It's worth mentioning that EN17092 tests garments with the pads *removed*. Meaning a AAA jacket or pant, which has been drop tested on the Darmstadt machine at 120kph, will still slide to a highway-speed stop without costing you skin (70kph for AA, 45kph for A). C-class garments have no abrasion resistance criteria whatsoever; this would be something like a mesh chassis for holding armour. Obviously, removing the pads from that would be silly, since its only purpose is to hold armour and you might as well wear a T-shirt instead. On that note, there *are* hero companies that make pads to greatly exceed CE 2 size and attenuation requirements. Aside from the Dainese back pad I showed, Rukka's D3O XTR comes to mind (link in description). Those pads are huge compared to the Type B template, and size matters if you're going to rely on pads to get to wherever your abrasion comfort level is. We don't always slide precisely on our shoulders, elbows and knees. It's usually the butt. We all have our own equations for balancing comfort v. practicality v. safety, which is why I made a point of *not* telling people to take the armour out of their jackets (twice!). Fortunately the CE standards make it fairly clear what your gear can and can't do, enabling us all to choose the stuff that achieves whatever we're after. ~RF9
Apologies that my first comment on one of my favourite channels is a criticism. EN1621-2 is the standard for back protection. The Limb Joint Protectors used in the video are covered by EN1621-1.
My biggest question to this (and I have many) would be are there quality stand-alone armor makers whose armor is worth replacing the substandard stuff with? And if so who are they?
@@dmoooooooo : D3O, Forcefield, Knox, Rheon and SAS-Tec, to name but five - although to refer to other manufacturers’ components as “substandard” is inaccurate. They pass the standard, so are not substandard; it is simply that some producers use superior materials or engineer their products to exceed the requirements set by the standard.
Thank you, another great video that actually brings information and data! One comment / question though, is how does this relate to offroad riding? I ride hard enduro, so when I fall, it's never at 120 MPH on asphalt. It's more at 10-25 MPH on gravel / rocks / dirt. And I think that these pads are very useful in spreading the absorbed force, so instead of being poked by pointy gravel, the hit is spread somewhat evenly across the surface of the pad, reducing the overall absorbed force (I believe quite more dramatically compared to the asphalt test). So, what is your opinion on using pads for offroad?
As an orthopaedic surgeon (and a motociclist) I can say that its easier (and got better results) to fix lower Energy fracture than higher energy fractures... So, the benefit of using this gear may not protect you from having that fracture in the first place, but may shield you from months of reabilitation and permanent pain and limitation.
I see alot of anecdotal stories in the comments discussing the pro and contra, but lets not forget the main purpose of the video: Lifting the regulation capture! Lets improve regulation based on scientific evidence in order to make companies product armor that actually helps against high energy injuries.
Yea it'll cost more for manufacturers, but it will also bring in more riders who are actually going to buy it. If costed me $100 more just to know it'll protect me better than the standard CE2 pad I'm all for it. But if it performs the same, then why bother paying extra money for brand name. We want safety for a hobby we enjoy, and they want our money. I'll just buy lightly used gear or people getting them brand new and selling them later for cheaper. Got my mig c2 gloves for $80 instead of $130. 🤭
"Regulations" will never keep up with the dynamics of the market. They are there as a feel good measure for people who think they know better than the people who make the gear. Another commenter says it'll "cost more for manufacturers" which is also laughable. They're in the business of making money. Nothing costs them anything; consumers will pay the price either way.
@@timnuccio6240 This is categorically and utterly false on all levels. Regulations aren't for keeping up with the market, they are for enforcing what is right and proper for society. They naturally lag behind innovations, but they are crucial for ensuring safety/cleanliness/ethics/fairness etc. Second, the market always tries to reduce costs, it is an integral part of business. There is nothing laughable to it. Also, higher costs can be a problem for smaller competitors. Third (not on this list): The market becomes a monopoly once saturated and once the optimum has been found. So much for your fun market to solve all problems.
He literally says he takes the armor out of his jacket lol. If that's not an endorsement to you then idk what is. Definitely should have left the video as a stab at the regulations, but he didn't.
@@antonk.653 It sounds like you both didn't watch the video and you don't know the definition of monopoly. I think it's obvious enough that there is no monopoly in the world of motorcycle safety equipment, which has many firms competing for our business. But if this video didn't persuade you that the regulation is driving us to rely on pads that are probably not optimal to protect our bones from impact, nothing else is going to convince you that market based solutions will work, either. I guess we all can double up on level 2 pads and hope for the best? Certainly we can't rely on the governments to address the concerns in the video as they've already failed to do so.
I’m an ER doc. I know armour won’t help in worst case, high energy scenario’s, but it helps mitigate the contusions, abrasions and lacerations in the kind of spills we are more likely to suffer. I had a low speed mishap riding off road in Iceland and diced up the elbows and arms of my riding jacket on volcanic rock. I had a few minor scratches from punctures through the Cordura fabric in the unpadded areas, but without armour protection it would have been a long complicated journey to a distant hospital to suture up contaminated, complex lacerations that would have terminated my bucket list trip. Some dabs of Polysporin for the skin and duct tape for the jacket and I was good to go.
Agreed. Even minimal protection can be the difference between a lesser injury and a severe injury. Early on in my riding days I had a lower speed crash where my left foot got pinned by the footrest and drug underneath the bike as I slid. I had worn basic "steel" toe boots and they prevented the footrest from impaling my foot. Still hurt, still injured, but it was the difference between literally walking away or visiting someone like you.
THIS! Fortnine is only looking at the "fracture" or "not fracture" binary, and completely ignoring the fact that fracture severity is a spectrum that runs from hairline to shattered, and that spectrum is directly correlated with impact force. Armor reduces force received by your body, which reduces injury severity.
I agree. I like Ryan F9 but he is FOS on this one. I've crashed before at (going less than 60km) and the armor protected my knees. I was able to walk away with no need for rehab. An airbag is not going to protect you if you are going fast enough and hit something hard enough. If Nike, Coach or Levis, wanted to get in the market, then putting body armor in their clothes, then it would not be that hard.
On behalf of Liz de Rome: 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. Associate Professor Liz de Rome.
@@PumpKing96Because turkeys borrow low resolution statements and mis apply them in the hopes they will sound smarter than they really are. The use-by date on research relevance is multi-factorial and differs across topics being studied. Ignore the turkey.
I'm an EMT. Been one for going on 13 years. I've seen more than my fair share of moto accidents. I can't say that gear has ever really prevented a fracture or not, but one thing I do think MUST be mentioned, that moto gear (with or without armor) DOES DO INSANELY WELL, is ABRASION resistance. Yes, a broken bone sucks, but I've seen a woman's breast belt sanded off by the asphalt because she only had on a sweatshirt. Down to the bone. Anecdotally, I have lowsided before at a pretty pedestrian 25-30mph. Armored jacket, regular denim pants. The jacket took the hit and I had no bruise or injury on my arm. The road went through my pants like they were tissue paper and I have a softball sized scar on my knee now. Armor wouldn't have really mattered there, but a pant with abrasion resistance absolutely would have. So while I can't critique the argument against armored pads because I'm not an expert on the literature and most severe motorcycle accidents I've seen have had broken bones with and without armor, I can say that road rash can be a nightmare and have never seen road rash on an area where someone was wearing proper gear, and ALWAYS seen it on every single person that wasn't wearing any. To that end, I think it's a bit of a disservice to leave that part of the equation hanging and not mentioned. That airbag is going to save you from a broken clavicle, but if you aren't wearing an abrasion resistant layer as well, the road might well grind your skin, fat and muscles down to the bone. We call those chest protectors with no sleeves "organ donor vests" for a reason.
I hope people read this and take your advice rather than do as Ryan says he does. Road rash is a motherf***er to say the least and anything to help prevent it is a positive. I have a “tattooed” left forearm where my shitty cuff button broke during a slide and let my sleeve roll up. Would have been a lot worse if it wasn’t there for any of the slide, not to mention the rest of me that the leather jacket was still covering.
pads are not for abrasion. They suck at it. Video is talking about effectiveness of pads for what they are intended - impact dissipation. This is why he choose remove pads FROM a JACKET, not get rid of a jacket.
Yeah I hit a deer last year and was completely geared up head to toe and even though I broke multiple ribs and bones including ones in my face under my Shoei helmet, every doctor, police and EMT said my gear saved my life. And later after investigating my gear I did notice my level 2 pads were ground down and took plenty of abuse. So it’s probably a useless point but the pads did help too. The only abrasion I had was where the hip pad wore through.
I first watched this after being released from hospital. I'd shattered my lower leg on a dirt bike. I was wearing level 2 armour underneath and all I can say is that after seeing the bruising as well as the chunks missing from my right elbow, I am VERY glad that I was. I have no doubt it would have been a fair bit worse if I'd had no padding there.
He is not saying they don't do anything he is saying they could be better but they don't bother. What the study he was using doesn't mention is the bikers that needed no medical intervention as its not captured.
I just crashed today because of an old man that did not see me. I landed extremely hard on my left shoulder without breaking any bones or any serious damage, just a lot of pain. It's crystal clear to me the importance that those stupid rubber things had during the crash: they helped me to soften the main impact and shielded my shoulder from the tarmac. Before this crash i thought they were useless as you said in the video, but i left them in my jacket just to be extra safe .. and I'm very glad i did.
I would say the point of this video is not to encourage or deter the use of plastic body armour but to put pressure on the motorcycle apparell companies to lift their game & offer protection that will significantly improve the risks of not fracturing bones in a fall. It's not about individual incidents but statistical analysis over a large data set. I have had crashes with & without body armour and never had a fracture but.... give me the choice of better protection & I would pay for having that.
Those studies don’t capture the 1000s of people who crash wearing the protection with no injury. Only the injured get captured in the data, similar to a survivorship bias.
My 4 years old son was riding his stacyc 16 e-drive bike down the hill 20 miles / 30 kilometers per hour and suddenly hit a big stone on the tarnac and hit the ground with filull speed. He was fully protected by fullface helmet, expensive knee and elbow pads, and glowes. No fracture, no bruises, just some crying. Without the protective gear he would have to be taken to ER and a dentist and stay in hospital for sure. It was traumatic for both of us. It was my fault, but to my point - always wear as much protection as you can.
Awesome story. However. That’s not what the video is saying. He was merely saying don’t buch cheap stuff, manufacturers need better standards to hold their gear to. Imagine same scenario, but you bought cheap China knock off stuff and it fell apart at first tumble. Would you still be saying “that gear was awesome!” Nope. You’d be saying the same thing f9 did. Read what you’re buying, manufacturers love catch phrases.
@@lecobra418I got my 3yo daughter Stacyc 12. Now she is 4 and I'm happy every time she crashes and is fine. Every crash is a lesson and I believe it's better to have these lessons at 4 and 20km/h rather than later and faster.
There are a number of issues with that research that I noticed as a researcher myself. First off the n (number of cases for x) for many of the categories are too small to derive reasonable statistical significance. Second it does not take into account the severity of the accidents for each case, which adds a massive statistical confound to the data. There is not sufficient data present to derive anything really. Also the studies for airbags on motorcycles are practically non existent for road users, and most airbags on the market offer little protection for legs, arms, and shoulders. Legs/feet are also the largest source of injury in most accidents. We do need better protection and better standards, but some protection in most cases will be better with none, I would rather hit the road with something to help cushion the landing. Airbags are not a perfect replacement for padding, they can fail to deploy, or break on impact, or be punctured. I use both pads and an airbag.
Well said, we got to be very careful when looking at those reports, generally speaking , since in most cases they try to correlate fractures/padding presence but the crash mechanism is completely lost, the amount of energy either and, I know friends who brought motorbike jeans and...didn't adjust knee D3O CE level 2, for instance... Yes, we want higher and more representative standards. How can we put this in practice? Let's make it happens, Ryan.
LegBags... feel free to do all the work and pay me for the name lol The worst thing about the token protection is it feels so restrictive to move that I feel more likely to crash while wearing it... so I don't wear it it.
I also do research for a living. If you pause the video at 2:28 and look down the column "Fracture %", the lowest values are almost all on the rows reading "Yes with Body Armor", meaning Yes to Motorcycle Jacket, then Yes to Motorcycle Gloves, then Yes to Motorcycle Pants and so on. Fractures are higher with motorcycle gloves than without them, but overall injuries are much higher without motorcycle gloves - duh. It's an odd outcome, but the number of cases is really too small for any statistical significance, certainly no p-value less than 0.05. As a daily, year round rider, who has been part of a group ride that went very, very wrong ending in a Life Flight helicopter ride for the guy with the broken thigh bone, I can tell you that our two crash victims were wearing modular helmets. Both had scratched up visors after bad wrecks, but both fully protected the heads and faces of their wearers. Having witnessed it, I wouldn't be caught dead without a helmet whatever the statistics say. After all, there are statistics and then there is what happens to YOU.
100% agree. However, if a meta-analyzes are performed they change the n. They could also potentially account for the confounding if severity is reported.
I never consider those pads as protective against bone fracture. But they are good for abrasion, small hits that can hurt you long time. And also some more serious knee or elbow injuries. But to be honest not for serious accidents. I would never remove them as "any protection is good protection"
I don't have a motorcycle license, just love F9's content, and every time they demonstrated pads "absorbing" impact force they seemed to not do that. The pads don't seem squishy at all, just flexible, but to absorb force you'd need to compress a material (Like the styrofoam in a helmet does) which these pads don't seem to do. They might spread the force over a somewhat larger area but that's it.
@@GameCyborgCh yes that is how you absorb impact. By spreading it over time and area. There is no way to magically disperse of the energy any other way.
the two studies he quoted also have some methodological flaws regarding how they collect their data. which is due to them getting their data based on reported accidents. aka accidents where the cops showed up and/or the motorcyclist got collected by an ambulance. Any single vehicle accident where the motoryclist was able to continue riding will not be in the database, on accouint of not requiring police to be called. And those less severe accidents are the ones where armor actually works.
Firefighter/paramedic here. Others have said enough and said it better. I always wear my armor and very glad I have. The only time I’ve had to test it was a slide at about 45-50mph and it was all pants. Luckily very minor road rash and a small bruise was all I got. I get what you’re saying here but it reminds me way too much of people who say they don’t like to wear helmets because they have seen people wearing helmets and still die or a helmet isn’t gonna save you at 75+ MPH when you hit a guardrail lol. Reminds me of the story of soldiers who refused to wear helmets to battle because they were uncomfortable and if they were meant to die, they were gonna die…regardless of the helmet. Point being guys…don’t make the grim reaper’s job easier. Even if it only saves you one broken toe, it’s worth it. You’re worth it.
I used to hear from older drivers when the first seat belt laws were enacted that they didn't like seat belts becuase they WANTED to be thrown clear of the car in a n accident. Too much Mannix, Starsky and Hutch!
Buddys showing off doing wheelies and crashed into each other, many broken bones, non fatal and ego bruising, both weren't wearing a helmet so the point is moot. P.S. No Open Casket either.
As someone that had a 10-15mph lowside in the BRC with no pads on legs, torso, and arms, I can tell you the bruising I got on my left knee and elbow was horrendous, lasting for about 2 weeks leaving me unable to work out or do anything strenuous. Over the winter I lowsided at roughly 2 times the speed of the BRC lowside, so 4 times the impact forces. However, this time I had CE level 2 pads in elbows, shoulders, back, hips, and knees. I walked away with nothing but a headache and was working out the next day. I really appreciate Ryan's philosophy on people making their own decisions, and just making sure they have all the information to make a well informed decision. For me, it's absolutely worth wearing the pads if it means there's a greater chance I won't be nearly bedridden for days.
I think your examples are where the padded armor is best - sliding with minimal impacts. I agree I will wear it just because why not, but I know if there is an impact I'm getting a break.
This! I (knock on wood) haven't had an unplanned on-road get off in a LONG time. However, I have ridden with dozens of people who have. I have seen the aftermath of *SLIDES* with and without armor. I ride with the best armor I can tolerate. I am sure that in high sides and multi-vehicle impacts, the presence or lack of a little foam pad is of little consequence. But, most accidents (not even reported) are not written up by a cop. The perpetrator tries to slink away before a COP shows up and adds insult to injury with a performance award such as: "Failure to maintain control of vehicle." Wearing good riding gear helps the road rash a lot, and the pads help with that too. So, I wonder about the validity of those surveys. Are the group of riders with and without armor reporting the accident results at the same rate? Perhaps riders with armor were able to sneak away from an accident scene and pretend like it was no big deal, and they aren't fully represented in the data. One time about 30+ years ago, I hit a small slick patch on an exit ramp. I low sided and slid to the outside of the curve. No impact and I got up and saw just a grayish frayed patch on my jacket. I picked up my bike noted the ground down parts, and the broken brake lever and turn signal. I then finished my ride to work. When I got to work and took off my outer layer, and then the inner down layer, and then the fleece liner, I noticed that my elbow had a patch the size of two quarters that looked like melted mozzarella cheese, it stuck to the fleece and came off, leaving a wet weeping raw meat underneath. The fleece, the down coat, and the outer layer were mostly fine, but the outer layer looked like I had scuffed it. If there had been a small pad there, I don't think I would have had that burn.
I've had a 30kph lowside in Kevlar with no pads and have a scar to show for it. I've also T-boned a car and gone flying in a cheap armored jacket and wasn't even bruised. Anecdotal yes, but I'll at least stick to some flexible C1 personally.
me too. Most automotive/powersports channels are just simps to whomever pays for a video, and consistently spread misinformation or show examples of things done wrong without explaining that it is unsafe. I can count on ONE HAND the number of car and car performance youtube videos where they have proper 5 or 6 point harnesses that are anchored correctly, with airbags removed. and I've only seen ONE video of a car where they had proper fire suppression. I've watched thousands of car videos over the decades
Not sure if it's such a good thing in this case. Maybe they just want to sell more airbags? I'll take laceration and abrasion protection at the cost of almost imperceptible discomfort.
No gear necessary at all, if you don't crash. If you do, you'll be grateful for every scrap of gear you're wearing, even if its an extra bit of padding. My armor pieces are staying in!
I took my pads out, to provide more room for extra clothing layers. (I ride nearly every day of the year) I wear an Immortal Chest Protector with the shoulder pads from my jacket & an Axial2 Back Pad zip tied to the inside of it. I wear an EVO 2 Racing Collar that helps provide my head & neck with the maximum amount of protection from the cold. It also helps support the weight of my helmet directly onto the hard plastic shoulders of my Chest Protector, which allows me to ride for extremely long distances without getting a sore neck. The elbow pads in my jacket began to irritate my funny bone, so I found more comfort, warmth and protection from wearing External Elbow Pads with Forearm Protection. This gives me the ultimate upper body protection from accidents & from the elements. (Superior comfort, especially in cold weather).
@@seebarnes6588 There are 2 types of humans those who have had the seks & those that are going to have the seks or never will What to take from it? Life is life.
this may be one of the greatest youtube channels of all time. look at the discussions in the comments. imagine every video on youtube had the same type of conversation surrounding it.
FWIW, I was wearing a Vanson jacket with elbow and back armor of their design, a pair of jeans with CE2 hip and knee armor, and a pair of Racer gloves with carbon knuckle armor when a drunk did a last second left in front of me. My knee punched a dent into the side of his truck and my brake lever, which was the first contact with the vehicle, came down hard on the carbon knuckle protectors of my last two fingers. I technically fractured my knee, but it was the kind of fracture where it looks weird on an MRI but none of the parts are displaced to different locations, and I was able to walk away from the wreck. Also, all of my fingers were still on my hand despite the guillotine brake lever. When I came off the bike I landed hard on my back, on my back protector, and while my ribs were badly bruised in the back, none were broken and my spine wasn't bruised. (Quick pitch for the sort of out of fashion Vanson brand: after landing on my back and sliding on the asphalt, the back of my jacket wasn't even scratched. The leather they use wears like iron). This is anecdote, not data, and I agree with your concerns about regulatory capture and undersized protection. However, I think saying "it's not enough protection so I won't wear it all" is a contrarian but self-defeating choice. It seems like "this isn't enough protection so I'll wear more" would be a more rational response. Impacts vary, and I'm not sure that "break a femur" is the right threshold to be using as a baseline. There are plenty of impacts, like the one on my right knee, that are below the "break a femur" threshold but may have still broken my knee without the marginal protection that my knee pad offered. Those pads absorbed some of the force before it got to my knee. Given i had a partial but not complete fracture, maybe it was enough. There are also a lot impacts on a motorcycle that will get to "break femur" territory even in the presence of non-existent CE3 or 4. The armor isn't protecting you from that existential 100mph low side into a steel barrier. I'm not sure why this marginal protection isn't showing up in the study you cited, but studies aren't impervious to flaws and are designed to answer yes / no questions, not illuminate nuance as you are well aware. Btw, my take away from my accident was that I should have been wearing my air bag vest that day. It would have saved me a lot of pain where the gas tank hit my pelvis and would further lessened my rib bruising. But it certainly didn't have me thinking I should ditch the knee, hip, and elbow armor. If anything, it had me thinking about ways to improve the protection at my extremities. With all of that said, I salute your willingness to call it like you see it despite where your bread is buttered.
Agreed I took fall on my knee without protection last year at low speed but it been a horrible recovery. I couldn’t walk for a month, and it cracks on every stairs I walk up and down, and I walk with a limp now and I still feel pain, I’m almost 100% sure if I had pad I wouldn’t be in pain, every since that experience I never go riding without pads .. as I learnt it don’t take much impact to give you a f up day
you should learn to speak like a human being. anyway, i think the argument is for better protection standards, not no protection. though he doesn't present any actual evidence for what the standard should be or that a proper standard was pre-empted by the industry.
You have said everything I wanted to say much better than I could have said it. Top answer 👍 It's not often I disagree with Ryan but wearing no pads means you're gonna feel more impact and that just means more pain. It's an absolute no brainer to wear it, drive safe Ryan
Respectfully I'm going to keep mine in. There are accidents where pads won't matter (either the impact was so soft that nothing would have broken, or the impact was so hard that no matter what you're wearing you'll break), but for that slight chance of an accident that the armor results in a bone bruise instead of a bone break I'll take that extra little bit of protection.
My only whoopsie so far was a lowside (raining, sand, cornering), and my right side came down pretty hard. I bruised my elbow, and that was WITH the elbow pad in my jacket. I think I may have broken my elbow-or at least got a bone bruise-if I hadn't had my elbow pad in place. I think Ryan's highlighting the fact that current armor pads need drastic improvement to help prevent the worst outcomes.
There is no, reasonable armor that can be 100% effective to prevent all injury. I've fallen a ridiculous amount of times, on street and offroad. After committing to buying motorcycle gear with armor, my injuries have significantly reduced. Similar falls that took me out of my work and hobbies for long periods now don't even register because no matter what armor I have, it's way way better than not having any armor at all. Like, Ryan is really suggesting we'd be just as protected I'm Levi's for crying out loud!
