Abrasion resistance

[Horse]

Although 240 is a good sample, Iwas thinking of a much wider scope taking the search aspects further, tying in crash investigation (so identifying actual impact speeds and forces), along with review of gear worn and damage suffered.

[The Spin Doctor]

Actually I meant that further, potentially effective, development may be possible.

I've never said it wouldn't. Paul Varnsverry on Elevenses some weeks back made that very point. I believe Liz de Rome also came to that conclusion based on the ineffectiveness of body armour at preventing anything other than abrasion injury in her post-crash injury study. Although it was a few years ago, standards haven't changed.

However, it would require extensive investigation of crash outcomes (injuries) and causes ('mechanism of injury'), then design and implementation of accurate testing of prototypes against accurate data for impact forces likely to be sustained in real-world crashes.

In other words, it probably won't happen, particularly for road riders.

But isn't the the work that de Rome has actually done?

[Horse]

That included review of the 2004 'MAIDS' report. I have no idea how much biomechanical information that report included.

Edit: I suppose that I'm thinking of something along the lines of what UCL are doing for head/neck injury, but for the spine. Looking at injury mechanisms, injuries sustained, then developing test rigs.

[Hot_Air]

But isn't the the work that de Rome has actually done?

Yes, up to a point. But (hidden behind the paywall) the more recent work by Oscar Ballester et al was considerably more detailed, and answers many of Horse's questions. Albeit it's only regarding trunk injuries.

Why hasn't anyone (except MotoCAP) built on the work at Cambridge University by Ron Woods? Years ago, he had worked out the higher levels of performance that would make a difference:

> CE standards allow a pass at 50 joules.
> High Performance is awarded at 75 joules
> Ultra High Performance at 85 joules
> Extreme Performance at 90 joules

[Horse]

Yes, up to a point. But (hidden behind the paywall) the more recent work by Oscar Ballester et al was considerably more detailed, and answers many of Horse's questions. Albeit it's only regarding trunk injuries.

Why hasn't anyone (except MotoCAP) built on the work at Cambridge University by Ron Woods? Years ago, he had worked out the higher levels of performance that would make a difference.

To use Spin's phrasing, that brings us full circle

That's where real detail is needed. For example, if many spine injuries are actually via the shoulder, how much is too much impact force? Is enough reduction in force possible, or is 'anything better than nothing?'

A common (no, I don't know the stats ) injury is to push the shoulder backwards, breaking nerves to the arm (I know someone who suffered this). Heaven knows how much cushioning might be needed to stop that severe injury. Again, is it 'anything better than nothing?'

There's no real answer to this and I don't know whether there's enough medical/injury force information to support subsequent testing.

[Hot_Air]

Is enough reduction in force possible, or is 'anything better than nothing?'

I reckon Dainese and Alpinestars are analysing this detail for MotoGP crashes. Yes, I know, they’re not the same as road crashes. But it’s a start.

Did you see Alpinestars’ data from the Márquez crash where he landed on his shoulder with a 26G impact?

https://www.motogp.com/en/news/2019/10/ ... ash/312639

[The Spin Doctor]

Why hasn't anyone (except MotoCAP) built on the work at Cambridge University by Ron Woods?

Paul Varnsverry has carried his work forward.

As he hinted in his interview, it's the manufacturers trying to push back.

[The Spin Doctor]

I reckon Dainese and Alpinestars are analysing this detail for MotoGP crashes. Yes, I know, they’re not the same as road crashes. But it’s a start.

And guess who worked tirelessly to persuade the EU that the previous CE standards on bike PPE were too tough?

You guessed.

What they do on the track is one thing. What they will sell as 'track-proven' for the road will be completely different.

[Mascagman]

Potential to bring back 13595 as a British standard instead and reintroduce level 3 performance is in the works.

[Hot_Air]

Potential to bring back 13595 as a British standard instead and reintroduce level 3 performance is in the works.

Excellent!

As a regular rider – whose primary interest is buying kit that will keep me safe – I’m delighted by this news. It will help many a UK rider (and doubtless benefit British companies from the likes of Hideout to armour manufacturers).

[Horse]

As a regular rider – whose primary interest is buying kit that will keep me safe

Your primary interest is secondary safety? I somehow doubt that

Although there's not a direct link between cost and performance ("$10 head" etc.), the Hideout interview that Spin broadcast was interesting as it noted that, for example, if you want triple stitched seams then they will need 3x the time for construction of the item. Which makes it all the more astounding that Aldi sold a CE suit when other manufacturers seemingly CBA.

