Why I always wear motorcycle armour (it's NOT useless) 

Just pasting in a great comment that was previously pinned from @jakeguymer-davies6427 "I'm a paramedic, I work in London and it seems the only bikers we need to treat are those not wearing proper gear- boots make a massive difference and pads are a must, at least for slower crashes. Yes you're dead after a certain speed regardless, but standard gear can mean the difference between walking away and spending the night in hospital. I'm travelling with my bike at the moment and hit a llama at 50mph- my Adventurespec gear with all the pads meant all i had was a grazed elbow and a limp after the bike landed on my boot. No way i am taking my armour out!"

Two words “Regulatory Capture”. We are purchasing equipment based on standards agreed by the manufacturers themselves and endorsed by the EU. Lest we all forget the level of protection these give were reduced last time around. Rather than demand increased levels of protection the manufacturers and the EU agreed on reduced levels. If you compare this approach to that adopted by Brian Sansom (proprietor BKS Leathers) namely protection to the Cambridge Standards you will find a manufacturer whose aim is to protect his customers to the highest levels. If you have an Aerostich suit you will find their armour is not EC marked, if you crash in their gear you will find that you it does works very well. Personal anecdotes only really help where one has identical experiences so I won’t tell you my crash stories. The point is that many manufacturers used to provide better protection working to higher standards, they colluded with the EU to reduce the levels of protection in their pursuit of profit. Your decision to wear armour or not is entirely yours- if you decide armour is a good idea then don’t believe all you read and hear, maybe make your own judgement, the much vaunted EU standards are there to protect but not maybe the people we thought.

@@bobklee2397 If 'regulatory capture' is the point some are taking from this, then it's perhaps worth pointing out that we've been pushing for optional higher safety levels for a long time (and no, it doesn't affect insurance)... After some brands opposed optional higher safety standards, we called them out on it. We launched the High Performance Awards to give those that want to give riders choice a chance to prove higher protection. We called out misinformation on riding jeans... there's a lot more too if you want to look into it. ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-n22vtWc8QRw.html ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-5QcWajVTfB4.html www.bennetts.co.uk/bikesocial/news-and-views/features/product/motorcycle-clothing-safety-ce-standards www.bennetts.co.uk/bikesocial/reviews/products/high-performance-safest-motorcycle-clothing

Once you buy into how sales works then the anything is better than nothing takes hold and your wallet is open season. MIPS helmets are sold in the same way, somehow your head impacting the ground at nearly 100 feet per second or even half of that is going to be better protected by a helmet that allows the shell to move some small fraction of distance because the remaining time of impact magically disappears. Part of learning is to be able to discern the intent of what someone else os trying to explain. In that F9( was pretty clear although eog gets in the way for many). He referred to impact, not abrasion other than to say armor did have some value in preventing abrasion. But lets be honest, there are different qualities of armor and most are just pads flopping around inside a pocket sewen into a jacket or pants right? How many of those armored items keep the pads where they can do any good? Few. So instead of listening to what F9 said lets all jump on the bandwagon of buy any armor because anything is better than nothing. Lets not advocate for better than what there is, lets instead sit around and figure out how to shoot down the very simple message that the standards used to sell armor are actually useless even if the armor is better than nothing. There s a difference between the standards being useless and the armor not being so. Its difficult to think critically instead of going for the controvesy and try to piggy-back on someone else's popularity as is being done in this video but enough people did seem to figure out what F9 was saying. The bottom line is that despite my not really being enamoured with F9's sharpie physics and many other out there ideas, he accomplished in that short video something you could never do, generate awareness among litterlly thousands and thousands of people who might complain about him but after a while think about the standards they so willingly accept as being more than something manufacturers and a few others dreamed up to sell armor.

And we need to remember that this is not the entirety of Ryan’s argument. In a previous video he showed stats about various types of injury and advocated for sensible use of protective equipment and the money spent on it. Good boots and good gloves with sliders on the heel of the hand along with a helmet and abrasive resistant clothing would statistically protect riders far better than the best armored one piece suit. This is another installment in his argument. The knee armor in my pants doesn’t stay in place and did not protect me in a previous crash. The rest of it did its job (maybe) but I wasn’t wearing good boots and my left ankle and foot were severely damaged.

