Thanks for the comprehensive reply, I am sure it will be OK on the day.
Just passed my IAM test
- Thread starter Jed
- Start date
Dear Rasher,
I'm a little perplexed about your latest Post above.
Unless I am much mistaken we met earlier in the year at the April "BikeSafe" at Gloucester Fire Station, which I sat in on.
Martyn spent a whole day going through "the Blue Book" and I remember him covering the topics you have raised.
Reference overtaking lines of traffic, I remember him saying about overtaking the rearmost vehicle in a queue as being OK as long as you had a gap to get into, but that as the overtake progressed, if all stayed clear you might well be able to overtake more than one vehicle, as long as you had a gap to get into each time.
Reference gear changing, that was dealt with at some length with Martyn explaining about sequential and block gear changing and how when bikes mostly had 4-speed boxes it was easier to go from fourth just down to third but nowadays with many, if not most, bikes now having 6-speed gearboxes, coming down sequentially during the slowing down period made more sense. I am sure he never said come to a halt then try to find neutral.
As to braking, there was a long discussion about slowing down through advanced observation and shutting off the throttle, and perhaps not needing to brake, but being conscious that if a following vehicle was close then perhaps give him a bit of brake light even if not really needing to brake.
Martyn then showed how on the approach to a sharp bend requiring quite a loss of speed, to brake in a straight line, enter the bend safely & then be in a position to accelerate out of the bend.
I am at a loss as to how much clearer it could have been.
It seemed to me that everyone there understood it.
Dear Rasher,
I'm a little perplexed about your latest Post above.
Unless I am much mistaken we met earlier in the year at the April "BikeSafe" at Gloucester Fire Station, which I sat in on.
Martyn spent a whole day going through "the Blue Book" and I remember him covering the topics you have raised.
Reference overtaking lines of traffic, I remember him saying about overtaking the rearmost vehicle in a queue as being OK as long as you had a gap to get into, but that as the overtake progressed, if all stayed clear you might well be able to overtake more than one vehicle, as long as you had a gap to get into each time.
Reference gear changing, that was dealt with at some length with Martyn explaining about sequential and block gear changing and how when bikes mostly had 4-speed boxes it was easier to go from fourth just down to third but nowadays with many, if not most, bikes now having 6-speed gearboxes, coming down sequentially during the slowing down period made more sense. I am sure he never said come to a halt then try to find neutral.
As to braking, there was a long discussion about slowing down through advanced observation and shutting off the throttle, and perhaps not needing to brake, but being conscious that if a following vehicle was close then perhaps give him a bit of brake light even if not really needing to brake.
Martyn then showed how on the approach to a sharp bend requiring quite a loss of speed, to brake in a straight line, enter the bend safely & then be in a position to accelerate out of the bend.
I am at a loss as to how much clearer it could have been.
It seemed to me that everyone there understood it.
Rasher was day-dreaming about multiple FD/EWS/FPC failure and failed to pay attention
You can help someone to understand the mechanics of counter steering,but there's no need to "teach" it,because if you ride a bike whether it be pedal or powered at more than 10mph ish and turn corners then you'll be counter steering it's natural.
Steve
I instructed for years and there was no reference for learner riders re countersteering...
In the early 2000's i was at an inquest where I heard a DSA area manager say it didn't exist and a high up Traffic say he wouldn't teach it. As before... work on your riding and understand what you do and it will keep you in one piece when many of the experts have retired or parked for the winter
Oh and learn how to brake like you stole it. Plenty know how to go but many don't know how to stop
I instructed for years and there was no reference for learner riders re countersteering...
As before... work on your riding and understand what you do and it will keep you in one piece when many of the experts have retired or parked for the winter
Oh and learn how to brake like you stole it. Plenty know how to go but many don't know how to stop
There is absolutely no question that counter steering exists,and as said earlier it doesn't need to be taught because it's natural.
You can teach someone how to enhance the effects of counter steering,but
for me this should be confined to the racetrack.