@@stephensumpter5311 Yeah, the CURRENT armor are useless for fractures. But just happen to be good enough for abrasions and bruise protection. We need stronger armor.
@@werepat I don't think he's suggesting that at all. The conclusion I got from his video is that safety standards are inadequate and armor should be better, but isn't. He literally says at the end that it is is more protective than no armor.
It's amazing how many people don't really watch or understand the video. He said he's NOT telling you to not to wear pads. He said they will stop bruises and abrasions and that's a good thing. His MAIN point is the pads COULD be made better but the industry standard is set too low so most manufactures don't make them as good as they SHOULD be. Just LEARN from the video and buy the highest quality protection equipment IF you want BETTER protection.
I think it's the last part he said about enjoying life vs protecting it. I heard that conclusion and believed he was advocating for ditching the useless armour. It was a confusing message.
The more I see the way the gear companies and government use outdated and shoddy standards really makes me think that their priority is making people feel safe rather than actually being safe, because feeling safe is much cheaper then being safe.
OSHA's pyramid of dangerous materials (you've seen this pyramid at every government facility) places personal protective equipment such as gloves, helmets, suit, etc... as the least effective of form of protection. And PPE is almost always the cheapest option. Doing things like actually separating the danger from people, or controlling who can handle these items, or training everyone how to handle dangerous items, is a lot more expensive. Another example would be keeping firearms out of everyone's hands, keeping it out of untrained hands, training everyone to use firearms, and finally wearing bullet resistant vests.
Yeah... I bought an FIM helmet for my motorcycle since I figured the single most important thing to protect was my head. Turns out the government where I live will only allow you to race track with a Snell helmet. FIM and ECE are considered "inferior" according to the government here, despite all the evidence they have it backwards.
@@langhamp8912you forgot the "make bulletproof backpacks and lunchboxes for elementary school students" option that we seem to be running with here in the States
Crash test dummy here.. flung myself off into the woods up in the Catskills after hitting a blind corner covered in sand from the prior winter. 7 broken ribs and a collapsed lung. Helicopter ride as well to a trauma center. Thankfully had a forcefield sub 4 back protector and level 2 everywhere else. Astar super tech boots saved my ankles, the bike landed on them and pinned me under the bmw. Knox handroid gloves..the ones with the exoskeleton saved my hand which was buried in a pile of river rock. Had yellow bruising around all the body armor but all good. I landed with my arm up on a pile or river rock which did the damage to my ribs. Full airbag vest could have helped, i suspect. The hospital bill was over $100,000! Do your self a favor and add as much armor as you can afford. Riding 15 years till that event. It will happen, and there is no need to end up in a wheelchair!
Murica! Would have been €600 own risk over here in NL. But crazy story ma dude. Hope you recovered well. I only ride with full gear. I like my body and skin.
It will happen? I'd say the majority of riders will get through a 50-year riding 'career' without a significant crash and/or injury. It's not a statistical certainty. Your story highlights the usefulness of gear, but you know what's even more useful? Safety and sport riding courses every single spring to refresh your skills and safely test your limits.
ER Doctor here - I have seen many injuries from motorcycles. There is no gentle way to say this... but this video is very very wrong, dangerous and you need to "redact" it immediately. For anyone that wants to read my entire comment please do so otherwise I will say this: wearing more pads will help you, do not listen to this clearly incorrect video. Now the longer explanation: 1. You mention the "keeping a captive market" concept and that current pad standards are not enough. This sounds very plausible and likely true. The natural conclusion here would be to have another "tier" of pad standards, not to take out your current pads. So do not conflate the issues of regulatory capture and inadequate regulatory standards for pads with "all pads do nothing". 2. You are just cherry picking studies and jumping to a false conclusion. The study you mention literally has this as a conclusion: "Our results argue for more widespread use of protective clothing by [motorcycle] users. Furthermore, a 30 second literature review shows other studies with the following conclusions: "Motorcycle protective clothing is associated with reduced risk and severity of crash related injury and hospitalization, particularly when fitted with body armour." Finally some things don't need a study. This is literal common sense... a classic example being the study "Parachute use to prevent death and major trauma when jumping from aircraft: randomized controlled trial". In this study they come to the following conclusion: "Parachute use did not reduce death or major traumatic injury when jumping from aircraft in the first randomized evaluation of this intervention. However, the trial was only able to enroll participants on small stationary aircraft on the ground, suggesting cautious extrapolation to high altitude jumps." This study is often used as a comical (but serious) critique of medical research in certain scenarios. Some studies are poorly designed, some are unnecessary and many leave room for drawing false conclusions. 3. You are focusing on the details about newtons of force and then making broad conclusions. This is not sound logic. Just think for a little bit about it. There is a soft pad... if you get hit by any random physical object while sliding/tumbling during a fall (a small bump in the road, the curb, your shoulder on the ground etc.) and these WILL minimize some of the force. Bones don't always snap... they chip, they twist and any number of other injuries happen. Pads decrease the force. 4. You walking and talking like you know what you are talking about and the overall high production value of this video makes this so much worse. 5. For any argument about "enjoying life" or making a risk benefit of the annoyance of pads vs no pads... (non-sarcastically) by all means, feel free to not wear pads, or a helmet or even wear flip flops on your bike! I authentically support your choice as long as you KNOW the risks. The problem with this video is that you are 100% wrong about the risks of not wearing pads. 6. Finally, you mention "We all have our own equations for balancing comfort v. practicality v. safety, which is why I made a point of not telling people to take the armour out of their jackets (twice!)". Here you are being disingenuous, you clearly implied that people should take out their pads. You put the word "USELESS" in your thumbnail - cmon man!
Brains, skill and experience is what protects you in motorbike riding, not armour. Less accidents, less statistics. Given that, always wear protection. But wear it to the extent it makes you confident and fearless enough to ride without sentimental distraction, and also to the point it does not make you seriously uncomfortable, temperature, range of motion, or even pain wise. The last thing you want is your protection to raise the chances of an accident. All the above considering that speeding is the No1 factor for an accident to happen. But if you don't speed, don't ride a bike, get a car. And that is the main point of life is precious but we have to live it. If it was all to avoid death, we would not have kids. ps. don't trust doctors. most of them are illiterate, especially when analysing statistics. i am not talking about this specific doctor, but, in general.
I high sided on the expressway last May doing approximately 130kph after hitting a metal patch on the road. I was airborn for what seemed like an eternity and knew it was going to hurt when I finally made contact with mother earth. When I landed I broke my collarbone and damaged my shoulder ((now titanium man ) however I also slid a long way alongside my bike. The motorcycle jeans I was wearing were damaged but the road never made contact with my skin due to the fabric and armour. My Jacket was like wise badly damaged but the material and armour protected my skin. My gloves had sliders on the heel of the palm and were both badly worn (trying to slow myself down ) but my hands were fine apart from a small cut on one finger. I never believed that so called armour would protect my bones and it did not, but there is no doubt what so ever, that if I had not been wearing it I would have suffered serious skin and tissue damage. I understand the points Ryan is making but his almost dismissive " It may save you a bruise" is, in my mind, a little dismissive of the very real possibility of serious slide injuries. His airbag may protect his bones in a crash but it will not stop him wearing away his elbow. Armour is there to help save the rider from unintentional weight loss due to skating on your ass down a strip of tarmac.
That's true, but is there really much of a point if you're riding around town and not going those speeds? Not arguing, it's just an interesting debate. 130km/h is higher than the speed limits for 99% of roads here in Aus
I think you're mixing up armor and slide protection. He's not advocating for not wearing abrasion resistant gear, just for taking the pads out of them to make them more wearable
@@newFaction64From the eyes of many first responders it would be objective wouldn’t it? If just one or two were adding anecdotes I would agree; however there are at least 100 of them.
I don't believe anything I see on the Internet today, but I am a believer that knee pads should extend farther around the side rather than simply covering the knee cap. The response to finding that existing armor is less effective than one would hope should not be to abandon all armor. It should be to demand innovation from makers to offer more effective armor. Nothing stops them from exceeding the regulatory standard but consumer expectations. Edit: Then again, I may be missing the more nuanced conclusion that broken bones are inevitable right now and the thing to invest in after adequate abrasion resistance isn't padding but wearable airbags to prevent more serious neck injuries. RF9 did include the Helite on his recent list of starter gear for 2024, after all.
Agreed. These tiny CE pads are kind of a joke, but if we had better armor on top of it to spread the impact it would matter. Of course, adventure and moto x riders do exactly that, but we aren't really willing to do that for routine on-road riding. All the current styles are "riding jeans" and "riding boots" that are actually hi-top tennis shoes. I choose to wear riding pants OVER my jeans and take them off at dest but most people won't - they want convenience so they get jeans with these little tiny pads that wouldn't protect you if you just fell over a stop sign....
I made a bicylcle crash at 50kmh thats like 30mph. My knee got damaged at the side not at the front what everybody always wants to protect... Really painfull. I wont imaging what would happened at 60mph because the force is 4x times higher :/
Agree. I have a pair of Klim jeans that have very little armor, just like F9 is showing in this video. I have a pair of Dianese leather pants that have amazing knee and shin protection. The two are miles apart in terms of armor and protection.
You can get not only wearable airbag jackets but airbag pants now as well. Only one brand of airbag pants right now but that should expand (heh) quickly.
This is anecdotal: I have had one fall / laydown of my bike on gravel in a corner. My elbow hit the ground and I was very happy to have this type of soft impact protection. No injury. I wore a knox mesh jacket.
As a guy who's had 3 unfortunate 'offs' (in 60+ years of riding - none of which were avoidable - and 2 of which resulted in helo rides), I gotta believe that the gear I had on saved my bacon, at least to a degree. In my latest 'event' I hit sand on a shaded road in the mountains of SW VA early in the morning while negotiating a corner at 50 (+/-) mph and the bike simply slammed me to the asphalt. I have no memory of the accident, but I have to believe the KLIM gear I had on significantly reduced my injuries (as did my helmet). The ER doc at the hospital in Johnson City, TN where I was life-flighted commented that he sees a lot of m/c related incidents resulting in permanent and sometimes fatal injuries, many from incidents where no 'gear' was worn and he attributed the lack of major injuries to me to my gear. I consider myself to be an experienced rider who doesn't ride above my skill levels, but I do ride a lot, and the more we ride the more the odds are against us. I'm merely trying to mitigate the chances of an off resulting in permanent or fatal results. I'll continue to use my pads.
As an ER doc in Johnson City, I just say that to everyone. Imagine if I started telling people their gear probably doesn't do anything, they'd want another doctor! Particularly since it's not like I saw the crash, or was even at the scene. But people think I can read trauma like their insides aren't organized yogurt. The mush whisperer.
@@NaeMuckle A car crossed the road 10 Meters in front of me. I rammed into the side of the car. 10 month later I was able to leave the hospital for the first time. Second crash so far in 40 years of riding motorbikes was a crash caused by a sort of Antilope which came out of the forest and jumped into my bike directly from the side. Now you tell us accidents like these are avoidable? It is totally disrespectful to tell the victims of an accident that they are to blame for their accident, because it could have been avoided in any case.
Not every accident is a simple lowside from riding too hard for the skill, tires, or road conditions. Sometimes life just has other plans my man. I just recently had an avoidable accident, but alas I put off upgrading the rubbers and it caught up to me @NaeMuckle
Although it felt like a horse kicked me in the ribs, I credit walking away from my 60 MPH highway slide- unscratched to my Armored Scorpion Jacket, Armored- knuckle gloves, Hawk pants, Forma Adventure boots and Nolan N100 Helmet. All of the above endured some level of roadrash, and my jacket and pants armor certainly did its part....ATGATT rings loud and clear with this rider!...
For someone who rides dual sports and has a lot of low speed falls the armour really does help. Probably doesn’t make much of a difference if you hit a wall at 90.
Fell over once doing some slow speed work in a parking lot. Landed hip first on the ground. Had hip armour in my pants, so I didn't feel a thing, but l imagine that would not have been the case without it. At the very least wouldn't been some bruising.
And if you fall on it again? Yeah, right. "Pads are worthless." You know what is actually worthless? This video! And to think so many people will simp over Ryan and his ability to read a script for 7 minutes that they'll just take his word and suggestions to heart and remove the pass from their gear anyway.
@@werepat ...if you actually read the comments you'd notice people either contesting him or reinterpretating his words correctly (current armor bad, we want better armor) but no, keep whining
What studies often miss are the accidents that didn’t end up in the survey because the person was absolutely fine…because they had armour. That time you slowly dropped and landed elbow down on concrete? Might have been an arm breaker, but you had a pad so you didn’t end up in ER.
Yes, can't see why the protector wouldn't be usefull if the primary impact is little above the fracture force level, and taking it back below. Doesn't take away the fact we could have better protectors.
Vital point, thank you. Especially as many of these studies were from US, where medical care is expensive. Many fallen riders just limped home feeling lucky
I'm glad I wore them a few days ago, the bruises in those slightly better protected areas are on a lighter yellow than the almost blue ones on my arm, my forearm, my leg or my foot. More important, a rider should never forget that wearing a certain level of protection doesn't mean being safe.
@@Derkenblosh2 yes I know that...but I was just thinking about which would be a better alternative for abrasion resistance Is a class A rated jacket with level 2 protectors better/worse than AA rated jacket without any armouring... which would be a better/cheaper way to increase abrasion resistance...and so on...lots of such questions not covered in this video
@@palashbhaumik42069 The A class is worse then the AA since it's not the pads but the surface material tested for abrasion, he covered that in a previous video something about textile versus leather.
I ve always enjoyed his videos although they were gone for a while. Don't understand this one, two years ago my wife was riding an HD Switchback was hit by a pickup toyota hilux; the bike flipped twice as the speed was 140km and she landed in a ditch. I immediately got her to a clinic, the doctors did not believe it. She no abrasions, breaks nor dislocation, just needed 7 stitches where the Cardo mic smacked. Lots of bruises. We both ride full gear and c2 pads. They do make a difference
this is the video that made me unsub, not just because of this, but the lack of apology and corrections. If this is the stuff we find out, imagine how many lies this channel repeats just through the thin veil of a fancy editing team.
Almost. If a fracture occurs at 4kN and our substandard (I agree) padding reduces the force of the impact (i.e. 6kN) as well as the disruption of the impact to below 4kN, the fracture will likely not occur. This will be a moot point for anyone riding a street bike into a concrete barrier at highway speed. But as some who have taken hard falls on elbows, hips and knees off-road, fall on my CE2 pads and Leatt knee and shin pads have saved my day more than once. Most of us have tried it both ways and regretted the days we left the padding at home. It is also important to remember the stats are only collected when someone presents at the hospital. This data is completely void of all the impacts that occurred, with padding, and no serious injury occurred.
This video has started a huge debate that will surely improve impact protection on jackets , improve standards for jackets and better rider understanding on how protection works and what to buy. For this alone , it was worth it. Thanks !
Yeah. I agree. He's very influential and so many riders might just stop wearing protective gear because to them what he says is gospel truth. Maybe he should've spent more time in clarifying his disclaimer because it's scary for riders to just drop everything and stop wearing gear
I think you will have to have a large contingent of the motorcycle riding community to, en mass, approach the manufacturers and demand better protection and variety (of size of pads) before they would voluntarily do such an expensive venture. But keep up the hope!
@@_titojoe they didn't listen very well then. He stopped wearing the slide in pads, because he's wearing different armor / airbag. Not because he settled wearing any protection. That only discusses his upper body back armor. He didn't talk about other parts. He is wearing either an airbag or fancy external back armor. He didn't stop and wear nothing. He didn't even say that the regular stuff was without utility, just not good enough.
IF - It helps anyone save edit time - When I use the record pause button - I also pause my jaw. It's simple - and effective. You just need to remember what you were saying in the previous shot. If you're moto blogging and you just ridden past something you want to find later - put your glove over the lens, then later just search for the black parts and Hey Presto...
....David Wood does a very impressive one take including a trip down a subway, if I remember he may even got on the train and popped up at tge exit subway, walked to a park bench and sat down. All in one take. I like it as it seems natural- if one is not too easily distracted
He’s using a brand he invested in heavily to pull this off. If you imagine your other moto vloggers doing this bit, 😅 their poor comment section. His brand enables this one shot, topic, and opinion to be. 🎉
What is totally correct about this video is that it is very important to have protectors in size and positioning that wrap the complete joint. Those small standard protectors in textile products are not extremely helpful in being there where you need them when the impact hits you. Every good sales pitch I had so far had the imprtance of correct fit of clothing AND protector pockets. During riding and weird twists you take when you fall. So when you move they still need to cover you. Also everyone told me the stuff they put is just filler so the pockets are not empty on trying it out. You always buy the good stuff afterwards to replace it - it's still a market - you're also right about that. Most ppl don't care about it or don't know about it so it's not a selling point. Only the most expensive suits 2-4k got it included already. Those also absorb/spread a lot more force. What is really hard to find is a good suit with a pocket or good protector that also covers the coccyx so you don't have to wear those maximum uncomfortable for anything but one-piece back turtles. I don't understand why most ppl rate protective gear in this order: helmet, jacket and maybe gloves When for my experience it should be more: Helmet, gloves (with combination shockpad + hard shell on nuckles, fingers and tying together the weak fingers - there is a reason there are hospitals specialized alone for hand surgery), massive boots with inner or outer skeleton restricting movement of the joint. Then the pants. hip is the place where you will slide on the most. Then the jacket where active safety like staying dry and in your temperature windows is even more important than passive safety. Purchase different gear and sizing for different temperatures. One combined with insulation shit in fall but not in summer will not fit correctly in both occasions and will less likely keep the crashpads where they belong. Everything textile below 2k bucks is only for very slow slides. If you want more, you don't want the same d500 shit doubled or tripled. you want leather and or at least kevlar. The plastic will just melt into your skin. I find airbags horrible for active safety. Feeling comfortable. I would take the Rukka protectors above it any time. I know ppl who kept their feet from a side crash and just break or crush it instead of tearing if off or crushing it to amputation level because they had Daytona Shoes. I someone who has a stiff leg now but kept it instead of loosing it cause he wore the best schwabenleder two-piece leather suit with the best protectors instead of losing it. Protectors are improtant. I can just walk it of in small or medium sized impacts with a lot less damabe to recover from or just keep a limb or organ instead of loosing it. It's not always 0% or 100%. Sometimes 10-20% reductions is all you need to be able to recover at all. btw. that almost leg loss was with 45kmh - scooter speed. Just an unlucky fall into a siderail. Which for me is no argument for not protection but all the protection you can get for all the speeds and all the distances. Even if it's 30km/h for 5 km to the ice cream shop.
A highway speed slide with a AAA garment, with the pad removed, will still hurt a lot more than with the pads installed. I'd rather fall from 5ft high with pads than without. That's all they are there for. That last line you threw in there about appreciating life, supports the idea that a marginal safety item, which doesn't have much downside, should be worn.
Not necessarily. It supports the idea that, being that the "highest value" is to enjoy life, if the body armor creates you more trouble than enjoyment, then it is of no use, and if it is of more benefit to enjoying life then it is an obstacle, then it is of use. Now he needed to argue the negatives about using armor, which he didn't, and weigh them against the positives. He gave his conclusion in the form of a metaphor without effectively and objectively weighing both sides of the scale against each other. Although the production is amazing, the theoretical side is limping. So each one has to draw their own conclusions
That's why the motto is: "dress for the slide, not the ride". Pads don't protect that much against the impact itself (minus the helmet), but is all about making the slide comfortable.
Just to add, I have never expected pads to prevent fractures, they just would have cover the entire limb to be able to do that like a suit of armor or a MOTOGP suit. Its always been about the slide for me.
@@spartanx169x I think that's just the common sentiment, as it is very obvious, but if the companies did hold up their end on protective gear then we might not need to dress for the slide, but the fractures and the impact.
Seems like some protection is better than none. It might not save a bone when the force is very large, but if it was just enough to break a bone, is the pad not going to absorb some of that and save you from a fracture?
I forgot what I was watching thanks to production quality. Beautiful stuff as always. Now, as for the topic. Considering what's provided is true, it surely remains effective to some extent as you mentioned. Different speeds, angles, impacted materials vary and the end result varies too. Despite all, having armour is most probably better than none. Striving for better stand-alone protection as you showed would be the right way to go. I wouldn't consider removing my armour parts, we fragile humans don't need fractures to feel pain. Bruises alone, abrasion, lacerations and much more can be a worse nightmare. Even then, medical recovery and treatment will be shorter and easier in case of anything extreme. Nevertheless, I 100% understand your point there so thank you for making it clear not to rely on said armour when it's virtually useless when it comes to life and death.
The 2 biggest flaws of this this video are: 1: The video is assuming because the armor doesn't meet 4kN in distribution, the armor's effect is near negligent. This is inaccurate. 2: The study said results are inconclusive. Yet the video pedals it as though there is no relation between armor and less injury/fracture. As a researcher myself I get frustrated when this happens. My first thought when I saw the data put on screen was this: "How do we know that the people wearing gear weren't going faster and getting in worse accidents?"
Yeah, it’s ridiculous. Tumbling off your bike at low speed and landing on your elbow. I know the armour will have me just picking up the bike, not going to hospital.
1) no... when is that assumed? The video states that the standard is not good enough because it's limited. 2) well, that's an assumption on your part, with no reason to suggest it. Other than statistically improbable. If you are a researcher you should understand the concept of the null hypothesis.
New rider here buying my first bike soon. I appreciate Ryan never taking safety gear promises at face value, especially regarding helmets. But I'll join most others here saying: I'll definitely be wearing pads. I expect I could take a spill or two and the less damage I take the more quickly I'll get back on that horse. I like my skin where it is.
Well your conclusion got it right - protect your skins, not your bones since the CE won't absorb enough to protect from break. I'd say $ better spent on quality abrasion protection in that case, i.e. I'll take kevlar over foam.
he doesn't even consider low speed crashes and simple falls. like say you're simply going too fast for a turn at an intersection and fall going twenty miles an hour. low chance of bone breakage or road rash, but would you rather land on your elbow without a pad, or with a pad? i'm definitely not going to stop wearing pads.
@@thinkdunson I think the studies he read from did take into consideration all crashes, including low speed ones. You will fracture your elbow even in a low speed crash (30mph), with or without pad. I suspect your speed going forwards is irrelevant to the downwards force on to your elbow in a simple ‘falling over’ crash, sure it will add major abrasion damage as the bike speed is a horizontal force, but your speed at falling downwards will remain the same, as it's just acceleration of gravity. Unless you get launched up into the air of course. But yeah, if you get launched horizontally into something, no pad will save you I mean I'm still gonna wear pads haha, but they will not save you from any impact force
I generally like your content...and understand the argument, but having had a good few crashes over 40 years of riding, I have experienced crashes both with and without CE armour. I currently wear Forcefield armour and it has, without a doubt, been highly effective at reducing injuries. As has the sorbothane armour in my old BKS leathers. Major impacts will break bones, but the trauma and damage will be reduced or eliminated for lower impacts. I continue to wear CE armour.
