[Nick1000]

After having a knockback from my insurers with regard to fitting 999 forks, I phoned around and had a hard time finding insurers willing to take me on with the amount of 'modifications' I had planned to do.

I have managed to get hold of a pair of 999 wheels, 999 forks, galfer brakes, 999 Brembos and with the other cosmetic changes I've made, I decided to inform my insurers.

You'd think I'd stuck a Ferrari engine on my bike judging by the responses I got. It was as if I was perpetually calling a plumber with the amount of air being sucked in when I mentioned my mods and forthcoming one's.

It's not as if I'm a 20yr old on my first bike either - I'm 48.

I finally got decent quotes from Ducati Insurance on the basis that my mods in the event of any damage would be replaced with stock items.

What's the experience of you guys around the globe with insurers, bearing in mind that this forum is so heavily into modding our bikes.

Any advice, stories. lies and anecdotes welcome.

Regards Nick

 

[GTMuzz]

so you technically make the bike handle and stop better and theyre freaking??

 

[Duccout]

Here in the UK, insurance companies have stated publicly, that changing a spark plug or tyre from the original make could invalidate an insurance policy.

 

[QuickNick]

Here in the UK, insurance companies have stated publicly, that changing a spark plug or tyre from the original make could invalidate an insurance policy.

I have just have relatives over from Blighty, I could'nt believe how bad it has got over there. I left in '82.

Here, we make as many mods as we want. Chance's are they will call the bike a right off anyway if the steering tab is bent in the event of any accident, however minor.

I only buy the insurance because I have to be legal, and I need something to shop the cop when I pulled for speeding!. Insurance companies have very creative ways of getting out of paying.

Oh, and, God save the Queen!

 

[jcasella]

A few years back a women backed into my parked ride, insurance wanted to total a ride I just paid $12500 for.. I faxed them all the custom work and engine mods and then they OK'd the $3500 repair bill..
Sounds like I got off lightly compared to other parts of the Globe?

 

[Bonafide]

It's not as if I'm a 20yr old on my first bike either - I'm 48.

Statistically here in the states, more guys in the 40s wreck Ducatis (and ahem: Harleys) than guys in the 20s ...

 

[Duccout]

Yes, here in the UK it really is the Land of the Free, where the police confiscate your bike for anti-social behaviour (filtering past stationary traffic) and the licensing authorities remove any evidence of your entitlement to ride a bike, forcing you to retake your test again, even if you have been riding for 30 years and have presented photocopied evidence that you are licensed to ride motorcycles. The Eastern Bloc is alive and well here in Britain.

 

[MajorSoftie]

Statistically here in the states, more guys in the 40s wreck Ducatis (and ahem: Harleys) than guys in the 20s ...

Care to back that up?

"Among all riders, motorcycle operators in the 20-29 age group had the largest percentage of fatal crashes even though this age group is purchasing fewer motorcycles than previous years."

"Motorcycle Industry Council findings show an increase in motorcycle purchases in the 40 and above age group. In the last 10 years, there has been an increase in rider fatalities in the 40 and above age group. Bottom line: More people in that age group with motorcycles on the road create more chances of accident occurence. The Council says the gap is narrowing between the 20-29 year old rider fatalities and the above 40 group fatalities" (emphasis added)
(http://www.bellaonline.com/articles/art39773.asp)



Note that the gap is narrowing between the 20-29 year-old group (as in, the gap still exists) and the above 40 group, which includes 40-49, 50-59, 60-69, plus 70 and over, ALL ADDED TOGETHER. The 20-29 group still leads the 40-and-over group, even though the 40-and-over group owns 53% of the motorcycles, while the 20-29 group owns only 18.4% of the bikes.

Care to note that there are OVER 50% more riders in the 40-49 age group than in the 18-29 age group, in spite of the younger group covering 20% more birth years? Care to note that there are almost 290% more riders in the total 40-and-over group, and yet there are still more riders from 18-29 racking themselves up?
(http://www.juneauabate.org/news/news.htm)



I believe you have confused "guys in their 40's" with everyone from 40 to 100 (something that most 40 year-olds would find rather offensive), as well as confusing that number getting closer to the 29 year-old group with it actually passing that group. Unless you can show me some evidence to dispute that which I have offered, I believe you are spreading rumor and false interpretation.

 

[DrD]

OK Major,
Now you have me curious. The first post was about people in a certain age group "wrecking" more bikes. You provided evidence about fatalities. So now you have me wondering what your source said about the total number of wrecks in the various age groups, not just the fatalities. Did they include those numbers?

Care to back that up?

"Among all riders, motorcycle operators in the 20-29 age group had the largest percentage of fatal crashes even though this age group is purchasing fewer motorcycles than previous years."

"Motorcycle Industry Council findings show an increase in motorcycle purchases in the 40 and above age group. In the last 10 years, there has been an increase in rider fatalities in the 40 and above age group. Bottom line: More people in that age group with motorcycles on the road create more chances of accident occurence. The Council says the gap is narrowing between the 20-29 year old rider fatalities and the above 40 group fatalities" (emphasis added)
(http://www.bellaonline.com/articles/art39773.asp)



Note that the gap is narrowing between the 20-29 year-old group (as in, the gap still exists) and the above 40 group, which includes 40-49, 50-59, 60-69, plus 70 and over, ALL ADDED TOGETHER. The 20-29 group still leads the 40-and-over group, even though the 40-and-over group owns 53% of the motorcycles, while the 20-29 group owns only 18.4% of the bikes.