Glad you're here to tell us! All the best, John

It's always the cars fault isn't it lol

I have a good friend who, years ago, ended up needing a hip replacement after a low-speed driveway tipover. He was in his 20's at the time. This is entirely anecdotal and assertive, of course, but I suspect that there are a lot of less-than-catastrophic accidents, esp. those that don't involve calling the authorities or paramedics, that don''t get reported, as they're less severe. It doesn't seem unreasonable to assume that some armor coverage would at the very least help lessen the severity of "abrasions, bruising, and lacerations."

​@@thirstybonsai1888obviously not always but 90% of the time things I've seen car drivers do while on a bike would definitely put you off

Same. I'll be keeping the armour. I've had accidents with and without armour. Armour saves a lot of pain. Especially since the clothing its in is certified to a standard. Bonus points because I get to keep my skin on also.

Thanks so much for this! All the best, John

This is another reason the test data is not a significant enough sample size. They aren't going to interview people who fell off bikes, got up and rode back home. They'll only look at data for people who are hospitalized or treated. Somewhat like a survivor bias (but the opposite case here). If you're in bad enough accident to get treatment/participate in the data collection, you're already in bad shape

If you wore airbags instead of pads there would be zero injury. That is really the gist of F9,s video, not squidding it!

I'll echo the sentiment about boots. I highsided in casual motorcycle trainers and smashed my foot up, and 9 months later I'm still not healed fully. Foot injuries are so complicated to fix, I would have much rather snapped my leg.

Good to hear from someone on the front line and a great job you all do. I often wear ankle High motorcycle boots not full hight, which have ankle protection and Z plate in the sole. Are the injuries you treat from riders wearing trainers or these type of foot protection? Cheers Matt

Not sure what you're talking about. This video hasn't provided _any_ evidence that armour is worth it. It's two people with a hunch that differs from Ryans.

The trouble with all this armour protection is it can and does give a false sense of security..invulnerability even...

this is the correct view point in my opinion. He never said it was completely useless, just that per the studies, it didnt prevent fractures.

@@mike_honcho_92 Which, when it's referred to as "impact protection" is quite important, and entirely the takeaway of his video. It's similar to calling something "stab-proof" when it offers very little puncture resistance, but does a good job mitigating slashes. "Yeah it doesn't do what the name implies, but it's still useful for other things."

I feel like F9 just started a conversation that needed to be addressed.

He complained that the manufactorers were too minimalisitisch in designing protectors… so he removes them. In my opinion that channel is looking for controversie, and losing credibility,

you're 100% right. Anyone that took it as him saying that you shouldn't wear pads completely missed the point..

It's odd that his takeaway from the research appeared to be that "these pads should be required to do more to be fully effective, so I'm removing them".

He stopped being factual some time ago.

Hes a tool making a video like that though!

Same, crashed once in a semi slow lowside, landed on my hip. If i hadnt worn pants with pads in the hip area i would have not walk away easily. Now i did with no issue at all except a minor bruise.

Exactly. ​@@JCintheBCC

This is an excellent point, and we should have mentioned it in the video, thanks!

When we were regularly riding 2 up on a loaded GS there were a number of occasions where we over balanced while parking or getting fuel or making a slow speed turn. Having armour is really important when you go to cushion your fall with your elbow/shoulder and fall on your hip. I have sometimes lost my balance when trying to swing my leg off the tall seat on my dirtbike and hit the ground-same story.

​@@bennettsbikesocial Aka survivor's bias? +1 I still take it from Ryan's usual shenanigans it must have been an April fool's awareness wake up call. Reverse psychology. And it worked in a cynical "bad news is good news" approach, didn't it? People began thinking: "NO WAY!" and that's good - raising attention. [Especially as he mentioned he does wear full armour offroad and on race tracks, and Helite's mech air vest on everyday riding, iirc?] ATTGAT: Mine will stay on. As a thin guy I wish I could afford better fitting stuff like Stadler or Schwabenleder than Hein Gericke's last sale offered. At least Held Kangaroo leather gloves, Alpine Stars Crossboots and Schuberth helmet have been my must have. An airbag vest is on my list, but €€€ plus yearly leasing rates for electronic features?! 👎 Come on folks at Dainese etc., who are you, Adobe?

