BMW R1200RT/R1250RT Forum

I was in the IAM until the local group decided that at NO time should a speed limit be broken. In practice this meant that they advocated passing an HGV doing 56 mph at no more than 60mph. The police I rode with on a Safe Rider course agreed that this was total nonsense and dangerous.
That said, I learned so much about defensive riding both from the IAM and the Police Saferider scheme and I think that many biking accidents could be avoided by the application of their principles.

As an advanced rider, you are encouraged to "remove the hazard", therefore pass the HGV to get a clear view of the road ahead.

Without taking the pi$$, the overtake should be executed safely & swiftly to minimise the amount of time on the wrong side of the road.

When "on test", this should be discussed with the examiner prior to setting off.

Re the retest IAM vs ROSPA.
I'm with IAM, at three years I asked an observer to accompany me on a ride and inform me if I was still ok and suggestions to remedy if not.
Got great feedback and it helped keep me refreshed. No need for retests if using this method. IMO.

Dogbreath wrote: Re the retest IAM vs ROSPA.
I'm with IAM, at three years I asked an observer to accompany me on a ride and inform me if I was still ok and suggestions to remedy if not.
Got great feedback and it helped keep me refreshed. No need for retests if using this method. IMO.

Yes, that is a good idea, but I know quite a few IAM holders who had a test 10 years ago or more and have had no check rides, but still consider themselves to ride to an advanced level, which may or may not be the case  8)

leonjennings wrote: keep trying you will pass!

Not according to the 'observer' I had.  But then I could start a whole new thread on that subject. 

MEM62 wrote:Not according to the 'observer' I had.

Did the group offer an alternative observer.

When part of my local group, both as an associate & observer, if for some reason it wasn't working out between any two parties, an alternative would be offered.
Likewise, whilst I was an observer, there where two associates who were told they would never pass their IAM test by a.n.other.
With my help and that of a SO, they both passed their tests.
I am aware of other examples where associates have switch observers & made better progress, resulting in a test pass.
One associate who wasn't happy with his observer, complained to the IAM and got a refund.

Just because you can ride a bike yourself, doesn't mean you can coach others to do so to.

The subjects at school & college etc., which were of most interest to me & I had most success in, were probably not just down to my own ability but how the teacher/lecturer delivered that subject.

David. wrote: Did the group offer an alternative observer.
When part of my local group, both as an associate & observer, if for some reason it wasn't working out between any two parties, an alternative would be offered.
Likewise, whilst I was an observer, there where two associates who were told they would never pass their IAM test by a.n.other.
With my help and that of a SO, they both passed their tests.
I am aware of other examples where associates have switch observers & made better progress, resulting in a test pass.
One associate who wasn't happy with his observer, complained to the IAM and got a refund.
Just because you can ride a bike yourself, doesn't mean you can coach others to do so to.
The subjects at school & college etc., which were of most interest to me & I had most success in, were probably not just down to my own ability but how the teacher/lecturer delivered that subject.

I joined the Wey Valley group and attended regular observed rides for about a year.  Each session was with a different observer as was their policy.  (And a good policy it is in my opinion as each observer has their pet subjects when it comes to riding)  As you will know, after each ride there is a debrief and you keep a chart with your scores on it to mark your progress towards test standard.  I reached a point where my 'scores' were static for a period of months so at the end of one ride I asked for advice on how to move the situation forward.  The best response that the observer could offer me was "Yes, I can see that there are issues with your riding."  (Actually, not for me there wasn't.  Neither was there for the Police officer that I spend the day with on a BikeSafe course or for the instructor with whom I had previously had some paid for advanced riding tuition) 

That being the best that they could offer I didn't return to the group.  I did receive an email from WVAM sometime afterwards when they followed up on lapsed associate members and I explained my reasons for not returning.  For me, certificate or no certificate, I had already derived a huge benefit from the training.  As it was clearly the opinion of the last observer with whom I rode that I would not reach test standard it seemed there was little to be further gained by returning.  They explained that all riders should be able to get through the test and that the primary reason for the groups existence was to achieve this.  Also, that they were introducing a mentoring system and on that basis I agreed to give it another go.  Unfortunately, the promised contact from the mentor never materialised so that was that.   

In Manchester we have a systems where each associate is appointed a NO as mentor but rides are generally with a different observer each time.  We aim to get most through their test in 3 months, which is 5 or 6 observed sessions, rides are twice a month so there is time to practice in between.  We find having a structured course with a target for completion helps focus most associates.  We have a few who have not passed within a few weeks of our normal schedule.


Each session has a theme, based on "The system"  we don't encourage practice around street features  such as a session on roundabouts, or motorways as proper application of systematic riding should make that irrelevant. Each route taken on a session is planned to include a variety of roads and features.  That said sometimes we have people with particular problems and then we have to work on them.


