Renters sometimes ride without helmets because they stink and in deplorable condition. I know because we rented bikes in Vietnam and Laos during our trips and my missus would bring her own helmet along .

1 minute ago, Ctkong said:

Renters sometimes ride without helmets because they stink and in deplorable condition. I know because we rented bikes in Vietnam and Laos during our trips and my missus would bring her own helmet along .

There's a joke there, some where's.

2 hours ago, PeeJayEm said:

There are also practical limits of what a coroner an establish in an event on the other side of the world without being able to call all witnesses. He/she established the recordable cause of death which is the basic job of a coroner and the details questions that intrigue you probably can't possibly be investigated by a coroner in England.

Well yes. I agree. Which why the fact that the coroner said that the car hit the bike, intrigued me. How could she know?

Not that it makes any difference. Clearly it was death by road traffic accident.

4 minutes ago, rocketboy2 said:

Think you can have a 20,000 crash hat and still get killed.

over to you.

I guess you have 350 baht head.

2 hours ago, rocketboy2 said:

I've been riding and driving on Thai roads for over 28 years.

Most Thais have no care for safety on the roads. it means zero to them.

Most foreigners don't think like that. and act very good on the roads here.

I like the way you slipped in the ( inexperienced foreigner ) line.

But I think your just showing, once again your bias against farangs in Thailand.

you just love to get that in.

Good day.

Your logic is sound except for maybe 10% of farangs who are careless. Overall Thais are far more dangerous.

8 minutes ago, richard_smith237 said:

Indeed, and this is where the issue becomes more nuanced than simply asking who caused the collision.

Consider two otherwise identical accidents.

In the first, a motorcyclist pulls out in front of a car, is struck, falls, and suffers catastrophic brain injuries because he was not wearing a helmet.

In the second, the same collision occurs, but the rider is wearing a properly rated helmet. He walks away with little more than bruises and a headache.

The mechanism of the accident is identical. The difference in outcome is not.

The question then becomes: who is responsible for the additional injury?

The collision may have caused the rider to fall, but it was the decision to ride without adequate head protection that transformed a survivable accident into a life-changing one.

The same principle applies even where the motorist is deemed at fault. If a driver makes a mistake and clips a motorcycle, are they responsible for the collision itself, or are they also responsible for every additional injury that results from the rider choosing to ignore basic safety laws?

At some point, personal responsibility has to enter the equation.

A rider who chooses not to wear a helmet or wear an non-conforming helmet is not merely accepting a risk to himself. He is increasing the potential consequences of any accident, regardless of who causes it.

That is why helmet laws exist in the first place. They do not prevent collisions; they reduce the severity of the outcome.

Without a helmet, the rider is operating illegally and knowingly exposing himself to a substantially greater risk of serious injury. Even where another party contributes to an accident, it is difficult to argue that they should bear full responsibility for injuries that would likely have been prevented, or significantly reduced, had the rider complied with the law.

The same argument extends, albeit less clearly, to novelty helmets, poor-quality helmets, or helmets that fail to meet recognised safety standards. The principle remains the same: if an individual voluntarily removes a layer of protection designed specifically to prevent catastrophic injury, they must bear some responsibility for the consequences when that protection is needed.

In many Western countries this debate rarely arises because helmet compliance is largely taken for granted. The assumption is that road users are complying with basic safety requirements, and liability is assessed within that framework.

Where widespread non-compliance exists, however, it becomes harder to ignore the distinction between responsibility for causing an accident and responsibility for the severity of the injuries that follow.

So - where you say good luck with that - I'd agree..... But I'd be wishing the guy with a 350 baht helmet far more luck, not to end up smashing his head in the first place.

Regardless of all of the above, you know full well that you will be paying if you injure or kill someone here..........It makes absolutely no difference to the family of the injured or deceased whether their loved one was wearing a helmet or not, nor will it make any difference to the amount that one would have to pay. In their eyes you injured or killed their loved one. In fact the more one tried to squirm out of it or paying less, the more likelyhood others will become involved and the bill will just keep getting higher and higher, not forgetting you are also a foreigner, so the compensation by default, will be higher anyway..

