Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Why I stopped wearing motorcycle body armor?
- Thread starter klaviator
- Start date
- Joined
- Jan 20, 2022
- Member Number
- 3
- Posts
- 962
Eh, I can see protection from dragging along the pavement being more important than smacking a limb. Riding along those wired barriers along the side of the road, I can't see how knee pads would help me through a cheese grader.
Trails and stuff I'd wear the pads. /shrug
Trails and stuff I'd wear the pads. /shrug
Expat47
Well-known member
When I got rear-ended last year my back took the brunt of the blow through the top box and into her fender but I ended up with nothing more than a cracked clavicle. But that old jacket had the hard armor not the rubber jobs these new ones are sporting.
The guy makes sense but I'll keep my pads all the same.
The guy makes sense but I'll keep my pads all the same.
FLrider
Well-known member
I just got a new suit with level II armor and I'll keep it thank you very much...
Me thinks it is a lot better to have something then nothing at all.. My 0.02 its..YMMV
Nice April 1 release btw...
Me thinks it is a lot better to have something then nothing at all.. My 0.02 its..YMMV
Nice April 1 release btw...
psykown
Well-known member
For smaller accidents its made the difference between riding home sore and riding home one arm hurting so bad I can't use sore. I do find it way more useful offroading and dualsporting over street riding though
Gear in general is mostly only useful for abrasion resistance. We'd need to wear an exo-skeketon/roll cage to really walk away from heavy impacts, but we all know that. That doesn't mean that armor is useful. This is all common sense that we already know. None of us need some romantic video to tell us this. Obviously, the addition of armor can only help, and it seriously strengthens areas abrasion happens. It's foolish to say it's not useful.
When Ryan first started his channel and was doing gear reviews it was really helpful. Now that's he's a "content creator" he's obviously feeling the burden to pump out content on a regular basis. Engagement drives YouTube stats (money) and getting people bickering in the comment section is a gold mine for engagement.
Lots of Ryan's recent videos completely contradict his earlier videos on "how you're motorcycling wrong". Meaning you can't trust that even he believes himself. He intentionally says controversial things nowadays just to drive engagement. It's stupid, unoriginal and exhausting. His fanbase is disturbingly cult like and they hang on every word he says. The fact that's he's suggesting ( or openly proclaiming it in the video title) that armor is useless is not only a cheap shot to drive engagement, is fucking irresponsible when you know that you've got lots of young impressionable riders idolizing you.
He should be called out, but his fanbois will have none of that. I've seen arguments in his comment sections and his followers will go to war for him. Their allegiance is disturbing and his channel is cheap click bait, even if it is highly produced.
When Ryan first started his channel and was doing gear reviews it was really helpful. Now that's he's a "content creator" he's obviously feeling the burden to pump out content on a regular basis. Engagement drives YouTube stats (money) and getting people bickering in the comment section is a gold mine for engagement.
Lots of Ryan's recent videos completely contradict his earlier videos on "how you're motorcycling wrong". Meaning you can't trust that even he believes himself. He intentionally says controversial things nowadays just to drive engagement. It's stupid, unoriginal and exhausting. His fanbase is disturbingly cult like and they hang on every word he says. The fact that's he's suggesting ( or openly proclaiming it in the video title) that armor is useless is not only a cheap shot to drive engagement, is fucking irresponsible when you know that you've got lots of young impressionable riders idolizing you.
He should be called out, but his fanbois will have none of that. I've seen arguments in his comment sections and his followers will go to war for him. Their allegiance is disturbing and his channel is cheap click bait, even if it is highly produced.
NotadenBennettii
Do Big Things!
Wow, LOL, upset you didn't he?
If you believe his videos are really that bad why do you even watch them?
Did you notice the first and last things he said in that video?
The first few seconds.
The last 20 or so seconds.
Just for the record I'm not one of his fanboys, I'm not even subscribed to his channel.
Why can't people be left to make up their own minds on a subject without someone always wanting to call the creators out as 'fucking irresponsible' just because that someone doesn't like what the creator says?
FLrider
Well-known member
Sadly the Utoob clickbait titles are pervasive with a lot of channels and frankly wearing me thin. I followed several sailing channels who went that way and I unsubscribed from them as well as other channels I no longer watch. No time for bs.
Soggy Biscuit
Well-known member
A solid chunk of the moto content creators don't really ride as much as they portray. They're also unhelpful when asked or inquired about help regarding bike maintenance. The only ones who ride as much as they portray seem to be Doodle and Jerry Palladino. Jerry emailed numerous moto content creators for a course challenge. Most ignored the emails. Only a few answered the call. I've asked a couple of PA based ones for some basic help and even offered to pay for the trip out, and all I got were crickets or a condescending email right back.