Steve
Next stage
So am I right in thinking, once I pass my IAM test in a couple of weeks I should be able to do this.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pJxOsYh12yY&feature=player_embedded
So am I right in thinking, once I pass my IAM test in a couple of weeks I should be able to do this.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pJxOsYh12yY&feature=player_embedded
A lot of the bikesafe stuff is quite real-world, there are some differences between what is done in those classes and what may be expected on the test.
In other cases observers disagree with the book, one example I can give is going straight on at a roundabout, the book tells you to get in the left lane and stay there until you exit.
I followed this for my observed rides without comment, but on the pre-test was questioned as to why I did this as it was better to go on a straight line (which out of test conditons I would) as you use less lean, are less exposed to dirtier road and don't enter a rooundabout on a big left lean that may lead a car to think you are going left.
I even checked the book again when I got home.
Braking and the use of brakes for bends is not covered at all in the cornering or braking sections, the whole "showing a brake light" thing is probably a topic that could be debated on forever.
In fact the more you study the book and listen to observers the more inconsistencies you find, so on the day do you do it by the book, or how your observer tells you???
Also what is the correct use of acceleration on an overtake, the books goes on about using the bikes engine in the most efficient region etc, on my ZZR this was probably 6k-9k, and dropping to third to overtake a car doing 45-50mph would see you at well over 100mph by the time you pass the car.
The GS is easier as it is not immensely powerful, but even so when using just 4k-6k region it does not hang about and can probably get you a fail for "excessive" speed.
Again the book is showing it's age here, all modern superbikes will exceed the national speed limit in first and put you into instant ban territory in second.
In other cases observers disagree with the book, one example I can give is going straight on at a roundabout, the book tells you to get in the left lane and stay there until you exit.
I followed this for my observed rides without comment, but on the pre-test was questioned as to why I did this as it was better to go on a straight line (which out of test conditons I would) as you use less lean, are less exposed to dirtier road and don't enter a rooundabout on a big left lean that may lead a car to think you are going left.
I even checked the book again when I got home.
Braking and the use of brakes for bends is not covered at all in the cornering or braking sections, the whole "showing a brake light" thing is probably a topic that could be debated on forever.
In fact the more you study the book and listen to observers the more inconsistencies you find, so on the day do you do it by the book, or how your observer tells you???
Also what is the correct use of acceleration on an overtake, the books goes on about using the bikes engine in the most efficient region etc, on my ZZR this was probably 6k-9k, and dropping to third to overtake a car doing 45-50mph would see you at well over 100mph by the time you pass the car.
The GS is easier as it is not immensely powerful, but even so when using just 4k-6k region it does not hang about and can probably get you a fail for "excessive" speed.
Again the book is showing it's age here, all modern superbikes will exceed the national speed limit in first and put you into instant ban territory in second.
It also says "Observe early to see if the left lane is busy. If it is, consider using the right-hand or centre lane." The accompanying diagram on page 64 even shows an example of a motorcycle using a centre lane on entry when going straight on.
At the top of page 63 it says "Generally, the safest course for a bike to take through a roundabout, in the absence of other road users, is the shortest route from entry to exit."
Page 73 talks about braking for corners.
What book are you using?
The current IAM Book is "How to be a better rider - Advanced Motorcycling, the essential guide". This is a new book, first produced for 2010. It is miles better than it's predecessor, so much so that I now only suggest to Associates that they may also like to buy "Motorcycle Roadcraft, Police riders handbook to better motorcycling" for further reading, whereas before I used to recommend it.
Regarding the speed for an overtake, you don't have to pin the throttle, good gear selection to select the ideal gear to allow you to make the overtake safely and swiftly, so the engine isn't labouring or over-revving, coupled with good throttle control is all that's required to complete the overtake without losing your licence.
Basically if you do as your observer, and whoever took you for your pre-test ride, has been telling you should do OK in the test.
Bob
I wasn't originally disagreeing but I think counter-steering should be explained at a very early stage in someone's bike life. I my experience which I count pretty extensive, one of the major failings of inexperienced riders is freezing up or even trying to pro-steer when the shit hits the fan. You can teach all the systems you want and know books end to end but unless you know and understand what you do naturally then you can't knowingly use it to your advantage or to get yourself out of trouble.
