DualSportBiker

So you think lane splitting should be at the same speed as the traffic? What is the point of legal lane splitting if not to overtake? Watch the vdo again with the sound off. The sound of that engine is misleading. He was only traveling 10-15 km/h faster than the majority of the cars, accelerated and slowed every encounter to pass at a more appropriate speed. 

And again, the prize of 'driving selfishly' in your opinion is what? Being knocked off? Being chased by a coward in a car who can kill you yet only suffer a scratch on their car? Can you justify that thought? Don't you think it just slightly disproportional? Do you think you and your cage should be squashed by an articulated truck if you pass them on the inside without a signal? Let me know, I'll drive the truck...

21 hours ago, canuckamuck said:

Clearly he was driving selfishly and not trying to indicate or match speed of the traffic zigging in and out. Lane splitting isn't a problem, but you don't drive like the other cars are slalom poles for your entertainment.

That being said, the old guy did deserve the punch in the face for the attempted bump. And the bike driver also accepted the risk of being killed when he confronted the driver. He's lucky it wasn't a gun or a baseball bat.

 

So what do you suggest as a penalty for not signalling? Being run off the road? Bumped from behind in heavy traffic? Keep trying until you make contact? What about extra points if you knock them under a truck?

You can't see the turn signals on that dash, nor his hands. But regardless, let's say you are right and he did not signal. Do you think it acceptable that those committing minor traffic offenses should be put at physical risk in retaliation? Your response to "he used his car as a weapon" is "the rider did not use his signals" What do you suggest if his headlight is out?

As for 'no excuse to ride like that' I beg to differ. If you are going to pass a car in traffic on a bike, get it over and done with and get into a space where you are more visible. Lane splitting is legal, but that does not mean it is as safe as other positions on the road. Pass, be visible, pass again. If the cars are nose to tail, just keep passing, but try and make yourself visible or audible at all times.

32 minutes ago, seajae said:

you ignore the fact the rider was not indicating what he was going to do and not doing it when safe to do so, ,I ride and drive so I see both sides,  the rider was not riding safely or indicating his moves as well as going way to close to the cars, all illegal here, he was also outside the left lane, also against thai laws. The old fart was also in the wrong but so was the biker, both should be charged, as for the biker, there is no excuse to ride like that, he was lucky he wasnt  cleaned up by a car changing lanes or moving over slightly in the lane they were in, the only ones that cant see that the rider was also at fault or riding badly  are those that ride the same way, some of these idiots have death wishes the way they ride, the laws are there to be followed, neither was doing that

You seem to avoid mentioning the car driver trying to hit the bike two times. Is that an act of bravery? or how do you factor that? How about the coma from the stab wound?

Oh BTW, lane splitting is legal here.  Overseas is irrelevant. 

5 minutes ago, seajae said:

both in the wrong, biker was taking quite a few risks lane splitting, it is ok as long as it is safe to do so, at the corner he undercut the car as well, was he visible to the driver, that is one major question. Another thai law states bikes are supposed to stay in the left hand lane, in this case he only did that just before the fight, problems in Thailand are that many of these idiots that try to do all these moves at speed without knowing what the car is going to do, while legal here it is not overseas as it is considered too dangerous, was the bike indicating all his moves, I doubt it very much. Cars and bikes have a very bad habit of not letting other road users know what they are going to do(can be seen everyday when a bike passes you on the lefft then tries to turn in front of you when you are going straight ahead), this doesnt help at all. both are in the wrong but the fight was the bikers fault, he bashed up a smaller old guy with glasses, that in itself is a cowardly act, no wonder he grabbed the knife to defend himself but that too was not the smartest thing to do, once again we see face and and making oneself out to be a "big" man  showing how pathetic some thai males really are. No excuses for the way either behaved

But that is the point right, it is up to the police to deal with any infractions of the driving code. The only role a citizen should have is the reporting of an incident. Judgement and sentence is the role of authorities...

As for the law, it contains so many contradictions it is clearly designed for wiggle room for the authorities to decide as they see fit for each case - that should be a surprise to nobody. For example, how do you lane split without tailgating first?

You'd see me if I was on your left - 3,900 lumens at mirror height. But I'd be smiling under my helmet... and only passing on the left if you were hogging the right lane :)

22 minutes ago, craigt3365 said:

Understood.  But I'm not so sure if a cop here reviewed the bikers moves he would call them all legal.  There are laws here about tailgating, quick lane changes, slow traffic, etc.