I would advise that you forget the premise of thinking that you would be able to mitigate away any responsibility as that is tantamount to having a false sense of security, and the more likelyhood there is that you will be less careful and less rational when encountering a local without a helmet on...............

1 minute ago, rocketboy2 said:

26 minutes ago, richard_smith237 said:

The plastic 350 baht buckets offer no protection apart from insects (and bribes).

Come on you know that is BS.

Why do you say such crazy things.

Yep - the helmets at Big C these days are slightly better than the the plastic 'only' ones we saw 10 years ago - my response about no protection from a cheap 350 baht BigC helmet (such as Index) is exaggerated - there is some protection.

But what level of protection do you 'think' this 350 baht helmet (i.e. Index) really offers you ?

Assuming something like an open face Index helmet (you mentioned open face) - here is the comparison

Two identical riders fall from their motorcycles at 50 km/h and strike the road.

The rider wearing the INDEX half-face helmet might avoid a fatal head injury. The helmet could theoretically absorb enough energy to prevent a skull fracture or severe brain trauma if the impact occurs on the specific area actually covered fully by the helmet. In that respect, it has done its job - IF the helmet is tight and well fitting.

However, crashes are rarely neat laboratory tests.

For example - at 50 km/h, the rider's body is still travelling at almost 14 metres per second.

IF the chin, jaw, cheekbone or face contacts the road first - a very common occurrence in motorcycle accidents - the INDEX offers essentially no protection whatsoever (the face shield protects you from bugs).

The rider may survive the crash only to face broken teeth, a fractured jaw, facial lacerations, reconstructive surgery, permanent scarring, or all of the above.

A decent higher range Helmet, for example Shoei; changes that equation significantly. The chin bar, face shield, shell construction and energy-absorbing liner all become part of the impact-management system. The same crash may still result in concussion, bruising, fractures elsewhere on the body, but the rider has a substantially better chance of walking away with their face still intact and brain undamaged.

The uncomfortable reality is that a 350-baht INDEX helmet does not offer a great deal of protection - That said, it is better than no helmet by a significant margin.

A Shoei helmet is designed around surviving real-world crashes with as much of the rider's anatomy preserved as possible.

If both riders strike the crown of the head on smooth asphalt, the difference may be measured in percentages - 20-30% better protection with a Shoei.

If both riders hit the road face-first, the difference can be measured in dental implants, titanium plates, skin grafts, months of surgery and decades of living with the outcome.

In simple terms:

At 50 km/h, the INDEX might protect your brain.

At 50 km/h, the Neotec II is protecting your brain, your face, your jaw, your teeth, your eyes and your future quality of life.

--- --- --- ---

I think I'll be using my full face helmet a lot more after going through all of that.

1 hour ago, Old Croc said:

To argue about Thai riding skills is silly. The statistics indicate the truth-20,000 die each year on the roads; the majority are Thai bike riders. They ride like idiots with a belief they will be protected by some deity. They just don't get all the publicity on this expat forum when they come to grief.

Along comes a naive young foreign tourist, he possibly doesn't have a bike license, certainly hasn't been riding through the mad streets here since he was 12 going to school. He thinks he can emulate the madness of the locals on his cheap rental bike, and no one here wears a helmet! He rides too fast and recklessly because he's on holiday and there are no cops waving you down, no rules!!

What he doesn't have is the knowledge that many Thai car drivers are idiotic and erratic also. Back in London no car driver does a U turn unless it's safe and clear. Here anyone can pull out into traffic, from anywhere at any time. The Thai dare devil knows it, the long-term expat knows it, the stupid tourist doesn't, and he cannons into the car at great speed.

Totally agree with what you say except that that “in London no car driver does a U Turn unless it’s safe and clear”. Plenty of TV shows showing the even more stupid things drivers do in the UK, just less than in Thailand.

From my own experience when I was a teenager riding a motorbike in London, a driver did exactly the same thing to me, U turn from stationary and took me out. His explanation of “sorry, didn’t see you” did nothing to ease the road rash and pain.