My girlies folks live on the edge of Derbyshire and the local roads are littered with signs warning bikers of bends and sadly flowers etc, mainly on bends and either single vehicle accidents or bikes running wide and hitting cars. This is to do with speed and not approaching a bend correctly but is also fundamentally to do with a bikes dynamics at speed wanting it to stay upright. It is the rider that has to make it lean and that is mainly by countersteering.
Leaving stuff like that to the track is either old fashioned or 'cos some instructor types don't understand it either. In my experience, teaching people basic bike control is vital and is why "system" stuff leaves many people cold. You mainly judge riders by how they ride not by what they know.
I think the running wide thing is a combination of many errors, probably starting with a feeling of being in too fast, then compunded by turning in early, target fixation, panic braking 
I think the IAM is really aimed at roadcraft and I would guess based around people running about at 80% of their ability so they have plenty of reserve combined with good early observation and planning.
Still think knowing the bike handling stuff better adds more tools to this armoury, but if riding the "IAM way" it is fairly unlikely you will judge a corner / your speed that badly to begin with.
Plus when you have the better handling skills you tend to go faster to compensate, so having both the roadcraft and the handling skills makes most sense.
Just having "track" skills on the road without the roadcraft is the worst combination, the attraction of a track is you know the corners before going quick, and that there will not be crap on a corner that was not there last time, or some twonk on your side of the road as you turn in - a load of run-off and soft gravel is another luxury the road rarely provides.
As to my previous comments:
This shows just using the one lane as opposed to shortest rroute....
Well spotted, just it now gives 3 versions of events spread across 3 pages of the book, this either means you can't fail, or you can't win!
I think the IAM is really aimed at roadcraft and I would guess based around people running about at 80% of their ability so they have plenty of reserve combined with good early observation and planning.
Still think knowing the bike handling stuff better adds more tools to this armoury, but if riding the "IAM way" it is fairly unlikely you will judge a corner / your speed that badly to begin with.
Plus when you have the better handling skills you tend to go faster to compensate, so having both the roadcraft and the handling skills makes most sense.
Just having "track" skills on the road without the roadcraft is the worst combination, the attraction of a track is you know the corners before going quick, and that there will not be crap on a corner that was not there last time, or some twonk on your side of the road as you turn in - a load of run-off and soft gravel is another luxury the road rarely provides.
As to my previous comments:
This shows just using the one lane as opposed to shortest rroute....
Well spotted, just it now gives 3 versions of events spread across 3 pages of the book, this either means you can't fail, or you can't win!
It’s been interesting to see the variety of opinions and experiences expressed in this thread. Here’s my take, for what it’s worth:
The reason advanced riding and driving was developed was simple – to get a police officer to your assault/burglary/robbery as soon as possible. An essential part of this mission is to always GET THERE – so safety has to be the number one priority. Police and other emergency services training allows for some relaxation of regulations under the Road Traffic Acts (although – critically – not Reckless, Careless or Dangerous Driving) and the police are regularly trained to drive and ride in excess of the speed limit – something I’m sure you would be appreciative of if you were fending off a burglar. This dispensation is not extended to the general public and so IAM & RoSPA training and tests have to be conducted within the law – including speed limits.
The advanced riding test, whether IAM or RoSPA, differs in one significant respect from the DSA test. There is a template to tell you the right way (pass) and the wrong way (fail) to take a DSA test. IAM & RoSPA tests require you to THINK about your ride and take action accordingly. There are generally several different ways most hazards can be negotiated. The matrix I use to judge a candidate’s actions is:
Was it safe?
Was it legal?
Was it progressive?
If his or her actions meet these criteria then the hazard was dealt with correctly. If there was a more progressive way of doing it and a candidate consistently failed to take that option, then they will be marked down for it. If a candidate conducts a manoeuvre that would produce a fail in a DSA test (breaking a speed limit, inability to handle the bike at low speed) then they must clearly fail, as the advanced standard must exceed that of the DSA.