 

Too many times I've signaled to move left, only to see a bike undercutting me.  No signal, no quarter, etc.  It's very hard to see scooters undercutting you.  Or, splitting lanes at high speeds.

I think a car driver's perception is likely affected by the noise of the bike. That particular bike is a high-revving powerful bike and the mic is on the engine... 

As a longtime rider in Bangkok's traffic I can assure you that riding slightly aggressively is the only way to survive. Car drivers will cut up a bike without a second thought unless the bike is moving confidently and/or is bright and/or is loud. Any mistake made by either is paid for by the rider (not financially, but physically.) 

I don't condone the riders response, but he was wearing a t-shirt... but that is besides the point. The prof used a car as a weapon and a weapon. Both are inexcusable.

20 minutes ago, PaDavid said:

  I guess your perception of who was driving/riding badly will depend on which form of conveyance you prefer. As a car driver, I perceive the bikey to be riding aggressively. 

 

As to what happened after the motoring incident, all I can say is a younger man protected by leathers and a crash helmet should not go around throwing punches and kicks at a much older and smaller guy wearing glasses, regardless of what went on before. I think if the bikey approached my car in such an aggressive fashion, I too would have grabbed the nearest thing I could to protect myself. 

Here we go again!

Caveat - there are too many poor drivers and riders here. I am not defending them all. Specific to this case, the rider was not doing anything technically or legally wrong. However all riders have the legal right to lane-split, and all your car journeys would be longer if that was not the case.

It is irrelevant to the law and to any ethical model if anyone hates what bikers do here. Lane splitting is legal - get over it. Without lane splitting, riding a bike would offer no benefit and there would be more cars on the roads, so be grateful for the risk others take that you benefit from.

It is morally abhorrent to suggest that anyone doing something legal but not liked or annoying should be convicted and physically punished by the observer/recipient/general population. Splitting lanes is legal (did we deal with that yet?), changing gears is legal, changing lanes to keep going is legal, accelerating (revving up) and deaccelerating (revving down) are also legal and expected. 

Chasing a bike, or a car, and just tailgating is bad, let alone trying to bump them in frustration cannot be excused under any circumstance. The consequences of the potential accident are too extreme to consider. The driver was in two lanes and was reminded by the rider. He took umbrage to an action that was benign and non-threatening and responded with two acts of violence that could harm the rider.

Once off the bike I think the rider was an idiot to respond as he did, but up to that point he had the legal and moral highground. As for using a car and then a knife, the professor is a complete douche. The second use of the car and the use of a knife are premeditated and should be treated as such.

A friend of mine was arrested and deported for not having their passport with them when caught in a raid at a Thai restaurant. She got a bit snippy with the guy, that did not help. PNG stamp in her passport!

How much time do you have on scooters and big bikes? I'm going to make a guess that you have low-to-no experience on a large bike. If that is the case, you might want to have a more open mind. "Thai drivers are awful, and that is why riding slowly is mandatory imo- big bike or small" is as dangerous a strategy on the road as you can have. 

I rode a Vespa in Singapore for 2 years after 6 years on a 650 chopper here. Since returning here I've been on a 650 Dualsport for 7 years and put in 50,000 k.m. Riding a fat and heavy 125 in traffic was suboptimal to say the least. Not being able to keep up means you are constantly looking for potential problems behind. I am guessing, but I don't you can envisage the added safety you gain by being able to concentrate more on what is in front of you. Riding as fast and slightly faster than the majority of cars on a road allows you to shift your attention forward. Unless you try it, you won't get it.

Anyhow, I'm done arguing with someone who does not have sufficient rubber on the road to make a bike-educated or experienced point. Ride safe and don't get rear-ended.

6 hours ago, mommysboy said:

I'm not making a judgement call or playing guessing games; it's simple logic that can't really be faulted as a generalization.  Of course there are exceptions such as accelerating away from trouble, but why are you in potential trouble in the first place?  Of course Thai drivers are awful, and that is why riding slowly is mandatory imo- big bike or small you are in a vulnerable position.

 

I agree with much of what you say about stability.  Scooters should not be used for anything other than town riding at slow speed imo.

 

Possibly some of what I've written needs to be watered down when considering highway riding.

