Why is it not compulsory to wear full leather protection while riding?

[DanF]

There's so many of these types of posts on enthusiast forums though. Most of the people here will be wearing decent levels of protection for the journey they are doing, the people who wear suits and flip-flops probably aren't on a geeky enthusiast forum reading this.

It's the same with the cycle hate posts in the car bit, most enthusiast cyclists know what they are doing and don't really cause an issue.

If you are talking about protecting idiots from themselves then there are so many other ways to do this more worthwhile than dealing with motorbikers. There's not that many of us compared to other groups and sports

 

[Freefaller]

My point is purely about the amount of personal risk you are prepared to take in life. It's a sliding scale, ranging from Low to high. Road Racers accept a huge level of risk. Yes, they wear all the proactive clothing they can, but if they crash at 150mph it's a higher risk of serious injury/death than the person wearing jeans at 50mph.

Rough sliding scale, lowest risk first:

People who won't ride a bike and stick to a car
people who ride a bike with every piece of protective and preventative clothing all the time (think IAM rider in hi-viz)
People who ride in full leathers and airbag
People who ride in full leathers <-----Lots of people in the thread are here
People who ride in textiles
People who ride in jeans and leather jacket <----- I am here (sometimes)
People who ride horses
People who ride an T shirt and shorts
People who compete in road racing
People who ride too fast on the road (in any clothing) <---- suspect from the crash thread lots of people are here

There are hundreds of permutations, but my point is you can't dictate where the correct level is in general, only for yourself, otherwise why are you correct and not the person who drives a car?

Yes it is down to personal choice...

but the facts are, you are much less likely to be seriously injured with decent protection, for whatever reason you have an off, be it at 10mph or 100mph.

It doesn't take a person of much intelligence to work out why it is better to ride protected.

I know it's a person's choice, but people are stupid - whilst I'm not suggesting we force things on people, and most in here are clever enough to take the risk they chose to - but why take that chance?

I'm a thrill seeker, I've done over 500 skydives, but I've always jumped with a spare parachute, despite never needing it, because jumping without one is daft.

I guess it depends how much you value your life

 

[Sagalout]

Do you ride with an airbag? If not can you explain why?

 

[4T5]

No way would I have walked away from my accident if I'd been in jeans & a street jacket. Same with my face, It took a knock on the inside of my helmet but if I'd had an open faced one on they would still be rebuilding my jaw instead of sorting out my teeth.



@Freefaller - You've just got married to a lovely lady, You are bang into your personal fitness & you have a high paid job, If I saw you on a bike without Full gear on I'd have to Arrest you & send you to a jail for some Man sex.

 

[DanF]

Yes it is down to personal choice...

but the facts are, you are much less likely to be seriously injured with decent protection, for whatever reason you have an off, be it at 10mph or 100mph.

It doesn't take a person of much intelligence to work out why it is better to ride protected.

I know it's a person's choice, but people are stupid - whilst I'm not suggesting we force things on people, and most in here are clever enough to take the risk they chose to - but why take that chance?

I'm a thrill seeker, I've done over 500 skydives, but I've always jumped with a spare parachute, despite never needing it, because jumping without one is daft.

I guess it depends how much you value your life

So if you don't want to make it law and you realise most of us on here wear decent levels of protection what exactly is this post for?

 

[wazza300]

it just boils down to common sense really

ride naked if you like but expect to be ground to a pulp if you come off,the risks are there like with every other form of transport

EDIT: how weird would that feel riding naked wind through the crown jewels

 

[ttaskmaster]

Protective gear should be mandatory, Perhaps not leathers but textiles at the very least.

I think you are thinking leather is massively better than textile when in reality the difference isn't massive.

Armour is armour and does its job where relevant, ie the joints.
In general, it's the sliding damage that's more common.

There's a website somewhere (one of the MAG ones probably has it) that shows how long different materials last when sliding at set speeds.
3-ply demin wears right through in under a second.
Kevlar holds up pretty well, but IIRC most types go in under 12 seconds.
1.3mm leather took 55 seconds in the tests.
Textile varies, although most is gone in under 5, although a lot of it actually melts away due to the friction heat.