Most of the candidates I have failed have done so for one reason – they are riding differently on test from the way they did on their training and cross-check (each IAM candidate gets a mock test, usually with a Senior Observer). I am at pains during the brief to point this out and do everything I can to remove any ‘test artificialities’ and ask them to give me their ‘normal’ ride and to not do anything different for test. Everyone I have failed on this point has said in the debrief that they recall this part of the brief and that they realised what they failed on was wrong when they did it. The most common single cause of failure is ‘failing to make progress’ – they consistently failed to ride quickly enough for the conditions.
If I see a trend towards a certain type of riding flaw in test candidates, I bring it up at the local IAM observers’ meeting and talk it through, in order that candidates are trained to the level they are to be tested. It serves no-one to get this wrong. I receive a QA check from the Deputy Chief Examiner every 18 months or so – this is to ensure that a candidate being tested in Cumbria is being examined to the same standard as one in Norfolk.
I see a wide variety of candidates. Some are just after getting a badge, but the majority are motivated by a genuine desire to improve their riding. These often ask what other ways there are to improve their riding once they’ve passed. Occasionally one appears who is determined not to change his or her riding habits, despite any advice or instruction and in the face of logical debate – I really don’t understand why someone would join the IAM if they didn’t want to change, but I guess it’s their money…
I have been on a few rideouts with Observers and found them to be a mixed bunch (as is any group of riders). There are undoubtedly some Blue Book Nazis amongst them, others that want definitive answers on how to deal with a particular hazard and who seem frustrated by my Safe/Legal/Progressive template answer, but the majority of them are motivated by a desire to help riders improve their riding and they give up a great deal of their spare time to do so for no monetary reward. As with all groups of people, there are good and bad observers: some you’ll get on with and some you won’t; some whose instruction style works for you and some whose doesn’t. If I were assigned to someone I didn’t feel right about, I’d ask for a reassignment – it’s important to get that relationship right.
IAM & RoSPA isn’t for everyone. I am glad to see every candidate, as it means that they are taking an interest in their riding, and that can only be a good thing.
The reason advanced riding and driving was developed was simple – to get a police officer to your assault/burglary/robbery as soon as possible. An essential part of this mission is to always GET THERE – so safety has to be the number one priority. Police and other emergency services training allows for some relaxation of regulations under the Road Traffic Acts (although – critically – not Reckless, Careless or Dangerous Driving) and the police are regularly trained to drive and ride in excess of the speed limit – something I’m sure you would be appreciative of if you were fending off a burglar. This dispensation is not extended to the general public and so IAM & RoSPA training and tests have to be conducted within the law – including speed limits.
The advanced riding test, whether IAM or RoSPA, differs in one significant respect from the DSA test. There is a template to tell you the right way (pass) and the wrong way (fail) to take a DSA test. IAM & RoSPA tests require you to THINK about your ride and take action accordingly. There are generally several different ways most hazards can be negotiated. The matrix I use to judge a candidate’s actions is:
Was it safe?
Was it legal?
Was it progressive?
If his or her actions meet these criteria then the hazard was dealt with correctly. If there was a more progressive way of doing it and a candidate consistently failed to take that option, then they will be marked down for it. If a candidate conducts a manoeuvre that would produce a fail in a DSA test (breaking a speed limit, inability to handle the bike at low speed) then they must clearly fail, as the advanced standard must exceed that of the DSA.
Most of the candidates I have failed have done so for one reason – they are riding differently on test from the way they did on their training and cross-check (each IAM candidate gets a mock test, usually with a Senior Observer). I am at pains during the brief to point this out and do everything I can to remove any ‘test artificialities’ and ask them to give me their ‘normal’ ride and to not do anything different for test. Everyone I have failed on this point has said in the debrief that they recall this part of the brief and that they realised what they failed on was wrong when they did it. The most common single cause of failure is ‘failing to make progress’ – they consistently failed to ride quickly enough for the conditions.
If I see a trend towards a certain type of riding flaw in test candidates, I bring it up at the local IAM observers’ meeting and talk it through, in order that candidates are trained to the level they are to be tested. It serves no-one to get this wrong. I receive a QA check from the Deputy Chief Examiner every 18 months or so – this is to ensure that a candidate being tested in Cumbria is being examined to the same standard as one in Norfolk.