Believe it or not, those experienced bikers that are expressing educated opinions are trying to keep others alive...  Driving too slowly is dangerous. This is not a point of discussion or bickering, it is a lesson to be remembered.

1 hour ago, mommysboy said:

In what respect? Too fast? Too slow?

 

I don't see any point in bickering like this.

So you are going to use this scenario to make a judgement call about bike in general... 

Small bikes lack both the braking and acceleration to apply proper defensive driving techniques. Riding slowly as you suggest may reduce the impact of an accident, or the likelihood that one occurs in some situations. However, riding slowly also means that vehicles are significantly more likely to pull out ahead of you, judge your speed slow enough to pass your or turn into your path making the assumption 'they will just slow/stop.' Small bikes don't cause other road users to take a second look - they don't have 'presence' and just blend into the background traffic.

Small bikes don't have ABS, handle unseen bumps and holes poorly, and can't keep up with traffic when it is moving at pace. Driving at 50 as you suggest exposes you to close encounters and potential accidents from behind. Being passed closely by a car from behind is not the same as you passing them closely. You don't control the encounter; when, the difference in speed, or the distance.

If you want to play a guessing game, try this: Had the KTM rider been riding at 40 all day long, he might well have been cut up by a dozen other road users already and had a couple of bumps before he got there...

1 minute ago, mommysboy said:

I understand and agree about scooters being somewhat unstable- I would say 50kmh max on open road, and 20kmh in tight situations.  Nevertheless, in essence you are arguing that speed is safe or better.  As we have seen in this tragic case, it isn't.  For example, had the big bike been going 40 kmh, then the accident likely would not have happened, or there might not have been the same carnage.

I can't see what he meant. The nationality of the people involved is as germane to the cause of the accident as the brand of bikes they were riding or their body mass indexes. We know for a fact that the KTM rider was an experienced and trained rider with many years riding here. We know that the police consider the Thai rider as the cause of the accident.

There are degrees of idiots, and some that cannot be avoided. That is where 'accidents' happen. One can assume that a vehicle or pedestrian ahead will pull out and adjust accordingly, up to a point. Eventually you are close enough that the chance they do something stupid diminishes significantly. At around that same point, regardless of speed, a false move will result in an accident. The only alternative is to slow to a crawl as you approach and ensure you have space to stop. Does that work on roads with legal and logical speed limits of 80 to 110 km/h? How many side streets, driveways or roadside stalls are there along highways? How do you compensate for increasing the chances of being rear-ended when slowing to a crawl on a highway?

There are thousands more big bikes on the roads these days. Most residents along highways similar to where this accident happened are more than familiar with larger bikes traveling at higher speeds. 90%++ of the riders are local, ride fast, and have accidents for just the same reasons. Your fixation of the nationality of the rider is beyond me.

That specific area is the gateway to one of Thailand's most popular spots for riding. Almost every weekend there are multiple convoys of larger bikes. I rode through there with 200 big bikes 5/6 years ago and we passed multiple other biker groups in each direction... If you think riders with less knowledge of the area should be more careful, what about people with low knowledge of large and fast bikes? How do you set relative speed limits based on knowledge and skill? Are you seriously advocating race-based rules? Are you happy with double pricing for national parks? or paying extra for clothes at the market because you're not a local? That is the wrong direction to head.

Accidents are unfortunate, regrettable, but natural. They can only be reduced in likelihood and impact, not completely obviated.

1 hour ago, bamukloy said:

The poster you reply to took it a bit far but i can see what he mean.

 

In a lot of the remote Isaan countryside you simply do not see bikes going huge speed.

They travel real slow to avoid burning gas.

(Except maybe on occasion some kid on way home from school showing off to friends.)

 

My point, (and what thais will probably say):

  the old guy is obviously been doing this for years. everyone else there probably putters around at 30ks an hour so they easy avoid him.

Along come a farang screaming around at xxx kmph. Someone sure to get collected.

 

Im sure by farang standard and spirit of the law, the old guy is in the wrong for a very bad illegal moove..but its accepted here as the police do nothing about it.

 

But as many say already, you know 100% some thais will pull krap like this so must drive always as if an idiot is around the corner.