Agree, when I first started riding, I was doing low speed drills in a paved parking lot. Lost my balance and went down with the bike. The first thing that hit the pavement was my elbow. I had an armored jacket on with elbow protection and I didn’t feel much of anything. If I would have not had that, I’m certain I would have broken my elbow.

Nothing wrong with your English, and I'll bet it's way better than my handling of whatever your native language is! Cheers, John

Each pad helps the surgeon to do less work. Good one!!!

@@Titan500J The amount of biker padding has to be adjusted antiproportinally to situation on the labour market of medical professionals. Should we ever encounter a situation of rising unemployment amongst medical professionals, wearing less armour would be strongly advised.

But is it enough? Do you have enough confidence in your gear that mitigates the risk of riding a motorcycle. A study in 2013 found jackets do not provide protection against spinal, abdominal, pelvic and other internal injuries.

If you want to be sure to stay in one piece, don't go riding. If you go riding, choose the best protection in your budget. For most people, that will certainly include armour.

​@@bcinspectorman motorcycle gear can't protect you from every type of injury, that's simply a fact, but it decreases the chance of sustaining injuries and that's the entire point. You can't make gear that protects you from everything because there's too many variables, but the way they make gear is by protecting parts that are the most susceptible to injuries in an accident and try to keep you as mobile as possible because being able to move around on a motorcycle is quite crucial. If you wanna be 99% safe on the road you'll need a fully caged car with bucket seats, harnesses, hans device etc and even then with some bad luck you could still end up severely injured or worse. Just do your best to keep yourself safe and that's all you can do

@@bcinspectorman man, almost everything you mentioned is not covered by the armor on a typical jacket, with the exception of the spine, but most spine injuries are the result of twisting and compression instead of direct hits to the spine, so that's also to be expected even though most jackets have back protection. In order for a typical road jacket to be comfortable and usable enough to actually wear on a regular day it only tries to cover the most common areas to suffer. There are different, more specialized clothes to wear on the track that provide much more protection, but most people wouldn't want to wear them every day. 50% protection on your body is worth 100 times 100% protection left in your house.

Totally agree! Cheers, John

Blimey - glad you're okay! Cheers, John

Or a large stone to the knuckle protector on my glove! Saw it coming off the back wheel of a truck going the other way. Knocked my left hand off the grip! No injury though.

Sometimes.

​@@bcinspectormantrue, if you are wearing a back protector and a car T-bones you hitting your leg, armour won't help your leg much... but I think people can work on the edge cases themselves and think about what level of protection they want/need/afford.

In the Fortnine video they are discussing, Ryan says he doesn't use armor but does use airbags. In my personal view, I feel like you should use both, not just one. They protect different areas against different damage. Any spill on a bike can cause damage regardless of safety equipment, but more protective gear gives a higher chance of minimal damage.

@@CaptainAstrum totally agree! You can swap the back protector for an airbag, but keep the knee, elbow and hip protectors just in case. They might not be preventing a fatal injury, but they can prevent tons of pain

This is my 2nd biggest problem with F9's video! The pads aren't even a comfort issue lmao. There's no reason to take them out!

I am confused, wasnt F9s video april fools? If you read the research in his video, you see he is using data out of context? I thought that was the joke?

​@@fightkostka I get your point. Maybe that was the case. But if he was trying to make some April Fools' Day joke that one was a bad joke because it has the power of misguiding people leading them to a bad and dangerous decision. I mean, as an influencer he has to have a responsible conduct.

​@fightkostka Huh, that's an interesting take. F9 is a witty guy so I suppose that could have been the videos plot. But I'll say I enjoy F9 videos and get most of the comedy and sarcasm in them, at least I think I do lol. But I certianly missed it in the armor vid if it was there.

My instructor while doing my cbt in the distant eons of time showed the effects of the face on the side of a desk with a half face helmet, simulating a curb compared to wearing a full face helmet instead. Touché what that instructor said, I will always remember!

The thing is, there are plenty of brands that are pushing to exceed the minimum standards, but there are also plenty who want to add confusion and try to remove standards. That's why we set up the Bennetts High Performance Awards, which help to highlight kit that goes beyond EN17092. And this will be evolving over time... www.bennetts.co.uk/bikesocial/reviews/products/high-performance-safest-motorcycle-clothing

This is exactly their point. The CE standards are inadequate when it relates to fractures, for which the pads are entirely about.