I see a wide variety of candidates. Some are just after getting a badge, but the majority are motivated by a genuine desire to improve their riding. These often ask what other ways there are to improve their riding once they’ve passed. Occasionally one appears who is determined not to change his or her riding habits, despite any advice or instruction and in the face of logical debate – I really don’t understand why someone would join the IAM if they didn’t want to change, but I guess it’s their money…
I have been on a few rideouts with Observers and found them to be a mixed bunch (as is any group of riders). There are undoubtedly some Blue Book Nazis amongst them, others that want definitive answers on how to deal with a particular hazard and who seem frustrated by my Safe/Legal/Progressive template answer, but the majority of them are motivated by a desire to help riders improve their riding and they give up a great deal of their spare time to do so for no monetary reward. As with all groups of people, there are good and bad observers: some you’ll get on with and some you won’t; some whose instruction style works for you and some whose doesn’t. If I were assigned to someone I didn’t feel right about, I’d ask for a reassignment – it’s important to get that relationship right.
IAM & RoSPA isn’t for everyone. I am glad to see every candidate, as it means that they are taking an interest in their riding, and that can only be a good thing.
I think you are reading too much into it. There aren't, IMHO, three version, it states the difference between the approaches and this partly depends on whether there is other traffic about.
The post by Mike O is spot on especially the bit about THINKing and taking the right action. The book issued by the IAM, and indeed Roadcraft, in the main do not contain strict do's and don'ts, instead it gives the grounding for thinking about how you should approach a ride to help keep you and others safe. Part of it is structured, such as explaining the System and how it works, so as to help you develop the mindset required, and improve your observations, to make these decisions. The one thing you must do during any ride with the IAM and especially so on the test is stay within the law.
Frequently I have associates ask questions regarding many scenarios where they may not follow the guidance given in the literature to the letter and I always reply as long as it's legal, they didn't compromise their's or anybody elses safety, and they can justify (not bluff) the action they took, then it's fine.
Bob
I think you are reading too much into it. There aren't, IMHO, three version, it states the difference between the approaches and this partly depends on whether there is other traffic about.
The post by Mike O is spot on especially the bit about THINKing and taking the right action. The book issued by the IAM, and indeed Roadcraft, in the main do not contain strict do's and don'ts, instead it gives the grounding for thinking about how you should approach a ride to help keep you and others safe. Part of it is structured, such as explaining the System and how it works, so as to help you develop the mindset required, and improve your observations, to make these decisions. The one thing you must do during any ride with the IAM and especially so on the test is stay within the law.
Frequently I have associates ask questions regarding many scenarios where they may not follow the guidance given in the literature to the letter and I always reply as long as it's legal, they didn't compromise there's or anybody elses safety and they can justify (not bluff) the action they took, then it's fine.
I'll repeat what I said in my last post, basically if you do as your observer, and whoever took you for your pre-test ride, has been telling you should do OK in the test.
Bob
I think the running wide thing is a combination of many errors, probably starting with a feeling of being in too fast, then compunded by turning in early, target fixation, panic braking
I think the IAM is really aimed at roadcraft and I would guess based around people running about at 80% of their ability so they have plenty of reserve combined with good early observation and planning.
Still think knowing the bike handling stuff better adds more tools to this armoury, but if riding the "IAM way" it is fairly unlikely you will judge a corner / your speed that badly to begin with.
Plus when you have the better handling skills you tend to go faster to compensate, so having both the roadcraft and the handling skills makes most sense.
Just having "track" skills on the road without the roadcraft is the worst combination, the attraction of a track is you know the corners before going quick, and that there will not be crap on a corner that was not there last time, or some twonk on your side of the road as you turn in - a load of run-off and soft gravel is another luxury the road rarely provides.
Generally agree...
I guess I have met too many "talk the talk" types who can spout all the books and systems under the sun but who fundamentally can't ride a bike particularly well... also there are some police who can ride/drive well and quite a few that have passed the tests and "think" they canKnowledge is power etc and its up to everyone to keep thinking about what they do and not to just believe what they are told, whoever is doing the telling... Just 'cos a "blue book" says XXX it doesn't mean its always right.
So to OP... keep riding, thinking for yourself and learning
Well I managed to pass, nearly all 2's with a few 1's thrown in for surprise.