 

I guess it come down to.. you are in their country you must adjust to their way

Personally i think  farangs and big bikes should be on a special speed limit here

 

They may have good skills but obvious even after many years they still dont know and dont allow for the driving habits of thais

Your guess is wrong! Experienced rider on roads he was familiar with. "To (sic) fast" is an assumption. If the old guy had neck problems he should be compensating for his ailment in some way, or not riding that is not possible.

56 minutes ago, YetAnother said:

wild guess; foreigner going too fast in an area he didnt know= primary responsibility; contributory negligence to the thai for not looking (rumored that thai do not look both ways when crossing a street due to neck problems)

4 hours ago, dexjnr555 said:

My point is that if the foreigner had not been in Thailand, the old Thai man would still be alive.

Unbelievable! If the foreigner who practised safe riding techniques his entire riding-life was not here, then the careless, skill-free, lackadaisical local would be ok? Two men are dead as the result of one's scant respect for the law, common sense and basic road safety and you want to equate this to trespassing?

How can you turn this into an issue of nationality? Are you seriously suggesting that people should not travel outside their country of origin? Or should only use public transport or hire a local driver whether on holiday or a long-term resident? It beggars belief that you can utter such twaddle, let alone take the time to type it and not see how fatuous your argument it. When your taxi driver pulls an illegal u-turn and kills a rider, will you step up and take responsibility? After all, if you were not here and commanding the driver to take you somewhere the accident would not have happened.

1 hour ago, 01322521959 said:

I now feel that the ability to ride big bikes here is pointless. Most roads just aren't designed for high speed. I have a 300, ride mostly in Bangkok and prefer to use my other smaller bike. Add to this Thais on the road and it all becomes a serious joke.

Sent from my i-mobile_i-STYLE_219 using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app
 

All is not lost. Whilst this was a senseless and tragic accident, it was just that. For every accident here, there are millions of kilometers ridden everyday.

Invest a little time in planning your route and loading it to your GPS. There are plenty of small roads that crisscross the country. You can still make pace while avoiding Fortuners, large coaches, and high volumes of minivans. For example, I ride to Mae Sot from Bangkok and only use the highway as far as Suphanburi town. I'm on 3 and 4 digit roads all the way to the Tak-Mae Sot road. It takes me an extra hour at max and some extra 80 km, but the roads are virtually empty by comparison the main road from Nakhon Sawan to Tak.

Be careful though, there are people here who will question if your 300 is a 'big bike'! 

You won't be passing any physics exams soon...

Friction is a function of weight and surface-area interaction. An object that slides with a large surface area touching the ground will slow faster than an object of the same weight with less area touching the ground. Speed, weight and surface interaction are the factors involved; speed and weight alone are insufficient.

The bend in question is on a dual-carriageway with a 110 speed limit. It is not a tight, low-speed corner. It is not a 'country road' by any UK definition. The heuristic I use is that I must always be able to come to a full stop in the road-space I can see. That means by the 'disappearing point' where the two curbs intersect. I've attached a sample from the road where the accident happened. 

Many posters are suggesting that road users to prepare for every eventuality and pick a speed for that. Given that cars, trucks and bikes mount the insufficient central divide often here, that would mean we all drive or ride at 40 in the left lane to allow sufficient time to stop when a Fortuner mounts the divide and flies in our direction at 140. Whether you can evade is another matter, but at least the armchair motorists of TV will not apportion to much blame provided you can provide evidence that you were riding to the conditions.

The road was dry, is not typically busy (I've ridden it a dozen times), and the corner offers sufficient visibility to drive or ride safely at close to 100 km/h. We know that the impact was hard and at speed so it is safe to assume that KTM was riding fast. What we don't know is if he had previously been riding much faster and had slowed for the corner, or the bike waiting to/crossing, or was riding at a consistent fast rate. We don't know how hard he was braking at impact, or for how long. You have convinced yourself that the only possible reason is excess speed and use your poor understanding of bikes and physics to justify it.

I suggest you stay on the soi, big roads might be too much for you.

6 hours ago, onthesoi said:

 

The fact he wasn't able to avoid what lay on the other side of a blind bend and killed both himself and someone else proves he was speeding, have you never heard of the term  'driving to the conditions'?... the additional fact that his bike took 100m to stop after a collision(not just sliding) just backs this up further.  There could have been an accident on the other side of the blind, if he'd came round that bend and ran into a stationary vehicle which had just been involved in accident would you still be saying he wasn't speeding?

