Conspicuity - some new research

Yes - precisely - that's what this whole thread is really about.

 

Yeah, I just wont wear it on the grounds of style and good taste

 

More than a bit.......I like the idea of the Z though! Going to mainly be practising that on the morrow

 

Exactly........

 

IMHO its the same people who wear full leathers, back protectors, air jackets, solid boots etc, etc cos they think/ percieve it will "safer" if/when they fall off. (see previous threads)

 

really????...strange cos i dont wear hi viz and personally dont want to either ....however i do wear leathers and motorcycle boots and gloves ....not because i believe that in an impact i will be any less likely to break something or die but in the event where i have a slide im going to put my money on leather/kevlar and armour lasting a little longer than denim and or skin as it slides along the tarmac.
i have always maintained that leather motorcycle gear is mis-sold as something that will protect you in a crash ...oh goodie i can hit a car head on and as long as im wearing the right gear ill be ok....Nope
but it has armour in the elbows shoudlers and knees ....YUP and thats because they are main friction points in the event of a slide and will take the most punishment against the ground ....END OF!!
lets not tar everyone with the same brush

 

If we're simply talking about sliding, if the abrasion resistant material does its job, it won't matter if you've got armour behind it - unfortunately because no-one buys CE-approved CLOTHING (as opposed to armour) it's a bit scary that I've seen several suits that HAVE failed from relatively low speed impacts and then it's been down to the armour behind it to take up the slack as the wearer slid down the road.

In an impact, all body armour can do is do exactly what you say - take the impact of landing on the ground from the height (plus a bit) of the bike - it can't even begin to absorb the impact of hitting something stationary when the body is moving - there's simply too much energy involved

But GuzziRob does have a point - people pay lots of money for a top of the range helmet "because it offers more protection". The SHARP tests suggest that they don't, and an independent US lab suggested a few years back they are worse than cheap helmets because the shells are TOO rigid.