@@Illuminum2392 No they aren't entirely about fractures, nor is it proven that they don't help with fractures (they most likely do and a big enough study could prove it). And, in fact, pads are the best soft tissue protection you will ever be wearing. All this is also in the first two minutes of this very video, explained from someone who actually does the studies.

@@ezsteel78 The evidence indicates that armour's additional abrasion resistance helps compensate for our clothing’s often inadequate abrasion resistance. However, armour is neither advertised nor tested for abrasion resistance. Sadly, scientific studies show that the CE standard is too low to protect us from fractures.

@@The-Splat Also, MotoCAP studies have noted that the most common failure of the garment material during testing is burst failure often from the material folding or pulling. The abrasion pads provide a more uniform, more rigid backing material to hold the abrasion material (leather, textile, etc.) flat and in place, allowing the material to abrade more evenly and last longer during a slide.

His point wasn't that armor is bad, the point was it's not good enough. What's wrong with improving body armor?

@@chronometer9931 Exactly, I'm growing tired of people missing the point of F9's video. He states his preference, he doesn't recommend that people copy him by removing the armour and he raises a big point about the current standards being too low. He even gave a suggestion of some armour that far exceeds CE level 2 for those that were interested.

@@chronometer9931 the problem is he clickbaited the video with that massive "USELESS" in the thumbnail picture. Useless and not good enough are two VERY different concepts.

People die from trauma which includes internal injuries not just fractures. "Motorcycle jackets were not protective for systemic injuries". Mortality risk from fractures for older riders: Study from Denmark: "a large new analysis of mortality among people aged 50 and older in Denmark finds an increase in mortality risk of up to 25 percent with other types of fractures (other than hip fractures) as well. Even with hip fractures, the "excess" risk of death remains slightly elevated for at least 10 years."

@@chronometer9931 His every argument about armor was wrong, because all the studies' quotes were taken out of context. And the studies claim the opposite of what Ryan was saying. To encourage improving the armor you should first point out the problems with it and Ryan didn't do that in his video!

Did the same since I started riding. I never trusted soft armor, for me it's enduro hard armor and knee high boots or might as well use street clothes.

I agree, I am a massive fan of Ryan and a fan of personal freedom to make choices, but you have to be extremely stupid not to wear armour. To see fellow motorcyclists in tee shirt and shorts make me feel sick inside at the skin left in the road. I have friends who are nurses in my local A&E department who tell me that the body goes into shock with skin loss and can be the cause of death. Wear good motorcycle clothing and armour! You know it makes sense.

That's a lot of accidents! Glad you're okay

​​@@bennettsbikesocialI would say that Laury is just a bad rider 🙄 Ryan was completely right in his superb video calling out the motorcycle clothing monopoly...most motorcycle body armour is basically useless. Chuck it in the bin! 😂

your point is pretty off-topic as you refer to boots armour and Ryan was speaking about shoulder armour :)

But seriously, how did you get into sonmany crashes? Stunting? Racing?

Regulatory capture is a major, major problem.

the issue is that the video, to be more polarizing and attractive perhaps - is 99% "hahah remove your pads" and 1% "not really, they should be improved. But I'm not wearing them! BUY THIS AIRBAG VEST!"

Ryan does not like airbags either.

@@alrightdave6135 At the end of the video he shouts out the airbags

@@Galf506 Not at all.

​@@alrightdave6135 tbf Ryan has said in several videos now how he uses an airbag quite a lot. He disses the electronic activation as it was conceived for track use (but companies look at hundreds of thousands of hours of road use in their ongoing R&D and send updates to electronic units) and hence he has bought and proudly uses a tether actuate HeLite.

He was advocating for better body armor not removing it, why do you think this is a bad thing? You should be for improving body armor...

@@chronometer9931 jfk he absolutely advocated removing CE1/2 pads because according to him those CE levels aren't good enough and thus is near useless - and since every armor pad on the market now is pretty much just CE1/2 pads that's really no different than saying don't use them, which is removing them.