There's a reason racing suits are still leather and it's the same reason I insist on thick, heavy leather for myself.

Do you ride with an airbag? If not can you explain why?

If you can find one in any of the bike shops within 100 miles of my location, I will be quite shocked.
That's why.
AFAIK, they're not even available yet...

EDIT: how weird would that feel riding naked wind through the crown jewels

It feels very weird, I promise you...

 

[growse]

I could not give a crap about them, If they want to spread themselves all over the road then fair play to them. I am trying to protect the innocent bystanders who have to see this, The nurses/doctors/Ambulance techs and police who have to deal with it and the cost on the NHS it creates by having to deal with this.

What evidence is there that unkittted riders have a higher cost on the NHS than kitted ones? If anything, a dead person puts less resource strain on the NHS than a living, broken one.

I get the emotional cost to bystanders / police etc. But I'm nowhere near convinced that the size of that cost justifies a law, which would probably be badly worded and extremely difficult and costly to enforce.

 

[Freefaller]

Do you ride with an airbag? If not can you explain why?

I don't ride at the moment, and if they were widely available then I'd consider it yes. Fortunately the time I was knocked off my bike I wasn't going that fast - an airbag wouldn't have been needed, having low sided round a track at 100mph, the more protection I could have had the better - I was sore and badly bruised for weeks and still had nasty grazes even through leather.

@Freefaller - You've just got married to a lovely lady, You are bang into your personal fitness & you have a high paid job, If I saw you on a bike without Full gear on I'd have to Arrest you & send you to a jail for some Man sex.

haha! <3

So if you don't want to make it law and you realise most of us on here wear decent levels of protection what exactly is this post for?

Discussion. Got a problem with that?

 

[DanF]

Discussion. Got a problem with that?

Just seems a bit weird and pointless.

TLDR Freefaller has some friends who crashed with bad clothing on, makes thread about how everyone should now wear clothing on a forum where everyone wears pretty good clothing. the end

 

[Woogie]

What evidence is there that unkittted riders have a higher cost on the NHS than kitted ones? If anything, a dead person puts less resource strain on the NHS than a living, broken one.

I get the emotional cost to bystanders / police etc. But I'm nowhere near convinced that the size of that cost justifies a law, which would probably be badly worded and extremely difficult and costly to enforce.

I do no have any written evidence but then I have not looked but lets look at my own accident last April.

I came off at sub 30 and was wearing full textiles, gloves, boots, back protector and I fractured my wrist, forearm and shoulder and all of that was only because I put my hand out if I didn't I would have walked away with minor bruising at worst.

I had an ambulance take me to the hospital, several xrays, a blood test, a urine sample taken and a cast put on as well as morphine for the pain.

If I was wearing no gear I would have needed more than this due to the road rash alone.

I understand it being difficult to justify and I do not know your personal circumstances with regards to gf/wife/kids/parents etc but I know the effect it would have on my Fiancé and parents if I were to die or be essentially crippled due to a lack of motorbiking gear. I can only begin to comprehend how I would feel if my fiancé died and that is not something I ever want to have to think about.

Just seems a bit weird and pointless.

TLDR Freefaller has some friends who crashed with bad clothing on, makes thread about how everyone should now wear clothing on a forum where everyone wears pretty good clothing. the end

Is discussion not what forums are for? I fail to see the point you are trying to make here. Freefaller came into a specific forum with a specific question to ask his target audience what they think? Its not like this is one of the bizarre threads that appear in GD nearly daily

 

[Freefaller]

Just seems a bit weird and pointless.

TLDR Freefaller has some friends who crashed with bad clothing on, makes thread about how everyone should now wear clothing on a forum where everyone wears pretty good clothing. the end

Please grow up before posting again.

I can point you towards the definition of discussion if you want? Or perhaps, you just want me to agree with you and not bother having a discussion?

