|
DataDan
Advanced Member
579 Posts
[Mentor]
Central Coast, CA
USA
Yamaha
FJR1300
|
 Posted - 08/24/2013 : 12:30 PM
|
We may have discussed this research before, but IMHO it doesn't get enough attention. They studied 618 motorcyclists who had crashed in the Australian Capital Territory (like DC only 10 times larger) over one year. Full text of the study here (PDF). My summary of the results:
garment......................worn by...soft tissue...open wound
---------------------------------------------------------------
motorcycle jacket................11%..........-27%.........-58%
motorcycle jacket, armored.......72%..........-33%.........-63%
motorcycle pants.................25%...........-8%.........-38%
motorcycle pants, armored........10%..........-34%.........-59%
motorcycle gloves................36%..........-40%.........-70%
motorcycle gloves, armored.......51%..........-62%.........-73%
motorcycle boots..................8%..........-65%..........n/s
motorcycle boots, armored........29%..........-69%.........-90%
non-motorcycle boots.............27%..........-61%.........-76%
The third column is the reduction in all soft tissue injuries--both open wounds and bruises. The fourth is reduction in open wounds only, abrasions and lacerations ("n/s" = not significant).
De Rome mentioned in the video that many garments failed in the crash. More than 30% of jackets, pants, and gloves failed, either wearing through the material or opening a seam. Interestingly, they found that in the event of failure, armor often provided backup abrasion protection in addition to its primary purpose of impact cushioning. (See Table 1 in the report.)
It's also important to note that they found no significant protection against fractures in any garment (Table 4). |
 |
|
The Gear Study- Video
