Why I Stopped Wearing Motorcycle Body Armour

Connect with us:

Directed and Edited by Edwin El Bainou

[FortNine]

It's worth mentioning that EN17092 tests garments with the pads *removed*. Meaning a AAA jacket or pant, which has been drop tested on the Darmstadt machine at 120kph, will still slide to a highway-speed stop without costing you skin (70kph for AA, 45kph for A). C-class garments have no abrasion resistance criteria whatsoever; this would be something like a mesh chassis for holding armour. Obviously, removing the pads from that would be silly, since its only purpose is to hold armour and you might as well wear a T-shirt instead.

On that note, there *are* hero companies that make pads to greatly exceed CE 2 size and attenuation requirements. Aside from the Dainese back pad I showed, Rukka's D3O XTR comes to mind (link in description). Those pads are huge compared to the Type B template, and size matters if you're going to rely on pads to get to wherever your abrasion comfort level is. We don't always slide precisely on our shoulders, elbows and knees. It's usually the butt.

We all have our own equations for balancing comfort v. practicality v. safety, which is why I made a point of *not* telling people to take the armour out of their jackets (twice!). Fortunately the CE standards make it fairly clear what your gear can and can't do, enabling us all to choose the stuff that achieves whatever we're after. ~RF9

[Felipechiota]

As an orthopaedic surgeon (and a motociclist) I can say that its easier (and got better results) to fix lower Energy fracture than higher energy fractures... So, the benefit of using this gear may not protect you from having that fracture in the first place, but may shield you from months of reabilitation and permanent pain and limitation.

[noahculver]

Wait... did he just... DID HE JUST ROCK A 6 MINUTE SINGLE TAKE?!?! Respect.

[federicofraschini]

I just crashed today because of an old man that did not see me.
I landed extremely hard on my left shoulder without breaking any bones or any serious damage, just a lot of pain.
It's crystal clear to me the importance that those stupid rubber things had during the crash: they helped me to soften the main impact and shielded my shoulder from the tarmac.
Before this crash i thought they were useless as you said in the video, but i left them in my jacket just to be extra safe .. and I'm very glad i did.

[antonk.]

I see alot of anecdotal stories in the comments discussing the pro and contra, but lets not forget the main purpose of the video: Lifting the regulation capture! Lets improve regulation based on scientific evidence in order to make companies product armor that actually helps against high energy injuries.

[silverido]

having pads in my jeans is worth it just for the many times I'm on my knees trying to fix my moto on the side of the road

[beejaysee]

I’m an ER doc. I know armour won’t help in worst case, high energy scenario’s, but it helps mitigate the contusions, abrasions and lacerations in the kind of spills we are more likely to suffer. I had a low speed mishap riding off road in Iceland and diced up the elbows and arms of my riding jacket on volcanic rock. I had a few minor scratches from punctures through the Cordura fabric in the unpadded areas, but without armour protection it would have been a long complicated journey to a distant hospital to suture up contaminated, complex lacerations that would have terminated my bucket list trip. Some dabs of Polysporin for the skin and duct tape for the jacket and I was good to go.

[amanhasnoname]

The comments and insight elicited from doctors, EMTS, engineers, and other riders in response to this video are more valuable than the video.

[cammmy]

I first watched this after being released from hospital. I'd shattered my lower leg on a dirt bike. I was wearing level 2 armour underneath and all I can say is that after seeing the bruising as well as the chunks missing from my right elbow, I am VERY glad that I was. I have no doubt it would have been a fair bit worse if I'd had no padding there.

[randomguitarguy]

Body Armor is redundant as I ride around in chain mail and knight armour anyways.

[andylines]

Unfortunately, lack of quality armour is how we lost Ryan F9.
This is his clone, Ryan F10.

[Lu-xdmi]

My 4 years old son was riding his stacyc 16 e-drive bike down the hill 20 miles / 30 kilometers per hour and suddenly hit a big stone on the tarnac and hit the ground with filull speed. He was fully protected by fullface helmet, expensive knee and elbow pads, and glowes. No fracture, no bruises, just some crying. Without the protective gear he would have to be taken to ER and a dentist and stay in hospital for sure. It was traumatic for both of us. It was my fault, but to my point - always wear as much protection as you can.

[darrelltoth]

It's amazing how many people don't really watch or understand the video. He said he's NOT telling you to not to wear pads. He said they will stop bruises and abrasions and that's a good thing. His MAIN point is the pads COULD be made better but the industry standard is set too low so most manufactures don't make them as good as they SHOULD be. Just LEARN from the video and buy the highest quality protection equipment IF you want BETTER protection.

[christopherhurren]

On behalf of Liz de Rome:
In the research paper (AAP, 2011), we reported that riders wearing motorcycle clothing fitted with impact protection (IP) were significantly less likely to sustain any injuries than were riders wearing motorcycle clothing without IP and those wearing non-motorcycle clothing. The analysis compared injured and uninjured riders by level of protection taking other factors into account such as crash type, object impacted and speed.

We were able to demonstrate significant reductions in open wound injuries associated with level of protection, but not fractures. In our discussion, we explain that the study sample (n=212) was too small to determine statistically significant evidence for the reduction of fractures. This is because fractures represent just 15% of riders’ injuries, compared to 71% soft tissue injuries across a population sample of crashed motorcycle riders. We strongly recommend that riders continue to wear impact protectors.