Whilst I don't post in this particular sub forum as much as I used to (owing to not having a bike at the moment) it's still something I'm passionate about (bikes), and I read pretty much all the threads in here.

A thread on protective clothing came up which triggered my interest, I'm replying to it.

If you find that too hard for your little mind to grasp then I think it best to just leave it at that if you're not able to join in on the discussion.

/the end.

 

[Sagalout]

If you can find one in any of the bike shops within 100 miles of my location, I will be quite shocked.
That's why.
AFAIK, they're not even available yet...

Plenty from the main brands like Aplinestars and Dainese:

http://www.motardinn.com/motorcycle...6&country=uk&gclid=CO355KS3vb8CFdPLtAodbCUAuw

http://www.sportsbikeshop.co.uk/motorcycle_parts/content_prod/93450

 

[growse]

I do no have any written evidence but then I have not looked but lets look at my own accident last April.

I came off at sub 30 and was wearing full textiles, gloves, boots, back protector and I fractured my wrist, forearm and shoulder and all of that was only because I put my hand out if I didn't I would have walked away with minor bruising at worst.

I had an ambulance take me to the hospital, several xrays, a blood test, a urine sample taken and a cast put on as well as morphine for the pain.

If I was wearing no gear I would have needed more than this due to the road rash alone.

I understand it being difficult to justify and I do not know your personal circumstances with regards to gf/wife/kids/parents etc but I know the effect it would have on my Fiancé and parents if I were to die or be essentially crippled due to a lack of motorbiking gear. I can only begin to comprehend how I would feel if my fiancé died and that is not something I ever want to have to think about.

And all of that is a perfectly good reason why you may choose to protect yourself. But none of that justifies a law. Bear in mind that a law costs a lot of resources to enforce, we need to make sure that the benefit outweighs the cost of it.

Personally, I'd rather the police concentrated on bad driving rather than trying to work out whether the guy on the moped trundling past is wearing government-approved boots.

 

[Freefaller]

as part of the CBT though they should show people the dangers of not wearing protective clothing, then if they choose not to they only have themselves to blame.

 

[DanF]

Please grow up before posting again.

lol woops, I thought you where the original poster. ah well

 

[.one.]

Please grow up before posting again.


If you find that too hard for your little mind to grasp then I think it best to just leave it at that if you're not able to join in on the discussion.

/the end.

This the first time I have ever read a thread in the bikers forum with name calling I am rather shocked.

 

[ttaskmaster]

as part of the CBT though they should show people the dangers of not wearing protective clothing, then if they choose not to they only have themselves to blame.

They do.... or at least, they did on both my CBT and DAS!

Plenty from the main brands like Aplinestars and Dainese:

HOW MUCH???????!!!!!!!!!
We could almost buy our own ship for that!!

OK, so that's a mere two options, one of which costs more than double what my bike did and really isn't suited to general daily life around a bike. Hell, for that money, I might as well get a flippin' car...!
Seriously, my current kit is all decent solid brands with high safety ratings, all for less than £200 including lid.

You make this kit actual law, the price will double and bikes will become a rich-only pursuit. While that may please a few angry drivers, you really don't want to force the likes of me into a cage given the type of bullying idiots out there on the road...

 

[DanF]

And all of that is a perfectly good reason why you may choose to protect yourself. But none of that justifies a law. Bear in mind that a law costs a lot of resources to enforce, we need to make sure that the benefit outweighs the cost of it.

Personally, I'd rather the police concentrated on bad driving rather than trying to work out whether the guy on the moped trundling past is wearing government-approved boots.

They already can't enforce noisy exhausts or very dark tint visors. One on other clothing would be the same. Well it'd give them another excuse to stop certain types of people I guess.

 

[Freefaller]

lol woops, I thought you where the original poster. ah well

No worries

This the first time I have ever read a thread in the bikers forum with name calling I am rather shocked.

It's ok DanF made a mistake.

They do.... or at least, they did on both my CBT and DAS!

I didn't get it at mine - good to hear they do that