So are you satisfied that the armour you're wearing is enough protection for you, especially at age 77? a large new analysis of mortality among people aged 50 and older in Denmark finds an increase in mortality risk of up to 25 percent with other types of fractures as well. Even with hip fractures, the "excess" risk of death remains slightly elevated for at least 10 years"

@@bcinspectorman I would try to get the best protection I can for all circumstances. I’m aware that ‘old people’ often die from hip fractures or their after-effects. Heard of several who fell out of bed and died because of the hip-fracture trauma. But while I would like 100% survivability guarantees I’m not aware of any, anywhere, on anything. Motorcycling is inherently dangerous. The main thing, after putting (or keeping) protection in my motorcycle clothing, boots, gloves, helmet, is making sure I drive/ride in the safest way possible, looking out for my own activity and that of the drivers/riders around me. If that is successful then I’ll never need to test my in-clothing protection. That stuff is only useful as a last resort! Ride safe!! Les

@@bcinspectormanit's no longer seen as a privilege, it's a God given right to drive in the UK apparently, no matter how old you are with zero tests.

Not all armour is expensive, and many brands are putting better and better protectors in. But some in the industry would like consumers to ignore standards, and instead trust in marketing hype (and influencer messaging).

If you can't spend $100 to save all kinds of your joints, bones, etc, then you are the problem. A rugby tackle is NOT an acute, high velocity, high density impact. It is wide range, low velocity, low density impact. You're saying that a padded football helmet is as good as no helmet. Not the case at all

Can't remember the last time I was rugby tackled whilst riding! Sarcasm aside, you're comparing apples and oranges. I've been off on public roads (hit diesel approaching a roundabout) and came off around 40mph whilst wearing a fully armoured set of leather. Both hip and elbow protectors had huge gouges out of them and led to me walking away shaken and bruised but otherwise uninjured. I will always wear the best protection I can afford. To do otherwise just seems idiocy

You are the reason our video exists - thanks so much for commenting. Cheers, John If you want some more info on just some of thew work we've been doing around safety standards for many years, have a watch of this: ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-5QcWajVTfB4.html

@@IIARROWS We've been pushing for optional higher safety levels for a long time (and no, it doesn't affect insurance)... After some brands opposed optional higher safety standards, we called them out on it. We launched the High Performance Awards to give those that want to give riders choice a chance to prove higher protection. We called out misinformation on riding jeans... there's a lot more too if you want to look into it. ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-n22vtWc8QRw.html ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-5QcWajVTfB4.html www.bennetts.co.uk/bikesocial/news-and-views/features/product/motorcycle-clothing-safety-ce-standards www.bennetts.co.uk/bikesocial/reviews/products/high-performance-safest-motorcycle-clothing

​@@IIARROWS Even the studies the Ryan has cited said that the all CE certified protectors were definitely helpful and one said they did much better than non-certified ones, so the standard is not as low as you and Ryan make it to seem. Ryan claimed that the IP's benefits are negligible and showed it as a reason for him to stop using them. Please stop making up excuses for Ryan's misguiding video.

This is hilarious. Had you actually watched the Fortnine video, you would know that he DIDN'T say that motorcycle armor was useless. You have indeed been influenced - by the misinformation presented in this video.

@IIARROWS spot on. I'm beginning to wonder whether the author of this video - and those parroting his false claim that Fortnine declared motorcycle armor to be useless - even watched said video.

Ironically, the biggest issue with back injuries is twisting, which no back protector can prevent.

@@bennettsbikesocial This is a straw man. No one ever argued what the most common type of injury is in any particular situation. We're just talking about the force required to cause a fracture and the type of pad that will prevent it (sub 4). If you want to respond to Ryan in your video, great, do whatever you want. It's just disingenuous to pretend he said things he didn't say.

I don't think he has been on an accident lately😂😂😂

A conclusion based on a flawed understanding of a study that does in fact, not, say that pads don't prevent fractures. Merely that with their limited sample size, that is what the evidence points towards. He also stated in the end of the video that based on this flawed understanding, he no longer wears pads in his jacket (and I believe he doesn't wear pads in his pants either). So no, the title was not clickbait at all, the video is actively giving the advice of "don't bother with pads as they are ineffective, especially against fractures", which is terrible advice that a lot of his followers will blindly follow or otherwise use as justification for their own poor judgement.