Associate Professor Liz de Rome.

[colinmartin]

I'm an EMT. Been one for going on 13 years. I've seen more than my fair share of moto accidents. I can't say that gear has ever really prevented a fracture or not, but one thing I do think MUST be mentioned, that moto gear (with or without armor) DOES DO INSANELY WELL, is ABRASION resistance. Yes, a broken bone sucks, but I've seen a woman's breast belt sanded off by the asphalt because she only had on a sweatshirt. Down to the bone.

Anecdotally, I have lowsided before at a pretty pedestrian 25-30mph. Armored jacket, regular denim pants. The jacket took the hit and I had no bruise or injury on my arm. The road went through my pants like they were tissue paper and I have a softball sized scar on my knee now. Armor wouldn't have really mattered there, but a pant with abrasion resistance absolutely would have.

So while I can't critique the argument against armored pads because I'm not an expert on the literature and most severe motorcycle accidents I've seen have had broken bones with and without armor, I can say that road rash can be a nightmare and have never seen road rash on an area where someone was wearing proper gear, and ALWAYS seen it on every single person that wasn't wearing any.

To that end, I think it's a bit of a disservice to leave that part of the equation hanging and not mentioned. That airbag is going to save you from a broken clavicle, but if you aren't wearing an abrasion resistant layer as well, the road might well grind your skin, fat and muscles down to the bone. We call those chest protectors with no sleeves "organ donor vests" for a reason.

[thecowboyfromcali]

Production quality is wild on this one. 1 take? Public park? Informative using statistics? A+ on this one, chief

[kornklone]

Firefighter/paramedic here. Others have said enough and said it better. I always wear my armor and very glad I have. The only time I’ve had to test it was a slide at about 45-50mph and it was all pants. Luckily very minor road rash and a small bruise was all I got. I get what you’re saying here but it reminds me way too much of people who say they don’t like to wear helmets because they have seen people wearing helmets and still die or a helmet isn’t gonna save you at 75+ MPH when you hit a guardrail lol. Reminds me of the story of soldiers who refused to wear helmets to battle because they were uncomfortable and if they were meant to die, they were gonna die…regardless of the helmet. Point being guys…don’t make the grim reaper’s job easier. Even if it only saves you one broken toe, it’s worth it. You’re worth it.

[eayzgaj]

Those studies don’t capture the 1000s of people who crash wearing the protection with no injury. Only the injured get captured in the data, similar to a survivorship bias.

[estrheagen]

I'm absolutely here for Ryan's airbag activism and continued call-outs of safety standards. Kudos

[jordankapper]

ER Doctor here - I have seen many injuries from motorcycles. There is no gentle way to say this... but this video is very very wrong, dangerous and you need to "redact" it immediately. For anyone that wants to read my entire comment please do so otherwise I will say this: wearing more pads will help you, do not listen to this clearly incorrect video. Now the longer explanation:

1. You mention the "keeping a captive market" concept and that current pad standards are not enough. This sounds very plausible and likely true. The natural conclusion here would be to have another "tier" of pad standards, not to take out your current pads. So do not conflate the issues of regulatory capture and inadequate regulatory standards for pads with "all pads do nothing".

2. You are just cherry picking studies and jumping to a false conclusion. The study you mention literally has this as a conclusion: "Our results argue for more widespread use of protective clothing by [motorcycle] users. Furthermore, a 30 second literature review shows other studies with the following conclusions: "Motorcycle protective clothing is associated with reduced risk and severity of crash related injury and hospitalization, particularly when fitted with body armour." Finally some things don't need a study. This is literal common sense... a classic example being the study "Parachute use to prevent death and major trauma when jumping from aircraft: randomized controlled trial". In this study they come to the following conclusion: "Parachute use did not reduce death or major traumatic injury when jumping from aircraft in the first randomized evaluation of this intervention. However, the trial was only able to enroll participants on small stationary aircraft on the ground, suggesting cautious extrapolation to high altitude jumps." This study is often used as a comical (but serious) critique of medical research in certain scenarios. Some studies are poorly designed, some are unnecessary and many leave room for drawing false conclusions.

3. You are focusing on the details about newtons of force and then making broad conclusions. This is not sound logic. Just think for a little bit about it. There is a soft pad... if you get hit by any random physical object while sliding/tumbling during a fall (a small bump in the road, the curb, your shoulder on the ground etc.) and these WILL minimize some of the force. Bones don't always snap... they chip, they twist and any number of other injuries happen. Pads decrease the force.

4. You walking and talking like you know what you are talking about and the overall high production value of this video makes this so much worse.

5. For any argument about "enjoying life" or making a risk benefit of the annoyance of pads vs no pads... (non-sarcastically) by all means, feel free to not wear pads, or a helmet or even wear flip flops on your bike! I authentically support your choice as long as you KNOW the risks. The problem with this video is that you are 100% wrong about the risks of not wearing pads.

6. Finally, you mention "We all have our own equations for balancing comfort v. practicality v. safety, which is why I made a point of not telling people to take the armour out of their jackets (twice!)". Here you are being disingenuous, you clearly implied that people should take out their pads. You put the word "USELESS" in your thumbnail - cmon man!