This is pretty much pointless. I’ve been riding for fifty years and can’t remember once thinking that my armored jacket would protect my bones. It’ll sure as hell soften the impact of a crash though, and mitigate road rash so I’ll keep mine in thank you.
I'd concur, if I hadn't been dragged 50 yards under my Blackbird fifteen years ago, and *almost* worn through the shoulder pad in my jacket. No pad, no shoulder. A single data point, maybe, but it's *my* single data point. Two years later my femur was smashed by my handle bar, but that was where there were no pads.
Eh this is kinda like not using a lock at all because all locks can be cut with a grinder. Having crashed with and without armour I know first hand how much less it hurts when you have armour. You know why that difference isn’t in the numbers? None of those impacts with the armour did I report. Basically will pads stop you braking bones in a bad crash? Nope. Will they make a smaller crash less painful and maybe protect from a small fracture? Yep
@@user-Podcast-Canadathat's not necessarily true-no one appreciates the idea of being in good shape like the person who no longer is! The point remains the same
I don't even like motorcycles, but your videos are so high quality I can hardly believe it. It's it's a beautiful conductance of many elements at once: engineering, production, market politics and regulation interplay, a big picture exposed clear and wide by the bloom of so many nuanced detail considerations. Hard to put into words, this channel has the magic sauce in spades.
Hit a van at 40mph side on, I was wearing full body armour and walked away without a single break. The trade off was head to toe bruising instead of shattered limbs.
I am a history teacher and I am using the final statement of this video in my lectures on war (with careful citations of course) . "Life is so beautiful, our instinct is gonna be to protect it. But our imperative, we have to remember, is to appreciate it". That's beyond profound!
With regard to this video, that sentiment is irrelevant. Wearing a padded jacket does nothing to decrease my appreciation or enjoyment of motorcycle riding! I get that ridingvwithout a helmet and gear really is a freeing sensation, and probably should be experienced by everyone, but saying wearing padded gear reduces the beauty of the world is, frankly, silly.
@@werepat Your comment is also irrelevant. What if wearing armor does impede someone's enjoyment of riding? Maybe I think we should limit all motorcycles to 60mph because I get the same enjoyment at 30mph as I do at 130mph. Surely that wouldnt impede on your fun right? And its safer right?! EI: Where's the line dude? The personalities who find it suitable to judge what is and what isnt "enjoyable", are often the same types who end up legislating limitations... I agree with you to an extent. I wear armor. But if someone says wearing armor reduces their enjoyment, thats their choice to make. Thats yhe freedom they can enjoy. Im happy they get to choose, and I expect them to be responsible for any consequences.
@@SuperSneakySniper my problem is not with unsafe practices. My problem comes from the tacit approval and implied encouragement from a notable personality that he thinks wearing armored gear is pointless. It's just wrong. Do whatever you want, but that includes doing your best to not be wrong.
I tripped and fell in my living room like an idiot, my foot got caught on something and I hit the ground hard enough that it would have almost definitely broken my knee, but I had just gotten home and was wearing my cheap motorcycle pants, and it almost didn’t hurt at all. Just because something isn’t 100% effective doesn’t mean it’s not worth having. If you hit something just hard enough to break a bone and the pad only takes 10% of the impact that’s still enough to save you.
Right, this like playing football without a helmet because studies show they don't stop concussions. Sometimes the testing protocol isn't even testing the right thing.
You're commenting on a remark where the author extols pads inside the house as justification for wearing pads for a completely different and higher-demand application where their utility is more to protect manufacturers than the wearer. As rugby players whether they want the sport to convert to American football style safety equipment, and then ask yourself why extra safety requirements can not only change behaviors, but also create new problems unintentionally.
@@caseyshiloh247 my point was that not every crash is hitting a tree at 50mph and sometimes the pads are more than enough to protect you. If you only look at the extremes the pads are useless but you’re also ignoring the fact that most motorcycle accidents are low speed crashes where pads are absolutely effective.
@@actualsize123 Yeah I had a low speed crash where my shoulder took the brunt of the impact. I didn't even realized it until I noticed the dirt on my jacket was indented with the honeycomb pattern of the armour underneath. It might have not been a fracture, but I was 2500km from home and a badly bruised shoulder would have been a dampener on the rest of my trip. Anyone doubting pads needs to think about standing on concrete and freely falling to their knees. It's going to hurt.
I have the highest level of respect for the production team behind these videos, and add to that, a generous dollop of admiration to Ryan for delivering them the way he does. Well done!!
I’m not removing pads. I know for a fact they have helps me on some crashes. Ryan has like 100x the experience I will ever have. As a less experienced rider, pads have protected me.
I have much more experience riding than Ryan and this video is hooey! I've been riding for nearly 30 years, all over the world and on every kind of bike, and I've crashed in dozens of different situations. Even if pads don't protect from every possible injury, I know that they have protected me from way more injuries than when I rode without them. I'm keeping them in, too! And Ryan is gonna get people hurt with this video.
Same! Starting next year to ride again after 5 Years I know the risk of minor Incidents will be high, exactly where Pads will help. But also the Helite Airbag Backpack will be a part of the Equipment, because People drive like Maniacs around here...
@@werepat It's april 1'st man. Not exactly the best time to take things seriously. That being said, it's obvious that if someone's actually taking the pads out, that person may have had a few sips of the kerosene we use to clean chains. Obviously, a push for better pads and more coverage/sizes is great. But they reduce impact forces to some extent. That alone is more than enough justification.
@@Aaron-sj2txGermany has a catch all phrase in the StVO which are the rules for the road for all vehicles. There’s a requirement that you should wear adequate protection at all times and your vehicle be properly maintained for the conditions. That loophole lets insurance decline coverage if you don’t have a seatbelt fastened, bald tires, snow or ice on windows, or on the motorcycle they can get you for improper footwear, lack of gloves, helmet.
No, they dont. Had an accident last year, no back protection but a broken vertebra and they didnt care at all. Although they tried to refuse paying for the helmet and other damaged gear.
Been skateboarding, MTBing, surfing forever. After age 35, I noticed that I don't heal as fast. 2016 was when I realized the significance of ANY protection. Longboarding down my local hill at ~15 mph wearing no pads = Took me about 10 minutes to get up off the ground from the pain. 6 weeks recovering from f-up knees and rash. Bought some non rated knee and elbow pads and did not care how I looked went down that hill again faster. Eventually I fell off, bounced and slid around, got up, got my board and went down the hill again laughing at how ridiculously awesome it felt to fall, take no damage and get up immediately. Picking up moto at 40 it was a no brainer buying as much protection as I could (no airbag yet) and after a few minor falls it is the same feeling. It doesn't change your mind until it happens as most things in life. In a major accident will armor protect you from broken bones or death? Apparently not, but I am wearing my armor for the minor stuff that I know can take me out for weeks and months away from the things I love.
My huge respect for RF9 has been significantly diminished by this video… as many others have previously said the primary purpose of the armour is to spread the impact forces over a greater area to reduce the point load thereby reducing the severity of damage/injury. While riding on green lanes last year I had a fairly large off sufficient to shatter my left wrist, right thumb and put a large bruise across my forehead where the helmet spread the impact of hitting the rocks I was riding on. Had I not been wearing a helmet I would be dead with a smashed skull… with a helmet the load was spread meaning I was only knocked unconscious. The A&E nurse that examined me was astounded that my wrist/hand injuries were the only the only broken bones… I was wearing MX boots and MX body armour under my jacket which spread the impact on the rest of my body… I was wearing thin gloves without any significant pads/plates and no wrist protection… not a mistake I will make again
I know a guy who was on the way to a viking re enactments show who fell off going into the Dartford tunnel under the Thames. The shower of sparks his mail shirt gave was most spectacular and absolutely freeked the people in the cars following him .the best bit was when he got up checked himself and with a few bruises carried on to the show .....he got a few more bruises from the Saxon hord he fought 👍
@cedhome7945 I used to do that back in late 90s (Regia Anglorum, Yorvingerhead, York) Wore chain mail vest... it weighed 7 stone!!! wish I still had it lol. Ta for memory unlock 👍🖖
Released on April 1. Good one. Also, pads are positioned on the JOINTS, hence are not meant to prevent bone fractures as such. Also... PPE is designed to REDUCE the scale of injuries, not to 100% prevent them.
He has said in earlier videos that the armor doesn't do much for impacts but rather keeping you off the ground or just a little bit longer. Which is the case.
7 місяців тому+5
Right?! Once i hit a rock with my shoe and fell on my knee on the asphalt. Not even on a motorcycle, just running. I couldn't stand on my leg for days and had to bandage it for 3 weeks! I wish i had a knee protector on. I don't want to imagine what could happen if i fell off of a bike.
Have you ever gone down with armor on? If not you can't comment on it. Landed on my side after 50 mph impact with a deer. Armor saved my elbow and shoulder 100%. Boots and gloves saved my feet and hands 100%. Was checked by the ambulance crew and went home after. Only bad injury was my knee that was only protected by jeans.
@@MrLaughingcorpse A well padded boot saved my left outter ankle and toes when I hit and slid down a wall. It was a low speed impact at an angle. Jeans torn, boot front badly 'bruised'. In the same accident, my left shoulder hit the railing on the said wall. I had a big bad bruise just under the joint but nothing else because that was a padded area. And my helmet brushed the railing, luckily it slid along, but that would have hit my jaw.
In all of my on and offroad crashes, I have never once thought, man I wish I didnt have these pads on. I understand the point you’re conveying, but my knees and elbows have always been grateful for my padding. Im keeping my road armor.
Exactly, it doesn't take a rocket surgeon to put pads on and realize they will help. Sure they aren't a steel roll cage, but I'd rather have anything in-between me and the concrete rather than nothing.
I've been hit by a van on one side, then the road on the other, then the road on the original side, then my back and head sliding across the rocks. I got up and walked away, I also would not have wanted to do that without the armor on. The only spot I even got a scratch was where the zipper for airflow was open on my forearm peeled away a couple of layers of skin. Otherwise than being a little light headed , filled with adrenaline, and pissed at the van driver... I was able to ride all the way home and make sure I didn't have a concussion at the hospital. This was in Kenya/East Africa
Had a crash last year and fell on my ellbow. I am convinced my level two protector spared me a fracture. I am keeping my level twos in. I want as much protection as possible!
Its true it did. No ifs ands or buts about it, it's not "convinced" or "belief", its fact.. The data presented in this video may be correct, but its interpreted incorrectly. A ~50kN force is reduced to 9kN, thats 80% reduction, and that makes a difference. Let's work the calculation the other way. Say your goal is to keep force
I really believe that you make some good points, Ryan, but I can tell you that I probably would not be walking without a cane or walker now if I did not have armor in my knees and full armor in the rest of my gear when I had a serious accident. In 2006, a huge SUV made a left turn in front of me and I impacted the front wheel at around 45 mph. I was thrown up and over the vehicle, knocked unconscious, and woke up to EMT’s cutting off my damaged helmet (would have dead or suffered severe brain injury without it) and new armored leather jacket. I was transported to the hospital where I was evaluated and released that day. I had no injuries or abrasions. My fingertips were very bruised (jammed between the brake lever and the vehicle) and were saved from serious injury because my gloves had finger tip armor. I also had a small fracture in my lower back. When I went to look at my beautiful Kawasaki ZRX1200R, I noticed that the steel tank had a huge dent in it (about 3” deep) where my right knee had impacted the tank. The guys at the salvage yard were surprised that I was still alive and walking, given the severe damage to the bike. I had very slight bruising on my right knee! It is surprising that my armor worked so well, especially so, given the fact that my back pad was just foam and none of my other armor was CE rated. I had another crash a few years later where I had no injuries or abrasions because I was wearing armored gear. I was never asked about what gear I was wearing in the first crash and I did not report the second crash, so it begs the question-how accurate is the data if motorcyclists walk away uninjured from a crash and don’t report the incident? Personally, I am so grateful and appreciative that we have such great protective gear and, at 77 years old and still riding, I will always ride with armor. Just my perspective, everyone. Feel free to do what you like. BTW, if you don’t like bulky armor, try ghost armor - you hardly know it is there. Ride safe and enjoy the ride for as long as you can!
Well , if you want safety ride a car , motorcycle is unsafe & the more safety and protection you add the more of a car it becomes... moving from a slingshot 3 wheel cycle to a 4 wheel go cart, to a 5 star safe rating suv , to a 20 wheel tank.
@@oscarbear7498I never noticed that what I'm wearing adds a couple extra wheels to my bike, or prevents me from leaning into a corner, or form feeling the wind in my face, or hearing the engine. What I'm wearing protects me, it doesn't make my bike any more "like a car".
@@WatanabeNoTsuna. its an Exaggeration to prove a point of a Slippery slope. That motorcycles are inherently dangerous on purpose! as there's absolutely no reason to ride a motorcycle given far better alternative exist like a comfortable car for transportation. The ONLY benefit a motorcycle has is maybe better gas mileage but on my bike how I ride I get 38mpg with a modified carburetor. One rides a motorcycle for the rush, & excitement that dangerous things provide. The more dangerous less pads , no boots, no motorcycle jacket , no helmet safe glasses just for the wind, gives the highest thrill at the cost pf highest danger. If you dress like an astronaut, in full bubble 🫧 suit isn't not as fun...again both extremes to show the contrast to prove a point since your mentally slowly.
I never ever expected my body armour to prevent a fracture. I always wear it to help prevent or minimize road rash in case of some sort of slide. You go ahead and stop wearing your armour, but I sure hope that this video doesn't influence someone else to make that same mistake.
I have fallen on pavement wearing a fully padded jacket and a pair of regular jeans. my hip was bruised, my knee was F'ed up for about three months, but my elbow, which hit the ground first, wasn't even bruised, nor was my shoulder or any other part of my upper body. Armor makes a difference, the 50J impact is just a number used for testing purposes, most likely to ensure that the armor will endure an unrealistically hard hit even if your bones wont. After that i high-sided on a hard packed dirt road going about 60 km/h, flew over the handlebars and hit the ground 5m in front of the bike. This time i was wearing padded jeans as well. Not a single bruise, got up and lifted my bike back up. Had I not been wearing armor my elbow would have been shattered and my knees wouldn't have been much better off. Don't spread misinformation, of course armor protects you from fractures, use common sense and don't over-analyze a lab test.
Dude, it's not about your personal experience which could differ from a statistical viewpoint, since your experience could be a statistical anomaly for the intended study.
@@asfandelfi think his point is that Ryan is missing the point a bit. Yeah at a certain point the impact will break bones regardless of weather or not you are wearing armor. But there is a threshold where armor protects, at lower speeds and forces. Those lower speeds you are also more likely to have an accident.
You are spot on there... if my armour saved my skin from looking like grated cheese then it works.... I know of several riders that have no bruises or skin abrasions etc due to their armour... any high speed impact will take anyone out no matter what you are wearing... bottom line is... rather be safe than sorry
@@asfandelf The statistics only look at actually injured people in armor. It is a well known bias called survivorship bias as it does not account for those that were completely uninjured, but would be otherwise injured without armor. Even a minor scrape saved by just wearing armor makes it worth it, as instead of taking off your gear to treat the scrape turns to dusting yourself off and riding on. F9s video will however create a discord in the industry most likely. Higher demand for airbags which over time will make them more affordable and reliable. A better padding as F9 is correct - you do not need to stand out in the game, someone who cares about spine armor (e.g. motocross riders) will buy a separate high end piece anyway making a built in one often redundant. So slap in the one that has been ok for like 15 years and claim you have the spine armor or back protector and charge extra for it. It will protect you from most injures but it does not cover a tailbone for example. In the end despite this video being misinformative, it will most likely be a net positive since it may create an actual demand for high end protective clothing from people that considered what they got good enough. My Meteor 350 can't really go at speeds where 50J impacts happen. So for a rider like me a B-type is pretty much ok. And most motorbikes in the world are lower displacement than mine, as most people ride 250s, 125s and such. Sure a guy on a litre bike going at 250kmph will not be saved by anything short of a miracle but most riders do not ride like that. Most riders that ride very (the ones that are statistically more likely to be in an accident) often ride at 80-100kmph at most. Be if for lack of power, wind fatigue, safety, obeying the laws and/or fuel economy most riders I have met just flow with the traffic and 1 in a 100 goes the 200 on a straight. But you only see the 1 in 100 (and that is confirmation bias), not the 99 other riders that just went at the speed limit and did not rev at 8k RPM nor swish past you. I kid you not there was a crash outside my window yesterday. On the camera you see 8 bikes going at speed limit (50) but one bike went 70. That one bike had right of way but a van driver did not see him and went into his way. And everyone in the comments was "those damn bikers, all of them are speeding daredevils". As they genuinely watched a 15s video where 8 bikes went at/under the speed limit.
I have had a couple of spills, and I'm absolutely grateful for my body armour. Something that isn't mention here is compound damage. Nothing that I'm currently aware of, that money can buy, is ever going to prevent serious impact damage if you come to a hard stop... but if you bounce along the road you may well strike elbows and knees several times with light to moderate impacts. Stack those impacts together and you have a potentially serious injury. The friends who have crashed/been knocked off and had no pads all suffered elbow and knee damage (even with lined riding jeans and no pads). 2 of those were at sub 30mph speeds. My own incidents were at twice that speed and I walked away with no injuries including where my lightweight leathers abraded through and I finished the slide on my backboard. Confirmation bias? Perhaps, but I'm leaving my armour where it is until they start making something better.
You are right, i bet you to this day felt the force impacting the protections where you hit the road, and some say they are there doing nothing... no ammount of bro science will make me ride without protection ever.
Maybe an April Fool’s joke, but I would never take out my armor based on anyone’s video. I have been smacked in the chin’s with road debris and knew what if I didn’t have armor on I would have been recovering instead of riding.
Yeah actually the road debris is a solid reason to always keep your pads inside. It's a common case to have a stone fly into your windshield when you drive a car, what can we say about going on the road without a windshield?
Great video! I just started getting my gear after getting my license recently, and I watched hundreds of reviews of different products. I tried tens of products myself in those specialized stores, and I 100% agree with your opinion. Every time I tried a garment, I wondered how that small shoulder or elbow pad would help in case of an accident. I'm just entering the motorcycle world, so I have a completely fresh and unbiased look, and it's so obvious how much the monetization strategies took over the actual purpose of this protective gear. I have experience with mountaineering gear. Being on the high mountain with somewhat compromised gear can also cost your life, and I would say most of the serious brands are not compromising the quality and are investing in new technologies, although you can definitely see that the lower-end products are ridiculous from a performance standpoint. Sadly, profit becoming the main priority comes with a high price for those riding the bikes, and it's good that there are still companies producing effective protective gear. Hopefully, someday, the law will change so that the competition increases to such a level that we, as consumers, benefit from lower prices and better quality.
To an extent this is true but it is missing a lot of real life use cases where protection does in fact make a huge difference. The major point being the abrasion/laceration protection. The focus in this video on broken bones, which are not a big deal in most cases. Scraping off part off your elbow or hip bone is a different matter, just like skin grafts or deep laceration that hit a major artery. Having had a whole bunch of accidents, on and off the bike, with and without protection, I can unequivocally say it does make a huge difference. The people that the research didn't approach were the more minor crashes, where people slide out or something to that extent and those crashes are much more common. In those cases, the protection absolutely does its job really well. There is also more than snapping a bone in half. You can chip or crack your elbows, shoulder or hips, which can create much bigger issues than a single, clean break. Bones also bruise, which takes months and months to heal, if it ever does. In my opinion this video is too narrow-minded, focussing too much a broken bones as being the worst injury you can have (which it isn't in most cases) and the fact the major brands have had a hand in setting that a standard that could be better. Instead of shooting down the concept of pads based on these two aspects of protective gear, you could argue for a better standard like the horse-girls get and include the situations where protection absolutely serves its purpose. Realise how many people take your opinion as gospel, even if you formulate in such a way you are not liable for people taking your advice to heart.
Yeah even though the message is technically there, way too many people are going to read the title and watch the first half and think they don't need armor anymore.
I can agree with F9 that standards should be challenged if there’s opportunity for improvement for the end-user, and any shortcomings they have should be known - but just writing off these inserts because bone strength < insert energy mitigation in a one dimensional controlled test irks me.
@@uncleren Exactly. Especially with the focus on broken bones, which are not the most common injury in crashes. Bruises, abrasions and lacerations are way more common. Having experienced injuries like that, I always use body armour. Every little bit helps.
Yeah the rant comes down to 'if something isn't 100% perfect then it's completely useless' which is silly. Didn't cite anything that says it increases injuries, I don't really understand the angle he took here unless it's just to get people to engage in the comments which clearly worked lol
My bones are strong and haven't broken, but after a severe off-roading accident, I damaged the ligaments/joint in the side of my hip. This experience made me consider how much better protected the more vulnerable parts of my body, like the hip area, would have been with armor. You do state this when you say "specifically in relation to fractures."
That’s a good point. The other thing I wondered was about the severity of those fractures, a small fracture is nothing compared to a severe break. To me, the challenge is to find the right comfortable gear where the pads don’t bother me, at least on the bike. I’ve done that now, so nothing to gain by removing them.
he did say at the end that it can still be protective, and that he does wear pads/air bags, just very high spec ones rather than the diddly little ones
body armor won't do anything to save ligaments and cartridges, knee braces can somehow protect the ligaments but at the expense of damaging your bones. it's nice that you mentioned your bones are strong, I once knew a rider who had an high bone density according to a medical examination, he never wears any safety gear, not even a helmet, he would sometimes come with road rashes and his bike beaten up yet he somehow never broke a bone. surely if he hit an object strong enough he'd break a bone, but I'm sure another weaker dude would've broke his bones.
@@DeadEightVids I crashed a dirtbike and got a hairline fracture in my wrist. My hand swelled and took a few weeks to heal. To this day, My wrist will hurt randomly. I cannot imagine if I broke it.
Hmm, strange approach here. I had a bad motorbike crash 10 months ago. My knee was injured with a fracture. I was full gear equiped BUT, without my knee armor, my knee would be destroyed, not just fractured, and today, repaired. I think the armor goal, was not to prevent fracture, but to absord energy to reduce the damage. Sorry for my english, i'm a french rider who wear full gear... still ^^ Have a nice day, and I hope for you that you will never had a bad crash, without your armor gears. Ride safe people, life is too short ;). Best regards.