Unfortunately the pads don’t include sensors so it can’t be shown in real accidents that a fracture would have occurred without the armour. Therefore when fractures do occur there is nothing to compare it to, so saying armour doesn’t stop fractures because people still get fractures is a bit of a straw man.

Ooof! Glad you recovered to ride again. Cheers, John

Really sorry to hear this. Hope you're on the mend. Cheers, John

So what armour are you wearing that allows you to repeatedly "crash hard onto rocks"? Does it have a big letter "S" on the front?

@@bcinspectorman ce2 armour (shoulder, elbow, back, knee, and hip) in the Revit Sand 3 gear. Big, standard CE2 pads. This isn't controversial. I'm a late 40's guy riding a T7 in places requiring more skill or a smaller bike than I have. It's just regular CE2 armour, not special stuff, but it's big - nearly full coverage from shoulder through wrist. 300lb guy, on a tall bike, slammed into rocks over and over, with no injuries to speak of. Yeah, speeds aren't high - we're not talking about high speed collisions with cars here, as I was pretty clear about - but low speed fuckups that drive you from standing on the bike very rapidly into rocks while going up and down rocky hills off road. Very much still the sorts of impacts that definitely end rides unarmored. I mean, I will (as a 300lb 6'4" guy) without hesitation drop to my knees(just straight up fall down onto them) on pavement with the ce2 kneeguards. I would NEVER do that just in a pair of jeans, I wouldn't walk again for days.

I can unfortunately relate to this. Which airbag vest did you go for?

Thanks! Unfortunately, like the lock video, I suspect only a tiny fraction will realise. Cheers, John

Thanks very much! Cheers, John

Yes its called compensating behavior theory , when seat belts were made mandatory it increased the incidence of accidents , which then had a knock on effect of the vulnerability of motorcyclists , cyclists and pedestrians etc.

Do they? I've seen plenty of people riding fast in a t-shirt and shorts.

I believe that the same is true on the ski slopes. Before sports (ski) helmets became popular and in many places mandatory, beginner and intermediate skiers and boarders worked on improving their skills to stay safe and have fun but now it seems to me that those beginner and intermediate enthusiasts are taking more chances falsely believing that they are protected from serious injury. That's a dangerous way of thinking no matter what the sport or activity. Ride safe!

That is my concern with F9 videos as well. I like his videos and been watching them for almost 8-9 years now but he does put out some controversial stuff like the body positioning video and has young fans who take his words very seriously.

It's clear you only looked at his thumbnail and not the actual video because he has the same conclusion you do (including using a helite vest)

To submise the video... He says the minimum standards are too low, and that he wears an airbag when riding (airbag goes way beyond the standards and provides greater protection over all). He personally doesn't use the pads in his gear and does NOT recommend for anyone else to do what he does. He says right in the beginning that the title was an April Fools joke (more so towards the gear manufacturers, than anything else). Ryan's video has had the effect it was meant to... get people talking and making people aware of the bad minimum standards.

Ryan didn't say you had to give up your "airbag", in fact, he mentioned the "airbag" armour as one piece that will prevent fractures and potentially lethal internal injuries. But the cost will prevent most from being able to purchase that gear.

The total number may be up, but how about the actual rate, i.e "X per 1,000 riders" or something like that? Not trying to be a jerk, I'm genuinely curious

An excellent point. Glad you're okay!

Glad you're on the mend. All the best, John

Same here. If I'm nipping out locally I'll wear jeans, but if I'm going over 20ish miles I'll get the overtrousers on

Some of us have been talking about it for many, many years. It's great to raise awareness, but it needs to be done in the right way.

@@CavalierNTX Moronic statement. Go ride around with no gear and see what happens when you come off. Oh wait, you won't because you will be cleaved in two tramatising the kids in the car next to you after seeing your splattered brains.

He has a massive audience and knows how to maximise his presence on social media. He is a gifted presenter not an academic nor an expert in the field. He has started a conversation which is positive. The reply by Bennetts is very welcome. Personally, I wear an airbag and elbow protection. Sometimes.

He set out to get views with half-baked advice again with an overly reductionist look at sources with a strong confirmation bias. It was garbage.