I am chuffed to have got a pass, and to be rid of the "limitations" of the IAM training environment which did take some enjoyment from riding, and in some ways made me a worse rider.
The first annoyance for me is not riding at my "normal" pace, at my natural speed things flow a lot better, positioning for corners (and the lines) make more sense as the speed is matched accurately to the bend (not mated to an exact number on the speedo) my brain wakes up and goes in full bore information processing mode instead of me having to keep forcing it out of standby.
This is not a criticism of the IAM as they obviously have to work within the speed limits set by the law - you know the ones originally designed for Morris Minors and Royal Oilfields, only we now have predominantly lower speed limits these days, yet the vehicles are capable of travelling a fair bit quicker with better safety margins.
The not showing of brake lights I think maybe helps a bit for training and testing, with more "normal" riding it may not be so easy to tell if the rider has spotted the village ahead until the brake lights come on, I found the IAM way quite good today as I knew the examiner knew that I had spotted the upcoming built up area / speed limit changes.
The hardest thing for me was the need to be so exact with speed, generally I do slow right down for 30's and 40's, but still use my brain, if the 30 limit starts a mile from the village (like so many these days do) I may not be bang on 30 as I go through the signs.
With modern bikes 30mph is a real crawl, the GS is not too happy at that speed, third gives little control and second is a bit revvy - and both have the bike surging a bit, with 40's not being much better as they seem to sit between third and fourth gear.
As roads are rarely dead flat I find myself looking at the speedo a lot to make sure I don't creep up a bit too quick, or get penalised for not making progress, it seems like you spend half your time looking down at the speedo instead of where your going.
Feeling better for getting it out of the way, the ride back was far easier as I have now taken what works for me (the system in general) and left what does not behind (Struggling to constantly sit bang on the speed limit, and rolling of the throttle soooo early for upcoming speed limits)
Outside of "observed" riding I can also ditch the constant huge gaps and keep a little closer when I feel an overtake may be on the cards, but I definately are far more aware of how close I used to sit most of the time, my overtaking position is now were my normal cruising position used to be, and I probably follow the 1.5 second rule most of the time now
My 50% Keith Code & 50% IAM riding cocktail is where I seem happy
Just not sure what to do next, a bit of off-roading I think will be my next quest, sounds like a real fun way of improving the skill set - and can normally be done on someone elses bike
I am chuffed to have got a pass, and to be rid of the "limitations" of the IAM training environment which did take some enjoyment from riding, and in some ways made me a worse rider.
The first annoyance for me is not riding at my "normal" pace, at my natural speed things flow a lot better, positioning for corners (and the lines) make more sense as the speed is matched accurately to the bend (not mated to an exact number on the speedo) my brain wakes up and goes in full bore information processing mode instead of me having to keep forcing it out of standby.
This is not a criticism of the IAM as they obviously have to work within the speed limits set by the law - you know the ones originally designed for Morris Minors and Royal Oilfields, only we now have predominantly lower speed limits these days, yet the vehicles are capable of travelling a fair bit quicker with better safety margins.
The not showing of brake lights I think maybe helps a bit for training and testing, with more "normal" riding it may not be so easy to tell if the rider has spotted the village ahead until the brake lights come on, I found the IAM way quite good today as I knew the examiner knew that I had spotted the upcoming built up area / speed limit changes.
The hardest thing for me was the need to be so exact with speed, generally I do slow right down for 30's and 40's, but still use my brain, if the 30 limit starts a mile from the village (like so many these days do) I may not be bang on 30 as I go through the signs.
With modern bikes 30mph is a real crawl, the GS is not too happy at that speed, third gives little control and second is a bit revvy - and both have the bike surging a bit, with 40's not being much better as they seem to sit between third and fourth gear.
As roads are rarely dead flat I find myself looking at the speedo a lot to make sure I don't creep up a bit too quick, or get penalised for not making progress, it seems like you spend half your time looking down at the speedo instead of where your going.
