Crunches, Crashes & Crushbuckets

Crunches, Crashes & Crushbuckets

SPECIAL REPORT:

PRELIMINARY FINDINGS ON MOTORCYCLE CRASH RESEARCH-AND SOME SHOCKING HELMET FAILURES

IVAN J. WAGAR

WILL your next motorcycle be a chopper? It could be, it the legislator pays much attention to the conclusions of a series ot motorcycle crashes conducted by a UCLA research team.

The group slammed seven Hondas, ranging from a CL90 to a CB750, at speeds of 20, 30 and 40 mph, into the sides of late model cars in their efforts to determine what happens in motorcycle/car conflicts. Using fully instrumented anthropometric dummies, the team concluded that motorcycles offer good energy management until the front wheel and forks have compressed against the engine. At that point there is a deceleration peak, where the rider begins to move forward and finally into or over the car.

CRUNCH SPACE

Extending the front forks would offer more “crunch" space, thereby lessening the deceleration peak when total compression of the frontal mass does occur. In most cases the dummy was slowed or restricted by the handlebars and crashed head first into the roof of the car.

Although I do not wish to disagree with the tests, I do, up to a point, question the complete validity when dummies are used to determine rider trajectory. As a completely unscratched survivor of a head-on car/motorcycle conflict (I was on the motorcycle), I think that unless the rider freezes from fright, there will be different results obtained with a live rider than those obtained with a dummy.

In my crash I was not scared, I was terrified. After checking cross traffic on a particularly bad cross street, I looked forward to find a car coming straight at me, about 20 ft. away. The combined vehicle spe^d w'as in the region of 30 mph. Fortunately, two years of road racing had sharpened thinking time on bailing out, and I jumped. I jumped with every ounce of strength in my body. I was still going up as my right knee touched the leading edge of the roof, which caused only minor discomfort the next day, and I did a tremendous belly-whopper on the roof of the station wagon.

FAIL AND BAIL

The lesson is, of course, as learned in racing, when all else fails, bail out.

The ideal situation, however, is to preclude those situations in which all else does fail, resulting in a crash. And “crash,” for the most part, is the more correct expression, rather than its commonly used euphemism, “accident." The distinction between the two is that “accident” has the effect of pointing the blame nowhere, and excusing it almost as an act of God. “Crash” bears with it the implications of guilt through negligence, lack of attention, improper equipment, etc., i.e., those factors which could have been avoided.

Several good recommendations came to light from the study. One is that large trucks should have side guards to prevent motorcycles and riders from going under the truck body. Another was the very strong plea tor riders to make themselves more visible to other motorists.

In case you may feel that my trick of jumping will always save you, the study points out that forces may reach as much as two tons, and that peak will occur in less than a tenth of a sec., so the “rolling with the punches” concept is a bit out the window.

PASSIVE RESTRAINTS

While admitting that it may be desirable for the rider to separate from the machine, the study points out the need for passive restraints. The recommendation is that a lap shield be developed as part of the motorcycle that would restrain the rider from the upward and forward trajectory. An inflatable air bag or an energy absorbing pad could be fitted in the handlebar crotch to protect the face as it is slammed forward. Seat belts were ruled out, as they would require an active act on the part of the user.

Either method would be preferable. considering the fact that once forces (1 believe it is in the region of 40 g’s) have popped both femurs from the hip sockets, it really doesn’t matter.

Several people and companies donated time and money to this project. I can’t help but wonder how many lives would be saved if we plowed the equivalent of that effort into rider training. Motorcycling is an area where government can get very quick payoffs from rider training and special licensing. Licensing exams should be tough. Only 31 states have separate licensing, a ridiculous statistic when we consider that up to 72 percent of all fatalities occur within the first three months of operation. More than half of all motorcycle deaths are on rented, borrowed or stolen motorcycles, and in the first month of operation.

MISLEADING INFORMATION

Early in the UCLA study we find a statement that 1 do disagree with completely. It is pointed out that in the past seven years motorcycle registrations have increased 400 percent, with an equally striking rise in fatalities. The statement implies that deaths have increased proportionally, which is not true. According to Universal Underwriters, the death rate per 100,000 miles decreased steadily from 116.6 in 1966 to 86.9 in 1969. During that period motorcycle registration increased from 1.7 million to 2.2 million.

In big sales years, we have grown to expect a bad fatality rate. An exception to this was in 1968, when new units increased over the previous year by almost 5 0 percent, while fatalities dropped from 197 1 to 1900. In 1969 we saw a 25 percent growth in new sales and 1960 deaths were recorded, an increase of only 3.1 percent.