Your armor mainly spread the blunt impact across the entire protected area. Without armor a portion of your knee would have taken all the impact, likely having a more severe outcome. Kudos for using it.
that's exactly what he said...the rating is a joke, it doesn't prevent damage just soften the blow and removes the road rash and other inconveniences. BUT the point is still there - why the bar/standard is set so low? Because manufacturers had it set this way with the help regulatory companies. And the latter did mention that is the minimum and manufacturers can go higher but the former don't, due to cost and uneducated consumers. Would you even look at the 2.5k jacket when there is a $500 one right next to it on the rack? If you did you would see the "low" cost one has the minimum standard for safety (15N) while the higher priced one guarantees
Your English makes way more sense than Ryan’s it won’t stop fractures like horse rider kit (which also wouldn’t at the speeds and G loadings of motorcycle CE standards by the way) so throw it away! Reducing the seriousness of fractures and eliminating them on more minor impacts is entirely the point! My impact pads are staying in!
I've been riding now for 50 years, In my youth I rode an IT400, my moto was if I wasn't crashing then I wasn't going fast enough. Back then everyone knew that helmets were important, and then clearly gloves, I rode quite often and when I was in high school, I commuted thru back roads to school. On my way home one day with my back pack, my home work and a book or two I had a significant crash. I remember hitting my back , but I could feel the cushion of the books and folders. Bottom line, I think this guy is nuts, I still ride and I wear full armour protection.
knee protection literally saved my knee when I was swerving from a car that pulled out in front of me and clipped my leg against the car’s rear tail light. Shoulder armour took the brunt of an offroad impact into a wall of dirt, likely saving my collarbone. The protection was oldschool vanson type armour, not non-newtonian d3o style armour.
@@atomsmasher12 Some people are so oblivious to the danger that the law is sometimes needed to impose a minimum level of safety. Hands are systematically exposed in a fall, even at low speed. In the same way, I wouldn't be shocked if bikers were forbidden to ride in shorts and flip-flops, as I've already seen in the south of France.
@@nayIIkoyeah, but... They do need to wear gloves in France. In certain states in the USA, you need eye protection, by law, but a skid lid is optional. Laws and regulations are often more confusing than helpful, I think it's an aid to Darwin's theory. (I understand keeping dust or errant insects out of riders' eyes is important).
The best way to avoid fractures and broken bones in a crash is not to stick your arms out before hitting the ground. Also try to stand up a little on the pegs before impact as this helps throw you over the car bonnet etc and stops you getting tangled up in the handle bars. In a low slide style accident it also pushes the bike away from you. In the interests of scientific testing, I've done a lot of crashing on motorcycles over the years (at least 2 dozen accidents from 20mph to 80mph) and I can honestly say I'd of avoided nearly all of these accidents if I was just riding a little more sensibly.
At 62 years old I got knocked off my Honda goldwing driving through California coast fog and smoke I was trying to be careful going 25 mph as it was getting dark Hit a construction patch and it threw me off the bike there is no way you can tell me that my gear didn't save me from having broken bones it was worth every penny my full year including gloves I hit the pavement I spun I don't know how many times The only thing that happened to me and it didn't show up on x-rays was probably a fracture a hairline one in my foot that took a long time to heal Yes I had a bruised kidney but I was able to get a new face shield on get my bike out of the ditch which hardly had a scratch and proceed another 250 mi to my destination anyone who doesn't ride with armor protection is just a fool we see them in the street riding with flip-flops shorts personally I won't go to pick up groceries without my gear Yes my next thing is to get one of those inflatable vests it's been on my wish list hopefully this year
Think about it... what he says makes total sense. If you are going 110mph and get launched from your bike are those little armor pads are really going to do jack all for your fall... a fall at that speed is going to massively hurt and the last thing in your mind will be "Well I hope that pad helps my fall". Its going to be "OHH SHIT this is going to hurt". He is right when he says they will help for abrasions but at the end of the day if you break a bone that is under those pads... what use was the pad?
@@canadianwithabeardWell, if you're going 110mph and you crash, I doubt you're thinking about your armor, rather thinking if within the next few moments you'll be able to form another thought or if this is the end of the line
You might think it's protectionism... but I think you missed the point. I put on a one piece leather suit that legitimately weights 20+ pounds with all the armor in it and go ride the racetrack FULLY aware that all its going to do is protect my skin. In fact I have this knowledge first hand. I crashed at Road Atlanta, and I had no abrasions or bruises, but I did break my hip in 4 places and my collar bone. I bought an air vest after that, which might have protected my hips, but not my collar bone. Your skin and other soft tissues represent the LARGEST organs your body has. Protecting those can and will make a significant clinical difference when it comes to skin grafts, both in terms of needing one, and the quality of available tissue if you do. But it also will reduce the likelihood of sepsis. You're at less risk of rabdo, kidney and liver failure because your body has a lot less to deal with than if you didnt have the pads on. You'll heal faster because your body isn't dealing with as many injuries. And then there's just the plain and simple fact that getting bruises and road rash just sucks. Not being miserable every waking (and sleeping) second for months following a crash is worth wearing a bulky jacket.
Yeah, I have been bruised after a small crash, and it was worse than my collarbone fracture during the first week. Getting all clean (from road debris) was one of the most painful things ever. The nurse rubbed it like if she was cleaning rusty bridge with a steel wool, but it was actually my bloody arm, hand, fingers... After some weeks all was good, but 2 years later I still have some light scars/colour difference in my skin. If I were wearing my usual riding jacket, it would have been way better surely. I still believe that a shoulder protector would have saved my collarbone. It was a really low speed impact.
you missed that he didn't say he stopped wearing abrasive resistant motorcycle gear. he said that he stopped wearing armour. you can wear a jacket with full kevlar abrasion resistance, but drop the armour pads.
He didn’t missed the point like he said in the very beginning there’s pads used in horse riding that are way more effective in preventing fractures but the moto companies still uses extremely subpar standards. The pads are designed for IMPACT. They can protect against abrasions but they’re not designed for that and suck at their job. While the skin is the biggest organ we have a fracture can have much worse repercussions than abrasions. These pads are the equivalent of laying the seatbelt over you body while driving so you don’t get a ticket.
@@natalyakeane The pads add more abrasion protection. Also, the pads protect from the smaller hits: if you smash your knee because you fell from a standstill you try doing that with and without pads and come with a straight face telling me pads don't work. Hitting your knee on the ground from a standstill can be a completely debilitating injury, even if you don't break your joint, you may injure yourself to the point that you can't walk. With a pad it's just a nuisance. THIS ENTIRE VIDEO IS BUILT ON THE FORCED IDEA THAT PADS ARE ONLY FOR YOUR BONES. Your body is FULL of soft tissue and a leather riding garment has nearly 0 shock absorption, so all the energy goes into your body. Good luck with that.
I never once expected that these pads would prevent fractures, but having had a couple of road rash incidents I'll keep using them for the abrasion resistance.
Ryan F9’s videos are always very well produced, usually entertaining and thought provoking, and often informative. Does that mean the take-away message is always in the viewer’s best interest? Ryan may well have said he can’t tell you to take the armour out of your jacket (etc.) because amongst other things it may, “by some statistical anomaly”, save you a fracture; but he has a lot of influence, and many people may well ditch their armour in favour of a bit more comfort, as he said he does. I would not recommend that. I’ve had many minor motorcycle spills and two major accidents. In the first, where my bike and the other's car were written off, I was wearing good gear with the standard armour exactly where it should have been, i.e. wrapped snugly around my joints which were naturally the touch points as I bounced along the road. Result: no fractures, just some bruises and muscle strain. In the second major accident, I was wearing an equally good jacket with the same standard armour, however due to my preference on the hot day for COMFORT, my jacket was partly unzipped down the front and this led to my shoulder armour being nudged out of place on impact. Result: anterior dislocation of shoulder and multiple fractures leading to full-arm immobilization for six weeks. The second accident was at half the speed, but otherwise quite similar, yet the result from displaced armour was much worse. If you wear your armour correctly, it won’t be merely a “statistical anomaly” which may save you a fracture, it’ll be the armour. A back protector protects your back, nothing else. An airbag protects your torso (and its precious contents), nothing else. These are both great (and expensive best-sellers at Fort Nine, obviously), but only part of a comprehensive protection regime. Having no armour for your elbows, shoulders, hips and knees - in exchange for comfort - is plain daft IMHO. I’m sure Ryan could have made his point about wanting better standards in a more responsible way. Regarding the AAP 2011 paper, I suspect from my own experience and that of other experienced riders I know, that if the researchers had a statistically significant sample, they would indeed have found a benefit to fracture reduction, but alas too few riders were in the data. I’ll keep wearing my joint/limb armour, well-fitted, as professional racers do, and I’ll keep recommending it to others. Absorbing some impact energy, and distributing residual energy will in pretty much all cases mitigate injury at the impact point. Why the hell do we wear helmets instead of beanies?
Just looking at the abstract for the Dome study, while it does indicate armor does not seem to have an appreciable reduction in fractures, those are not the only types of injuries. The abstract also notes "When garments included fitted body armour there was a significantly reduced risk of injury to the upper body (RR=0.77, 95% CI: 0.66-0.89), hands and wrists (RR=0.55, 95% CI: 0.38-0.81), legs (RR=0.60, 95% CI: 0.40-0.90), feet and ankles (RR=0.54, 95% CI: 0.35-0.83)". Seems like the question is whether one expects the bits of armor to protect against fractures or to protect against injuries. Maybe more important is the finding that in several instances the effectiveness of any armor was negated by the fact that the garment failed (disintegrated, etc.) during an incident which rendered the armor useless. The study suggests this was due to poor quality control on manufacturing of gear, so maybe buying high quality gear is worth it if one wants to minimize the risk of injury.
Hands and wrists are gloves, feet and ankles are boots. Ryan doesn't suggesting not wearing boots or gloves (or riding jacked and pants with cevlar), but rather about usefulnes of insert pads.
I once had a minor tumble wearing a hoodie and armour underneath. I was shocked that the outer hoodie survived with no damage and the armour torn apart at the shoulder. The garment was not CE rated which I excused because it was not intended to be the outer layer. I only wear whole garment CE rated stuff now.
He literally said that they works for other things but not for fractures in the video. He doesn't says anything about, helmets, gloves, abrasion resistent gear, boots, knee protectors. This is spesificly about pads. Which are certified by their impact resistance and how that certification has little to no effect again again impacts.
interesting position. i think first and foremost, the protectors are there you minimize injury. how do you do that ? by trying to negate the maximum damage that could be applied: in this instance a fracture. according to this video, standard protectors DONT, but they prevail and negating secondary class injuries like bruises and scratches from lesser impacts.
When I did the CHP Motorcycle Safety Class some years ago, they presented injury data, by body part, in riders wearing gear compared to those that weren't. Riders wearing gear fared significantly better and for some body parts the number of injuries were reduced by 80-90%. Ok, they didn't go into detail on bone breaking force, but the fact that injuries can be greatly reduced by simply wearing some padding is a no-brainer.
The MSF courses just emphasize wearing pants instead of shorts, enclosed shoes/boots, and gloves. They will allow a long sleeve t shirt in class and any gloves you had lying around. His point was the padding is so thin it won't do anything, so the amount determines whether it is a no-brainer. As a referee I have problems getting people to wear shinguards in a situation where they are guaranteed an impact - and can result in severe injury - so I tend to think most people are no-brainer to begin with (in a bad way). You are right that the padding can't hurt, just don't expect it to do much more than prevent a bruise if you drop your bike at a stop sign.
@@ws8080 MSF only requires long sleeves, pants, etc. and not real gear because you're never doing more than 20mph in a parking lot during a course. They preach the hell out of ATGATT when talking about real-world riding
My MSF course showed the same kind of injury body map too, but I don't think Ryan is necessarily disregarding that. He's not arguing against long pants/long sleeves, or even heavy-duty materials. The scrapes and slides are common injuries that *are* very easily eliminated with simple coverage... but what he's suggesting is that hard impacts aren't going to be any better whether you have a little pad or not. He's saying you're just as good with a kevlar jacket *without* pads as you are a kevlar jacket *with* pads because when you're smashing into an oncoming car or a tree or what have you, a little 1/2" pad isn't going to keep your arm from breaking. I'm not about to go take my pads out of my jacket. But it's a logical and seemingly statistically proven trend that might make some of the no-gear-ever squids a little more willing to throw on a jacket if it's not necessarily all-or-nothing and can at least still be comfortable.
Having crashed at high speed (70 mph into an embankment) with pads and low speed (about 20 mph gravel) without pads I had severly more bruising from the low speed low impact crash. While I did crack a vertebrea on the high speed accident my back pad and shoulder pads saved me from a lot more pain and agony. I had some sorenes in my shoulders and my wrists were bad since they took the brunt of the impact. However no bad bruising or lacerations anywhere. The worst part initially was the nettle that hit my face when the visor got ripped off. On the contrary when I laid my biked down on gravel my right arm was blue from my shoulder to my elbow and got scratched up bad. Wear your gear guys
Doesn't factor in little accidents where you are fine and the bike is fine and you just get up and carry on riding. Low level injury prevention is still a thing.
Yeah but unless you want to wear full motocross gear every time you go out, then you will make some trade-off between protection and comfort. Videos like this help riders make better informed decisions about which pieces (like pads or a thick plastic chestplate) may not be necessary for them.
Fell off doing about 25kph due to some gravel last summer, hit my knee and hip and it didn’t hurt much due to armour. Fell off my bicycle doing about 5 kph this winter (ice), hurt like hell for a week, no armour. Much like his strange 285 degree crank video or 180 about the value of GoreTex I wonder how Ryan is doing.
@@903lew I fell off my e bike last winter accelerating out of T junction. Low sided, was maybe doing 15 mph landed on my hip and I've had pain ever since. Had similar accidents whilst riding motorcycles had the only damage I sustained was embarrassment, even when the force and weight of the bike has added to the force of the impact. Distributing that shock to a greater area is so so beneficial.
@@user-co6ww2cm9k I always geared up when riding my motorcycle, no matter the weather. The suggestion from Ryan is that the pads are a waste of time and that he removes them and encourages others to do the same issue frankly silly of him. Some protection is better than no protection and often some protection is the difference between walking away and having to go to hospital.
@@freedomofmotion Yup. Took to Westling armour all winter on the e-bike, figured I already had it so might as well use it. In the end that first icey off was my only one. Think I’ll do that every year when the studded tires go on, seems silly not to.
I remember I specific incident when I first started riding where I wish I had been wearing armored pants. I totally botched a turn on a hill from a stop sign. I popped the clutch, which made my newb brain grab the front brake too hard, which made me lose control and get all kinds of wonky. I ended up in the ditch on the other side of the road, and I had banged my knee against a stone as I went down. Having that armor would absolutely have saved my knee from the punishment it received that day. I could barely ride home. Would it have saved me from a break had I gone down a different way? Maybe not. But, I sure wished I had it that day. And now, I wear full gear, with armor, every time I ride. You do you.
Try hitting your knee cap against a rock (or any other hard/sharp object for that matter) without a pad on, then you will appreciate the value that knee pads add. They may not save you from a fracture in the worst impact case, but will save you from painful injuries during most other impacts. The added abrasion protection is also a very good thing! I wore through my AA pants during a slide and grinded the knee pad underneath, but I was unscratched! Imagine the damage to my knee if the pad wasn't there, I would be grinding through my kneecap!
@@inevespace AA is an abrasion resistance class, second best you can buy. AAA class is even better, but it's pretty much reserved for full leather suits. It's part of CE rating.
As a rider that got hit by a wrong way driver, I disagree. My pad’s kept my patella from shattering on impact with the driver’s windshield. Bruised is better than broken.
@@diyfreediver my bad, i was miss spell, i mean bump your head against the pavement, and obviously it was sarcasm! Its very cool that you still skating at this age, im never you to it, and im only 29, but use skatepark with my bicycle and teaching youner generation to use protection:) good luck!
Almost poetry! Beautiful! Not too long, not too short, not too boring, factual and clear, nicely filmed, basic, yet not too basic and it hits the core! A masterpiece of a video!
The de Rome paper shows that wearing armour reduces your risk of injury by 60-70%. They are not stoping fractures but they are doing the job of poorly designed garments by providing abrasion and cut protection.
No doubt! Pads are significant at preventing abrasions and lacerations. Personally, I would look to 1.2mm+ leather for the wider coverage. But you can always use both to be extra safe, to each his own! ~RF9
@@FortNine you literally made a video saying "don't wear pads". You have a large audience and are possibly putting lives at risk with this. Then in the comments you say that pads are good. What the fuck is happening to this channel.
It's worth mentioning that EN17092 tests garments with the pads *removed*. Meaning a AAA jacket or pant, which has been drop tested on the Darmstadt machine at 120kph, will still slide to a highway-speed stop without costing you skin (70kph for AA, 45kph for A). C-class garments have no abrasion resistance criteria whatsoever; this would be something like a mesh chassis for holding armour. Obviously, removing the pads from that would be silly, since its only purpose is to hold armour and you might as well wear a T-shirt instead.
On that note, there *are* hero companies that make pads to greatly exceed CE 2 size and attenuation requirements. Aside from the Dainese back pad I showed, Rukka's D3O XTR comes to mind (link in description). Those pads are huge compared to the Type B template, and size matters if you're going to rely on pads to get to wherever your abrasion comfort level is. We don't always slide precisely on our shoulders, elbows and knees. It's usually the butt.
We all have our own equations for balancing comfort v. practicality v. safety, which is why I made a point of *not* telling people to take the armour out of their jackets (twice!). Fortunately the CE standards make it fairly clear what your gear can and can't do, enabling us all to choose the stuff that achieves whatever we're after. ~RF9
Apologies that my first comment on one of my favourite channels is a criticism.
EN1621-2 is the standard for back protection. The Limb Joint Protectors used in the video are covered by EN1621-1.
My biggest question to this (and I have many) would be are there quality stand-alone armor makers whose armor is worth replacing the substandard stuff with? And if so who are they?
Great video. Thanks for the educational perspective.
@@dmoooooooo : D3O, Forcefield, Knox, Rheon and SAS-Tec, to name but five - although to refer to other manufacturers’ components as “substandard” is inaccurate. They pass the standard, so are not substandard; it is simply that some producers use superior materials or engineer their products to exceed the requirements set by the standard.
Thank you, another great video that actually brings information and data!
One comment / question though, is how does this relate to offroad riding?
I ride hard enduro, so when I fall, it's never at 120 MPH on asphalt. It's more at 10-25 MPH on gravel / rocks / dirt. And I think that these pads are very useful in spreading the absorbed force, so instead of being poked by pointy gravel, the hit is spread somewhat evenly across the surface of the pad, reducing the overall absorbed force (I believe quite more dramatically compared to the asphalt test).
So, what is your opinion on using pads for offroad?
As an orthopaedic surgeon (and a motociclist) I can say that its easier (and got better results) to fix lower Energy fracture than higher energy fractures... So, the benefit of using this gear may not protect you from having that fracture in the first place, but may shield you from months of reabilitation and permanent pain and limitation.
Thanks mate, very helpful comment
Absolutely!
Is a high energy fracture determined by the speed of the mechanism of injury or the newtons applied to the bone? Just out of curiosity.
Touche!
This is how I feel about it. It's not always about prevention, just protection.
having pads in my jeans is worth it just for the many times I'm on my knees trying to fix my moto on the side of the road
Riding a Harley 😂😂😂
Haha. Truth 👍
And a 2 stroke
He rides a ducati. Italian pasta
Five comments and no gay jokes… I’m disappointed
Wait... did he just... DID HE JUST ROCK A 6 MINUTE SINGLE TAKE?!?! Respect.
...... and arriving at the point where the back armour and airbag backpack were waiting under the tree in blossom at EXACTLY the right moment. Genius!
@@Bazza.baz224 I think his buddy probably placed it there just before he arrived. But yeah, good take.
Now I remember that I miss Tom Scott
Better than Goodfellas camera following Copacabana club visitors :)
I guess there were 5-10 failed takes )
I see alot of anecdotal stories in the comments discussing the pro and contra, but lets not forget the main purpose of the video: Lifting the regulation capture! Lets improve regulation based on scientific evidence in order to make companies product armor that actually helps against high energy injuries.
Yea it'll cost more for manufacturers, but it will also bring in more riders who are actually going to buy it. If costed me $100 more just to know it'll protect me better than the standard CE2 pad I'm all for it. But if it performs the same, then why bother paying extra money for brand name. We want safety for a hobby we enjoy, and they want our money. I'll just buy lightly used gear or people getting them brand new and selling them later for cheaper. Got my mig c2 gloves for $80 instead of $130. 🤭
"Regulations" will never keep up with the dynamics of the market. They are there as a feel good measure for people who think they know better than the people who make the gear. Another commenter says it'll "cost more for manufacturers" which is also laughable. They're in the business of making money. Nothing costs them anything; consumers will pay the price either way.
@@timnuccio6240 This is categorically and utterly false on all levels. Regulations aren't for keeping up with the market, they are for enforcing what is right and proper for society. They naturally lag behind innovations, but they are crucial for ensuring safety/cleanliness/ethics/fairness etc.
Second, the market always tries to reduce costs, it is an integral part of business. There is nothing laughable to it. Also, higher costs can be a problem for smaller competitors.
Third (not on this list): The market becomes a monopoly once saturated and once the optimum has been found. So much for your fun market to solve all problems.
He literally says he takes the armor out of his jacket lol. If that's not an endorsement to you then idk what is. Definitely should have left the video as a stab at the regulations, but he didn't.
@@antonk.653 It sounds like you both didn't watch the video and you don't know the definition of monopoly. I think it's obvious enough that there is no monopoly in the world of motorcycle safety equipment, which has many firms competing for our business. But if this video didn't persuade you that the regulation is driving us to rely on pads that are probably not optimal to protect our bones from impact, nothing else is going to convince you that market based solutions will work, either. I guess we all can double up on level 2 pads and hope for the best? Certainly we can't rely on the governments to address the concerns in the video as they've already failed to do so.
I’m an ER doc. I know armour won’t help in worst case, high energy scenario’s, but it helps mitigate the contusions, abrasions and lacerations in the kind of spills we are more likely to suffer. I had a low speed mishap riding off road in Iceland and diced up the elbows and arms of my riding jacket on volcanic rock. I had a few minor scratches from punctures through the Cordura fabric in the unpadded areas, but without armour protection it would have been a long complicated journey to a distant hospital to suture up contaminated, complex lacerations that would have terminated my bucket list trip. Some dabs of Polysporin for the skin and duct tape for the jacket and I was good to go.
Agreed. Even minimal protection can be the difference between a lesser injury and a severe injury. Early on in my riding days I had a lower speed crash where my left foot got pinned by the footrest and drug underneath the bike as I slid. I had worn basic "steel" toe boots and they prevented the footrest from impaling my foot. Still hurt, still injured, but it was the difference between literally walking away or visiting someone like you.
Hey Internet why isn't this the comment with 14k likes?
THIS! Fortnine is only looking at the "fracture" or "not fracture" binary, and completely ignoring the fact that fracture severity is a spectrum that runs from hairline to shattered, and that spectrum is directly correlated with impact force. Armor reduces force received by your body, which reduces injury severity.