YT has some good stuff but I mostly listen to music on the platform. Majority of the content creators aren't what they claim to be.
Point.
Counterpoint.Wow, LOL, upset you didn't he?
If you believe his videos are really that bad why do you even watch them?
Did you notice the first and last things he said in that video?
The first few seconds.
The last 20 or so seconds.
Just for the record I'm not one of his fanboys, I'm not even subscribed to his channel.
Why can't people be left to make up their own minds on a subject without someone always wanting to call the creators out as 'fucking irresponsible' just because that someone doesn't like what the creator says?
The underlying problem is the way Ryan presented his argument. You do what you want, but here are all the reasons I'm right - isn't remotely balanced. While he said you should decide for yourself, he spent the majority of the video making his case to ditch armor inserts. For good or bad, Ryan's opinion carries weight and he knows it. I agree that he was irresponsible by pretending to offer an unbiased opinion, and he could've done so much better if his goal was to inform.
A more balanced approach would've been to have someone represent the counter argument for inserts, noting problems with drawing some conclusions from the cited studies, along with stressing the benefits offered by inserts (abrasion & thermal protection, protection from lesser impacts, improved burst protection). The clickbait title could've still been used, but the content would've presented a better overview of the pros & cons and still churned up engagement - though admittedly not as much.
I don't know Ryan. I hope he's struggling with the ethics involved with videos like this one. He's smart, entertaining, and has often claimed to care about motorcycling. I don't doubt that he cares about motorcyclists, but this video was disappointing. With years of well produced, entertaining videos and nearly two million YT subscribers, I think he can afford to dial back the engagement and put a little more effort into providing value.
Updated after mulling it over more.
Last edited:
This was posted in the YT comments. I'll put it here since it addresses the content of the video and could easily disappear again. Other than minor formatting changes, this is a direct quote of the comment. Roy had a few problems with Ryan's video. 
PLEASE NOTE: I'm having to publish this comment again as this channel deleted it earlier as my comment calls out the irresponsible rhetoric of this video (my comment had more than 1,000 likes in a couple of hours & replies from fellow motorcyclists).
This is Roy, owner of the review website Motorcycle Gear Hub; I have reviewed all the best motorcycle armor in the industry for years on my website, even armor that's only available to professional riders. I'm saying this so that anyone reading my comment can first know a bit about my background.
This entire video is a mix of cherry-picking data, misinterpreting the data, only reading the abstract of a research paper (either because Ryan has no access to journals or because he's an amateur trying to look scientific), taking what PPE researchers say out of context, and good old clickbait for views. The clickbait preview picture of this video is also doing more harm than good, especially for riders who don't know any better regarding motorcycle armor.
I'm also in constant contact with Paul Varnsverry (whom Ryan has conveniently taken his words out of context), who's the go-to guy for PPE along with Dr. Christopher Hurren of MotoCAP and a very-small number of PPE professionals/researchers.
Since this video is simply an exercise in click-bait for views and I don't have all the time in the world to debunk every incorrect point/half truth in this video, here's the reality of motorcycle armor:
1) Limb armor is designed to protect the joint, which is surrounded by soft tissue and which A) Is of critical importance to also protect and B) allows the bone section of the joint to withstand higher impact forces by distributing the force to the surrounding soft tissue. Ergo, the claim about motorcycle armor not preventing bone fractures is only partially true and will depend upon where the impact is along the bone's axis and which specific bone. Even the original research regarding fractures was not final on its conclusion (Ryan would know this if he read the paper and not the abstract as I'm guessing he did).
2) While limb armor may not prevent bone fractures, it will dampen the transmitted force and thus lead to a less-severe fracture all things equal. This point flew over Ryan's head as he skews and cherry picks his "research". In fact, the whole point of motorcycle armor is to attenuate impact energy, not to spare you from a traumatic amputation or compound fracture if you slam a lamp post at 80mph.
3) There's limb armor nowadays that approaches 10kn (and lower) of transmitted residual force to the EN 1621-1:2012 testing. And that's just talking of limb armor for the elbows, knees, shoulders and hips. I have reviewed all these highly impact-absorbing armored products, which include but are not limited to:
There are more, and I have reviewed them all on my website, including the listed ones above. I also have full access to custom-made protectors designed for MotoGP riders. Any of the above-listed limb protectors will actually do something in a crash and attenuate impact forces to a useful degree.
4) Yes, impact protectors also served as abrasion-resistant padding. This is something that we have known for years. Nothing new about this.