But it's all moot if you avoid crashing*. You could always follow Rollie Free's PPE guidance

* And, of course, weather protection, etc.

[Hot_Air]

My primary interest when buying bike clothing is safety. Otherwise, I might as well wear hiking gear for weather protection, etc.

Triple stitching, you say? Manufacturers should have been using it in high-risk areas all along. And it appears to bear little resemblance to retail prices: Dainese - not a cheap brand - only started using triple stitching in all high-risk areas when EN17092 arrived on scene. Yet cheaper brands had been using triple stitching appropriately for years.

But it's all moot if you avoid crashing*.

In case I make a human error, why not wear protective kit too? Yesterday I avoided a deer that thought it had right of way. What if I don’t avoid the next one? Oh deer! Then I’d have to rely on my PPE (and luck).

[Horse]

But it's all moot if you avoid crashing*.

In case I make a human error, why not wear protective kit too? Yesterday I avoided a deer that thought it had right of way. What if I don’t avoid the next one? Oh deer! Then I’d have to rely on my PPE (and luck).

So price is no object if you want best available protection?
Your choice of gear, if protection is primary, will be racing leathers first, then weather protection next?
Do you always wear a Leatt brace and airbag jacket?


My choices were made the other way around. I used a warm, dry, but vented (and removable thermal liner), one piece suit. The suit was armoured, with (IIRC) 1000D material on most vulnerable areas, 500D elsewhere, good stitching. A heated waistcoat for colder weather.

The suit was easy (2 minutes on or off) to put on over every day clothes, meaning that I was more likely to wear it than gear (particularly trousers) that required a full change. The only variation in my gear was to add thermals, different neck tubes, or change gloves (Held unlined or Halvarssons thermal/waterproof).
[To complete the set, BMW System lid & Daytona boots]


What gear do you wear? How did you choose? Do you have one 'level' of protection for all rides, or were you prepared to compromise- if so, how were those choices made?


Yes, you can't always choose your crash. I'm sure, if given the option, if we were told "today's the day you crash", we might make different choices when getting our gear on! [Instructor at Castle Coombe: "don't have anything in your pockets that you wouldn't want a surgeon to have to dig out"].

But most days we don't crash. In many crashes, just 'OK' gear is, well, OK.

But I'm not arguing that PPE standards shouldn't be improved where possible (and achievable) or that manufacturers should be more honest.

Edit: Although my suit was American, there's no reason why it shouldn't have incorporated better armour. And although CE is European, international suppliers are well aware of it. IIRC Motoport at one time used armour that, because of its design (larger, with 'softer' edges) wouldn't pass CE - but they believed that its larger coverage was a good compromise.

[Hot_Air]

What influences our perspectives? A couple of things have changed mine: I witnessed my riding buddy’s gear shred in a 30mph crash (luckily for him, I’d just done Biker Down training), and breeding grounds for pheasants and deer surround me.

Dress for the crash you expect? Animals are high on my crash list. A friend of mine was (legally) doing 60 mph when a deer hit him. He had a long slide and glide, but full leathers saved his derrière. Price always matters - I'm still waiting for that lottery win - but I'm in leathers for as much of the year as possible.

Do you always wear a Leatt brace and airbag jacket?

Yes. And so might you, if you’d had as many close encounters of the animal kind.

[Horse]

Do you always wear a Leatt brace and airbag jacket?

Yes. And so might you, if you’d had as many close encounters of the animal kind.

Well, I head,butted a small bird, which came off worst, and a no-score draw with a pheasant which bounced off the fairing before my shoulder. A few near misses with deer (there's a video screengrab on TRC of one).

So what's your daily gear choice?

One other thought, and back to primary safety: how do you adjust your riding to plan for deer and what is your pre-planned response if they appear, then if impact is certain?

[Hot_Air]

how do you adjust your riding to plan for deer

I might plan for the worst, but hope impact isn’t guaranteed!

* Information: What’s the time of day? If it’s dusk, I’ll minimise riding through forests (but I can’t always avoid it). And I'll be using my eyes to scan for Britain!
* Position: I’ll avoid an extreme nearside position for a right-hander if it puts me close to dense bushes etc.
* Speed: In a high-risk area, like a pheasant breeding ground or dense forest at dusk, I’ll slow down by about 20 mph.
* Gear: I always wear stylish gear
* Acceleration: I’ll nail the throttle to high tail it outta there on the back wheel.