@@Ghazrin Most dmg comes from sliding on concrete, for that the armor works just fine.
I agree. I like Ryan F9 but he is FOS on this one. I've crashed before at (going less than 60km) and the armor protected my knees. I was able to walk away with no need for rehab. An airbag is not going to protect you if you are going fast enough and hit something hard enough.
If Nike, Coach or Levis, wanted to get in the market, then putting body armor in their clothes, then it would not be that hard.
On behalf of Liz de Rome:
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.
Associate Professor Liz de Rome.
Great for a direct response from one of the sources. Let's get this upvoted!
Bennetts Insurance (UK) have done a response video, including interviewing one of those quoted in F9's video 👍
Source is too old to be relevant. Any paper older than 5 years should be scrutinized; older than 10 should not be used.
@@springer91977why do you think research gets outdated after 5 years.
@@PumpKing96Because turkeys borrow low resolution statements and mis apply them in the hopes they will sound smarter than they really are. The use-by date on research relevance is multi-factorial and differs across topics being studied. Ignore the turkey.
I'm an EMT. Been one for going on 13 years. I've seen more than my fair share of moto accidents. I can't say that gear has ever really prevented a fracture or not, but one thing I do think MUST be mentioned, that moto gear (with or without armor) DOES DO INSANELY WELL, is ABRASION resistance. Yes, a broken bone sucks, but I've seen a woman's breast belt sanded off by the asphalt because she only had on a sweatshirt. Down to the bone.
Anecdotally, I have lowsided before at a pretty pedestrian 25-30mph. Armored jacket, regular denim pants. The jacket took the hit and I had no bruise or injury on my arm. The road went through my pants like they were tissue paper and I have a softball sized scar on my knee now. Armor wouldn't have really mattered there, but a pant with abrasion resistance absolutely would have.
So while I can't critique the argument against armored pads because I'm not an expert on the literature and most severe motorcycle accidents I've seen have had broken bones with and without armor, I can say that road rash can be a nightmare and have never seen road rash on an area where someone was wearing proper gear, and ALWAYS seen it on every single person that wasn't wearing any.
To that end, I think it's a bit of a disservice to leave that part of the equation hanging and not mentioned. That airbag is going to save you from a broken clavicle, but if you aren't wearing an abrasion resistant layer as well, the road might well grind your skin, fat and muscles down to the bone. We call those chest protectors with no sleeves "organ donor vests" for a reason.
I hope people read this and take your advice rather than do as Ryan says he does. Road rash is a motherf***er to say the least and anything to help prevent it is a positive. I have a “tattooed” left forearm where my shitty cuff button broke during a slide and let my sleeve roll up. Would have been a lot worse if it wasn’t there for any of the slide, not to mention the rest of me that the leather jacket was still covering.
abrasion resistance should have been poited out better. but playing devil's advocate the video doesn't promote
no gear , only no pads
Or rather, that the common pads aren't worthwhile
pads are not for abrasion. They suck at it. Video is talking about effectiveness of pads for what they are intended - impact dissipation. This is why he choose remove pads FROM a JACKET, not get rid of a jacket.
Yeah I hit a deer last year and was completely geared up head to toe and even though I broke multiple ribs and bones including ones in my face under my Shoei helmet, every doctor, police and EMT said my gear saved my life. And later after investigating my gear I did notice my level 2 pads were ground down and took plenty of abuse. So it’s probably a useless point but the pads did help too. The only abrasion I had was where the hip pad wore through.
I first watched this after being released from hospital. I'd shattered my lower leg on a dirt bike. I was wearing level 2 armour underneath and all I can say is that after seeing the bruising as well as the chunks missing from my right elbow, I am VERY glad that I was. I have no doubt it would have been a fair bit worse if I'd had no padding there.
He is not saying they don't do anything he is saying they could be better but they don't bother.
What the study he was using doesn't mention is the bikers that needed no medical intervention as its not captured.
lower... leg? on a dirt bike? dude, that's what motocross boots are for!
Were you not wearing boots??
Same here.
Body Armor is redundant as I ride around in chain mail and knight armour anyways.
Chain mail probs slide for awhile
Everything about this was serious until I read this comment. Died and came back to life laughing.
chain mail itself is a redundant term, simply call it mail or get out.
Nothing measures up to full plate armor!
I would ride naked but I think there are laws against it. So in summer I wear a T-shirt and shorts. Works!
I just crashed today because of an old man that did not see me.
I landed extremely hard on my left shoulder without breaking any bones or any serious damage, just a lot of pain.
It's crystal clear to me the importance that those stupid rubber things had during the crash: they helped me to soften the main impact and shielded my shoulder from the tarmac.
Before this crash i thought they were useless as you said in the video, but i left them in my jacket just to be extra safe .. and I'm very glad i did.
Get well soon.
Exactly the same but without armor. I broke 3 bones. Whoever say it's not a necessity should go to jail.
@@edmondszilagyi2802 of course, the single data point rebuttal, i think you might’ve damaged your brain
I would say the point of this video is not to encourage or deter the use of plastic body armour but to put pressure on the motorcycle apparell companies to lift their game & offer protection that will significantly improve the risks of not fracturing bones in a fall. It's not about individual incidents but statistical analysis over a large data set. I have had crashes with & without body armour and never had a fracture but.... give me the choice of better protection & I would pay for having that.
@EllaViewD of course, completely disregarding a data point that disagrees with you, I think you might have damaged your brain.
Those studies don’t capture the 1000s of people who crash wearing the protection with no injury. Only the injured get captured in the data, similar to a survivorship bias.
ABSOLUTELY CORRECT, THANK YOU! I'm keeping my pads ON.
This is a really good point, thanks for understanding statistics
Bingo
Great Point!!
Indeed, the study cited is among crashes with known injuries. Not crashes without injuries, protection or not.
"THEY ASK EACH PERSON WHAT THEY WERE WEARING," left that part out.
My 4 years old son was riding his stacyc 16 e-drive bike down the hill 20 miles / 30 kilometers per hour and suddenly hit a big stone on the tarnac and hit the ground with filull speed. He was fully protected by fullface helmet, expensive knee and elbow pads, and glowes. No fracture, no bruises, just some crying. Without the protective gear he would have to be taken to ER and a dentist and stay in hospital for sure. It was traumatic for both of us. It was my fault, but to my point - always wear as much protection as you can.
Awesome story.
However. That’s not what the video is saying.
He was merely saying don’t buch cheap stuff, manufacturers need better standards to hold their gear to.
Imagine same scenario, but you bought cheap China knock off stuff and it fell apart at first tumble.
Would you still be saying “that gear was awesome!” Nope. You’d be saying the same thing f9 did. Read what you’re buying, manufacturers love catch phrases.
Why would you let a 4 year old kid going on a bike at 30km/h? You're asking for trouble my man.
@@lecobra418I got my 3yo daughter Stacyc 12. Now she is 4 and I'm happy every time she crashes and is fine. Every crash is a lesson and I believe it's better to have these lessons at 4 and 20km/h rather than later and faster.
@@lecobra418literally any hill will result in a bike going over 25km an hour it’s just physics mam.
Unfortunately, lack of quality armour is how we lost Ryan F9.
This is his clone, Ryan F10.
AI bots are getting real
What happened to Ryan F1 - F8?
@@michaeladler3035 Like in Resident Evil - they were just failed prototypes ;)
@@michaeladler3035 failed to make it out of the test tubes
😂
There are a number of issues with that research that I noticed as a researcher myself. First off the n (number of cases for x) for many of the categories are too small to derive reasonable statistical significance. Second it does not take into account the severity of the accidents for each case, which adds a massive statistical confound to the data. There is not sufficient data present to derive anything really. Also the studies for airbags on motorcycles are practically non existent for road users, and most airbags on the market offer little protection for legs, arms, and shoulders. Legs/feet are also the largest source of injury in most accidents. We do need better protection and better standards, but some protection in most cases will be better with none, I would rather hit the road with something to help cushion the landing. Airbags are not a perfect replacement for padding, they can fail to deploy, or break on impact, or be punctured. I use both pads and an airbag.
Wow , the voice of reason gets the least likes , yikes !
Well said, we got to be very careful when looking at those reports, generally speaking , since in most cases they try to correlate fractures/padding presence but the crash mechanism is completely lost, the amount of energy either and, I know friends who brought motorbike jeans and...didn't adjust knee D3O CE level 2, for instance...
Yes, we want higher and more representative standards. How can we put this in practice?
Let's make it happens, Ryan.
LegBags... feel free to do all the work and pay me for the name lol
The worst thing about the token protection is it feels so restrictive to move that I feel more likely to crash while wearing it... so I don't wear it it.
I also do research for a living. If you pause the video at 2:28 and look down the column "Fracture %", the lowest values are almost all on the rows reading "Yes with Body Armor", meaning Yes to Motorcycle Jacket, then Yes to Motorcycle Gloves, then Yes to Motorcycle Pants and so on. Fractures are higher with motorcycle gloves than without them, but overall injuries are much higher without motorcycle gloves - duh. It's an odd outcome, but the number of cases is really too small for any statistical significance, certainly no p-value less than 0.05.
As a daily, year round rider, who has been part of a group ride that went very, very wrong ending in a Life Flight helicopter ride for the guy with the broken thigh bone, I can tell you that our two crash victims were wearing modular helmets. Both had scratched up visors after bad wrecks, but both fully protected the heads and faces of their wearers. Having witnessed it, I wouldn't be caught dead without a helmet whatever the statistics say. After all, there are statistics and then there is what happens to YOU.
100% agree. However, if a meta-analyzes are performed they change the n. They could also potentially account for the confounding if severity is reported.
I never consider those pads as protective against bone fracture. But they are good for abrasion, small hits that can hurt you long time. And also some more serious knee or elbow injuries. But to be honest not for serious accidents. I would never remove them as "any protection is good protection"
I don't have a motorcycle license, just love F9's content, and every time they demonstrated pads "absorbing" impact force they seemed to not do that. The pads don't seem squishy at all, just flexible, but to absorb force you'd need to compress a material (Like the styrofoam in a helmet does) which these pads don't seem to do. They might spread the force over a somewhat larger area but that's it.
@@GameCyborgCh yes that is how you absorb impact. By spreading it over time and area. There is no way to magically disperse of the energy any other way.
the two studies he quoted also have some methodological flaws regarding how they collect their data.
which is due to them getting their data based on reported accidents. aka accidents where the cops showed up and/or the motorcyclist got collected by an ambulance.
Any single vehicle accident where the motoryclist was able to continue riding will not be in the database, on accouint of not requiring police to be called.
And those less severe accidents are the ones where armor actually works.
@@anonym3017 this
@@anonym3017 good point
Firefighter/paramedic here. Others have said enough and said it better. I always wear my armor and very glad I have. The only time I’ve had to test it was a slide at about 45-50mph and it was all pants. Luckily very minor road rash and a small bruise was all I got. I get what you’re saying here but it reminds me way too much of people who say they don’t like to wear helmets because they have seen people wearing helmets and still die or a helmet isn’t gonna save you at 75+ MPH when you hit a guardrail lol. Reminds me of the story of soldiers who refused to wear helmets to battle because they were uncomfortable and if they were meant to die, they were gonna die…regardless of the helmet. Point being guys…don’t make the grim reaper’s job easier. Even if it only saves you one broken toe, it’s worth it. You’re worth it.
I used to hear from older drivers when the first seat belt laws were enacted that they didn't like seat belts becuase they WANTED to be thrown clear of the car in a n accident. Too much Mannix, Starsky and Hutch!
Sorry, but I'm not English spoken therefore the lack of finesse... but I still stand to the core of my statement.
Buddys showing off doing wheelies and crashed into each other, many broken bones, non fatal and ego bruising, both weren't wearing a helmet so the point is moot.
P.S. No Open Casket either.
As someone that had a 10-15mph lowside in the BRC with no pads on legs, torso, and arms, I can tell you the bruising I got on my left knee and elbow was horrendous, lasting for about 2 weeks leaving me unable to work out or do anything strenuous.
Over the winter I lowsided at roughly 2 times the speed of the BRC lowside, so 4 times the impact forces. However, this time I had CE level 2 pads in elbows, shoulders, back, hips, and knees. I walked away with nothing but a headache and was working out the next day.
I really appreciate Ryan's philosophy on people making their own decisions, and just making sure they have all the information to make a well informed decision. For me, it's absolutely worth wearing the pads if it means there's a greater chance I won't be nearly bedridden for days.
I think your examples are where the padded armor is best - sliding with minimal impacts. I agree I will wear it just because why not, but I know if there is an impact I'm getting a break.
This! I (knock on wood) haven't had an unplanned on-road get off in a LONG time. However, I have ridden with dozens of people who have. I have seen the aftermath of *SLIDES* with and without armor. I ride with the best armor I can tolerate. I am sure that in high sides and multi-vehicle impacts, the presence or lack of a little foam pad is of little consequence.
But, most accidents (not even reported) are not written up by a cop. The perpetrator tries to slink away before a COP shows up and adds insult to injury with a performance award such as: "Failure to maintain control of vehicle." Wearing good riding gear helps the road rash a lot, and the pads help with that too. So, I wonder about the validity of those surveys. Are the group of riders with and without armor reporting the accident results at the same rate? Perhaps riders with armor were able to sneak away from an accident scene and pretend like it was no big deal, and they aren't fully represented in the data.
One time about 30+ years ago, I hit a small slick patch on an exit ramp. I low sided and slid to the outside of the curve. No impact and I got up and saw just a grayish frayed patch on my jacket. I picked up my bike noted the ground down parts, and the broken brake lever and turn signal. I then finished my ride to work. When I got to work and took off my outer layer, and then the inner down layer, and then the fleece liner, I noticed that my elbow had a patch the size of two quarters that looked like melted mozzarella cheese, it stuck to the fleece and came off, leaving a wet weeping raw meat underneath. The fleece, the down coat, and the outer layer were mostly fine, but the outer layer looked like I had scuffed it.
If there had been a small pad there, I don't think I would have had that burn.
I've had a 30kph lowside in Kevlar with no pads and have a scar to show for it.
I've also T-boned a car and gone flying in a cheap armored jacket and wasn't even bruised.
Anecdotal yes, but I'll at least stick to some flexible C1 personally.
Totally agree with above ❤
Lol at a 2 week bruise being "Horrendous" , people are weak today...
I'm absolutely here for Ryan's airbag activism and continued call-outs of safety standards. Kudos
me too. Most automotive/powersports channels are just simps to whomever pays for a video, and consistently spread misinformation or show examples of things done wrong without explaining that it is unsafe. I can count on ONE HAND the number of car and car performance youtube videos where they have proper 5 or 6 point harnesses that are anchored correctly, with airbags removed. and I've only seen ONE video of a car where they had proper fire suppression. I've watched thousands of car videos over the decades
When are they adding airbags to motorcycles 😂
Not sure if it's such a good thing in this case. Maybe they just want to sell more airbags? I'll take laceration and abrasion protection at the cost of almost imperceptible discomfort.
@@patrickday4206Honda goldwing has an airbag.
@@patrickday4206 Gold Wing has done it years ago already.
No gear necessary at all, if you don't crash. If you do, you'll be grateful for every scrap of gear you're wearing, even if its an extra bit of padding. My armor pieces are staying in!
I took my pads out, to provide more room for extra clothing layers. (I ride nearly every day of the year) I wear an Immortal Chest Protector with the shoulder pads from my jacket & an Axial2 Back Pad zip tied to the inside of it. I wear an EVO 2 Racing Collar that helps provide my head & neck with the maximum amount of protection from the cold. It also helps support the weight of my helmet directly onto the hard plastic shoulders of my Chest Protector, which allows me to ride for extremely long distances without getting a sore neck.
The elbow pads in my jacket began to irritate my funny bone, so I found more comfort, warmth and protection from wearing External Elbow Pads with Forearm Protection.
This gives me the ultimate upper body protection from accidents & from the elements.
(Superior comfort, especially in cold weather).
Something like the helite turtle he showed at the end is still a no brainer in my book
there are 2 types of riders
those that have gone down
&
those that are going to go down
@@seebarnes6588 There are 2 types of humans
those who have had the seks
&
those that are going to have the seks or never will
What to take from it? Life is life.
@@seebarnes6588There are two types of riders: those who have crashed; and those who pay attention to what is going on around them.
this may be one of the greatest youtube channels of all time. look at the discussions in the comments. imagine every video on youtube had the same type of conversation surrounding it.
"Life is so beautiful our instinct is going to be to protect it, but our imperative, we have to remember, is to appreciate it". That's a great quote.
In other words FUCK IT WE BALL
did not expect philosophy in my motorcycle gear channel, but I'm here for it
Yeah, but his life affirming wisdom would have a much greater impact if he was not holding a DEAD flower... :-)
Appreciate it, indeed... but I would respectfully amend to "to experience it".
Essentially it's just a fancy way to say "yolo". The quote sounds nice but in the context of the topic is kind of a bad quote.
FWIW, I was wearing a Vanson jacket with elbow and back armor of their design, a pair of jeans with CE2 hip and knee armor, and a pair of Racer gloves with carbon knuckle armor when a drunk did a last second left in front of me. My knee punched a dent into the side of his truck and my brake lever, which was the first contact with the vehicle, came down hard on the carbon knuckle protectors of my last two fingers. I technically fractured my knee, but it was the kind of fracture where it looks weird on an MRI but none of the parts are displaced to different locations, and I was able to walk away from the wreck. Also, all of my fingers were still on my hand despite the guillotine brake lever. When I came off the bike I landed hard on my back, on my back protector, and while my ribs were badly bruised in the back, none were broken and my spine wasn't bruised. (Quick pitch for the sort of out of fashion Vanson brand: after landing on my back and sliding on the asphalt, the back of my jacket wasn't even scratched. The leather they use wears like iron).
This is anecdote, not data, and I agree with your concerns about regulatory capture and undersized protection. However, I think saying "it's not enough protection so I won't wear it all" is a contrarian but self-defeating choice. It seems like "this isn't enough protection so I'll wear more" would be a more rational response.
Impacts vary, and I'm not sure that "break a femur" is the right threshold to be using as a baseline. There are plenty of impacts, like the one on my right knee, that are below the "break a femur" threshold but may have still broken my knee without the marginal protection that my knee pad offered. Those pads absorbed some of the force before it got to my knee. Given i had a partial but not complete fracture, maybe it was enough. There are also a lot impacts on a motorcycle that will get to "break femur" territory even in the presence of non-existent CE3 or 4. The armor isn't protecting you from that existential 100mph low side into a steel barrier. I'm not sure why this marginal protection isn't showing up in the study you cited, but studies aren't impervious to flaws and are designed to answer yes / no questions, not illuminate nuance as you are well aware.
Btw, my take away from my accident was that I should have been wearing my air bag vest that day. It would have saved me a lot of pain where the gas tank hit my pelvis and would further lessened my rib bruising. But it certainly didn't have me thinking I should ditch the knee, hip, and elbow armor. If anything, it had me thinking about ways to improve the protection at my extremities.
With all of that said, I salute your willingness to call it like you see it despite where your bread is buttered.
Holy ---- the voice of reason , thank you ...
Agreed I took fall on my knee without protection last year at low speed but it been a horrible recovery. I couldn’t walk for a month, and it cracks on every stairs I walk up and down, and I walk with a limp now and I still feel pain, I’m almost 100% sure if I had pad I wouldn’t be in pain, every since that experience I never go riding without pads .. as I learnt it don’t take much impact to give you a f up day
you should learn to speak like a human being. anyway, i think the argument is for better protection standards, not no protection. though he doesn't present any actual evidence for what the standard should be or that a proper standard was pre-empted by the industry.
Damn! Wish I'd said this. It was just what I was thinking but couldn't articulate. Good job.
You have said everything I wanted to say much better than I could have said it. Top answer 👍
It's not often I disagree with Ryan but wearing no pads means you're gonna feel more impact and that just means more pain. It's an absolute no brainer to wear it, drive safe Ryan
Respectfully I'm going to keep mine in. There are accidents where pads won't matter (either the impact was so soft that nothing would have broken, or the impact was so hard that no matter what you're wearing you'll break), but for that slight chance of an accident that the armor results in a bone bruise instead of a bone break I'll take that extra little bit of protection.
I think the general gist of the video was a call for better armor
My only whoopsie so far was a lowside (raining, sand, cornering), and my right side came down pretty hard. I bruised my elbow, and that was WITH the elbow pad in my jacket. I think I may have broken my elbow-or at least got a bone bruise-if I hadn't had my elbow pad in place.
I think Ryan's highlighting the fact that current armor pads need drastic improvement to help prevent the worst outcomes.
There is no, reasonable armor that can be 100% effective to prevent all injury. I've fallen a ridiculous amount of times, on street and offroad. After committing to buying motorcycle gear with armor, my injuries have significantly reduced. Similar falls that took me out of my work and hobbies for long periods now don't even register because no matter what armor I have, it's way way better than not having any armor at all.
Like, Ryan is really suggesting we'd be just as protected I'm Levi's for crying out loud!
@@stephensumpter5311 Yeah, the CURRENT armor are useless for fractures. But just happen to be good enough for abrasions and bruise protection. We need stronger armor.
@@werepat I don't think he's suggesting that at all. The conclusion I got from his video is that safety standards are inadequate and armor should be better, but isn't. He literally says at the end that it is is more protective than no armor.
It's amazing how many people don't really watch or understand the video. He said he's NOT telling you to not to wear pads. He said they will stop bruises and abrasions and that's a good thing. His MAIN point is the pads COULD be made better but the industry standard is set too low so most manufactures don't make them as good as they SHOULD be. Just LEARN from the video and buy the highest quality protection equipment IF you want BETTER protection.
He could be more clear though, and less clickbaity
naaaaw, he's trying to get government involved to mandate airbags that he has interest in.
its not amazing when the title of the video is "why i stopped wearing motorcycle body armour" ... most people will not understand the true message
I think it's the last part he said about enjoying life vs protecting it. I heard that conclusion and believed he was advocating for ditching the useless armour. It was a confusing message.
First time I listened, I had no idea what he was talking about. Thank you for the clarification.
The more I see the way the gear companies and government use outdated and shoddy standards really makes me think that their priority is making people feel safe rather than actually being safe, because feeling safe is much cheaper then being safe.
Their priority is cars, I feel.
OSHA's pyramid of dangerous materials (you've seen this pyramid at every government facility) places personal protective equipment such as gloves, helmets, suit, etc... as the least effective of form of protection. And PPE is almost always the cheapest option. Doing things like actually separating the danger from people, or controlling who can handle these items, or training everyone how to handle dangerous items, is a lot more expensive.
Another example would be keeping firearms out of everyone's hands, keeping it out of untrained hands, training everyone to use firearms, and finally wearing bullet resistant vests.
Yeah... I bought an FIM helmet for my motorcycle since I figured the single most important thing to protect was my head. Turns out the government where I live will only allow you to race track with a Snell helmet. FIM and ECE are considered "inferior" according to the government here, despite all the evidence they have it backwards.