10 minutes ago, richard_smith237 said:

Yep - the helmets at Big C these days are slightly better than the the plastic 'only' ones we saw 10 years ago - my response about no protection from a cheap 350 baht BigC helmet (such as Index) is exaggerated - there is some protection.

But what level of protection do you 'think' this 350 baht helmet (i.e. Index) really offers you ?

Assuming something like an open face Index helmet (you mentioned open face) - here is the comparison

Two identical riders fall from their motorcycles at 50 km/h and strike the road.

The rider wearing the INDEX half-face helmet might avoid a fatal head injury. The helmet could theoretically absorb enough energy to prevent a skull fracture or severe brain trauma if the impact occurs on the specific area actually covered fully by the helmet. In that respect, it has done its job - IF the helmet is tight and well fitting.

However, crashes are rarely neat laboratory tests.

For example - at 50 km/h, the rider's body is still travelling at almost 14 metres per second.

IF the chin, jaw, cheekbone or face contacts the road first - a very common occurrence in motorcycle accidents - the INDEX offers essentially no protection whatsoever (the face shield protects you from bugs).

The rider may survive the crash only to face broken teeth, a fractured jaw, facial lacerations, reconstructive surgery, permanent scarring, or all of the above.

A decent higher range Helmet, for example Shoei; changes that equation significantly. The chin bar, face shield, shell construction and energy-absorbing liner all become part of the impact-management system. The same crash may still result in concussion, bruising, fractures elsewhere on the body, but the rider has a substantially better chance of walking away with their face still intact and brain undamaged.

The uncomfortable reality is that a 350-baht INDEX helmet does not offer a great deal of protection - That said, it is better than no helmet by a significant margin.

A Shoei helmet is designed around surviving real-world crashes with as much of the rider's anatomy preserved as possible.

If both riders strike the crown of the head on smooth asphalt, the difference may be measured in percentages - 20-30% better protection with a Shoei.

If both riders hit the road face-first, the difference can be measured in dental implants, titanium plates, skin grafts, months of surgery and decades of living with the outcome.

In simple terms:

At 50 km/h, the INDEX might protect your brain.

At 50 km/h, the Neotec II is protecting your brain, your face, your jaw, your teeth, your eyes and your future quality of life.

--- --- --- ---

I think I'll be using my full face helmet a lot more after going through all of that.

I was riding a dual sport about 10 years ago and made U-turn in a parking lot and grabbed to much brake and face planted into in the asphalt. My Shoei ADV helmet saved the day. My only injury was my pride.

13 minutes ago, richard_smith237 said:

Yep - the helmets at Big C these days are slightly better than the the plastic 'only' ones we saw 10 years ago - my response about no protection from a cheap 350 baht BigC helmet (such as Index) is exaggerated - there is some protection.

I think I'll be using my full face helmet a lot more after going through all of that.

Thank you for acknolaging your exaggeration.

Your welcome to carry on using a full face helmet.

I won't be doing that on a Honda wave round pattaya.

Up to me, Up to you.

On another thread a few weeks ago, someone made a comment, telling the story that they spent 3 years on the back of grab bikes to get the hang of how locals navigated the treacherous roads of Thailand before they ventured out on 2 wheels themself...................... I'm not sure if his story was true or exaggerated, but, for the experienced newly arrived foreign rider, observing how obviously smarter Thais drive motorcycles makes alot of sense...........

6 minutes ago, TedG said:

I was riding a dual sport about 10 years ago and made U-turn in a parking lot and grabbed to much brake and face planted into in the asphalt. My Shoei ADV helmet saved the day. My only injury was my pride.

Hope your riding skills have improved.

I like your motor cross bike avatar.

2 minutes ago, rocketboy2 said:

Thank you for acknolaging your exaggeration.

Your welcome to carry on using a full face helmet.

I won't be doing that on a Honda wave round pattaya.

Up to me, Up to you.