​@@CavalierNTXThat is my assessment of his work. The arguments for it are set forth largely in this Bennett's video.

Sorry to hear about that, but glad you're here to tell us! Cheers, John

Exactly - that's my worry. Cheers, John

Absolutely - as Paul and I agree in this video. But it's still a lot better than taking it out!

The bloke goes on to say he will not wear any protection armour.

@@cybersleuth558 watch again, he spoke about better protection for areas not covered for serious injuries, like the back protector and the airbag and holding the industry to higher standards.

@@AO1YinYang Yeah and then at the end said he removes the armour from his clothing... Airbags are great but they hardly help if you remove the knee pads

@@elobiretv ... He also states that while he removes the pads and likes it, that no one should do what he does. Ryan's video has gotten people talking and making them aware of the poor standards.

Thanks very much fort this! Cheers, John

Ryan also says in that video that he rides with an airbag, because it's the highest level of protection available and far exceeds the standards.

@JJ_ExMachina True, but I don't have the cash for that. What I can afford, I sport a Joe Rocket summer mesh or cold weather HWK brand ADV jacket and pants, hi viz, with the standard set of pads. Besides that, an airbag vest doesn't cover your arms, shoulders, hips or knees where protection is needed. Ankles and feet are covered with TCX boots. Not the best but affordable. In the end, some armor is better than nothing, if it's good enough for the pros, it's good enough for me.

@@blandrooker6541 Yep, no one is saying for you to ride without the armor pads in your jacket and or pants. I ride sometimes without a helmet, BUT that is my choice and NOT something I would ever recommend for anyone else to do. Just like Ryan saying he chooses what he chooses.

Armour could definitely be improved, and totally agree. Trouble is the video has the thumbnail 'useless' and the first words in the description are "These pads are useless", so that's pretty clear. I just hope the majority do question it properly.

@@bennettsbikesocial Yes, agreed 100%. The title of his video is really click bait, but he's a reasonable guy and re-watching his video, it doesn't really address the fact that even class II joint protection will significantly reduce impact loads. The "evidence" otherwise may not be from a statistically valid cross section, and that's before severity of accident is accounted for. Ploughing into a vehicle which pulls out in front of you from any speed is likely to be a very different outcome to sliding down the road at 60mph! I will be investing in an air vest for sure, having existing spinal injuries and will encourage those I coach to consider one too. It's strange, but we all think nothing of dropping £500 or £600 on a fancy lid or a £100 plus for gloves, but often shrug off the benefits of modern air vests due to price. They've come down a lot in price over the past few years so the way I see it, £400 on an air vest and about the same on a decent lid seems reasonable given the reduction of serious injuries. The best advice I can think to give, is invest in decent clothing with Class II protection, wear and air vest and get yourselves trained to advanced level as this alone will reduce risks of the unthinkable happening quite considerably, but can never be a complete antidote.

@ReferenceFidelityComponents : Type A sized armour has a legitimate and necessary function in smaller garment sizes for those who wear them, with Type B being required for the next group of sizes up the scale. At least one larger size is required, however, for taller and larger riders. Any level of protection (Level 1 or Level 2 - or in the future, higher) will be compromised if it does nor adequately cover the parts of the body it is intended to safeguard.

No, his point was regulatory capture. And that undercuts confidence in regulations, and ultimately what we claim about safety. Do you trust what carmakers say about safety--when they're pushing for regs? No? What about apparel companies? Don't you think they've got a stake in this? Wear what you think you should. But be smart:not just about safety, but about what you think is the gospel truth. And why.

@@bennettsbikesocial watch the video properly, and not critique from a skewed perspective Sir. He mentioned the full back protector and the airbag...to prevent broken bones and serious injury. All you did was take snippets out of context and try debunk, without actually to his point, help raise that industry standard is just not acceptable enough. My suspicious mind tells me you have a vested interest in the status quo of the industry...