Care to note that there are OVER 50% more riders in the 40-49 age group than in the 18-29 age group, in spite of the younger group covering 20% more birth years? Care to note that there are almost 290% more riders in the total 40-and-over group, and yet there are still more riders from 18-29 racking themselves up?
(http://www.juneauabate.org/news/news.htm)



I believe you have confused "guys in their 40's" with everyone from 40 to 100 (something that most 40 year-olds would find rather offensive), as well as confusing that number getting closer to the 29 year-old group with it actually passing that group. Unless you can show me some evidence to dispute that which I have offered, I believe you are spreading rumor and false interpretation.

 

[Bonafide]

Care to back that up?

Sure, like every govt agency, we follow the open records act. Come pull all the accident reports I've written for the past 10 or yrs (dont think we keep them for more than that) and read for yourself what I get to see firsthand or would you rather I copy/paste some BS I found on a website?

Go on ... go find some hard evidence that shows how more 20something yr old owners wreck their Ducatis and Harleys than 40something yrs old owners of Ducatis and Harleys.

I believe you have confused "guys in their 40's" with everyone from 40 to 100 (something that most 40 year-olds would find rather offensive), as well as confusing that number getting closer to the 29 year-old group with it actually passing that group. Unless you can show me some evidence to dispute that which I have offered, I believe you are spreading rumor and false interpretation.

I believe you're trying to be an ahole for some odd reason - but I dont have evidence to back that up either. I'm also not confused - you are - about the content of my reply. But hey, you obviously know more than anyone else here with your expansive internet knowledge so have at it Boss. BTW, I'm 40-something and I'm not offended by how many of my peers own/ride and wreck expensive bikes, but I do take offense to your reply.

 

[Nick1000]

Gentlemen - Please

Gents,

Majorsoftie is talking about the twenty somethings wrecking their bikes - whatever the make - Suzuki, yamaha etc.

And Bonafide is talking about Ducati and Harley riders - different demographics.

Thanks gents but back to the subject.

 

[MajorSoftie]

Sure, like every govt agency, we follow the open records act. Come pull all the accident reports I've written for the past 10 or yrs (dont think we keep them for more than that) and read for yourself what I get to see firsthand or would you rather I copy/paste some BS I found on a website?

I believe you misunderstood my question. I did not ask if you would like me to go find proof of your statement, I asked if you could offer any.

Apparently, your answer is: no. So, I shall give it all the validity it is due.

If "your" agency has such numbers, I'm sure they are available on "some BS website" for you to copy and paste. You made the claim. Can you back it up or not?

I also must admit my own confusion about what agency you could be a part of that would be generating national statistics and would involve you writing accident reports of events seen firsthand. It is also difficult to imagine how pulling and reading your personal accident reports could possibly prove national statistics.


You are correct that you did specify Ducatis and Harleys, and that is a good point. However, as far as backing that up, you still have shown us nothing. As far as acknowledging that any such claimed increase in accident count is directly related to a huge increase in ownership, you apparently do not choose to do that either. This is an enormous factor in Harley ownership, who's median age of ownership continues to climb each year. I do not know if it is a factor in Ducati ownership. Nick was discussing insurance risk factors, which have nothing to do with how many accidents occur in an age group, but how many accidents per bike per mile occur in that age group. We have rather poor numbers on accidents per mile, but we have pretty clear ones per bike, and those are the ones I offered. More fatalities continue to occur in the 18-29 year-old age group than in the 40-49 year-old group, even though there are FAR fewer riders in the younger group. So, even if the count were higher for the older group, the rate would still remain far lower, which is what is related to the insurance risk that Nick was discussing.

If you have data that shows that the situation is different for Harleys and Ducatis, please show us. If you think that someone is trying to be an "Ahole" because they challenge your statement, ask for evidence, and point out the very important missing factor relevant to the topic, well than I am that Ahole. I am not, however, the one who has taken things personal: I have not become sarcastic, nor have I done any name calling. Those would be your choices.


In the interest of fairness, I should say that I consider it entirely possible that more Harley accidents involve mature riders (if there are many more Harley riders in that group, it would be somewhat surprising if it were not so) but I have never seen any proof. On the other hand, as far as Ducatis I've never seen anything that would even hint that this was so, thus my original question. There is a surprising amount of Harley specific national data available, but I've never seen any Ducati specific accident data. According to Ducati CFO Enrico D’Onofrio, in 2007 the average Harley owner was 55 (most other numbers I've seen are more like 48) while the average Ducati owner was 35 (http://homepage.mac.com/gegomez/blogwavestudio/LH20050304120358/LHA20070613073049/index.html). This is just one of the pieces of information which makes your claim seem so much less likely for Ducatis than for Harleys.



DrD, yes, you're right that most of the numbers I've shown are for fatalities. These numbers are much easier to find and verify than accident count numbers. For whatever reason, the different states don't seem as consistent in their motorcycle accident reporting procedures as in their fatality reporting so national accident numbers are considered less reliable, but everything I've seen shows no statistically relevent difference in the fatality percentages per accident between the different age groups, so, yes, comparing the fatality numbers should be fairly representative of the accident comparison.