@@langhamp8912you forgot the "make bulletproof backpacks and lunchboxes for elementary school students" option that we seem to be running with here in the States
In my province I can’t wear a helmet that’s ec22 rated but I can wear a helmet from a 30 year defunct csa standard.
Crash test dummy here.. flung myself off into the woods up in the Catskills after hitting a blind corner covered in sand from the prior winter. 7 broken ribs and a collapsed lung. Helicopter ride as well to a trauma center. Thankfully had a forcefield sub 4 back protector and level 2 everywhere else. Astar super tech boots saved my ankles, the bike landed on them and pinned me under the bmw. Knox handroid gloves..the ones with the exoskeleton saved my hand which was buried in a pile of river rock. Had yellow bruising around all the body armor but all good. I landed with my arm up on a pile or river rock which did the damage to my ribs. Full airbag vest could have helped, i suspect. The hospital bill was over $100,000! Do your self a favor and add as much armor as you can afford. Riding 15 years till that event. It will happen, and there is no need to end up in a wheelchair!
100k?! How much of that was paid by insurance???
Do you still ride?
Thanks
Murica! Would have been €600 own risk over here in NL. But crazy story ma dude. Hope you recovered well. I only ride with full gear. I like my body and skin.
It will happen? I'd say the majority of riders will get through a 50-year riding 'career' without a significant crash and/or injury. It's not a statistical certainty. Your story highlights the usefulness of gear, but you know what's even more useful? Safety and sport riding courses every single spring to refresh your skills and safely test your limits.
ER Doctor here - I have seen many injuries from motorcycles. There is no gentle way to say this... but this video is very very wrong, dangerous and you need to "redact" it immediately. For anyone that wants to read my entire comment please do so otherwise I will say this: wearing more pads will help you, do not listen to this clearly incorrect video. Now the longer explanation:
1. You mention the "keeping a captive market" concept and that current pad standards are not enough. This sounds very plausible and likely true. The natural conclusion here would be to have another "tier" of pad standards, not to take out your current pads. So do not conflate the issues of regulatory capture and inadequate regulatory standards for pads with "all pads do nothing".
2. You are just cherry picking studies and jumping to a false conclusion. The study you mention literally has this as a conclusion: "Our results argue for more widespread use of protective clothing by [motorcycle] users. Furthermore, a 30 second literature review shows other studies with the following conclusions: "Motorcycle protective clothing is associated with reduced risk and severity of crash related injury and hospitalization, particularly when fitted with body armour." Finally some things don't need a study. This is literal common sense... a classic example being the study "Parachute use to prevent death and major trauma when jumping from aircraft: randomized controlled trial". In this study they come to the following conclusion: "Parachute use did not reduce death or major traumatic injury when jumping from aircraft in the first randomized evaluation of this intervention. However, the trial was only able to enroll participants on small stationary aircraft on the ground, suggesting cautious extrapolation to high altitude jumps." This study is often used as a comical (but serious) critique of medical research in certain scenarios. Some studies are poorly designed, some are unnecessary and many leave room for drawing false conclusions.
3. You are focusing on the details about newtons of force and then making broad conclusions. This is not sound logic. Just think for a little bit about it. There is a soft pad... if you get hit by any random physical object while sliding/tumbling during a fall (a small bump in the road, the curb, your shoulder on the ground etc.) and these WILL minimize some of the force. Bones don't always snap... they chip, they twist and any number of other injuries happen. Pads decrease the force.
4. You walking and talking like you know what you are talking about and the overall high production value of this video makes this so much worse.
5. For any argument about "enjoying life" or making a risk benefit of the annoyance of pads vs no pads... (non-sarcastically) by all means, feel free to not wear pads, or a helmet or even wear flip flops on your bike! I authentically support your choice as long as you KNOW the risks. The problem with this video is that you are 100% wrong about the risks of not wearing pads.
6. Finally, you mention "We all have our own equations for balancing comfort v. practicality v. safety, which is why I made a point of not telling people to take the armour out of their jackets (twice!)". Here you are being disingenuous, you clearly implied that people should take out their pads. You put the word "USELESS" in your thumbnail - cmon man!
I don't know about you guys, but I'm definitely trusting the doctor on this matter!
100% to everything in this response! Very well put.
Sure, armor is less important when wearing back protection and airbag but personally pads have saved me from road rash.
Brains, skill and experience is what protects you in motorbike riding, not armour. Less accidents, less statistics. Given that, always wear protection. But wear it to the extent it makes you confident and fearless enough to ride without sentimental distraction, and also to the point it does not make you seriously uncomfortable, temperature, range of motion, or even pain wise. The last thing you want is your protection to raise the chances of an accident. All the above considering that speeding is the No1 factor for an accident to happen. But if you don't speed, don't ride a bike, get a car. And that is the main point of life is precious but we have to live it. If it was all to avoid death, we would not have kids.
ps. don't trust doctors. most of them are illiterate, especially when analysing statistics. i am not talking about this specific doctor, but, in general.
I do support this. I think his suggestion is one of the most irresponsible advice for riders I have ever seen 🤬
I high sided on the expressway last May doing approximately 130kph after hitting a metal patch on the road. I was airborn for what seemed like an eternity and knew it was going to hurt when I finally made contact with mother earth. When I landed I broke my collarbone and damaged my shoulder ((now titanium man ) however I also slid a long way alongside my bike. The motorcycle jeans I was wearing were damaged but the road never made contact with my skin due to the fabric and armour. My Jacket was like wise badly damaged but the material and armour protected my skin. My gloves had sliders on the heel of the palm and were both badly worn (trying to slow myself down ) but my hands were fine apart from a small cut on one finger. I never believed that so called armour would protect my bones and it did not, but there is no doubt what so ever, that if I had not been wearing it I would have suffered serious skin and tissue damage. I understand the points Ryan is making but his almost dismissive " It may save you a bruise" is, in my mind, a little dismissive of the very real possibility of serious slide injuries. His airbag may protect his bones in a crash but it will not stop him wearing away his elbow. Armour is there to help save the rider from unintentional weight loss due to skating on your ass down a strip of tarmac.
That's true, but is there really much of a point if you're riding around town and not going those speeds? Not arguing, it's just an interesting debate. 130km/h is higher than the speed limits for 99% of roads here in Aus
Yeah because bikers never go over the speed limit
High sided on the expressway??????? Lol
I think you're mixing up armor and slide protection. He's not advocating for not wearing abrasion resistant gear, just for taking the pads out of them to make them more wearable
@@willie123567yeah but those pads add significantly to the amount of material that is between u and the road u slide over.
The comments and insight elicited from doctors, EMTS, engineers, and other riders in response to this video are more valuable than the video.
It almost feels like it was the unintended purpose of the video lol
@@cmontygman Unintended? :)
@@cmontygmanThat is an oxymoron. A direct “purpose” cannot be unintended.
That’s a misconception, you can’t replace data with subjective experiences.
@@newFaction64From the eyes of many first responders it would be objective wouldn’t it?
If just one or two were adding anecdotes I would agree; however there are at least 100 of them.
I don't believe anything I see on the Internet today, but I am a believer that knee pads should extend farther around the side rather than simply covering the knee cap. The response to finding that existing armor is less effective than one would hope should not be to abandon all armor. It should be to demand innovation from makers to offer more effective armor. Nothing stops them from exceeding the regulatory standard but consumer expectations.
Edit: Then again, I may be missing the more nuanced conclusion that broken bones are inevitable right now and the thing to invest in after adequate abrasion resistance isn't padding but wearable airbags to prevent more serious neck injuries. RF9 did include the Helite on his recent list of starter gear for 2024, after all.
Agreed. These tiny CE pads are kind of a joke, but if we had better armor on top of it to spread the impact it would matter. Of course, adventure and moto x riders do exactly that, but we aren't really willing to do that for routine on-road riding. All the current styles are "riding jeans" and "riding boots" that are actually hi-top tennis shoes. I choose to wear riding pants OVER my jeans and take them off at dest but most people won't - they want convenience so they get jeans with these little tiny pads that wouldn't protect you if you just fell over a stop sign....
I made a bicylcle crash at 50kmh thats like 30mph.
My knee got damaged at the side not at the front what everybody always wants to protect...
Really painfull.
I wont imaging what would happened at 60mph because the force is 4x times higher :/
Agree. I have a pair of Klim jeans that have very little armor, just like F9 is showing in this video. I have a pair of Dianese leather pants that have amazing knee and shin protection. The two are miles apart in terms of armor and protection.
You can get not only wearable airbag jackets but airbag pants now as well. Only one brand of airbag pants right now but that should expand (heh) quickly.
DEPEENDS ON WHAT YOU GET... FOR EXAMPLE TOP PRICE DAINESE STUFF EXTENDS THE WHOLE SHIN
Production quality is wild on this one. 1 take? Public park? Informative using statistics? A+ on this one, chief
/yawn
@@jumolbureanu2415 you ACTUALLY took some energy to type that. hahaha , sorry you feel alone
This is anecdotal: I have had one fall / laydown of my bike on gravel in a corner. My elbow hit the ground and I was very happy to have this type of soft impact protection. No injury. I wore a knox mesh jacket.
I have nerve damage from a low speed fall. Why? No elbow protection.
Weird how that works.
Yes, I have had low speed offs where the padding worked great. Not taking mine out.
but but bones
@@rosskstar BONELESS!
As a guy who's had 3 unfortunate 'offs' (in 60+ years of riding - none of which were avoidable - and 2 of which resulted in helo rides), I gotta believe that the gear I had on saved my bacon, at least to a degree. In my latest 'event' I hit sand on a shaded road in the mountains of SW VA early in the morning while negotiating a corner at 50 (+/-) mph and the bike simply slammed me to the asphalt. I have no memory of the accident, but I have to believe the KLIM gear I had on significantly reduced my injuries (as did my helmet). The ER doc at the hospital in Johnson City, TN where I was life-flighted commented that he sees a lot of m/c related incidents resulting in permanent and sometimes fatal injuries, many from incidents where no 'gear' was worn and he attributed the lack of major injuries to me to my gear. I consider myself to be an experienced rider who doesn't ride above my skill levels, but I do ride a lot, and the more we ride the more the odds are against us. I'm merely trying to mitigate the chances of an off resulting in permanent or fatal results. I'll continue to use my pads.
As an ER doc in Johnson City, I just say that to everyone. Imagine if I started telling people their gear probably doesn't do anything, they'd want another doctor! Particularly since it's not like I saw the crash, or was even at the scene. But people think I can read trauma like their insides aren't organized yogurt. The mush whisperer.
Saying none were avoidable just goes to show how you think about this stuff.
Oh they were avoidable. All crashes are avoidable. The fact you haven't learnt they're avoidable means you've taken nothing away from both incidents.
@@NaeMuckle A car crossed the road 10 Meters in front of me. I rammed into the side of the car. 10 month later I was able to leave the hospital for the first time. Second crash so far in 40 years of riding motorbikes was a crash caused by a sort of Antilope which came out of the forest and jumped into my bike directly from the side. Now you tell us accidents like these are avoidable? It is totally disrespectful to tell the victims of an accident that they are to blame for their accident, because it could have been avoided in any case.
Not every accident is a simple lowside from riding too hard for the skill, tires, or road conditions. Sometimes life just has other plans my man.
I just recently had an avoidable accident, but alas I put off upgrading the rubbers and it caught up to me @NaeMuckle
Credit to the cameraman for walking backwards for six minutes without falling over.
gimble with face tracking, you do not need to watch the camera, sorry to spoil the magic
I envision a person holding a camera. Being pulled along while sitting in a red rider wagon using camera stabilization. lol
Too dangerous for the cameraman .It’s Ryan who was walking backward and talking in reverse. They just had to reverse the video afterwards.
I thought most camera have rotatable screen, no?
Yeah, and the producer, leading that cameraman every step of the way. And perhaps another one or 2 people.
Although it felt like a horse kicked me in the ribs, I credit walking away from my 60 MPH highway slide- unscratched to my Armored Scorpion Jacket, Armored- knuckle gloves, Hawk pants, Forma Adventure boots and Nolan N100 Helmet. All of the above endured some level of roadrash, and my jacket and pants armor certainly did its part....ATGATT rings loud and clear with this rider!...
For someone who rides dual sports and has a lot of low speed falls the armour really does help. Probably doesn’t make much of a difference if you hit a wall at 90.
exactly mate, clonk a body part on a tree at 30 KMs am hour and the pads work 🤘🇦🇺
Fell over once doing some slow speed work in a parking lot. Landed hip first on the ground. Had hip armour in my pants, so I didn't feel a thing, but l imagine that would not have been the case without it. At the very least wouldn't been some bruising.
And if you fall on it again? Yeah, right. "Pads are worthless."
You know what is actually worthless? This video!
And to think so many people will simp over Ryan and his ability to read a script for 7 minutes that they'll just take his word and suggestions to heart and remove the pass from their gear anyway.
@@werepat ...if you actually read the comments you'd notice people either contesting him or reinterpretating his words correctly (current armor bad, we want better armor) but no, keep whining
I really only wear the armor as another layer of abrasion resistance for the slide and not the impact.
What studies often miss are the accidents that didn’t end up in the survey because the person was absolutely fine…because they had armour. That time you slowly dropped and landed elbow down on concrete? Might have been an arm breaker, but you had a pad so you didn’t end up in ER.
Bingo!
Agreed
Yes, can't see why the protector wouldn't be usefull if the primary impact is little above the fracture force level, and taking it back below.
Doesn't take away the fact we could have better protectors.
Yeah it's like with the survivorship bias. Some just might not be reported as no injury occured, no help was needed. Hence no data.
Vital point, thank you. Especially as many of these studies were from US, where medical care is expensive. Many fallen riders just limped home feeling lucky
I'm glad I wore them a few days ago, the bruises in those slightly better protected areas are on a lighter yellow than the almost blue ones on my arm, my forearm, my leg or my foot. More important, a rider should never forget that wearing a certain level of protection doesn't mean being safe.
I hope you recover quickly!
Do you think it could have more to do with having a better abrasion resistant material on the impact zones than the pads themselves?
@@palashbhaumik42069 having pads in turn, does increase abrasion resistance
@@Derkenblosh2 yes I know that...but I was just thinking about which would be a better alternative for abrasion resistance
Is a class A rated jacket with level 2 protectors better/worse than AA rated jacket without any armouring... which would be a better/cheaper way to increase abrasion resistance...and so on...lots of such questions not covered in this video
@@palashbhaumik42069 The A class is worse then the AA since it's not the pads but the surface material tested for abrasion, he covered that in a previous video something about textile versus leather.
I ve always enjoyed his videos although they were gone for a while. Don't understand this one, two years ago my wife was riding an HD Switchback was hit by a pickup toyota hilux; the bike flipped twice as the speed was 140km and she landed in a ditch. I immediately got her to a clinic, the doctors did not believe it. She no abrasions, breaks nor dislocation, just needed 7 stitches where the Cardo mic smacked. Lots of bruises. We both ride full gear and c2 pads. They do make a difference
this is the video that made me unsub, not just because of this, but the lack of apology and corrections.
If this is the stuff we find out, imagine how many lies this channel repeats just through the thin veil of a fancy editing team.
Almost. If a fracture occurs at 4kN and our substandard (I agree) padding reduces the force of the impact (i.e. 6kN) as well as the disruption of the impact to below 4kN, the fracture will likely not occur. This will be a moot point for anyone riding a street bike into a concrete barrier at highway speed. But as some who have taken hard falls on elbows, hips and knees off-road, fall on my CE2 pads and Leatt knee and shin pads have saved my day more than once. Most of us have tried it both ways and regretted the days we left the padding at home. It is also important to remember the stats are only collected when someone presents at the hospital. This data is completely void of all the impacts that occurred, with padding, and no serious injury occurred.
This video has started a huge debate that will surely improve impact protection on jackets , improve standards for jackets and better rider understanding on how protection works and what to buy.
For this alone , it was worth it. Thanks !
Or does it just encourage a lot more people to ride without gear duh
Yeah. I agree. He's very influential and so many riders might just stop wearing protective gear because to them what he says is gospel truth. Maybe he should've spent more time in clarifying his disclaimer because it's scary for riders to just drop everything and stop wearing gear
I think you will have to have a large contingent of the motorcycle riding community to, en mass, approach the manufacturers and demand better protection and variety (of size of pads) before they would voluntarily do such an expensive venture. But keep up the hope!
@@_titojoe they didn't listen very well then. He stopped wearing the slide in pads, because he's wearing different armor / airbag. Not because he settled wearing any protection. That only discusses his upper body back armor. He didn't talk about other parts.
He is wearing either an airbag or fancy external back armor. He didn't stop and wear nothing. He didn't even say that the regular stuff was without utility, just not good enough.
Lol.
This 6 minute one-take is the best example of how good video planning can save you hours in editing😮
If we assume this was the first take.
IF - It helps anyone save edit time - When I use the record pause button - I also pause my jaw. It's simple - and effective. You just need to remember what you were saying in the previous shot. If you're moto blogging and you just ridden past something you want to find later - put your glove over the lens, then later just search for the black parts and Hey Presto...
....David Wood does a very impressive one take including a trip down a subway, if I remember he may even got on the train and popped up at tge exit subway, walked to a park bench and sat down. All in one take. I like it as it seems natural- if one is not too easily distracted
Worth watching the Johnny Walker advertisement The Man Who Walked Around the World that inspired this -- incredible performance and camera work
He’s using a brand he invested in heavily to pull this off. If you imagine your other moto vloggers doing this bit, 😅 their poor comment section.
His brand enables this one shot, topic, and opinion to be. 🎉
What is totally correct about this video is that it is very important to have protectors in size and positioning that wrap the complete joint. Those small standard protectors in textile products are not extremely helpful in being there where you need them when the impact hits you.
Every good sales pitch I had so far had the imprtance of correct fit of clothing AND protector pockets. During riding and weird twists you take when you fall. So when you move they still need to cover you. Also everyone told me the stuff they put is just filler so the pockets are not empty on trying it out. You always buy the good stuff afterwards to replace it - it's still a market - you're also right about that. Most ppl don't care about it or don't know about it so it's not a selling point. Only the most expensive suits 2-4k got it included already. Those also absorb/spread a lot more force. What is really hard to find is a good suit with a pocket or good protector that also covers the coccyx so you don't have to wear those maximum uncomfortable for anything but one-piece back turtles.
I don't understand why most ppl rate protective gear in this order: helmet, jacket and maybe gloves
When for my experience it should be more: Helmet, gloves (with combination shockpad + hard shell on nuckles, fingers and tying together the weak fingers - there is a reason there are hospitals specialized alone for hand surgery), massive boots with inner or outer skeleton restricting movement of the joint. Then the pants. hip is the place where you will slide on the most. Then the jacket where active safety like staying dry and in your temperature windows is even more important than passive safety.
Purchase different gear and sizing for different temperatures. One combined with insulation shit in fall but not in summer will not fit correctly in both occasions and will less likely keep the crashpads where they belong. Everything textile below 2k bucks is only for very slow slides. If you want more, you don't want the same d500 shit doubled or tripled. you want leather and or at least kevlar. The plastic will just melt into your skin.
I find airbags horrible for active safety. Feeling comfortable. I would take the Rukka protectors above it any time.
I know ppl who kept their feet from a side crash and just break or crush it instead of tearing if off or crushing it to amputation level because they had Daytona Shoes. I someone who has a stiff leg now but kept it instead of loosing it cause he wore the best schwabenleder two-piece leather suit with the best protectors instead of losing it.
Protectors are improtant. I can just walk it of in small or medium sized impacts with a lot less damabe to recover from or just keep a limb or organ instead of loosing it. It's not always 0% or 100%. Sometimes 10-20% reductions is all you need to be able to recover at all.
btw. that almost leg loss was with 45kmh - scooter speed. Just an unlucky fall into a siderail. Which for me is no argument for not protection but all the protection you can get for all the speeds and all the distances. Even if it's 30km/h for 5 km to the ice cream shop.
A highway speed slide with a AAA garment, with the pad removed, will still hurt a lot more than with the pads installed. I'd rather fall from 5ft high with pads than without. That's all they are there for. That last line you threw in there about appreciating life, supports the idea that a marginal safety item, which doesn't have much downside, should be worn.
Not necessarily. It supports the idea that, being that the "highest value" is to enjoy life, if the body armor creates you more trouble than enjoyment, then it is of no use, and if it is of more benefit to enjoying life then it is an obstacle, then it is of use. Now he needed to argue the negatives about using armor, which he didn't, and weigh them against the positives. He gave his conclusion in the form of a metaphor without effectively and objectively weighing both sides of the scale against each other. Although the production is amazing, the theoretical side is limping. So each one has to draw their own conclusions
@@Bhghihrevit back armor is so soft and light while being CE2 I don't even remember it's there
This channel is an absolute blessing to the motorcycling community.
It really is!
Real
This time i dont think so.
@@jrodriguesraposo Why's that?
actually it isn't, starting to promote silly ideas...
That's why the motto is: "dress for the slide, not the ride". Pads don't protect that much against the impact itself (minus the helmet), but is all about making the slide comfortable.
Slide also rhymes with ride...
Just to add, I have never expected pads to prevent fractures, they just would have cover the entire limb to be able to do that like a suit of armor or a MOTOGP suit. Its always been about the slide for me.
This is a good one; I'll have to remember this. Another one I have heard for helmets is "skid lid."
@@spartanx169x I think that's just the common sentiment, as it is very obvious, but if the companies did hold up their end on protective gear then we might not need to dress for the slide, but the fractures and the impact.
Seems like some protection is better than none. It might not save a bone when the force is very large, but if it was just enough to break a bone, is the pad not going to absorb some of that and save you from a fracture?
I forgot what I was watching thanks to production quality. Beautiful stuff as always. Now, as for the topic. Considering what's provided is true, it surely remains effective to some extent as you mentioned. Different speeds, angles, impacted materials vary and the end result varies too. Despite all, having armour is most probably better than none. Striving for better stand-alone protection as you showed would be the right way to go.
I wouldn't consider removing my armour parts, we fragile humans don't need fractures to feel pain. Bruises alone, abrasion, lacerations and much more can be a worse nightmare. Even then, medical recovery and treatment will be shorter and easier in case of anything extreme.
Nevertheless, I 100% understand your point there so thank you for making it clear not to rely on said armour when it's virtually useless when it comes to life and death.
The 2 biggest flaws of this this video are:
1: The video is assuming because the armor doesn't meet 4kN in distribution, the armor's effect is near negligent. This is inaccurate.
2: The study said results are inconclusive. Yet the video pedals it as though there is no relation between armor and less injury/fracture. As a researcher myself I get frustrated when this happens. My first thought when I saw the data put on screen was this: "How do we know that the people wearing gear weren't going faster and getting in worse accidents?"
The plain physics of dispersed energy and energy spread over time has been proven so damn many times.