For my child, 15 years ago, I went to Paris and paid the equivalent of £200 for a really decent full face and for myself, I purchased what I believed was the best open face that money could buy here for round town driving. You're actually far more aware of one's surroundings with an open face anyway.....

25 minutes ago, richard_smith237 said:

IF the chin, jaw, cheekbone or face contacts the road first - a very common occurrence in motorcycle accidents - the INDEX offers essentially no protection whatsoever (the face shield protects you from bugs).

The rider may survive the crash only to face broken teeth, a fractured jaw, facial lacerations, reconstructive surgery, permanent scarring, or all of the above.

35% of all helmet impacts occur on the chin bar… which is why I only wear full-face models as they are the safest choice by far.

3 hours ago, FigLeaf said:

As you have reiterated, the car was parked. So that would be a yes.

A parked car carrying a u-turn does not necessarily indicate that it was at a place dedicated to u-turns nor a junction. It might be a road without a divider. Without further details, I don't know and neither do you. I hope that helps.

Cars can do legal U-turns on any road without a solid white dividing line. My guess is he was riding too fast and not paying attention, and without a helmet. Dirt bikes (with gears) are not as safe as scooters, and reaction time is much slower. Cars are the killers on the road. Where I live, just across the Railway Road, East of Pattaya, about 75% of Thais don't wear helmets, and about the same percentage drive much too fast for conditions. Most people are in a hurry. I ride at about 40 - 60 km/h on the open roads, and cars and bikes shoot past me, probably doing 80-100 kph on roads posted with 60 kph limits. The cars drive even faster still, and present most of the danger to motorcyclists.

6 minutes ago, Off Piste said:

For my child, 15 years ago, I went to Paris and paid the equivalent of £200 for a really decent full face and for myself, I purchased what I believed was the best open face that money could buy here for round town driving. You're actually far more aware of one's surroundings with an open face anyway.....

Yes.

Should always get the best for kids.

Getting them to wear them when they are with there mates is the hard part.

We all know the kids ride bikes at a young age here.

2 minutes ago, Off Piste said:

Regardless of all of the above, you know full well that you will be paying if you injure or kill someone here..........It makes absolutely no difference to the family of the injured or deceased whether their loved one was wearing a helmet or not, nor will it make any difference to the amount that one would have to pay. In their eyes you injured or killed their loved one. In fact the more one tried to squirm out of it or paying less, the more likelyhood others will become involved and the bill will just keep getting higher and higher, not forgetting you are also a foreigner, so the compensation by default, will be higher anyway..

Thats not correct - the 'foreigner is always at fault' here is a myth - I base that on personal experience of a couple of accidents in the past (in Bangkok).

Obviously that differs if I'm drunk - speeding - driving recklessly etc - but under normal conditions - dash-cams serve a great purpose - fault is readily established based on clear evidence.

If another party was not wearing a helmet - the outcome would depend purely on 'fault' - and I have dash-cams to cover that.

If at fault - of course I'd feel terrible and have no intention of squirming out of anything - however, if it were some lunatic pulling out without looking - avoiding compensation is not 'squirming out of it' thats just refusing to be held accountable for someone else's carelessness.

I've been in that situation before in a car accident ( a long time ago now ) - the other party at fault (IMO). On the road illegally, no insurance, illegal overtake, hit my car, tried to blame me, he faked injury, police agreed with him, I held my ground, pushed back (politely), pushed back more, wouldn't sign anything - end result Police called 50/50 - my insurance paid for my damages only, compensation discussion thrown out immediately (and I didn't even bother with the 'phone a friend card' with the that one).

2 minutes ago, Off Piste said:

I would advise that you forget the premise of thinking that you would be able to mitigate away any responsibility as that is tantamount to having a false sense of security, and the more likelyhood there is that you will be less careful and less rational when encountering a local without a helmet on...............

I agree with the 'false sense of security' point you are trying to make and its extremely valid - but, I don't fear the police or accountability here - I've been here long enough to know exactly how to deal with such issues (and whom to know) - I'm cautious because of one simple reason - I have no wish to hurt anyone on the roads, the very same reason I never DUI, jump lights, or drive erratically etc.

