
In the meantime, keep up the fight.
Stealth will mean the same as it did 40 years ago!
So much more fun.

FBF · Clubman A

Personally for me, loud bikes irritate the hell out of me. I don't have too much problem with multi cylinder bikes on roads as long as they are not stupidly loud. Singles however are very different, the TE450 I had was quite loud enough with the standard can, in fact probably too loud imho even repacking it did not seem to quell the noise that much. Basically a 4T will rattle your windows out if it has a loud can on.

For lanes quiet is good, gave me a headache if in a group and all you can hear is some bike barking away all the time just niggles me and don't really see the point. Too quiet is also bad, no-one will hear you coming makes you wonder what will happen if electric bikes do become the norm. I had a ZX9R on standard pipes and several people stepped out in front of me while on busy pedestrian lined streets, just don't seem to see or hear it coming.

You will always get those with loud pipes either because it adds .001 bhp or they think it sounds cool. It is up to people to be responsible. All too easy for somebody to slip a loud can on or yank the baffles out cos it sound "cool". Don't have an answer for it, we had a rider with a XR400 that rode with our group and was always asking him to shut the thing up., took several ride outs for him to comply. Some people just don't get it.

FBF · Clubman A

Just as an added thought I am always having a look at what the new world of bikes may bring. Latest interest is a hybrid motorcycle being designed for the US marines. Big budget projects often bring rewards to the private sector.

http://edition.cnn.com/2014/04/28/us/stealth-military-motorcycle/

Interesting new Toyota generator concept engine that has motorcycle potential.

http://www.cycleworld.com/2014/05/15/motorcycle-hybrid-engine-technology-from-toyota/