My pre-planned response is braking to get the impact speed as close to zero as possible. But I'd very much welcome other ideas!

[The Spin Doctor]

My primary interest when buying bike clothing is safety. Otherwise, I might as well wear hiking gear for weather protection, etc.

NOW it makes sense when rephrased... but there are plenty of riders who WILL prioritise the purchase of kit over training. Just the other day got a reply from someone who's been hum'ing and haa'ing since last autumn: "sorry, won't be able to make the training this year now, just spent £500 on new boots and gloves". As I'm only charging a COVID-friendly £160 for a one-day course right now, you'd think that maybe he could have either trimmed his budget on new kit, or delayed the purchase a bit - after all, by his own admission, he "only rides when it's warm and the sun's shining" so those shiny new boots and gloves are going in the cupboard in about eight weeks.

Triple stitching, you say? Manufacturers should have been using it in high-risk areas all along. And it appears to bear little resemblance to retail prices: Dainese - not a cheap brand - only started using triple stitching in all high-risk areas when EN17092 arrived on scene. Yet cheaper brands had been using triple stitching appropriately for years.

I've seen the results of two low-speed crashes in top-of-the-range Dainese kit - one Max Biaggi replica suit, another a Scott Russell. Both suits burst seams open in low speed crashes. My buddy Keith crashed turning right at lights (I suspect petrol as he couldn't find anything on the surface by the time he'd recovered his wits enough to look) and a instructor buddy Ian swerved into a field avoiding a car backing out of a driveway from behind a hedge on a blind corner. Both crashes were probably sub 30 mph. The Scott Russell replica boots and gloves also failed.

You paid for the name, not the quality.

But it's all moot if you avoid crashing*.

In case I make a human error, why not wear protective kit too? Yesterday I avoided a deer that thought it had right of way. What if I don’t avoid the next one? Oh deer! Then I’d have to rely on my PPE (and luck).
[/quote]

But you can reduce the risks by getting some training in the first place. I know YOU have... but it's 'pour encourager les autres', innit??

[Horse]

how do you adjust your riding to plan for deer

* Information: What’s the time of day? If it’s dusk, I’ll minimise riding through forests (but I can’t always avoid it).
* Acceleration: I’ll nail the throttle to high tail it outta there on the back wheel.

My pre-planned response is braking to get the impact speed as close to zero as possible. But I'd very much welcome other ideas!

Couple of things that you might want to consider.
- Not just in woodland; I was doing a session over the downs, near the Ridgeway, one evening. Turned around 10 minutes later - half a dozen deer in the field alongside the road. Were they already in the hedges as we passed?
- Herd animals, a classic for 'where there's one there's another'. Just because one clears the road, doesn't mean more won't follow.
- Animals don't usually reverse, and even if they do, not briskly. Aim for the back end, if you're lucky then it will scarper and leave a space.
- What size is it, whether deer, dog, whatever? One suggestion I heard was that if impact is unavoidable, drop a gear and accelerate to give maximum fork travel. Might help absorb impact, possibly help clear a small animal. What deer do you have locally? Muntjac are diddy, Roe a bit bigger. Fallow are sheep on stilts. Good luck with a Red.

So, this stylish gear; why are you reluctant to explain your choices?

[Hot_Air]

Just the other day got a reply from someone who's been hum'ing and haa'ing since last autumn: "sorry, won't be able to make the training this year now, just spent £500 on new boots and gloves".

Someone who, in my opinion, made a daft decision. Unless he or she didn't have serviceable boots and gloves! But then I know training's saved my motorcycling bacon (more than once).

[Hot_Air]

So, this stylish gear ... ?

My mainstay is (perhaps) motorcycling’s most underrated gear: waterproof leathers. It’s my most versatile clothing, comfy over an incredible range of weather, and a brilliant bit of kit. I’ve got Held leather laminate: I’ve toured in summer (the leather’s fully perforated and treated with TFL Cool) around the Alps. Being a laminate, it sheds water. And with the right base layer, I’m warm in winter.

Nobody thinks to buy waterproof leather, so there’s always end-of-season-bargains. Mine were half-price. And they’ve lasted aeons: a little leather care gives a lot of longevity.

I don’t know if Held still makes ’em – now Held has Clip-In waterproofing for its leathers – but Halverssons makes the Atle jacket and Tengil trouser. Or, if you win the lottery, Rukka makes Coriace waterproof leathers.