In nearly 30 years of driving here, I've 'clipped a motorcycle' once - he wasn't grounded, just a tyre mark on my bumper, their fault cutting across me - they were lucky not to fall. We both pulled over, the rider wai'ed and apologised - I figured the damage would 'buff out' (it did) - no harm done.

Otherwise I'm surprised I've never had 'contact' with a motorcycle while driving - but there are many occasions where there can only be cm's in it.

A motorcyclist has clipped my motorcycle while out riding - he was pulling out of a sub-soi, timed it badly and clipped my numberplate ( I think with his foot ) - we pulled over. He apologised, wai'ed, I bent my numberplate back (no real damage) - no harm done (his mother was nearby and saw it - came over and chewed him a new one !).

Chances are I'll end up hitting a motorcyclist at one point, I sincerely hope not - however, there have been too many near misses - none I'd accept as my fault - just other guys taking chances with their own welfare while I'm driving in a straight line - if it happens, I'll have the dash-cam footage, the 1st class insurance and if things go sideways, the right numbers to call - I hope they would be wearing a helmet - but if not, thats out of my control, not my fault, not my responsibility, and ultimately not something I'm accountable for - I don't drive differently because of that knowledge (or impression) - I still don't want to get anyone hurt - so end up driving very defensively but feel as though its every other day I 'save someone' from an injury with defensive reactions to create a gap that was otherwise not there allowing them to avoid other traffic etc - many other drivers in Thailand are clearly forced to react the same way and many motorcyclists continue to ride taking advantage of that, but risking their own welfare - it often goes wrong as we see.

3 minutes ago, rocketboy2 said:

Getting them to wear them when they are with there mates is the hard part.

We all know the kids ride bikes at a young age here.

Sure................ that never happened anyway, it was purely for riding with me for a few years and we were long gone before the teenage schenanigans..........

4 minutes ago, richard_smith237 said:

Thats not correct - the 'foreigner is always at fault' here is a myth - I base that on personal experience of a couple of accidents in the past (in Bangkok).

Yes, it is a myth, you are correct, I too have been fortunate in that regard, believe it or not, having only been in the country 6 months then.......................

I admire your lengthy replies, apologies, but I like to keep my opinions short and hopefully simple and I don't have the online commitment like yourself...........respect due Richard.........

24 minutes ago, TedG said:

I was riding a dual sport about 10 years ago and made U-turn in a parking lot and grabbed to much brake and face planted into in the asphalt. My Shoei ADV helmet saved the day. My only injury was my pride.

When I was a teenager - I saw the state of my fathers full face helmet after an off... Dark country road, tree down, no chance - his face would have been missing.

It was the UK - AGATT - he broke a finger. He stopped riding after that.

AGATT is a lot easier in the UK because of the temperatures - but also because of the average riding speeds - its not hot - so I understand the want to be more comfortable without protection here - its just too hot - that alone stops me riding half the time.

Riding in the UK is also mostly a hobby - not to 'get about a city quickly' (for the most part) and not a means of family transport - I'm far more forgiving of need for 'affordable family transport' here seeing kids on bikes etc - but FFS Thai parents put decent helmet on your most prized possession.

9 minutes ago, Off Piste said:

Yes, it is a myth, you are correct, I too have been fortunate in that regard, believe it or not, having only been in the country 6 months then.......................

I admire your lengthy replies, apologies, but I like to keep my opinions short and hopefully simple and I don't have the online commitment like yourself...........respect due Richard.........

Respect back - I type extremely quickly... a 2 min response is a full pager !

32 minutes ago, Off Piste said:

For my child, 15 years ago, I went to Paris and paid the equivalent of £200 for a really decent full face and for myself, I purchased what I believed was the best open face that money could buy here for round town driving. You're actually far more aware of one's surroundings with an open face anyway.....

Needs must... Wife has never been on a motorcycle (ever).

Son, has only ever been on mine within our Moobaan.

