Looks like the majority of people who think is was the car drivers fault happen to be bikers themselves. He was doing almost 100mph near a junction. I’m sure he wasn’t being deliberately reckless, but you have to anticipate that other people make mistakes and that they aren’t expecting other motorists to be flying towards them at almost double the speed limit
Slowing down when approaching junctions can actually encourage vehicles waiting to make risky pull outs though.
Sure if you’re doing 56mph near a motorway junction and a car is trying to merge with the motorway then slowing down can cause problems for those behind you and next to you and for the person trying to join the motorway. But if you are doing 100mph then every ones options are limited
Ched:
Slowing down when approaching junctions can actually encourage vehicles waiting to make risky pull outs though.
Sure if you’re doing 56mph near a motorway junction and a car is trying to merge with the motorway then slowing down can cause problems for those behind you and next to you and for the person trying to join the motorway. But if you are doing 100mph then every ones options are limited
Don’t mean motorways, junctions where traffic is waiting if you slow down within visibility of waiting cars you will find they suddenly pull out where they would have waited if you had not eased off the gas.
You also can’t rely on an assumption oncoming traffic is within the speed limit it could be an emergency services vehicle, unmarked police car with faulty lights in the grill or someone rushing an injured child to hospital in their own car.
The biker was riding far too fast for the situation but I personally don’t think that gives everyone else a free pass on observation.
Gembo:
Left hand down!:
The argument posted that if he’d been doing the speed limit or less it wouldn’t have happened is weak to non-existent simply by the fact that the car driver admitted to not even being able to see the car following him so he’d have still turned across him regardless.With respect, that’s bull. The excessive speed is entirely relevant, if he’d been doing nearer 60, he wouldn’t have even been there at the same time as the dozy prick in the car!
Stupid argument. It’s entirely possible that the next car to turn right when he got there some time later could’ve done the exact same thing, could it not? 
Left hand down!:
Even at 50mph a direct impact like that is going to have very little likelihood of being survivable.He’d have had a dam sight better chance at 50 or 60 than nigh-on a ton for Christ sakes!
Unlikely survivable at those speeds or without life changing injuries such that his family’s life would still be just as ruinous.
I reckon he had about a tenth of a second to react which left him no chance of taking avoiding action. If he’d have been going slower, he’d have had more time to react- obviously.
Left hand down!:
The biker of course should have anticipated the possibility of the car turning and adjusted his speed such that he’d have given himself time to react - which he did not - so some of the blame rests with himself.And now you’ve just totally contradicted your self from your statement in your first para.
Doesn’t contradict anything, it’s a simple fact that under normal circumstances you are going to greatly reduce your chances of a collision if you adopt some anticipation to others’ behaviour. This wasn’t a normal situation as the car driver would’ve turned anyway because - by his own admittance - he didn’t see him nor the vehicle behind him.
Ched:
Looks like the majority of people who think is was the car drivers fault happen to be bikers themselves.
Not in my case.
Own Account Driver:
You also can’t rely on an assumption oncoming traffic is within the speed limit it could be an emergency services vehicle, unmarked police car with faulty lights in the grill or someone rushing an injured child to hospital in their own car.The biker was riding far too fast for the situation but I personally don’t think that gives everyone else a free pass on observation.
^ Exactly my thoughts.
It would seem he was an experienced rider using a road he knew well, he had just passed 2 cars and continued to accelerate towards the junction modern bikes are so incredibly fast you can be doing silly speeds without realizing there is no way I would batter it with a junction ahead, perhaps a moment of madness.
To all the armchair riders he would have died if he had been driving at the limit for the road, the speed factor influences the time the driver has to see him, the bike looked fairly new therefore the headlight would have been on, the biggest portion of the blame is with the car driver however 97mph near a junction and the overtake before sealed his fate, if he had waited till he had passed the junction he would still be alive today.
The motorcycle is by far the most difficult of all road going vehicles to master the risk factor and the countless scenarios have to be thought through and you have to ride regularly to reduce the risk, a very sad case indeed.
Serious question now.
Why do motorcyclists think that speed limits don’t apply to them?
If it was a car doing the best part of a ton in the video and then getting all intimate with the other car, the narrative of this thread would be very different.
Nobody would defend the car doing 100mph.
Why is it different for bikes?
Contraflow:
Serious question now.Why do motorcyclists think that speed limits don’t apply to them?
If it was a car doing the best part of a ton in the video and then getting all intimate with the other car, the narrative of this thread would be very different.
Nobody would defend the car doing 100mph.
Why is it different for bikes?
yeah, bloody good question. The general consensus seems to be “that it would have made no difference if he had been not speeding” So just keep all the bloody taps open then. 
I also notice down my way that the numerous crosshatched centre of wide roads now seems to be a new motorbike over taking lane specifically for use by bikers in a hurry
Contraflow:
Serious question now.Why do motorcyclists think that speed limits don’t apply to them?
If it was a car doing the best part of a ton in the video and then getting all intimate with the other car, the narrative of this thread would be very different.
Nobody would defend the car doing 100mph.
Why is it different for bikes?
Physics.
Roymondo:
Contraflow:
Serious question now.Why do motorcyclists think that speed limits don’t apply to them?