 

Some basic physics, a stationary bike does not slide very far regardles of how heavy it is, in fact a heavy bike will brake itself more than a lighter bike due to the incontravertable laws of friction.... the force that allows a bike to carry on for 100m after a collision and against the laws of friction is, wait for it,.... speed at point of impact.  The point being weight is nothing without speed.

 

It's kinda hilarious you making all these posts about what a safe and experienced driver you are but you don't have the first clue about what you should be doing when approaching a blind bend.

 

59% of all fatalities occur on country roads. These roads often have sharp bends and blind bends which can hide unexpected hazards. Stay in control and give yourself time to react because you never know what’s around the corner. THINK! Brake before the bend, not on it.

http://think.direct.gov.uk/country-roads.html

 

 

 

It is almost as if you have never driven or ridden your entire life. Add to that that you have no idea whether the Austrian was braking, or swerving, or both. All you are doing is making a series of assumptions based on a clear bias against anyone who rides a bike. It is ok to of sub-par intelligence, the trick is not to let anyone else know...

10 hours ago, Destiny1990 said:

Doesnt matter both are death.Buy surely the guy was speeding on his big bike otherwise he would have used his breaks or avoided the crash.

10 minutes ago, joebrown said:

You're struggling to call it a blind corner because you're looking at the wrong one. The accident happened just after a right hand bend 1 km south of Na Chaliang on the south bound carriageway! 

OK. I was working off the 175/7-800 km markers quoted by another TV member...

I took a look at StreetView on Google Maps. Here's what I found. I struggle to call that blind corner, not from a drivers/riders perspective. From the pics here it looks like there is at least 100m visibility throughout the corner. The enclosed screen grabs start from the 175/700 marker and are around 100 meters apart.The the final picture shows the /800 marker highlighted. 

Us armchair analysts can't make anything else but assumptions about the rest of the circumstances. Regardless of what we think, two are dead and it's messed up. 

RIP.

3 hours ago, onthesoi said:

 

 

so only you can lay blame but others cannot?

 

I didn't say I see thai bashing everywhere I was addressing you directly

 

As for who is to blame, when coming down on a blind bend you should be at crawl speed to deal with whatever lies in wait on the other side of the bend, this wasn't just some random old man, he was actually using a crossing point popular with the locals, all the physical energy that killed everyone was created by the falang, coupled with the fact he was speeding coming down on a blind bend and was not familiar with the road ....that means at least 90% of the blame lies with the falang, not the 50/50 picture you are trying to sell, I'm pretty sure if a thai was driving that bike you would be all over this blaming the thai as you normally do.

7 hours ago, ezzra said:

Most unfortunate accident, with powerful bikes, the skills of the rider

to control the machine comes to play vividly, many, who has no experience

in riding super bikes are oblivious to that, not saying that this is the case

here, but it's known to happened frequently in places where you can hire

any bike you want, regardless whether you can ride it or not....

1 hour ago, IMA_FARANG said:

A Fool on a powerful Bike on his way to Pattaya.

I don't care whose "fault" it was.

Whose "fault" it was is totally irrelevant, dead is dead, and that is the final answer.

 

 

The rider in question was both a highly experienced rider and very familiar with Thailand riding his own bike on a route he was familiar with. Your collective assumptions are ugly and serve nothing than your unjustifiable smugness. 

On 2017-5-12 at 3:01 PM, onthesoi said:

Video is grainy but it looks like the truck only made contact with one bike which then side swiped the other two, if the bikes had been riding safely only 1 bike would have been taken out, dunno what the thai highway code says but rules of the road seem to be when something bigger pulls out in front of you then slow down and give it room to enter the road which is probably what the truck was expecting, defensive motorbike driving keeps you alive in Thailand ....all at fault in my book.

Like I stated, they were too close to each other, but are you suggesting that hitting just one would be OK?
 

Sounds like you may be willing to lube up and bend over for anyone and everything that has the potential to harm you. Are you advocating that the law is unimportant? The question is who is in the wrong 'in the eyes of the law.' What the law permits may not be always wise, but judgement is made against the law.

Without cases like this to publicly sent a message that committing four errors in sequence and causing bodily harm and damage to assets is not permitted, there will be no improvement. You seem to suggest that everyone just accept that standards are poor and hope for the best or give up one's rights to those who would steal them on pain of injury or death.