5) Whenever possible, choose protectors with a large surface area. However, it's imperative that such protectors are CE-certified as Type B (if limb protectors) as there are a number of large protectors that, in reality, only offer impact attenuation to a reduced zone of their chassis (i.e. Type A protectors). Dainese's composite CE Level 1 protectors in their low-priced garments are an example of this. If choosing a back protector, go with an FB certification instead of a CB certification.
6) There's plenty of low-quality protectors in the market, including those sold on Amazon with fake certifications. Do not buy protectors from fly-by-night brands on Amazon or Ebay.
7) There's a trend for very-slim and lesser-protective protectors. This is because riders are demanding this, so brands act accordingly. What I can say, as someone who owns by now more than 160 motorcycle protectors of all types, is that there's highly-protective motorcycle armor out there that's not only useful to riders in the event of a crash but that's also comfortable, ventilated and ergonomic. Of course, none of the above matters if a rider's garments don't fit snug enough to ensure the proper positioning of the protectors, but that's another topic altogether.
Overall, folks, keep wearing your motorcycle armor (and an airbag if your budget allows for it), and fit high-quality CE Level 2 protective armor to your garments if possible. They will make a difference if and when you go down.
UPDATE: since my comment has blown up with people liking it and it's now very visible to other riders in the commenting section, I'm posting below the direct commentary from researcher Liz de Rome regarding the intentional cherry-picking and misinterpreting from Ryan F9 of her research. This commentary from Liz de Rome was posted in another comment from Dr. Christopher Hurren, but it is not as visible, so I am including it now in my comment so as to give Liz de Rome's important commentary more visibility and, once more, prove how Ryan F9 is simply cherry-picking data (and not purposely not reading the research correctly) so that he can construct his misleading and clickbait rhetoric of this irresponsible video from FortNine:
Commentary from Liz de Rome regarding her quoted research by Ryan F9:
"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."
@MotorcycleGearHub
21 hours ago (edited)PLEASE NOTE: I'm having to publish this comment again as this channel deleted it earlier as my comment calls out the irresponsible rhetoric of this video (my comment had more than 1,000 likes in a couple of hours & replies from fellow motorcyclists).
This is Roy, owner of the review website Motorcycle Gear Hub; I have reviewed all the best motorcycle armor in the industry for years on my website, even armor that's only available to professional riders. I'm saying this so that anyone reading my comment can first know a bit about my background.
This entire video is a mix of cherry-picking data, misinterpreting the data, only reading the abstract of a research paper (either because Ryan has no access to journals or because he's an amateur trying to look scientific), taking what PPE researchers say out of context, and good old clickbait for views. The clickbait preview picture of this video is also doing more harm than good, especially for riders who don't know any better regarding motorcycle armor.
I'm also in constant contact with Paul Varnsverry (whom Ryan has conveniently taken his words out of context), who's the go-to guy for PPE along with Dr. Christopher Hurren of MotoCAP and a very-small number of PPE professionals/researchers.
Since this video is simply an exercise in click-bait for views and I don't have all the time in the world to debunk every incorrect point/half truth in this video, here's the reality of motorcycle armor:
1) Limb armor is designed to protect the joint, which is surrounded by soft tissue and which A) Is of critical importance to also protect and B) allows the bone section of the joint to withstand higher impact forces by distributing the force to the surrounding soft tissue. Ergo, the claim about motorcycle armor not preventing bone fractures is only partially true and will depend upon where the impact is along the bone's axis and which specific bone. Even the original research regarding fractures was not final on its conclusion (Ryan would know this if he read the paper and not the abstract as I'm guessing he did).
2) While limb armor may not prevent bone fractures, it will dampen the transmitted force and thus lead to a less-severe fracture all things equal. This point flew over Ryan's head as he skews and cherry picks his "research". In fact, the whole point of motorcycle armor is to attenuate impact energy, not to spare you from a traumatic amputation or compound fracture if you slam a lamp post at 80mph.
3) There's limb armor nowadays that approaches 10kn (and lower) of transmitted residual force to the EN 1621-1:2012 testing. And that's just talking of limb armor for the elbows, knees, shoulders and hips. I have reviewed all these highly impact-absorbing armored products, which include but are not limited to:
- SAS-TEC EVO protectors
- SAS-TEC SC-1/42 Prestige protectors
- D3O LP2 Pro (both standard and racing, both which I've too reviewed)
- Powertector CE Level 2 protectors (used by RST among others)
- Several limb protectors made by Betac* Alpinestars' Nucleon Flex Pro protectors (which MotoCAP shows to score under a mean 10kn, even though Alpinestars lists them at 14-16kn mean)
- The high-end CE Level 2 protectors from Dainese implemented in racing suits and some high-end textile garments (which are extremely basic as they are sandwiched protectors).
