No tracking device will be put on any of my equipment, especially from a government agency. They would need a warrant first. I fight for rights and ride free. Do what you guys want, but I want no part in it.

Put me down as a "NO WAY" for installing their device on my bike.

Like some of the other posters, I don't think SGI needs this kind of data from me to make a reasonable ruling on this issue. Most government agencies will generally consult others to see how they're doing things...especially when it's successful in the other jurisdiction. In this case, there seems to be ample information available to consider alternate plans, other than just gouging the majority. Guilt by association is not acceptable logic.

I'm glad SGI is willing to discuss this openly, I just hope common sense prevails.

_________________
2014 KTM 690 Enduro R

I can understand that opinion. I don't particularly want SGI watching me either - since I may bend an occasional law or two on my bike . Does that make me dangerous? No, as long as it's done deliberately under safe conditions (i.e. on a gravel road in the middle of nowhere and not on a busy street in a school zone at 3:30 PM etc.). Common sense goes a long way, and I think most of the people in the SDSC have enough of that to know when they shouldn't fool around on the bike.

However, I do hope that people in this group would consider participating in the pilot program, even if you don't want the device on your bike later for actual insurance purposes. Dual-sport riding is very different than a lot of other types of riding, and I'm afraid that if SGI eventually pushes this thing through dual-sporters will not be properly represented by the data, and that many of the problems with installing this device on a dual-sport (i.e. defining where you're riding off-road) won't get accounted for when SGI implements the program. If that's the case then down the road if (when?) Big Brother makes these things mandatory we'll really be hooped...

There's no effect on your insurance during the pilot program. SGI just needs baseline data to understand what qualifies as "safe" driving on a motorcycle. Sask is the first place in the world (as far as we know) to do this for motorcycles, and so they can't rely on talking to other insurers or sharing their data.

I think it's obvious to everyone that safe rates of acceleration, braking, cornering, etc are very different for motorcycles than they are for cars. Plus SGI would need a way to tell if a dual-sporter is riding off-road. By having some data demonstrating this it would help them understand the issues with implementing this, and help us not to get screwed by it someday down the line.

_________________
Chris

2017 Versys X
1991 Suzuki TS200R

I get it... we should participate in the pilot program *just in case* these GPS trackers become mandatory so that DS riding styles are represented.

However, by participating in the pilot you are actually endorsing this program. You can just picture the SGI internal memo saying something like - "Pilot program a great success! X thousand motorcyclists VOLUNTEERED - Full steam ahead Comrades!!"

Maybe it's just me but I would rather see this squashed before it even gets started.

_________________
2015 KTM 500 EXC
2008 KTM 990 Adventure S

Yeah, I see your point, Ken.

I guess I'm just worried that SGI is going to push this through regardless. If you want to squash it we'll have to do something more than just not participate in the pilot. I'm not sure what yet, though.

_________________
Chris

2017 Versys X
1991 Suzuki TS200R

Bahahahahahahahaha....... who the hell would!

_________________
14 klr 650
81 cb650c modified
09 sx250 ... Stolen
89 rm125 ... Stolen

As i have said before it is all about context and what is happening around you while are driving your machine - not just what your machine is or is not doing.

As many here have pointed out this "idea" of SGI is not a good one, but it seems to keep coming up for some reason in various provinces.

_________________
07 BMW Dakar, 09 Multistrada, Suzuki 200SE

I think one of the big appeals of it for people is the fact that we all think we are the good driver and other people are the bad driver, and that we don't want to pay high premiums for the stupid things that they are doing. Admit it - you've probably thought this way at some point - I know I have.

So people get these things because they think that then they won't have to pay for other people's idiocy.

That said, the article makes some good points. The article "Motor Mouth" (there is a link in the middle of the article you attached) indicates that the maximum "safe" acceleration for a car in Quebec is 13 km/h per second, and the maximum "safe" braking is 15 km/h per second. These sound a bit low to me, especially if they were to use them for bikes.

I think SGI will bring this in in one way or another, so like it or not, it might be here to stay.

_________________
Chris

2017 Versys X
1991 Suzuki TS200R

_________________
2016 FE 501

Interesting. I think a lot of people would tend to agree - dashcams aren't as big an issue as UBI. Is that the case?

But wait a second - that's a bit like saying you trust "some guy" more than you trust SGI. Now I know that SGI is connected to the Government and so theoretically the information they collect could find its way into other Government uses (many of which you might not like), but who the hell knows who that guy is that's running a dash-cam and whether you're going to find yourself on YouTube or something without your consent.

I guess the big thing is that "some guy" is not watching you all the time. Just for that time when he's somewhere near you. But it'll probably only be a matter of time before all these dash-cams are networked in and all of the data from everyone's dash-cam is stored somewhere central. The data rates aren't there yet, though, so for now the dash-cams are probably OK...

_________________
Chris

2017 Versys X
1991 Suzuki TS200R