@@logangodofcandy what does this mean for our current discussion?
Yeah, it’s ridiculous. Tumbling off your bike at low speed and landing on your elbow. I know the armour will have me just picking up the bike, not going to hospital.
As a writer myself, _Negligible Peddle_ could be a great researcher punk band.
1) no... when is that assumed? The video states that the standard is not good enough because it's limited.
2) well, that's an assumption on your part, with no reason to suggest it. Other than statistically improbable.
If you are a researcher you should understand the concept of the null hypothesis.
New rider here buying my first bike soon. I appreciate Ryan never taking safety gear promises at face value, especially regarding helmets. But I'll join most others here saying: I'll definitely be wearing pads. I expect I could take a spill or two and the less damage I take the more quickly I'll get back on that horse.
I like my skin where it is.
Well your conclusion got it right - protect your skins, not your bones since the CE won't absorb enough to protect from break. I'd say $ better spent on quality abrasion protection in that case, i.e. I'll take kevlar over foam.
he doesn't even consider low speed crashes and simple falls. like say you're simply going too fast for a turn at an intersection and fall going twenty miles an hour. low chance of bone breakage or road rash, but would you rather land on your elbow without a pad, or with a pad? i'm definitely not going to stop wearing pads.
@@thinkdunson I think the studies he read from did take into consideration all crashes, including low speed ones. You will fracture your elbow even in a low speed crash (30mph), with or without pad.
I suspect your speed going forwards is irrelevant to the downwards force on to your elbow in a simple ‘falling over’ crash, sure it will add major abrasion damage as the bike speed is a horizontal force, but your speed at falling downwards will remain the same, as it's just acceleration of gravity. Unless you get launched up into the air of course.
But yeah, if you get launched horizontally into something, no pad will save you
I mean I'm still gonna wear pads haha, but they will not save you from any impact force
It definitely adds a level of confidence at the beginning. Also scabs the size of a large pizza really suck....
body armor has nothing to do with the skin
I generally like your content...and understand the argument, but having had a good few crashes over 40 years of riding, I have experienced crashes both with and without CE armour. I currently wear Forcefield armour and it has, without a doubt, been highly effective at reducing injuries. As has the sorbothane armour in my old BKS leathers. Major impacts will break bones, but the trauma and damage will be reduced or eliminated for lower impacts. I continue to wear CE armour.
This is pretty much pointless. I’ve been riding for fifty years and can’t remember once thinking that my armored jacket would protect my bones. It’ll sure as hell soften the impact of a crash though, and mitigate road rash so I’ll keep mine in thank you.
I'd concur, if I hadn't been dragged 50 yards under my Blackbird fifteen years ago, and *almost* worn through the shoulder pad in my jacket. No pad, no shoulder. A single data point, maybe, but it's *my* single data point. Two years later my femur was smashed by my handle bar, but that was where there were no pads.
But if you listened to what he said.. he openly said they can help for abrasions and that maybe enough for people to keep using them.
Wow sounds like you've just discovered anecdotal evidence. Congratulations
That’s exactly the point he made in the video. Good for abrasions, not so much for fractures.
exp bias
@@nigelcook730 same for the rest of the moto gear. Should we ride without jackets and pants?
Eh this is kinda like not using a lock at all because all locks can be cut with a grinder.
Having crashed with and without armour I know first hand how much less it hurts when you have armour. You know why that difference isn’t in the numbers? None of those impacts with the armour did I report.
Basically will pads stop you braking bones in a bad crash? Nope. Will they make a smaller crash less painful and maybe protect from a small fracture? Yep
yeah but that doesnt make for a good click baity title.
“Life is so beautiful our instinct is to protect it… but our imperative is to appreciate it.”
Good lord, what a line.
One should be alive and in good shape to appreciate life
@@user-Podcast-Canadathat's not necessarily true-no one appreciates the idea of being in good shape like the person who no longer is! The point remains the same
Wink wink vaccines, WHO, WEF...
Makes sense to me
@@user-Podcast-Canadayou don't have to be in good shape to appreciate life lol 🤦
I don't even like motorcycles, but your videos are so high quality I can hardly believe it. It's it's a beautiful conductance of many elements at once: engineering, production, market politics and regulation interplay, a big picture exposed clear and wide by the bloom of so many nuanced detail considerations. Hard to put into words, this channel has the magic sauce in spades.
Hit a van at 40mph side on, I was wearing full body armour and walked away without a single break. The trade off was head to toe bruising instead of shattered limbs.
I am a history teacher and I am using the final statement of this video in my lectures on war (with careful citations of course) . "Life is so beautiful, our instinct is gonna be to protect it. But our imperative, we have to remember, is to appreciate it". That's beyond profound!
With regard to this video, that sentiment is irrelevant. Wearing a padded jacket does nothing to decrease my appreciation or enjoyment of motorcycle riding!
I get that ridingvwithout a helmet and gear really is a freeing sensation, and probably should be experienced by everyone, but saying wearing padded gear reduces the beauty of the world is, frankly, silly.
@@werepat That is NOT what he said nor implied with that quote. Wowza, you that butt hurt about his point?
@werepat what the fuck are you smoking?
@@werepat Your comment is also irrelevant. What if wearing armor does impede someone's enjoyment of riding? Maybe I think we should limit all motorcycles to 60mph because I get the same enjoyment at 30mph as I do at 130mph. Surely that wouldnt impede on your fun right? And its safer right?!
EI: Where's the line dude?
The personalities who find it suitable to judge what is and what isnt "enjoyable", are often the same types who end up legislating limitations...
I agree with you to an extent. I wear armor. But if someone says wearing armor reduces their enjoyment, thats their choice to make. Thats yhe freedom they can enjoy. Im happy they get to choose, and I expect them to be responsible for any consequences.
@@SuperSneakySniper my problem is not with unsafe practices. My problem comes from the tacit approval and implied encouragement from a notable personality that he thinks wearing armored gear is pointless. It's just wrong. Do whatever you want, but that includes doing your best to not be wrong.
I tripped and fell in my living room like an idiot, my foot got caught on something and I hit the ground hard enough that it would have almost definitely broken my knee, but I had just gotten home and was wearing my cheap motorcycle pants, and it almost didn’t hurt at all. Just because something isn’t 100% effective doesn’t mean it’s not worth having. If you hit something just hard enough to break a bone and the pad only takes 10% of the impact that’s still enough to save you.
Right, this like playing football without a helmet because studies show they don't stop concussions. Sometimes the testing protocol isn't even testing the right thing.
Wearing bodypads in the house and being clumsy is not the flex you think it is, or the lesson you we want to arrive on.
You're commenting on a remark where the author extols pads inside the house as justification for wearing pads for a completely different and higher-demand application where their utility is more to protect manufacturers than the wearer. As rugby players whether they want the sport to convert to American football style safety equipment, and then ask yourself why extra safety requirements can not only change behaviors, but also create new problems unintentionally.
@@caseyshiloh247 my point was that not every crash is hitting a tree at 50mph and sometimes the pads are more than enough to protect you. If you only look at the extremes the pads are useless but you’re also ignoring the fact that most motorcycle accidents are low speed crashes where pads are absolutely effective.
@@actualsize123 Yeah I had a low speed crash where my shoulder took the brunt of the impact. I didn't even realized it until I noticed the dirt on my jacket was indented with the honeycomb pattern of the armour underneath. It might have not been a fracture, but I was 2500km from home and a badly bruised shoulder would have been a dampener on the rest of my trip.
Anyone doubting pads needs to think about standing on concrete and freely falling to their knees. It's going to hurt.
I have the highest level of respect for the production team behind these videos, and add to that, a generous dollop of admiration to Ryan for delivering them the way he does. Well done!!
Too bad he was delivering a load of crap in this one. Usually he puts out great info but this one was very misleading.
I’m not removing pads. I know for a fact they have helps me on some crashes. Ryan has like 100x the experience I will ever have. As a less experienced rider, pads have protected me.
I have much more experience riding than Ryan and this video is hooey! I've been riding for nearly 30 years, all over the world and on every kind of bike, and I've crashed in dozens of different situations. Even if pads don't protect from every possible injury, I know that they have protected me from way more injuries than when I rode without them.
I'm keeping them in, too! And Ryan is gonna get people hurt with this video.
Same!
Starting next year to ride again after 5 Years I know the risk of minor Incidents will be high, exactly where Pads will help.
But also the Helite Airbag Backpack will be a part of the Equipment, because People drive like Maniacs around here...
All I have to say to this is LMFAOOO
@@werepat It's april 1'st man. Not exactly the best time to take things seriously.
That being said, it's obvious that if someone's actually taking the pads out, that person may have had a few sips of the kerosene we use to clean chains.
Obviously, a push for better pads and more coverage/sizes is great. But they reduce impact forces to some extent. That alone is more than enough justification.
For everybody in Germany, you must also remember: If you take it out, your insurance WILL take this as an oportunity to shorten your claim
In Germany you have to tell the insurance company the gear you ride with?
@@Aaron-sj2txGermany has a catch all phrase in the StVO which are the rules for the road for all vehicles. There’s a requirement that you should wear adequate protection at all times and your vehicle be properly maintained for the conditions. That loophole lets insurance decline coverage if you don’t have a seatbelt fastened, bald tires, snow or ice on windows, or on the motorcycle they can get you for improper footwear, lack of gloves, helmet.
For everybody in Germany, there's Stadler motorcycle clothes, and their protectors are much bigger than the rest.
No, they dont. Had an accident last year, no back protection but a broken vertebra and they didnt care at all.
Although they tried to refuse paying for the helmet and other damaged gear.
This is nonsense. Unless the policy states specific clothing to wear.
Been skateboarding, MTBing, surfing forever. After age 35, I noticed that I don't heal as fast. 2016 was when I realized the significance of ANY protection. Longboarding down my local hill at ~15 mph wearing no pads = Took me about 10 minutes to get up off the ground from the pain. 6 weeks recovering from f-up knees and rash. Bought some non rated knee and elbow pads and did not care how I looked went down that hill again faster. Eventually I fell off, bounced and slid around, got up, got my board and went down the hill again laughing at how ridiculously awesome it felt to fall, take no damage and get up immediately. Picking up moto at 40 it was a no brainer buying as much protection as I could (no airbag yet) and after a few minor falls it is the same feeling. It doesn't change your mind until it happens as most things in life. In a major accident will armor protect you from broken bones or death? Apparently not, but I am wearing my armor for the minor stuff that I know can take me out for weeks and months away from the things I love.
My huge respect for RF9 has been significantly diminished by this video… as many others have previously said the primary purpose of the armour is to spread the impact forces over a greater area to reduce the point load thereby reducing the severity of damage/injury.
While riding on green lanes last year I had a fairly large off sufficient to shatter my left wrist, right thumb and put a large bruise across my forehead where the helmet spread the impact of hitting the rocks I was riding on.
Had I not been wearing a helmet I would be dead with a smashed skull… with a helmet the load was spread meaning I was only knocked unconscious.
The A&E nurse that examined me was astounded that my wrist/hand injuries were the only the only broken bones… I was wearing MX boots and MX body armour under my jacket which spread the impact on the rest of my body… I was wearing thin gloves without any significant pads/plates and no wrist protection… not a mistake I will make again
I know a guy who was on the way to a viking re enactments show who fell off going into the Dartford tunnel under the Thames. The shower of sparks his mail shirt gave was most spectacular and absolutely freeked the people in the cars following him .the best bit was when he got up checked himself and with a few bruises carried on to the show .....he got a few more bruises from the Saxon hord he fought 👍
@cedhome7945 I used to do that back in late 90s (Regia Anglorum, Yorvingerhead, York) Wore chain mail vest... it weighed 7 stone!!! wish I still had it lol. Ta for memory unlock 👍🖖
I was with regia =.Wessex during the 90s
Released on April 1. Good one.
Also, pads are positioned on the JOINTS, hence are not meant to prevent bone fractures as such. Also... PPE is designed to REDUCE the scale of injuries, not to 100% prevent them.
It’s not a joke though. There is a bit more detail in the pinned comment.
He has said in earlier videos that the armor doesn't do much for impacts but rather keeping you off the ground or just a little bit longer. Which is the case.
Right?! Once i hit a rock with my shoe and fell on my knee on the asphalt. Not even on a motorcycle, just running. I couldn't stand on my leg for days and had to bandage it for 3 weeks! I wish i had a knee protector on. I don't want to imagine what could happen if i fell off of a bike.
Have you ever gone down with armor on? If not you can't comment on it. Landed on my side after 50 mph impact with a deer. Armor saved my elbow and shoulder 100%. Boots and gloves saved my feet and hands 100%. Was checked by the ambulance crew and went home after. Only bad injury was my knee that was only protected by jeans.
@@MrLaughingcorpse A well padded boot saved my left outter ankle and toes when I hit and slid down a wall. It was a low speed impact at an angle. Jeans torn, boot front badly 'bruised'. In the same accident, my left shoulder hit the railing on the said wall. I had a big bad bruise just under the joint but nothing else because that was a padded area. And my helmet brushed the railing, luckily it slid along, but that would have hit my jaw.
In all of my on and offroad crashes, I have never once thought, man I wish I didnt have these pads on. I understand the point you’re conveying, but my knees and elbows have always been grateful for my padding. Im keeping my road armor.
Exactly, it doesn't take a rocket surgeon to put pads on and realize they will help. Sure they aren't a steel roll cage, but I'd rather have anything in-between me and the concrete rather than nothing.
I've been hit by a van on one side, then the road on the other, then the road on the original side, then my back and head sliding across the rocks. I got up and walked away, I also would not have wanted to do that without the armor on. The only spot I even got a scratch was where the zipper for airflow was open on my forearm peeled away a couple of layers of skin. Otherwise than being a little light headed , filled with adrenaline, and pissed at the van driver... I was able to ride all the way home and make sure I didn't have a concussion at the hospital. This was in Kenya/East Africa
This dude does such a good job. He did not have to do this at a single shot. Not many will even notice but I appreciate and respect it! Great job!
Had a crash last year and fell on my ellbow. I am convinced my level two protector spared me a fracture. I am keeping my level twos in. I want as much protection as possible!
Its true it did. No ifs ands or buts about it, it's not "convinced" or "belief", its fact.. The data presented in this video may be correct, but its interpreted incorrectly. A ~50kN force is reduced to 9kN, thats 80% reduction, and that makes a difference. Let's work the calculation the other way. Say your goal is to keep force
Alright, you put up a good argument.
**Pulls the rolled up Amazon package bubble wrap out of my jacket pockets**
That would be an insane insulator, you will overheat
bro, thats not a bad idea xD
that's probably better
At least bubble wrap makes a fun sound upon impact
@@thomasborger6548 lols
I really believe that you make some good points, Ryan, but I can tell you that I probably would not be walking without a cane or walker now if I did not have armor in my knees and full armor in the rest of my gear when I had a serious accident. In 2006, a huge SUV made a left turn in front of me and I impacted the front wheel at around 45 mph. I was thrown up and over the vehicle, knocked unconscious, and woke up to EMT’s cutting off my damaged helmet (would have dead or suffered severe brain injury without it) and new armored leather jacket. I was transported to the hospital where I was evaluated and released that day. I had no injuries or abrasions. My fingertips were very bruised (jammed between the brake lever and the vehicle) and were saved from serious injury because my gloves had finger tip armor. I also had a small fracture in my lower back. When I went to look at my beautiful Kawasaki ZRX1200R, I noticed that the steel tank had a huge dent in it (about 3” deep) where my right knee had impacted the tank. The guys at the salvage yard were surprised that I was still alive and walking, given the severe damage to the bike. I had very slight bruising on my right knee! It is surprising that my armor worked so well, especially so, given the fact that my back pad was just foam and none of my other armor was CE rated. I had another crash a few years later where I had no injuries or abrasions because I was wearing armored gear. I was never asked about what gear I was wearing in the first crash and I did not report the second crash, so it begs the question-how accurate is the data if motorcyclists walk away uninjured from a crash and don’t report the incident? Personally, I am so grateful and appreciative that we have such great protective gear and, at 77 years old and still riding, I will always ride with armor. Just my perspective, everyone. Feel free to do what you like. BTW, if you don’t like bulky armor, try ghost armor - you hardly know it is there. Ride safe and enjoy the ride for as long as you can!
Gary is a G. Bless, grandpa
Well , if you want safety ride a car , motorcycle is unsafe & the more safety and protection you add the more of a car it becomes... moving from a slingshot 3 wheel cycle to a 4 wheel go cart, to a 5 star safe rating suv , to a 20 wheel tank.
@@oscarbear7498I never noticed that what I'm wearing adds a couple extra wheels to my bike, or prevents me from leaning into a corner, or form feeling the wind in my face, or hearing the engine. What I'm wearing protects me, it doesn't make my bike any more "like a car".
@@WatanabeNoTsuna. its an Exaggeration to prove a point of a Slippery slope. That motorcycles are inherently dangerous on purpose! as there's absolutely no reason to ride a motorcycle given far better alternative exist like a comfortable car for transportation.
The ONLY benefit a motorcycle has is maybe better gas mileage but on my bike how I ride I get 38mpg with a modified carburetor.
One rides a motorcycle for the rush, & excitement that dangerous things provide. The more dangerous less pads , no boots, no motorcycle jacket , no helmet safe glasses just for the wind, gives the highest thrill at the cost pf highest danger.
If you dress like an astronaut, in full bubble 🫧 suit isn't not as fun...again both extremes to show the contrast to prove a point since your mentally slowly.
@@oscarbear7498 dogwater take. you wont make it to gary's age at this rate.
I never ever expected my body armour to prevent a fracture. I always wear it to help prevent or minimize road rash in case of some sort of slide. You go ahead and stop wearing your armour, but I sure hope that this video doesn't influence someone else to make that same mistake.
I have fallen on pavement wearing a fully padded jacket and a pair of regular jeans. my hip was bruised, my knee was F'ed up for about three months, but my elbow, which hit the ground first, wasn't even bruised, nor was my shoulder or any other part of my upper body. Armor makes a difference, the 50J impact is just a number used for testing purposes, most likely to ensure that the armor will endure an unrealistically hard hit even if your bones wont.
After that i high-sided on a hard packed dirt road going about 60 km/h, flew over the handlebars and hit the ground 5m in front of the bike. This time i was wearing padded jeans as well. Not a single bruise, got up and lifted my bike back up. Had I not been wearing armor my elbow would have been shattered and my knees wouldn't have been much better off.
Don't spread misinformation, of course armor protects you from fractures, use common sense and don't over-analyze a lab test.
Dude, it's not about your personal experience which could differ from a statistical viewpoint, since your experience could be a statistical anomaly for the intended study.
@@asfandelfi think his point is that Ryan is missing the point a bit. Yeah at a certain point the impact will break bones regardless of weather or not you are wearing armor. But there is a threshold where armor protects, at lower speeds and forces. Those lower speeds you are also more likely to have an accident.
You are spot on there... if my armour saved my skin from looking like grated cheese then it works.... I know of several riders that have no bruises or skin abrasions etc due to their armour... any high speed impact will take anyone out no matter what you are wearing... bottom line is... rather be safe than sorry
You’re right check out bennet bike social
@@asfandelf The statistics only look at actually injured people in armor. It is a well known bias called survivorship bias as it does not account for those that were completely uninjured, but would be otherwise injured without armor.
Even a minor scrape saved by just wearing armor makes it worth it, as instead of taking off your gear to treat the scrape turns to dusting yourself off and riding on.
F9s video will however create a discord in the industry most likely. Higher demand for airbags which over time will make them more affordable and reliable. A better padding as F9 is correct - you do not need to stand out in the game, someone who cares about spine armor (e.g. motocross riders) will buy a separate high end piece anyway making a built in one often redundant. So slap in the one that has been ok for like 15 years and claim you have the spine armor or back protector and charge extra for it. It will protect you from most injures but it does not cover a tailbone for example.
In the end despite this video being misinformative, it will most likely be a net positive since it may create an actual demand for high end protective clothing from people that considered what they got good enough. My Meteor 350 can't really go at speeds where 50J impacts happen. So for a rider like me a B-type is pretty much ok. And most motorbikes in the world are lower displacement than mine, as most people ride 250s, 125s and such. Sure a guy on a litre bike going at 250kmph will not be saved by anything short of a miracle but most riders do not ride like that. Most riders that ride very (the ones that are statistically more likely to be in an accident) often ride at 80-100kmph at most. Be if for lack of power, wind fatigue, safety, obeying the laws and/or fuel economy most riders I have met just flow with the traffic and 1 in a 100 goes the 200 on a straight. But you only see the 1 in 100 (and that is confirmation bias), not the 99 other riders that just went at the speed limit and did not rev at 8k RPM nor swish past you.
I kid you not there was a crash outside my window yesterday. On the camera you see 8 bikes going at speed limit (50) but one bike went 70. That one bike had right of way but a van driver did not see him and went into his way. And everyone in the comments was "those damn bikers, all of them are speeding daredevils". As they genuinely watched a 15s video where 8 bikes went at/under the speed limit.
I have had a couple of spills, and I'm absolutely grateful for my body armour. Something that isn't mention here is compound damage. Nothing that I'm currently aware of, that money can buy, is ever going to prevent serious impact damage if you come to a hard stop... but if you bounce along the road you may well strike elbows and knees several times with light to moderate impacts. Stack those impacts together and you have a potentially serious injury. The friends who have crashed/been knocked off and had no pads all suffered elbow and knee damage (even with lined riding jeans and no pads). 2 of those were at sub 30mph speeds. My own incidents were at twice that speed and I walked away with no injuries including where my lightweight leathers abraded through and I finished the slide on my backboard. Confirmation bias? Perhaps, but I'm leaving my armour where it is until they start making something better.
You are right, i bet you to this day felt the force impacting the protections where you hit the road, and some say they are there doing nothing... no ammount of bro science will make me ride without protection ever.
Maybe an April Fool’s joke, but I would never take out my armor based on anyone’s video. I have been smacked in the chin’s with road debris and knew what if I didn’t have armor on I would have been recovering instead of riding.
Yea, same I fell right on my elbow and got a nasty bruise. I'm pretty sure I would have broken my arm if it wasn't for the Armor.
Yeah actually the road debris is a solid reason to always keep your pads inside. It's a common case to have a stone fly into your windshield when you drive a car, what can we say about going on the road without a windshield?
Great video! I just started getting my gear after getting my license recently, and I watched hundreds of reviews of different products. I tried tens of products myself in those specialized stores, and I 100% agree with your opinion. Every time I tried a garment, I wondered how that small shoulder or elbow pad would help in case of an accident. I'm just entering the motorcycle world, so I have a completely fresh and unbiased look, and it's so obvious how much the monetization strategies took over the actual purpose of this protective gear. I have experience with mountaineering gear. Being on the high mountain with somewhat compromised gear can also cost your life, and I would say most of the serious brands are not compromising the quality and are investing in new technologies, although you can definitely see that the lower-end products are ridiculous from a performance standpoint. Sadly, profit becoming the main priority comes with a high price for those riding the bikes, and it's good that there are still companies producing effective protective gear. Hopefully, someday, the law will change so that the competition increases to such a level that we, as consumers, benefit from lower prices and better quality.