Some think we are going to teach them how to actually ride the bike, and I guess we do, but for me  they should already be able to physically ride, our role should be  helping them make better risk assessments then take the appropriate action to mitigate  as much danger as possible.


Speed limits;  we tell associates these are a legal limit  if a planned overtake means they need to exceed the posted limit then it is poor planning and should not be undertaken. However if during an overtake something unexpected happens  and the safest solution is to increase speed and complete the manoeuvre  rather than abort  then safety must take priority but they need to be able to defend the decision afterwards.


Speed creep is one of the most common faults I see with new associates. I call it sheep syndrome, the heard instinct that means we always want to catch up an follow the vehicle in front and forget they are expected to keep to the posted limits.

Sounds like a good structure.  I was mid 40's when I joined the group and arrived with 29 or so years of riding experience.  I probably did around 15 observed rides and did gain a lot from it.  The system is still part and parcel of my riding today.  It absolutely makes you a safer rider. 

I am a born again biker and had not ridden a bike for 40 yrs, until June last year. I did a bridging the gap two day course. I was given an observed ride by an IAM observer from Sefton advanced motorists (SAM) I enrolled on their course in March which is an 8 Saturday course with theory  for  1/1.5 and then Observed ride with a different observer every week. You are encouraged to practice on your own between sessions.
After the 8 weeks I was put in for my test which I passed first time.
It was the best money I ever spent and has made me a better rider and driver and increase my mpg on both the bike and car.
The IAM Test is like your bike test it equips you with the Knowledge and confidence to ride but you have to keep practising the system to get better.

I'm doing the IAM with my local group. They do assign a dedicated observer and I was told that they work hard to match up the trainees with an observer who has a compatible personality and style. That might be smoke to cover them being short of observers, but I have enjoyed building a good personal relationship with my observer so it has worked well for me. Certainly they operate to a different pace as I was told the 'usual' number of sessions for someone to pass was around 11. Having said that, I think I am on session 6 and my observer is trying to get a pre-test check ride arranged so perhaps it's just a case that they get more than their fair share of numpties.

Whatever the arrangements, I have found the course to be invaluable. It does take a certain amount of discipline and commitment to ride in the way they define. Like the overtaking subject - what I was taught is that if you cannot overtake safely without breaking the speed limit then you don't overtake. The truck must be an old example as these days they are limited to 40 mph on single-carriageway A roads but the principle is still the same. If someone is going 5 mph below the speed limit then there is no safe way to overtake them on the straight - but the first time there is a decent bend they will slow down and the bike will have them coming out of the corner! Although I found that initially constraining, these days I enjoy the challenge of 'making progress' without breaking the speed limit. But then I'm probably not representative of the average biker.

I can see how the IAM would not be for everyone. I have never been a 'full throttle' rider and I have never owned a sports bike so I don't find it cramping my 'style' so much as others may. But pass or no pass, I'm sure everyone can learn something from it.

leonjennings wrote:
keep trying you will pass!

Thanks for the encouragement but I gave up on that a while back as you will see from my post.  I have no particular desire to return to the IAM. 
MM

MEM62 wrote:
Thanks for the encouragement but I gave up on that a while back as you will see from my post.  I have no particular desire to return to the IAM. 
MM

Have a go with ROSPA, they are a little more flexible, especially around overtakes. I did both and didn't find a lot of difference in the tests, except around overtakes and speed,

Having also done both IAM (bike & car) plus RoSPA (twice),  IMO RoSPA certainly encourage more "progressive" riding, including overtaking, cornering & positioning for extended forward observations.

It costs £10 to join my local RoSPA group, training if free, just have to pay for the test at £68.

Echo the positives above re the IAM. I did my test a few years back and passed at second attempt. The first was one of those clumsy days when had it not been for the test, then the bike would have stayed in the garage! Having ridden (off and on) since I was 16, it seemed a good idea to find out whether I was safe or just lucky. I find the 'system' is really practical in day to day riding. My examiner's comment on speed was 'I don't have a calibrated speedo on my bike...' so brisk overtakes in national speed limit areas were okay. I had a long running discussion with my observer about being right against the hedge in right handers: I originally come from Devon and know that creatures hide in hedges and so prefer to stay out a bit and sacrifice a little speed to compensate for the slightly restricted visibility. This was borne out when a kamikaze pheasant flew out of the hedge and into the front of the bike (K1300GT) and wrecked the oil cooler. I sent him the pictures, response awaited... Lucky though ,a bit higher and it would have been nasty. I still belong to the local group, but must admit it's not really my bag. A little too structured and (occasionally) opinionated.
Never regretted doing the course though - well worth it - as much to validate the bits I was doing right as correct those that were wrong.