Unfortunately, we suffered, or so it would seem at this time, a large fatality year in 1970 when new unit sales increased by 50 percent over the previous year. Because it takes a whole year for definite fatality figures related to the vehicles used, estimates indicate about 2480 motorcycle deaths, or about half the increase of new units. Considering the number of already experienced riders who moved up to new machines during last year, we find an even more accurate gauge of where the trouble lies: inexperience.

"BETTER DRIVERS”

I received an admission of stunning consequences from one fed when I pointed out that California consumed more than 25 percent of the new motorcycles last year, but suffered less than 22 percent of the national estimate for fatalities, despite the fact that our riders have 12-month exposure and we don’t have a helmet law. His reply was, and this is the punch line: “But Californians are better drivers.”

While that may seem like a pretty feeble excuse for a fed, 1 think it is true. The greater exposure leads to more practice. Our drivers license endorsement for motorcycle operation is not as stiff as we would like to see, but at least we have a written exam and a test of sorts. Stiffening the skill test would reduce deaths even further.

Currently there is a bill before the California legislators (AB 2340), introduced by Assemblyman Chappie, to require schools with driver education courses to include a course on the safe operation of motorcycles. This would be a giant step toward safer motorcycling. There is considerable money in federal funds available to states for the implementation of a motorcycle rider training program. If your school doesn’t have a motorcycle program, you should find out why, then talk to your dealer. If your dealer is a member of the Motorcycle Industry Council he will be able to get help to encourage the local school board to develop such a program. (If he is not a member of the MIC, he should not be your dealer anyway. It’s time to get lid of the freeloaders.)

The (Cl A study placed great stress upon the use of helmets. The possibility of surviving a 30-mph crash with a car is just about ni! if a helmet is not worn. A normal, good quality helmet will provide the skull with up to four times its normal ability to protect the brain. Realizing how small that figure is, we should see the stupidity in not wearing a helmet. The forces involved in even a 10-mph crash could easily damage the brain permanently.

GRAVE HELMET FAULTS

The subject of helmets does not end there. 1 am gravely concerned over a situation which is just now coming to my attention, although I am now informed that it has existed for a couple of years. Recently I received a $25 helmet which had fallen from a dealer’s counter to the floor and had burst into two pieces. Subsequent investigations revealed that one distributor received back “more than 200” accidentally broken helmets from his dealers during 1970. Many of them had been broken in shipping and were still in their original boxes. Another distributor reported “about 20” helmets had broken from falling off shelves and counters, and again, some were still in their boxes.

I am further upset by the fact that when I confront manufacturers and distributors with this development, I usually get the answer: “Well, we had a problem last year, but that’s all straightened out now.”

“All straightened out now” does very little good if a hundred thousand riders are using helmets that might break if they fall off a dresser onto a hardwood floor, or if the riders wearing them might walk into a door. Unfortunately, the Department of Transportation did not realize five years ago that requiring the states to promulgate compulsory helmet laws would open the door to the lowest form of racketeers: quick buck artists selling a safety product that offers little or no protection.

MEANINGLESS STANDARDS

The states, often just misguided, selected helmet standards that in some cases were meaningless. At the present time, a helmet manufacturer can meet some standards, but there may be no policing of future production. In other words, a special, hand-built helmet might meet a standard, but thousands of helmets later, the dyes could change, or the manufacturer could have moved to a different climactic condition, or even the basic materials could have changed so that the helmet currently produced would be a farfetched cousin from the one actually approved.

Some helmet materials are very susceptible to various kinds of paints, laquer thinners, carbon tetrachloride fumes from many chemicals and even ordinary gasoline, in some cases. If you own one of the plastic variety of helmets, you should check with your dealer to see if he has had failures with other helmets sold near the time of your purchase. Again, if he is an MIC’ member dealer, you should get a pretty straight answer.

I am still doing homework on this one, and will shortly be meeting with the Safety Helmet Council of America to discuss the problem. Consumer’s Union, Ralph Nader and, of course, the Department of Transportation are all concerned and digging into the problem.

YOU CAN HELP

If you know of an accidentally broken helmet, I would appreciate your sending me a letter marked “Helmets,” to my attention, preferably with photos. Please let us know if the helmet is still in your possession and if you are prepared to loan it forevaluation. Please include date of purchase, age of helmet and details of the breakage.

Ensuring that you have a safe helmet, one that offers protection when you need it, and that you take the time to thoroughly know your machine and its crash avoidance characteristics, may mean that you will not become a digit when the toll is counted this year.

But here is an even better idea: teach a buddy to ride. If you know a fellow that is interested in motorcycling, take the time to teach him. Teach the defensive tactics so vitally needed to ensure his well-being in today’s traffic stream. Remember, as you pass on your skills learned as a motorcyclist, they will not be forgotten when your pupil is driving his car. And most imposant, he will be looking out for a fellow motorcyclist while he drives his car.