I will also note in the conversation you discuss the benefits of airbags. I've been saying for years that F9's video comparing airbag designs is critically flawed. Ryan notes at 8:30 in his video that a 40ms crash detection of an electronic airbag is slower than the 36ms it takes to cover the 0.5m tether at 50 kph. However, he's comparing *deployment* to *detection*. My Astars TechAir5 deploys (fully) in under 40 ms. Helite states on their website that inflation of a Helite Turtle (with slower CO2 than Ar) takes about 100ms. This is never mentioned in the video. So, the 36ms tether begins the 100ms inflation for a total of 136ms at best. If I am rear-ended by a car traveling 30 mph, guess how long I have before I hit the windshield of that car? About 100ms. TechAir is fully inflated. Helite is partially inflated. Anyone who has slept on a partially-inflated air mattress knows how much good that does. I'll stick with the argon.

Ryan never once says for anyone one to take out their pads. He specifically states to keep them in and do not take them out. He also says airbags offer the highest levels of protection available. That the gear standards are far too low. So I am at a lose where Ryan's message was a bad one.

Sorry it was a bit rushed! Cheers, John

​@@bennettsbikesocial I appreciate the quick release. This is really important stuff and has real world impact on riders' safety. Thanks again for this - having this information and varying opinions is essential for people to make their own informed decisions. 👍

The government's put laws in place to stop smaller manufacturers from making good quality affordable protection while protecting the rich people's profits the numbers prove this current safety standards don't stop broken bones and worse it stops a scratches and bruises the highest quality safety protection should be the standard for all gear manufactured in a fair market not allowing the rich to corner the market with cheaper made protection but that's capitalism profit over the consumer every time

Thank you very much for the quick response to the RF9's misguiding video and for addressing all the issues surrounding this topic! Great channel!

Sorry@@cookiemonster-uv6vs, but that's totally incorrect.

@@cookiemonster-uv6vs that is quite literally the opposite of how it works. Without the government forcing safety and quality standards, all you get is ripoffs and monopolies from profit seeking criminals.

The central point of Ryan’s video was regulatory capture-the title was merely clickbait. His video called out regulatory capture, which has resulted in ineffective CE standards for fracture risk reduction and little incentive for many manufacturers to produce more protective armour. Considering that regulatory capture has blocked AAAA and AAAAA ratings for clothing, how can we believe the CE standards committee will improve the standards for body armour?

Please feel free to post the full comment in here Roy

Your comment's gone again Roy. Please do post it in full here if you like.

@@bennettsbikesocial Yes, just noticed that. It was nearing 10,000 likes.

@@MotorcycleGearHub Unbelievable! What an absolute joke he is!

Just FYI, it's likely that Ryan didn't delete the comment, most likely RU-vid did because some word about injury or harm triggered RU-vids nebulous analysis systems. I find that comments of mine disappear frequently on just about any given video.

Glad you're okay! Cheers, John

@@bennettsbikesocialSupermoto -- it's kind of unavoidable. :>)

We've been pushing for optional higher safety levels for a long time (and no, it doesn't affect insurance)... After some brands opposed optional higher safety standards, we called them out on it. We launched the High Performance Awards to give those that want to give riders choice a chance to prove higher protection. We called out misinformation on riding jeans... there's a lot more too if you want to look into it. ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-n22vtWc8QRw.html ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-5QcWajVTfB4.html www.bennetts.co.uk/bikesocial/news-and-views/features/product/motorcycle-clothing-safety-ce-standards www.bennetts.co.uk/bikesocial/reviews/products/high-performance-safest-motorcycle-clothing

The study wasn't flawed, but its interpretation for 'entertainment' potentially was.

I'd have preferred to do a better job on it, but it seemed too important to delay. Cheers, John

If there truly is a deep and clever message to Ryan's video (potentially at the expense of many being exposed to more harm), then wouldn't it have been better to actually do something about it? Fort9 could test all armour and declare what level of impact mitigation it offers for instance, because after all, many brands ARE striving for better protection, and they deliver it. Of course, that takes a lot of time and effort, and it doesn't generate any money, as I know from launching the Bennetts High Performance Awards, which recognise kit that meets the highest existing standards, as well as giving the criteria for brands to prove that some kit really does go above and beyond. Those platinum and Diamond standards require properly sized Level 2 armour as a minimum. Or he could simply have pointed people to MotoCAP in Australia, which tests gear sold in that region (and there's a lot of crossover with the US/Canada). That'd be helpful. There's room for improvement everywhere, but influencers need to understand the great responsibility they have.