I advocate that motorcycling isn't as risky as the stats show - yet I find a certain hypocrisy when it comes to my family.

That said - I've also done more damage do myself than I care to account for playing sports - riding in comparison may well be safer, even here !!

--- --- ---

On the helmet topic - when I returned to Thailand during covid - there was a 2 week SandBox (Quarantine) period in Phuket - I didn't want the crappy 'rental helmets' and ordered an AVG open face helmet (and gloves) from Paddock (Bkk) to be delivered to the hotel in Phuket (then rented Honda AGV 150) - open face to accommodate the variable sizing because on full face helmets the 'cheek fitting' makes a huge difference - I still use it for nearby 7-11 trips... convenient - but again, thats when I'm more likely to end up biting the pavement... (statistically - locally nearby, lack of concentration and focus etc).

24 minutes ago, richard_smith237 said:

AGATT is a lot easier in the UK because of the temperatures - but also because of the average riding speeds - its not hot - so I understand the want to be more comfortable without protection here - its just too hot - that alone stops me riding half the time.

Riding in the UK is also mostly a hobby - not to 'get about a city quickly' (for the most part) and not a means of family transport - I'm far more forgiving of need for 'affordable family transport' here seeing kids on bikes etc - but FFS Thai parents put decent helmet on your most prized possession.

I get it, riding is a hobby for me, and I understand gear and hot weather. Waiting at a long stoplight on a hot day, with the engine heat radiating up, is not all that fun.

I'm always telling my GF nephew to wear the safety gear.

1 hour ago, rocketboy2 said:

1 hour ago, TedG said:

is your head worth 350 baht or 20,000 baht?

Think you can have a 20,000 crash hat and still get killed.

over to you.

With respect - you could be in a Volvo with a roll cage and 5 point harness, and still get killed....

If your argument is 'you can still get killed in fully rated helmet vs a 350 Big-C special' - you are missing the point...

In identical incidents - one makes far greater difference - a life changing difference (arguably).

Your argument so far is 'you prefer the 350 baht helmet' - but we get that its not really an argument, its just stating your preference which of course is fine - but if you are attempting to justify the position but the argument carries fundamental flaws - Your preference is good enough - thats what you want to do.

---

Somewhere earlier in the thread (can't recall the poster) it was argued that 'open face helmets might make a rider more aware' (I'm paraphrasing because I only glanced over the comment) - but its a valid point.

• Road awareness and accident avoidance is far more important than any safety gear.

But - to counter that I'd present the following counter arguments. For such 'an improvement in road awareness to exist, one needs...

• Clear (directional) hearing

• Perfect peripheral vision

• Open face, to allow the full sound

... and to achieve that:

• A helmet cannot be tight around the head - its sits less tightly on the ears, the rendering fit and impact effectiveness less effective.

• Perfect peripheral vision also opens up the facial aperture, rendering far more of the face vulnerable to impact in the even of an accident.

• No face guard (shield) which means a wasp hitting you in the face at 70 kmh.

The point being that while there is an argument for being 'more aware' of your surroundings - the compromise possibly comes at far greater cost.

1 hour ago, JensenZ said:

Cars can do legal U-turns on any road without a solid white dividing line. My guess is he was riding too fast and not paying attention, and without a helmet. Dirt bikes (with gears) are not as safe as scooters, and reaction time is much slower. Cars are the killers on the road. Where I live, just across the Railway Road, East of Pattaya, about 75% of Thais don't wear helmets, and about the same percentage drive much too fast for conditions. Most people are in a hurry. I ride at about 40 - 60 km/h on the open roads, and cars and bikes shoot past me, probably doing 80-100 kph on roads posted with 60 kph limits. The cars drive even faster still, and present most of the danger to motorcyclists.

The article does state scooter, though that is neither here nor there. You do need to stay focussed when riding and driving here.

4 minutes ago, FigLeaf said:

The article does state scooter, though that is neither here nor there. You do need to stay focussed when riding and driving here.

