Ryan F9 on body armour

[Rusty Nuts]

Interesting.

[The Doctor 46]

Very interesting. I took the amour out of my trousers years ago because it was so uncomfortable but left it in my jacket. It's reassuring to know that statistically I don't need it. Then I am a man who has ridden at speed in a pair of speedo's and a crash helmet. Thank you for the post. 

[Rookie]

I watched that just recently, I thought he made a very interesting point or two, it would be good to find someone with an opposing view. Just so I could draw my own conclusions.

[Rusty Nuts]

Interesting he says the industry endorsed the standard limit. No mention of who proposed it in the first place. Most of us won't be in the mindset of donning ous armour, believing ourselves invincible and riding accordingly but the theory of risk compensation suggests we might ride differently if clad in a mankini and flip flops. I'll keep my armour in, even if it only serves to make my shoulders appear broader or helps in a slide rather than an impact.

[Joe Rocket]

Yes, very interesting but then it only reminds me of how loose knee pads feel in jeans and elbow/shoulder pads feel in my jacket.

He brings up EU standards in the video about having to sell clothing here (France) with protection included. I bought a new jacket last November but it didn't come with a 'dorsal' back protector. Having more or less ended the year's riding then I thought it would be simple to add one later. Alas, as hinted throughout the video there is a whole new questionable market in protection technology and I only found a choice of two to fit my (common to France) marque jacket. Firstly the two ratings he mentioned and then the actual size to fit the back jacket 'pocket'.

A good heads up to need over benefit although going without those pads does give me a naked feeling....... No, no photos! 

[Brockett]

My accident when I went down the road at 60mph: gloves ripped but not right through, Textile trousers had ripped knees, the knee armour grazed but my knees were moslty OK. There is no way I will ride without knee and elbow armour, proper motorcycle gloves and boots. Yes they may not save me from all incidents but like my mate Pepper says "leather is expensive but it's cheaper than a skin graft."
The injury I suffered was when my hand became caught on the mirror stem and two layers of leather were not quite enough. I sudder to think what injuries I would have had without the clothing I was wearing.   

[nigel s]

Not looked at the vid,
But  I only wear leathers.With armour.
I have a Richa gortex jacket I got for downpour rides and every time I rode in it I felt exposed.
It lives on a hook in my hall now and if it starts to rain I stop and get my waterproofs out of my engine bar bags.
Might be fine,,,,,,,,,,,might not.
I was at my brothers bedside when they got the gravel out of his thigh after getting knocked off, with a toothbrush and no anesthetic due his allergies/fits.....not something I want to see again,
Also..leathers are quieter, they don't flap.
Touching my wooden desk........brrrh

[user650]

Another twist

[TLPower]

  you beat me to it Paul!

The Fortnine channel is going through a few changes, I usually agree with Ryan but I feel this video is just chasing views and comments.

[crump]

Interesting to watch both videos back to back. For me Ryan f9 is more sensationalist and a bit click baity while the Bennetts Social was more in depth and nuanced . I'll be keeping my protectors in as they offer some protection and I don't really notice them in everyday use.
to be honest I've not really researched it before but in my tiny brain I've always thought of the protection as being more for abrasion and only minimal impact protection anyway.

[2112]

Like most things in life people have different views on things. I can see both side of the coin with this one and it falls very much into the 'personal choice' category for me. I can however, see a future where ALL your bike kit will have to be CE approved and compulsory, not just a helmet. France have already gone for compulsory CE approved gloves and are looking at boots next. I wouldn't see it as an additional burden, mearly a chance to help people help themselves. Like those people who ride in shorts and a vest with flip flops on their feet & no gloves, personal choice... at the moment.

[purplebikeunicorn]

Realistically, even if it doesn't offer that much difference, it's still something that can be worn to mitigate some risk. Bang your knee on a door, bang your knee on same door with the pad in, guarantee you it'll hurt less. That, and the extra material being there when it's abrading on the tarmac, so some heat resistance too.

The problem is that any research done into this subject has always been on people involved in crashes with a massive amount of other variables, plus the reporting bias (I.e. what about those people who didn't get injured, because of the armour, not being reported in the numbers). So then you're stuck with laboratory data, and no really trustworthy "real world" data.

With good armour, like in my RST jacket/trousers and my jeans, you don't even notice they're there. I am very surprised that places are still selling "non CE" approved stuff too, the one mark of "this garment meets a minimum standard of X".