Feeling better for getting it out of the way, the ride back was far easier as I have now taken what works for me (the system in general) and left what does not behind (Struggling to constantly sit bang on the speed limit, and rolling of the throttle soooo early for upcoming speed limits)
Outside of "observed" riding I can also ditch the constant huge gaps and keep a little closer when I feel an overtake may be on the cards, but I definately are far more aware of how close I used to sit most of the time, my overtaking position is now were my normal cruising position used to be, and I probably follow the 1.5 second rule most of the time now
My 50% Keith Code & 50% IAM riding cocktail is where I seem happy
Just not sure what to do next, a bit of off-roading I think will be my next quest, sounds like a real fun way of improving the skill set - and can normally be done on someone elses bike
slimbo
Registered user
the amazing thing is your now only qualified to work out what went wrong from a hospital bed , its not like driving a volvo you aint invincible!!!
if you keep that in mind you will indeed survive..
if you keep that in mind you will indeed survive..
And not only analyse your own mistakes but do likewise for all the others you hear about/see. There is no point being squeamish about working out what happened and then doing the same thing yourself.
Seen/heard about many accidents, had a few myself, seen plenty of near misses and always try to learn for later
Those that take no blame for anything fail to learn anything...
Jed
Registered user
Well I managed to pass, nearly all 2's with a few 1's thrown in for surprise.
I am chuffed to have got a pass, and to be rid of the "limitations" of the IAM training environment which did take some enjoyment from riding, and in some ways made me a worse rider.
The first annoyance for me is not riding at my "normal" pace, at my natural speed things flow a lot better, positioning for corners (and the lines) make more sense as the speed is matched accurately to the bend (not mated to an exact number on the speedo) my brain wakes up and goes in full bore information processing mode instead of me having to keep forcing it out of standby.
This is not a criticism of the IAM as they obviously have to work within the speed limits set by the law - you know the ones originally designed for Morris Minors and Royal Oilfields, only we now have predominantly lower speed limits these days, yet the vehicles are capable of travelling a fair bit quicker with better safety margins.
The not showing of brake lights I think maybe helps a bit for training and testing, with more "normal" riding it may not be so easy to tell if the rider has spotted the village ahead until the brake lights come on, I found the IAM way quite good today as I knew the examiner knew that I had spotted the upcoming built up area / speed limit changes.
The hardest thing for me was the need to be so exact with speed, generally I do slow right down for 30's and 40's, but still use my brain, if the 30 limit starts a mile from the village (like so many these days do) I may not be bang on 30 as I go through the signs.
With modern bikes 30mph is a real crawl, the GS is not too happy at that speed, third gives little control and second is a bit revvy - and both have the bike surging a bit, with 40's not being much better as they seem to sit between third and fourth gear.
As roads are rarely dead flat I find myself looking at the speedo a lot to make sure I don't creep up a bit too quick, or get penalised for not making progress, it seems like you spend half your time looking down at the speedo instead of where your going.
Feeling better for getting it out of the way, the ride back was far easier as I have now taken what works for me (the system in general) and left what does not behind (Struggling to constantly sit bang on the speed limit, and rolling of the throttle soooo early for upcoming speed limits)
Outside of "observed" riding I can also ditch the constant huge gaps and keep a little closer when I feel an overtake may be on the cards, but I definately are far more aware of how close I used to sit most of the time, my overtaking position is now were my normal cruising position used to be, and I probably follow the 1.5 second rule most of the time now
My 50% Keith Code & 50% IAM riding cocktail is where I seem happy
Just not sure what to do next, a bit of off-roading I think will be my next quest, sounds like a real fun way of improving the skill set - and can normally be done on someone elses bike
Congratulations on the pass.
I was also worried about the speed aspect but my tester was pretty pragmatic about it, he said try to still to limits but if my speedo and his are showing 30 we will be going different speeds ( more than likely), also he said on the motorway stay with flow of traffic he didn't want me sitting in slow lane at 70 with National Express coaches overtaking me and blowing me every where. I did a number of overtakes (something else I was worried about) and on one on a national I
passed 4 cars cos there was a big gap but ended up doing 80 to get it done ASAP and thought bolloxs I've failed but he said all of them were perfect as I took clear opportunity and was safe.
I also will be doing the off road course to continue the learning process.