If it was a car doing the best part of a ton in the video and then getting all intimate with the other car, the narrative of this thread would be very different.
Nobody would defend the car doing 100mph.
Why is it different for bikes?
Physics.
Did the subject of this video skip his physics lessons then?
No idea - but it’s the relative absence of mass which makes bikes fun to ride quickly (and applied in reverse, is part of the reason why trucks are subject to lower speed limits than cars). Applying the same principles should result in bikes being subject to higher speed limits than cars (i.e. it takes less to stop them, and they do less damage when they hit something). Plus of course when the excrement hits the rotational ventilation equipment, they can squeeze through much smaller gaps.
Contraflow:
Serious question now.Why do motorcyclists think that speed limits don’t apply to them?
If it was a car doing the best part of a ton in the video and then getting all intimate with the other car, the narrative of this thread would be very different.
Nobody would defend the car doing 100mph.
Why is it different for bikes?
Boris1971:
What’s the speed limit on that road?
Not more than 60mph.
Own Account Driver:
Contraflow:
Serious question now.Why do motorcyclists think that speed limits don’t apply to them?
If it was a car doing the best part of a ton in the video and then getting all intimate with the other car, the narrative of this thread would be very different.
Nobody would defend the car doing 100mph.
Why is it different for bikes?
Note that the braking distance given for a bike at 100mph (160km/h) is the same as for a car traveling at 65mph (110km/h) - about 100 metres in both cases.
Roymondo:
No idea - but it’s the relative absence of mass which makes bikes fun to ride quickly (and applied in reverse, is part of the reason why trucks are subject to lower speed limits than cars). Applying the same principles should result in bikes being subject to higher speed limits than cars (i.e. it takes less to stop them, and they do less damage when they hit something). Plus of course when the excrement hits the rotational ventilation equipment, they can squeeze through much smaller gaps.
So, if London cyclists could somehow self propel their way to 100mph+ on their 10kg lumps of metal and rubber, you’d be cool with that then?
■■■■■ please.
Left hand down!:
Unlikely survivable at those speeds or without life changing injuries such that his family’s life would still be just as ruinous.
An excellent attitude! So ■■■■ it then, all speed limits are a waist of bloody time folks, lets all just hare about at a ton and be done with it eh seeing as though by your reckoning, should we be doing the speed limit and hit some pillock in a car we’ll all be screwed anycase!
Left hand down!:
Doesn’t contradict anything, it’s a simple fact that under normal circumstances you are going to greatly reduce your chances of a collision if you adopt some anticipation to others’ behaviour.
So does that not also include driving at an appropriate speed according to prevailing roads conditions then?
I think you missed the point I was trying to get across. You said -
Left hand down!:
The argument posted that if he’d been doing the speed limit or less it wouldn’t have happened is weak to non-existent
You then said-
Left hand down!:
The biker of course should have anticipated the possibility of the car turning and adjusted his speed such that he’d have given himself time to react - which he did not - so some of the blame rests with himself
If that’s not contradicting yaself, I don’t know what is!
Left hand down!:
Stupid argument. It’s entirely possible that the next car to turn right when he got there some time later could’ve done the exact same thing, could it not?
Quite but it would also be highly likely that the biker would have met some one at the junction who could drive properly in the first place and who looks twice instead of a quick casual glance.
Firstly, I know of two bikers that the same thing happened to, as in this instance. Both survived and fully recovered. In both cases impact speed was between 55-60mph
Secondly, you get dicks driving all vehicles not just bikes. Trucks have plenty of ■■■■ driving them as well, for example.
Finally, when a biker does something like this, he kills himself.
When a truck driver/coach driver/car driver behaves as irresponsibly - he likely kills anyone in his path.
Roymondo:
No idea - but it’s the relative absence of mass which makes bikes fun to ride quickly (and applied in reverse, is part of the reason why trucks are subject to lower speed limits than cars). Applying the same principles should result in bikes being subject to higher speed limits than cars (i.e. it takes less to stop them, and they do less damage when they hit something). Plus of course when the excrement hits the rotational ventilation equipment, they can squeeze through much smaller gaps.
Sure they do less damage but what about the rider when said bike hits something? rider comes off much worse than that of a cars occupant protected in a steel box surrounded with air bags etc.
I don’t buy the “bikes can go faster because” BS. Rather crash in a car than on a bike any day.
Truckulent:
pointless requotes (6 I think)
I think your opinions are not warranted in this instance. You are a self opinionated bigot who has no feeling or regard for the death that has occurred.
What he should have or shouldn’t have done…etc etc - is totally irrelevant!! 
The car made a bad judgement and is totally to blame regardless of the speed of the motorcyclist.
He should be driving slower, he should have anticipated it, junction ahead etc etc! If the car turning right had done this then he would still be alive!!
I spend all day thinking and driving for other people and avoid accidents regularly people like you 
I’ll not complete the sentence because I’ll get told off
As I said earlier I had a low speed low impact accident done a lot of damage yep to extent life changing mate had a high speed accident he walked away with dented pride
So can someone please explain this as most say speed was a factor & if he had been going slower the outcome different
I passed my test when you bought bike rode it went in for test the tester stood at said point while you rode round the block
In the video it looks like the car driver had no intention of stooping which as we know at a give way you check then check again