23 hours ago, teatree said:

The bikes had nowhere to go?  I'm pretty sure the motorcycles here are fitted with brakes.

What right does the driver have to use fear of death/injury to force others to change direction or to brake? You seem to suggest that when a car pulls out in front of a bike, the bike should just brake because any accident would be their fault. I don't know if you ride a bike, but I have over 100,000 k.m. on Thai roads on a bike and many times that in cars. When a vehicle pulls out and I have a lane to avoid it, I use the lane. I do not slow to a crawl just in case the moron in a cage compounds the error of pulling out in front of me by squeezing me into the central reservation. 

5 hours ago, teatree said:

Truck driver cut up the bikers BUT the lead biker had ample time to adjust/slow down/swerve etc.

 

For a country that has so many motorcycles, the lack of knowledge about how to control a bike is staggering.  I have seen motorbike taxi riders who clearly have no idea about how to use counter steering.

Just how do you come to that judgement? The bikes were riding too tightly for sure. It is not possible to see if the lead bike was partially blocked the the bike to its right. The bikes did move right as the driver waltzed in to the outside lane and cut them up. He pushed further and further right as they moved to avoid them.

5 hours ago, SOUTHERNSTAR said:

There could be more to this. I wonder if these bikes didn't cross the vacant land between the two roads. It seems as if they are trying to cross the road (to the right) from the left hand side to the right side. If they crossed from the road on the left over the vacant land on to the right hand road they could have blind sided the vehicle driver. It also seems as if they were going very slowly at they are pointed to the right side of the road which let me to believe that both parties are wrong. The bikers crossed the road illegally and the driver didn't look.

What on earth are you talking about? Keep wandering, and while you are at it, keep your ifs, they make no sense and are irrelevant. The riders were on the road in the inside lane moving right to avoid a car that pulled out in front of them and then continued to move right until they had no where to go.

Riding in too tight a pack is foolish, but it is not justification for the driver shadowing them across the road and cutting off their legitimate path.

I'm voting for a 80/20 split where 80% of the blame goes to the pedestrian. She failed to look and made no effort to reduce her risk by speeding up; she sauntered nonchalantly across. However the biker should have been prepared for anything hidden by the car he was passing. I wonder if he hit the horn? One fast step and she would have cleared him...

Lane splitting is legal here, so he was not in the wrong, but when you block your view of the road in any way, you need to prepare for what you could not see coming into your path. He was not speeding, seemed to hit the brakes quickly (although seeing the vid at normal speed is needed to judge that properly).

No it isnt, its a wonderful city with beautiful parks, recreation areas, sublime sport facilities, great schools and lots of space for children to play.  I fail to see how Singapore is boring. Bangkok is dirty, jammed and there is no space to do any outdoor activities. 
 
 
 

So asking nicely no longer works! Without official paperwork, Thai vehicles cannot be taken over...

This crossing is busier than it was 3 years ago, much busier. I asked the Customs' boss and he politely explained how things have changed and he can't get away with it anymore, "It is too busy here now."

If you can avoid it, don't go in the first few days after a major holiday! The Q of Burmese was 100 long when I got back across! There is no specific window for non-Burmese foreigners, so I had to wait a 30+ minutes to get through...

It took precisely two hours from Central Chaeng Wattana to the border, 90 minutes to cross and get back, and precisely two hours to get back. At 27 Baht per liter, I spent 440 Baht on fuel. 

Thanks for the report. I'll ask nicely about taking my bike through to get my entry stamp... Last time the immigration guy said 'no' but the customs guy said 'ok, and it is up to me.' Let's see. I'll head out this week.

1 hour ago, 50BahtLeo said:

Just got back from a border hop at Phu Nam Ron. Very easy and cheap

 

Can get train to Kanchanaburi from Bangkok Noi (Thonburi) 100 baht.

 

Bus from K'buri bus station was only 50 baht (one-way). Van to return was 80 baht. Note that bus station is not walkable from train station or bar area. Motorbike taxi 30 baht will get you there.

 

As stated 960 is 'all-in' fee for border hop. You sit in car on the Myanmar side while agent takes your passport into small shack and returns with entry/exit stamp.

 

I get the impression that it would be difficult to take your own car across. Unconfirmed.

 

Left K'buri on 10 AM bus and was back at hotel by 3 PM. Hidden gem IMO