- Forcefield Isolator 2 protectors
There are more, and I have reviewed them all on my website, including the listed ones above. I also have full access to custom-made protectors designed for MotoGP riders. Any of the above-listed limb protectors will actually do something in a crash and attenuate impact forces to a useful degree.
4) Yes, impact protectors also served as abrasion-resistant padding. This is something that we have known for years. Nothing new about this.
5) Whenever possible, choose protectors with a large surface area. However, it's imperative that such protectors are CE-certified as Type B (if limb protectors) as there are a number of large protectors that, in reality, only offer impact attenuation to a reduced zone of their chassis (i.e. Type A protectors). Dainese's composite CE Level 1 protectors in their low-priced garments are an example of this. If choosing a back protector, go with an FB certification instead of a CB certification.
6) There's plenty of low-quality protectors in the market, including those sold on Amazon with fake certifications. Do not buy protectors from fly-by-night brands on Amazon or Ebay.
7) There's a trend for very-slim and lesser-protective protectors. This is because riders are demanding this, so brands act accordingly. What I can say, as someone who owns by now more than 160 motorcycle protectors of all types, is that there's highly-protective motorcycle armor out there that's not only useful to riders in the event of a crash but that's also comfortable, ventilated and ergonomic. Of course, none of the above matters if a rider's garments don't fit snug enough to ensure the proper positioning of the protectors, but that's another topic altogether.
Overall, folks, keep wearing your motorcycle armor (and an airbag if your budget allows for it), and fit high-quality CE Level 2 protective armor to your garments if possible. They will make a difference if and when you go down.
UPDATE: since my comment has blown up with people liking it and it's now very visible to other riders in the commenting section, I'm posting below the direct commentary from researcher Liz de Rome regarding the intentional cherry-picking and misinterpreting from Ryan F9 of her research. This commentary from Liz de Rome was posted in another comment from Dr. Christopher Hurren, but it is not as visible, so I am including it now in my comment so as to give Liz de Rome's important commentary more visibility and, once more, prove how Ryan F9 is simply cherry-picking data (and not purposely not reading the research correctly) so that he can construct his misleading and clickbait rhetoric of this irresponsible video from FortNine:
Commentary from Liz de Rome regarding her quoted research by Ryan F9:
"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."
Ryan & Roy seem like a good pair to discuss the topic further in a follow-up video.
I'd also like to see FortNine delve into the way PPE standards appear to be manipulated by manufacturers. One aspect that bothers me is that test results are presented as Go/No Go to get a certification label. I'd like to know the actual results so I can see how items compare, and by how much they exceed the standard.
I'd also like to see FortNine delve into the way PPE standards appear to be manipulated by manufacturers. One aspect that bothers me is that test results are presented as Go/No Go to get a certification label. I'd like to know the actual results so I can see how items compare, and by how much they exceed the standard.
Not upset, just calling a spade a spade.Wow, LOL, upset you didn't he?
If you believe his videos are really that bad why do you even watch them?
"If you don't like it, leave" is a very fanboy response.
Go with the narrative or go away. Discussion not welcome.
Here I thought he was calling out the lower priced garment companies to do better with their armor. I see in some of my gear some pretty cheesy pads. If I compare them to the Aerostich pads they are about 1/3 the pad and coverage.
Have to say I like the small pads in the mesh gear but I understand they are not the same.
I only have reports from other riders that have fallen down in the Stich gear and not that many of them to base my opinion.
I have to think F9 was saying they should do better. But we do love cheap Chinese stuff...
Have to say I like the small pads in the mesh gear but I understand they are not the same.
I only have reports from other riders that have fallen down in the Stich gear and not that many of them to base my opinion.
I have to think F9 was saying they should do better. But we do love cheap Chinese stuff...
He did that, too.
I'm with him on his criticism of the creation and use of standards. Iirc, he's made similar comments over the years. Decoupling manufacturers from the creation of standards seems like a good place to start.
Ryan stepped in it with his questionable logic. Even if current armor & standards aren't as good as they should be, that doesn't mean they're useless.
Madmx
Well-known member
I think safety is a quantum discussion.
And it never hurts to ride slower. I won't watch the video..maybe. Because there might be an underlying tone of ride smarter
And it never hurts to ride slower. I won't watch the video..maybe. Because there might be an underlying tone of ride smarter
NotadenBennettii
Do Big Things!
Your post gives the impression you were upset with what you viewed.
My response is just common sense, Homer explains
Discussion is welcome, we are discussing it aren't we?