To an extent this is true but it is missing a lot of real life use cases where protection does in fact make a huge difference. The major point being the abrasion/laceration protection. The focus in this video on broken bones, which are not a big deal in most cases. Scraping off part off your elbow or hip bone is a different matter, just like skin grafts or deep laceration that hit a major artery.
Having had a whole bunch of accidents, on and off the bike, with and without protection, I can unequivocally say it does make a huge difference. The people that the research didn't approach were the more minor crashes, where people slide out or something to that extent and those crashes are much more common. In those cases, the protection absolutely does its job really well.
There is also more than snapping a bone in half. You can chip or crack your elbows, shoulder or hips, which can create much bigger issues than a single, clean break. Bones also bruise, which takes months and months to heal, if it ever does.
In my opinion this video is too narrow-minded, focussing too much a broken bones as being the worst injury you can have (which it isn't in most cases) and the fact the major brands have had a hand in setting that a standard that could be better.
Instead of shooting down the concept of pads based on these two aspects of protective gear, you could argue for a better standard like the horse-girls get and include the situations where protection absolutely serves its purpose. Realise how many people take your opinion as gospel, even if you formulate in such a way you are not liable for people taking your advice to heart.
Yeah even though the message is technically there, way too many people are going to read the title and watch the first half and think they don't need armor anymore.
I can agree with F9 that standards should be challenged if there’s opportunity for improvement for the end-user, and any shortcomings they have should be known - but just writing off these inserts because bone strength < insert energy mitigation in a one dimensional controlled test irks me.
@@uncleren Exactly. Especially with the focus on broken bones, which are not the most common injury in crashes. Bruises, abrasions and lacerations are way more common. Having experienced injuries like that, I always use body armour. Every little bit helps.
Yeah the rant comes down to 'if something isn't 100% perfect then it's completely useless' which is silly. Didn't cite anything that says it increases injuries, I don't really understand the angle he took here unless it's just to get people to engage in the comments which clearly worked lol
Very well said.
My bones are strong and haven't broken, but after a severe off-roading accident, I damaged the ligaments/joint in the side of my hip. This experience made me consider how much better protected the more vulnerable parts of my body, like the hip area, would have been with armor.
You do state this when you say "specifically in relation to fractures."
Ligaments take forever to heal, like months if not in some cases years.
That’s a good point. The other thing I wondered was about the severity of those fractures, a small fracture is nothing compared to a severe break.
To me, the challenge is to find the right comfortable gear where the pads don’t bother me, at least on the bike. I’ve done that now, so nothing to gain by removing them.
he did say at the end that it can still be protective, and that he does wear pads/air bags, just very high spec ones rather than the diddly little ones
body armor won't do anything to save ligaments and cartridges, knee braces can somehow protect the ligaments but at the expense of damaging your bones.
it's nice that you mentioned your bones are strong, I once knew a rider who had an high bone density according to a medical examination, he never wears any safety gear, not even a helmet, he would sometimes come with road rashes and his bike beaten up yet he somehow never broke a bone.
surely if he hit an object strong enough he'd break a bone, but I'm sure another weaker dude would've broke his bones.
@@DeadEightVids I crashed a dirtbike and got a hairline fracture in my wrist. My hand swelled and took a few weeks to heal. To this day, My wrist will hurt randomly.
I cannot imagine if I broke it.
Hmm, strange approach here. I had a bad motorbike crash 10 months ago. My knee was injured with a fracture. I was full gear equiped BUT, without my knee armor, my knee would be destroyed, not just fractured, and today, repaired. I think the armor goal, was not to prevent fracture, but to absord energy to reduce the damage. Sorry for my english, i'm a french rider who wear full gear... still ^^ Have a nice day, and I hope for you that you will never had a bad crash, without your armor gears. Ride safe people, life is too short ;). Best regards.
Good input on this discussion. Your reply makes sense to me!
Your armor mainly spread the blunt impact across the entire protected area. Without armor a portion of your knee would have taken all the impact, likely having a more severe outcome. Kudos for using it.
Good point!
that's exactly what he said...the rating is a joke, it doesn't prevent damage just soften the blow and removes the road rash and other inconveniences. BUT the point is still there - why the bar/standard is set so low? Because manufacturers had it set this way with the help regulatory companies. And the latter did mention that is the minimum and manufacturers can go higher but the former don't, due to cost and uneducated consumers. Would you even look at the 2.5k jacket when there is a $500 one right next to it on the rack? If you did you would see the "low" cost one has the minimum standard for safety (15N) while the higher priced one guarantees
Your English makes way more sense than Ryan’s it won’t stop fractures like horse rider kit (which also wouldn’t at the speeds and G loadings of motorcycle CE standards by the way) so throw it away!
Reducing the seriousness of fractures and eliminating them on more minor impacts is entirely the point!
My impact pads are staying in!
I've been riding now for 50 years, In my youth I rode an IT400, my moto was if I wasn't crashing then I wasn't going fast enough. Back then everyone knew that helmets were important, and then clearly gloves, I rode quite often and when I was in high school, I commuted thru back roads to school. On my way home one day with my back pack, my home work and a book or two I had a significant crash. I remember hitting my back , but I could feel the cushion of the books and folders. Bottom line, I think this guy is nuts, I still ride and I wear full armour protection.
knee protection literally saved my knee when I was swerving from a car that pulled out in front of me and clipped my leg against the car’s rear tail light.
Shoulder armour took the brunt of an offroad impact into a wall of dirt, likely saving my collarbone. The protection was oldschool vanson type armour, not non-newtonian d3o style armour.
Real armor works. Convenient slim pads not so much. Glad you avoided injury.
@@ws8080 The shoulder pads that saved him are probably identical to the ones shows in this video
i hope you were wearing acamera, and even then got some compo from that mf
Ryan, I fell 15 years ago. Jacket, helmet, boots, did the job. I wasn't wearing gloves. It still hurt sometimes... now I ride only fully armed.
That's why CE gloves are now mandatory if you ride in some countries, like France. And that's a really good thing.
I prefer not to need a law to dictate what is the best for self. But there are too many idiots unfortunately.
@@atomsmasher12 Some people are so oblivious to the danger that the law is sometimes needed to impose a minimum level of safety. Hands are systematically exposed in a fall, even at low speed.
In the same way, I wouldn't be shocked if bikers were forbidden to ride in shorts and flip-flops, as I've already seen in the south of France.
@@atomsmasher12 Bit hypocritical to admit you went down with minimal gear, then call people idiots for not wearing gear?
@@nayIIkoyeah, but... They do need to wear gloves in France. In certain states in the USA, you need eye protection, by law, but a skid lid is optional.
Laws and regulations are often more confusing than helpful, I think it's an aid to Darwin's theory.
(I understand keeping dust or errant insects out of riders' eyes is important).
The best way to avoid fractures and broken bones in a crash is not to stick your arms out before hitting the ground. Also try to stand up a little on the pegs before impact as this helps throw you over the car bonnet etc and stops you getting tangled up in the handle bars. In a low slide style accident it also pushes the bike away from you. In the interests of scientific testing, I've done a lot of crashing on motorcycles over the years (at least 2 dozen accidents from 20mph to 80mph) and I can honestly say I'd of avoided nearly all of these accidents if I was just riding a little more sensibly.
At 62 years old I got knocked off my Honda goldwing driving through California coast fog and smoke I was trying to be careful going 25 mph as it was getting dark Hit a construction patch and it threw me off the bike there is no way you can tell me that my gear didn't save me from having broken bones it was worth every penny my full year including gloves I hit the pavement I spun I don't know how many times The only thing that happened to me and it didn't show up on x-rays was probably a fracture a hairline one in my foot that took a long time to heal Yes I had a bruised kidney but I was able to get a new face shield on get my bike out of the ditch which hardly had a scratch and proceed another 250 mi to my destination anyone who doesn't ride with armor protection is just a fool we see them in the street riding with flip-flops shorts personally I won't go to pick up groceries without my gear Yes my next thing is to get one of those inflatable vests it's been on my wish list hopefully this year
.....,,,,, Here you have some punctuation, use it liberally
I was expecting an April fools video, but now I don't know what to think.... hmmm
Ditto 😂
he got you!
(by making you think it was an April Fool's, and it wasn't)
Think about it... what he says makes total sense. If you are going 110mph and get launched from your bike are those little armor pads are really going to do jack all for your fall... a fall at that speed is going to massively hurt and the last thing in your mind will be "Well I hope that pad helps my fall". Its going to be "OHH SHIT this is going to hurt". He is right when he says they will help for abrasions but at the end of the day if you break a bone that is under those pads... what use was the pad?
@@canadianwithabeardWell, if you're going 110mph and you crash, I doubt you're thinking about your armor, rather thinking if within the next few moments you'll be able to form another thought or if this is the end of the line
You might think it's protectionism... but I think you missed the point. I put on a one piece leather suit that legitimately weights 20+ pounds with all the armor in it and go ride the racetrack FULLY aware that all its going to do is protect my skin. In fact I have this knowledge first hand. I crashed at Road Atlanta, and I had no abrasions or bruises, but I did break my hip in 4 places and my collar bone. I bought an air vest after that, which might have protected my hips, but not my collar bone.
Your skin and other soft tissues represent the LARGEST organs your body has. Protecting those can and will make a significant clinical difference when it comes to skin grafts, both in terms of needing one, and the quality of available tissue if you do. But it also will reduce the likelihood of sepsis. You're at less risk of rabdo, kidney and liver failure because your body has a lot less to deal with than if you didnt have the pads on. You'll heal faster because your body isn't dealing with as many injuries. And then there's just the plain and simple fact that getting bruises and road rash just sucks. Not being miserable every waking (and sleeping) second for months following a crash is worth wearing a bulky jacket.
Yeah, I have been bruised after a small crash, and it was worse than my collarbone fracture during the first week. Getting all clean (from road debris) was one of the most painful things ever. The nurse rubbed it like if she was cleaning rusty bridge with a steel wool, but it was actually my bloody arm, hand, fingers... After some weeks all was good, but 2 years later I still have some light scars/colour difference in my skin. If I were wearing my usual riding jacket, it would have been way better surely. I still believe that a shoulder protector would have saved my collarbone. It was a really low speed impact.
you missed that he didn't say he stopped wearing abrasive resistant motorcycle gear. he said that he stopped wearing armour. you can wear a jacket with full kevlar abrasion resistance, but drop the armour pads.
He didn’t missed the point like he said in the very beginning there’s pads used in horse riding that are way more effective in preventing fractures but the moto companies still uses extremely subpar standards. The pads are designed for IMPACT. They can protect against abrasions but they’re not designed for that and suck at their job. While the skin is the biggest organ we have a fracture can have much worse repercussions than abrasions. These pads are the equivalent of laying the seatbelt over you body while driving so you don’t get a ticket.
@@natalyakeane The pads add more abrasion protection. Also, the pads protect from the smaller hits: if you smash your knee because you fell from a standstill you try doing that with and without pads and come with a straight face telling me pads don't work.
Hitting your knee on the ground from a standstill can be a completely debilitating injury, even if you don't break your joint, you may injure yourself to the point that you can't walk.
With a pad it's just a nuisance. THIS ENTIRE VIDEO IS BUILT ON THE FORCED IDEA THAT PADS ARE ONLY FOR YOUR BONES. Your body is FULL of soft tissue and a leather riding garment has nearly 0 shock absorption, so all the energy goes into your body. Good luck with that.
this guy doctors
I never once expected that these pads would prevent fractures, but having had a couple of road rash incidents I'll keep using them for the abrasion resistance.
Ryan F9’s videos are always very well produced, usually entertaining and thought provoking, and often informative. Does that mean the take-away message is always in the viewer’s best interest?
Ryan may well have said he can’t tell you to take the armour out of your jacket (etc.) because amongst other things it may, “by some statistical anomaly”, save you a fracture; but he has a lot of influence, and many people may well ditch their armour in favour of a bit more comfort, as he said he does. I would not recommend that.
I’ve had many minor motorcycle spills and two major accidents. In the first, where my bike and the other's car were written off, I was wearing good gear with the standard armour exactly where it should have been, i.e. wrapped snugly around my joints which were naturally the touch points as I bounced along the road. Result: no fractures, just some bruises and muscle strain. In the second major accident, I was wearing an equally good jacket with the same standard armour, however due to my preference on the hot day for COMFORT, my jacket was partly unzipped down the front and this led to my shoulder armour being nudged out of place on impact. Result: anterior dislocation of shoulder and multiple fractures leading to full-arm immobilization for six weeks. The second accident was at half the speed, but otherwise quite similar, yet the result from displaced armour was much worse.
If you wear your armour correctly, it won’t be merely a “statistical anomaly” which may save you a fracture, it’ll be the armour.
A back protector protects your back, nothing else. An airbag protects your torso (and its precious contents), nothing else. These are both great (and expensive best-sellers at Fort Nine, obviously), but only part of a comprehensive protection regime. Having no armour for your elbows, shoulders, hips and knees - in exchange for comfort - is plain daft IMHO. I’m sure Ryan could have made his point about wanting better standards in a more responsible way.
Regarding the AAP 2011 paper, I suspect from my own experience and that of other experienced riders I know, that if the researchers had a statistically significant sample, they would indeed have found a benefit to fracture reduction, but alas too few riders were in the data. I’ll keep wearing my joint/limb armour, well-fitted, as professional racers do, and I’ll keep recommending it to others. Absorbing some impact energy, and distributing residual energy will in pretty much all cases mitigate injury at the impact point. Why the hell do we wear helmets instead of beanies?
Just looking at the abstract for the Dome study, while it does indicate armor does not seem to have an appreciable reduction in fractures, those are not the only types of injuries. The abstract also notes "When garments included fitted body armour there was a significantly reduced risk of injury to the upper body (RR=0.77, 95% CI: 0.66-0.89), hands and wrists (RR=0.55, 95% CI: 0.38-0.81), legs (RR=0.60, 95% CI: 0.40-0.90), feet and ankles (RR=0.54, 95% CI: 0.35-0.83)". Seems like the question is whether one expects the bits of armor to protect against fractures or to protect against injuries.
Maybe more important is the finding that in several instances the effectiveness of any armor was negated by the fact that the garment failed (disintegrated, etc.) during an incident which rendered the armor useless. The study suggests this was due to poor quality control on manufacturing of gear, so maybe buying high quality gear is worth it if one wants to minimize the risk of injury.
Hands and wrists are gloves, feet and ankles are boots. Ryan doesn't suggesting not wearing boots or gloves (or riding jacked and pants with cevlar), but rather about usefulnes of insert pads.
My D30 is there to protect against the initial impact at 90 KPH; I fully expect the sliding and the bounces are probably going on skin.
I once had a minor tumble wearing a hoodie and armour underneath. I was shocked that the outer hoodie survived with no damage and the armour torn apart at the shoulder.
The garment was not CE rated which I excused because it was not intended to be the outer layer. I only wear whole garment CE rated stuff now.
He literally said that they works for other things but not for fractures in the video. He doesn't says anything about, helmets, gloves, abrasion resistent gear, boots, knee protectors. This is spesificly about pads. Which are certified by their impact resistance and how that certification has little to no effect again again impacts.
interesting position. i think first and foremost, the protectors are there you minimize injury. how do you do that ? by trying to negate the maximum damage that could be applied: in this instance a fracture. according to this video, standard protectors DONT, but they prevail and negating secondary class injuries like bruises and scratches from lesser impacts.
When I did the CHP Motorcycle Safety Class some years ago, they presented injury data, by body part, in riders wearing gear compared to those that weren't. Riders wearing gear fared significantly better and for some body parts the number of injuries were reduced by 80-90%. Ok, they didn't go into detail on bone breaking force, but the fact that injuries can be greatly reduced by simply wearing some padding is a no-brainer.
The MSF courses just emphasize wearing pants instead of shorts, enclosed shoes/boots, and gloves. They will allow a long sleeve t shirt in class and any gloves you had lying around. His point was the padding is so thin it won't do anything, so the amount determines whether it is a no-brainer. As a referee I have problems getting people to wear shinguards in a situation where they are guaranteed an impact - and can result in severe injury - so I tend to think most people are no-brainer to begin with (in a bad way). You are right that the padding can't hurt, just don't expect it to do much more than prevent a bruise if you drop your bike at a stop sign.
@@ws8080 MSF only requires long sleeves, pants, etc. and not real gear because you're never doing more than 20mph in a parking lot during a course. They preach the hell out of ATGATT when talking about real-world riding
MSF has nothing to do with real world motorcycle training @@mrastleysghost
Funny, since most CHP riders I've seen, and the two that I know personally, don't wear body armor. most don't even wear chest armor
My MSF course showed the same kind of injury body map too, but I don't think Ryan is necessarily disregarding that. He's not arguing against long pants/long sleeves, or even heavy-duty materials. The scrapes and slides are common injuries that *are* very easily eliminated with simple coverage... but what he's suggesting is that hard impacts aren't going to be any better whether you have a little pad or not. He's saying you're just as good with a kevlar jacket *without* pads as you are a kevlar jacket *with* pads because when you're smashing into an oncoming car or a tree or what have you, a little 1/2" pad isn't going to keep your arm from breaking.
I'm not about to go take my pads out of my jacket. But it's a logical and seemingly statistically proven trend that might make some of the no-gear-ever squids a little more willing to throw on a jacket if it's not necessarily all-or-nothing and can at least still be comfortable.
Having crashed at high speed (70 mph into an embankment) with pads and low speed (about 20 mph gravel) without pads I had severly more bruising from the low speed low impact crash.
While I did crack a vertebrea on the high speed accident my back pad and shoulder pads saved me from a lot more pain and agony. I had some sorenes in my shoulders and my wrists were bad since they took the brunt of the impact. However no bad bruising or lacerations anywhere. The worst part initially was the nettle that hit my face when the visor got ripped off.
On the contrary when I laid my biked down on gravel my right arm was blue from my shoulder to my elbow and got scratched up bad.
Wear your gear guys
Doesn't factor in little accidents where you are fine and the bike is fine and you just get up and carry on riding.
Low level injury prevention is still a thing.
Yeah but unless you want to wear full motocross gear every time you go out, then you will make some trade-off between protection and comfort. Videos like this help riders make better informed decisions about which pieces (like pads or a thick plastic chestplate) may not be necessary for them.
Fell off doing about 25kph due to some gravel last summer, hit my knee and hip and it didn’t hurt much due to armour. Fell off my bicycle doing about 5 kph this winter (ice), hurt like hell for a week, no armour.
Much like his strange 285 degree crank video or 180 about the value of GoreTex I wonder how Ryan is doing.
@@903lew I fell off my e bike last winter accelerating out of T junction. Low sided, was maybe doing 15 mph landed on my hip and I've had pain ever since.
Had similar accidents whilst riding motorcycles had the only damage I sustained was embarrassment, even when the force and weight of the bike has added to the force of the impact.
Distributing that shock to a greater area is so so beneficial.
@@user-co6ww2cm9k
I always geared up when riding my motorcycle, no matter the weather.
The suggestion from Ryan is that the pads are a waste of time and that he removes them and encourages others to do the same issue frankly silly of him.
Some protection is better than no protection and often some protection is the difference between walking away and having to go to hospital.
@@freedomofmotion Yup. Took to Westling armour all winter on the e-bike, figured I already had it so might as well use it. In the end that first icey off was my only one. Think I’ll do that every year when the studded tires go on, seems silly not to.
I remember I specific incident when I first started riding where I wish I had been wearing armored pants. I totally botched a turn on a hill from a stop sign. I popped the clutch, which made my newb brain grab the front brake too hard, which made me lose control and get all kinds of wonky.
I ended up in the ditch on the other side of the road, and I had banged my knee against a stone as I went down.
Having that armor would absolutely have saved my knee from the punishment it received that day. I could barely ride home.
Would it have saved me from a break had I gone down a different way? Maybe not. But, I sure wished I had it that day. And now, I wear full gear, with armor, every time I ride.
You do you.
Try hitting your knee cap against a rock (or any other hard/sharp object for that matter) without a pad on, then you will appreciate the value that knee pads add.
They may not save you from a fracture in the worst impact case, but will save you from painful injuries during most other impacts.
The added abrasion protection is also a very good thing! I wore through my AA pants during a slide and grinded the knee pad underneath, but I was unscratched! Imagine the damage to my knee if the pad wasn't there, I would be grinding through my kneecap!
what is AA pants? Any decent motorcycle garment withstand sliding from 100kmh without problem.
Same here after hitting a deer, a few pads wore through the suit and started grinding pads.
@@inevespaceanti abrasion pants I'm assuming
@@inevespace AA is an abrasion resistance class, second best you can buy. AAA class is even better, but it's pretty much reserved for full leather suits. It's part of CE rating.
@@patrik9666 There are AAA rated jeans too, for a more casual style.
As a rider that got hit by a wrong way driver, I disagree. My pad’s kept my patella from shattering on impact with the driver’s windshield. Bruised is better than broken.
It's not everyday you catch the smooth guy, 7 minutes after he uploads
Everybody who did off-road riding knows why you need at least knee and elbow pads.
Sk8rs too
@@diyfreediverits not cool to wear protection then you ride a skate, yo, just bump your against a pavement, yo
For sure. They really do work. Off-road riding has resulted in many many spills. My armor did its job.
@@chocolatewafles Yeah, but I’m 58 now, so I wear the minimum to keep from breaking any more bones
@@diyfreediver my bad, i was miss spell, i mean bump your head against the pavement, and obviously it was sarcasm! Its very cool that you still skating at this age, im never you to it, and im only 29, but use skatepark with my bicycle and teaching youner generation to use protection:) good luck!
Almost poetry! Beautiful! Not too long, not too short, not too boring, factual and clear, nicely filmed, basic, yet not too basic and it hits the core! A masterpiece of a video!
Worth watching the Johnny Walker advertisement "The Man Who Walked Around the World" that inspired this
All in all, I think the title Useless captures the content of this video quite well.
The de Rome paper shows that wearing armour reduces your risk of injury by 60-70%. They are not stoping fractures but they are doing the job of poorly designed garments by providing abrasion and cut protection.
No doubt! Pads are significant at preventing abrasions and lacerations. Personally, I would look to 1.2mm+ leather for the wider coverage. But you can always use both to be extra safe, to each his own! ~RF9
@@FortNine you literally made a video saying "don't wear pads". You have a large audience and are possibly putting lives at risk with this. Then in the comments you say that pads are good. What the fuck is happening to this channel.
@@Galf506I think you missed the point of the video
@@Galf506 gotta make those UA-cam revenues.
I’d agree with @galf506! Any protection is better than None!