Advanced Driving Hub

Posted: **Mon May 01, 2023 8:47 pm**

Considering how many manufacturers have blocked better standards for motorcycle clothing, I was delighted Bennetts took the initiative to encourage higher safety standards with its new High-Performance Awards:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5QcWajVTfB4

Could the IAM and RoSPA endorse it? There’s been a massive gap in advocacy for better protective clothing (sadly, the EU and BSI standards committees are under the manufacturers’ thumbs, resulting in lower standards).

Currently, the EU and BSI standards allow manufacturers to sell race leathers that are only tested to a single 'A' rating (i.e. their abrasion resistance is tested to under 30 mph). It's hardly appropriate for motorways speed, let alone track use! It beggars belief. Couldn't the IAM and RoSPA look into it?

Posted: **Tue May 02, 2023 7:43 am**

[mode=devilsadvocate]

All gear now advertised/sold has to be marked as A, AA or AAA (though that is poorly enforced) There's no legal requirement to wear protective clothing. So if you are in the market for gear, surely you buy what goes with your personal cost/risk analysis.

I personally ride in AA rated gear all the time, though the ne denim jeans are AAA rated.

Posted: **Tue May 02, 2023 8:00 am**

GTR1400MAN wrote:[mode=devilsadvocate]

All gear now advertised/sold has to be marked as A, AA or AAA (though that is poorly enforced) There's no legal requirement to wear protective clothing. So if you are in the market for gear, surely you buy what goes with your personal cost/risk analysis.

I personally ride in AA rated gear all the time, though the ne denim jeans are AAA rated.

"Not another standard?" is a fair challenge. From my limited understanding of it, AAA offers substantially lower protection than the old, defunct, CE standard*, and that's what this new 'award' is intended to address.

And there's the Aussie MotoCAP system too.

* Note that Lidl were able to sell a two-piece fabric suit to this standard for IIRC about £150. So it's hardly difficult to achieve. Single A is, apparently, a normal set of denims.

Personally, my fabric suit was chosen (some time ago) for the weight of the fabric, quality of construction and adjustability. Oh and practicality - no point in having something that I didn't feel comfortable in.

https://www.webbikeworld.com/olympia-phantom/

Posted: **Wed May 03, 2023 11:49 am**

GTR1400MAN wrote:[mode=devilsadvocate]

Clothing choice is personal, and nobody's suggesting otherwise.

However, the new Gold/Platinum/Diamond ratings solve several problems:
• You can pass the AAA test with gear that provides only around a second (1.3s) of abrasion resistance on a typical British road surface.
• If you're a police rider, do track days or commute at motorway speeds, you might want to choose clothing with appropriate abrasion resistance. The AAA rating doesn't let us differentiate which clothing fits the bill, so we can't make an informed choice.
• The CE ratings fail to incentivise manufacturers to produce anything better than AAA. Some manufacturers are designing gear down to the minimum standard, e.g. using less Kevlar reinforcement than before the A-ratings were introduced.
• Under the current CE standards, clothing can have Level 1 armour yet pass the AAA rating. It's confusing for gear to have "the highest CE safety rating" despite having only Level 1 armour.
• The CE ratings for boots are complex and confusing, whereas Bennetts' new Gold rating is simple.
• Bennetts' Gold rating for gloves is helpful when choosing gloves for police riding, track days, etc. It's also more straightforward than the current 1, 1KP and 2 ratings.
• Manufacturers essentially determine the current CE and BSI standards, meaning the poachers are also the gamekeepers.

Bennetts' new Gold/Platinum/Diamond ratings seek to tackle these issues, and it should be a no-brainer for the IAM and RoSPA to support it.

Posted: **Wed May 03, 2023 1:00 pm**

Or perhaps IAM & ROSPA should campaign to get the official regulators/standards to include AAAA & AAAAA

Posted: **Wed May 03, 2023 3:30 pm**

Ohlins wrote: .
• The CE ratings fail to incentivise manufacturers to produce anything better than AAA. Some manufacturers are designing gear down to the minimum standard, e.g. using less Kevlar reinforcement than before the A-ratings were introduced.

• Manufacturers essentially determine the current CE and BSI standards, meaning the poachers are also the gamekeepers.

Rumour I heard from someone was that a higher grade was proposed, but a manufacturer [Knox] and the MCIA [ie 'the industry'] voted against it. Unanimous in favour needed, so thrown out.

GTR1400MAN wrote:Or perhaps IAM & ROSPA should campaign to get the official regulators/standards to include AAAA & AAAAA

As a start, ask MCIA to explain how (if accurate) voting it down was beneficial for riders. Whilst noting that it's an industry association ...

Posted: **Fri May 05, 2023 11:35 am**

Paul Varnsverry on Facebook wrote:With AA, testing in Zone 1 is conducted at 70kph/43.5mph. Originally, however, the AA settings were 75kph/46.6kph, but these were reduced to the lower setting when it was discovered materials in common use in motorcycling garments could not withstand the 75kph starting point, but passed at 70kph. Let that soak in for a minute!

The requirements were changed so that materials on the point of critical failure at the original settings could generate a pass result.

Posted: **Fri May 05, 2023 2:49 pm**

To be fair, I heard a similar tale from Snell (when they had a test centre at Farnham).

Developing a test standard for horse riders' helmets.

Do some sums, estimate how much oompf (SI unit doncha know) a hoss could put into a hoof.

Laugh. Halve it. Think for a moment. Halve it again. That'll be as good as any manufacturer will get.

Posted: **Fri May 05, 2023 7:51 pm**

[devilsadvocate mode=on]

The trouble is with all safety standards, they start off as a no brainer, sensible idea and quickly descend to this being required by some

Posted: **Fri May 05, 2023 8:18 pm**

Horse wrote:To be fair, I heard a similar tale from Snell (when they had a test centre at Farnham).

Developing a test standard for horse riders' helmets.

Do some sums, estimate how much oompf (SI unit doncha know) a hoss could put into a hoof.

Laugh. Halve it. Think for a moment. Halve it again. That'll be as good as any manufacturer will get.

riders helmets were a bit more scientific than that, one of my companies also did a lot of testing on how a first impact degraded a helmet and affected its protective nature in a second impact (horse / bicycle / polo / motorbike / etc)

Advanced Driving Hub

High-Performance Award for bike clobber

High-Performance Award for bike clobber

Re: High-Performance Award for bike clobber

Re: High-Performance Award for bike clobber

Re: High-Performance Award for bike clobber

Re: High-Performance Award for bike clobber

Re: High-Performance Award for bike clobber

Re: High-Performance Award for bike clobber

Re: High-Performance Award for bike clobber

Re: High-Performance Award for bike clobber

Re: High-Performance Award for bike clobber