And that is relevant because????

 

[img]i/expressions/face-icon-small-confused.gif[/img]

 

I think the relevance here is that this ties directly to the responsible, safe, legal, and ethical operation of ATV's. These should be the first things that come to mind before Joe Schmoe goes out blazing new trails with his brand spankin' new 1200cc power-wheels. OK, a little sarcasm there. But you get my point.


Now to the instructor question...

It is just common sense to wear a helmet and proper eye protection at a minimum. Instructor title aside, "If someone doesn't wear a helmet, there's not much to save between the ears in the first place". Yeah, I know some guys prefer not to wear a helmet, and that's their perogative. But in the event of a crash, they must understand that any significant injuries as a result of no protection hurts the entire sport of ATV'ing. Not just in their area, but nation wide. What I do here in MN reflects on all riders on a national basis. The general non-riding public (86% here in MN) does not differentiate between you, me, or the dog next door. If there's an ATV involved, that's the first thing that sticks in their mind. The common denominator if you will.

Do remember that helmets are never a life insurance policy. They might reduce the severity of an injury. They might not.

I know of a boy, 13 years old, who hit a field approach while riding double. The impact was hard enough to cause a brain hemmorage, and he died 7 days after the accident. Immediately after the accident, he was sitting up, alert, talking, and coherent. It was all down hill from there. He was wearing a helmet.

Another thing that I want to point out is that many people feel that riding ATV's is their right. Guess again. It's a privilege, and it can be taken away. If too many people get hurt, legislation will be put in place for an all out ban on the vehicles. I noticed the question the need for roll bars on ATV's. I don't remember the user's name, but there was a guy from Israel who rides a DS 650, who happens to have a roll bar on his machine. Not by choice, but because of the law. There's pro's and con's to the roll bars, but I would prefer to ride my DS without. It would get in the way more than it would do me any good for my style of riding.


Again, thanks for all the replies on this thread guys. I see a slightly different tone than in the other forum where this topic originated.

 

When I brought this up I was not sure if anyone had ever tried it, I had not idea it was a law in some places.

But I guess it illustrates my point in a way. Some legislation in that country must have forced it into a law, so there is no doubt we could someday face a similar potential.

I was thinking it only for the big work utes, (like 650-plus pounds) and I was thinking something on the back of the rear rack, like an extension of the rack itself. Maybe even something that could be removed by the more advanced user. Most people would probably take them off anyway, but at least then the sport at a whole does not look culpable.

At least then the news report could say "so-and-so removed the safety bar which may have contributed to his injury" and not "dangerous machine with no safety features kills man"

 

here is a chart with some size limits, weight limits, and other laws by state. i was a little surprised by some of the limits.

http://www.atvsafety.org/InfoSheets/...t_2005-May.pdf

monty

 

Two weeks ago we were riding in the mountains on some nastry terrain that was very, very off camber. The guy in front of me (on a ute of course), looked back to see where I was. At the same time he hooked a rock that jerked the bars out of his hands (he wasn't exactly a big strong guy), and he went over toward the downhill side. The quad rolled over upside down, with the wheels still spinning in the air.

He had his racks loaded kind of high, and it actually saved him from serious injury (which was fortunate because we were at 9,000 ft and 100 miles from any kind of medical help). The tall load on the rack created a space under the quad, where he ended up. If his racks had been empty, he would have had heavy quad right on top of him!

So, there might be something to some kind of roll bar idea. On the other hand, one could also imagine getting squished by the roll bar......... (I do also remember the roll bar from Israel thing.) Again, why not just go with a Rhino that has a full roll cage?

 

The Rhino, Ranger, Prowler, or Mule type vehicles don't meet the size requirements to be considered an ATV in most states due to the weight.

I think another thing that differentiates the Rhino's from what we consider an ATV is you drive a Rhino more like a car, whereas the ATV's are more like a motorcycle and gives the operator a greater sense of freedom. Could this be because we sit on, and not in, these vehicles?

I like the point earlier of the guy who was saved from serious injury due to the items on his racks. Things like this could prompt serious changes in machines of the future. But for some, this only adds to the weight issue and may pose limits on some confined trails these machines could be ridden on.

 

The Rhino certainly has some disadvantages. On a quad, when it is off-camber you can shift your weight to the high side, and counter the desire of the machine to roll over downhill. And, on a quad, if it's going over the edge, at least you can bale out.

On the ride where this accident happened (Swansea/Cerro Gordo loop in the Inyo Mountains), there were places where if you went off the trail, your machine would have rolled thousand of feet (that's VERTICAL feet) down the mountainside. If you were strapped into a Rhino or truck in those conditions, it might very well not be survivable. Anyway, my boys were riding their 250EX sport quads, and they had an way easier time of it on the off-camber stuff, than the rest of us who were on utes (no snow this time of year)!

No vheicle is perfect for all conditions.........

The ride, one mountain range over from Death Valley: http://www.air-and-space.com/2002062...rdo%20Road.htm

http://www.ghosttowns.com/states/ca/cerrogordo.html

http://www.ripleysghosttowns.com/swansea.html

 

Thanks for sharing this one Recon, this is exactly the idea I was thinking of and you have illustrated a real world application.

Even a bar 12" high or something would probably do the trick. I don't think one as high as the drivers head would be needed since you are not strapped in. But just one big enough to give the body some space to maneuver should the quad roll on them.

 

Although something along the lines of a roll bar or something like a 12" high rack extender might do the trick in certain situations, it can also be another item to inflict serious injury. Imagine if you would be thrown from a machine with a 12" tall extender that is made from 1/2" tubing. Add a little speed/momentum during the roll over. Only for comparisons sake, let's say the seat would be the first thing to hit the operator. You'd have the entire force of the machine spread out over a wider area vs. an area that's only 1/2" wide. This also could be the recipe for disaster.

I witnessed a rider on a ute who had some accessory brackets on his wheeler. He lost momentum going up a hill, rolled backwards then rolled the machine over himself. The ugly part was the brackets were made from 1/4" thick steel plate and were only about 2" in length across the top and stood about 6" tall off the racks. One of these was the first thing to hit the rider in the thigh during the roll. It didn't break the skin open, but the immediate bruising and swelling was enough to make a person puke. If the impact area was anywhere on the head, death could have been instantaneous.