100% - head on a swivel !!... driving and riding - realistically, driving its just point and shoot, stay in your lane, watch out for people who may pull out or cut across you. On an MC, there's more to watch out for - in BKK at least, when riding the cars are generally ok because they make no sudden movements - its the other motorcyclists who are the hazard, they come 'brushing' past at speed (yes, literally brushing past you - you can feel the air from them as they pass), or pull out not caring if you are there or not as they believe two bikes will fill the space you are in and if you don't give them space they will ride into the side of you !!!!

As car as the word scooter goes - there's been enough about that recently on this forum - it means motorcycle and is just a colloquialism used commonly in the UK to mean small motorcycle, usually step through - not a full 'sit over' motorcycle, but sit on type - we all know what it means - some like to argue about it though.

1 hour ago, FigLeaf said:

The article does state scooter, though that is neither here nor there. You do need to stay focussed when riding and driving here.

Oh, OK, I was focused on the photo with him on a dirt bike and made that assumption.

On another note, as far as risk assessment is concerned, I believe the dangers are overstated, as there aren't too many countries with more people on motorcycles. I read that 96% of Thais ride on them. Most car owners own scooters too. With so many scooters (motorcycles) on the roads, you get a higher percentage of motorcycle deaths.

1 hour ago, JensenZ said:

Oh, OK, I was focused on the photo with him on a dirt bike and made that assumption.

On another note, as far as risk assessment is concerned, I believe the dangers are overstated, as there aren't too many countries with more people on motorcycles. I read that 96% of Thais ride on them. Most car owners own scooters too. With so many scooters (motorcycles) on the roads, you get a higher percentage of motorcycle deaths.

The occurrence of accidents is actually low, from an empirical viewpoint. I don't see that many, maybe 3-4 per month on average, and I drive/ride daily. While that's definitely more than what I see in France, it's not that much either… IMO because the Thais have their own informal highway code, understood and followed by everyone, which works 99% of the time. In fact, it can sometimes be foreigners who are dangerous, because our Western reflexes and 'road philosophy' are so counterintuitive to the average Thai. It happened to me just earlier this evening:

I stopped my motorbike at a pedestrian crossing as a foreigner was waiting to cross. As always in these situations, I put the hazard lights on and watched my rearview mirror attentively. I am always wary of these contexts, because you never know if the vehicles behind you are going to follow your example and stop too, or double down and go through anyway, which creates a much more dangerous situation than the initial one, especially as your stopping can encourage the pedestrian to cross (when they initially didn't intend to) and be struck like a bowling pin.

A car and a motorbike came crashing past me: the motorbike, which was initially in my lane, overtook me and avoided me by 10 cm max, honking their horn. Neither vehicle even considered braking and both Thais driving them probably wondered what the stupid farang 'mai roo ruang' ('doesn't have a clue') was up to. I made the wrong call on this one, there could have been an accident and I am the one who would have caused it. The foreigner crossed the road, gave me a thumbs up and I nodded back, but the truth is I shouldn't have stopped – it's a tricky call to make.

14 hours ago, BexMan said:

Totally agree with what you say except that that “in London no car driver does a U Turn unless it’s safe and clear”. Plenty of TV shows showing the even more stupid things drivers do in the UK, just less than in Thailand.

From my own experience when I was a teenager riding a motorbike in London, a driver did exactly the same thing to me, U turn from stationary and took me out. His explanation of “sorry, didn’t see you” did nothing to ease the road rash and pain.

I tend to generalise.

Of course, there have been incidences of bad driving in London, Liverpool and every other city on earth.

My point was that, comparatively, Thailand roads are unpoliced death traps where road rules are rarely enforced and largely ignored. Drivers and riders could perform dangerous maneuvers in front of you half a dozen times on your way to the shops. Where these tourists come from it may have happened to them once in their teenage years.

On 6/16/2026 at 6:54 PM, Ctkong said:

Renters sometimes ride without helmets because they stink and in deplorable condition. I know because we rented bikes in Vietnam and Laos during our trips and my missus would bring her own helmet along .

The ones supplied with the bikes are emergency commodes.