Most of my riding on the Matchless is done wearing DR gear with minimal protection in case of a spill. It has not bothered me too much.......you tend to ride carefully anyhow bearing in mind the antics of a lot of car drivers and the performance of WD brakes.........but I have always said that bike riders should be responsible and wear the proper gear if only to respect the concerns of family and dependants and the medics who have better things to do than deal with gravel rash injuries occasioned by low speed spills wearing minimal clothing. I have been looking around for a possible solution to this conundrum (wearing DR gear but good protection) and have come across Draggin Jeans "K Legs" range which is basically a woven Kevlar set of long pants that can be worn as under- or over- wear. There is also a top. They are not cheap but what price your skin? Any other ideas, anyone?

email (option): Fergusanckorn@icloud.com

Not for me...I've always just worn a helmet, leather jacket and leather gloves..and usually combat trousers and leather combat boots...

Personally, I'm not paranoid about 'safety' (or danger depending on how you look at it) and thus not keen on body armour, which I think is uncomfortable or the dayglo theory of protection...

It's worked OK like that for 45 years and I don't think much has changed to alter that outlook...

Ride sensibly, enjoy it, but look out for the idiots...What's new?

Body armour, dayglo clothing, air bags (they have them now), helmet cams, kevlar trousers etc....where does it end?....

No doubt there's an argument for all of it but pretty soon you'll need half a day to get dressed up to go for a ride....

Strange how a 'risk' that used to be taken without a second thought has suddenly become so dangerous....but then we do live in a society where they dish out goggles to kids playing conkers... ....Ian

email (option): ian@wright52.plus.com

There are certain members in our Dorset area, who get quite agitated because they think I should wear a Hi Viz vest on convoy duty. I maintain that if other motorists can't see me without a Hi Viz......Then every lamp post should wear one Ron

email (option): ronpier@talk21.com

Agreed...If a driver has trouble seeing a motorcycle with a rider sat on it they shouldn't be driving...

One of the greatest myths, perpetuated by drivers, the Police, politicians and even some motorcyclists is that it is difficult to see a motorcyclist...

Utter nonsense...A motorcyclist is no less visible than anything else in the environment...I don't have any trouble seeing them...

You won't see anything if you don't look for it...Ian

email (option): ian@wright52.plus.com

Some thoughts on "Armour" from FJ Camm's Book of the BSA, printed in 1935. Times sure have changed.
%%htmlItem_1%%
%%htmlItem_2%%

email (option): pvlietstra@gmail.com

I wore jeans with built-in knee and hip protection, leather jacket, DR gauntlets and most important a spinal chord protector, that made me look like a ninja turtle but fortunately was immediately hidden under the jacket. All that hot as hell, but better be hot than dead....

email (option): davmax@ntlworld.com

The subject of riding gear is is like what oil to use and what tyres to use. Everybody has an opinion. Just wear what you feel happy and comfortable in.
For me, I want be at good temperature when I am on the bike and when I get off off it. I am pretty much in alignment with what Ian said, but always wear eye and hand protection above 10mph.

Certain insurance co.'s require 'protective clothing' check yours ...

Personally, I'm from the era before helmets - I always wore one simply cos I got ear-ache otherwise.
Sadly a member of our group riding a cub was vegetable-ised by not wearing a helmet.
I don't think anyone would argue against helmet's anymore, but I'm afraid 'piss-pot's' and winter riding are simply unpleasant.

My 'thing' is gloves - I can still remember the skin peeling off my hands after a spit-off in 1970 - despite extensive skin grafts to the knees from the same accident ... its hands that worry me!!!

['Certain insurance co.'s require 'protective clothing' check yours']..

There you go, before you know it something that was your choice becomes a requirement laid down by someone else....

AAAAAAAAAARGHH!!... ...Ian

email (option): ian@wright52.plus.com

I don't see how any insurance company can overrule the law of the land? It would be like saying, we're not going to insure your car unless you wear two seat belts.......Or perhaps they can Ron

email (option): ronpier@talk21.com

If you want a shock Ron, look into what some companies are demanding before they'll insure you and the things some of them classify as 'modifications'....

Non standard stickers/paint..top boxes etc. etc...In many cases nothing to do with the safety or performance of the machine but merely an arbitrary list drawn up by unqualified insurance company employees with no back up statistics...

They are insuring the so called risk and the law allows them to define that risk....

The result is that in effect they are unelected lawmakers....

If the companies got together and decided you had to wear a dayglo one piece suit then you would if you wanted to get insured...Even though this is not a requirement in law....

That's why I hate creeping safety paranoia....Ian

email (option): ian@wright52.plus.com

I worked for a large organisation which had risk assessments for everything, if you encountered something new you would be expected to carry out a dynamic risk assessment.
I tended to think this was a contradiction in terms common sense is what we used to call it
I had the honest belief the most ardent of the enforcers of the risk assessments would still be living in caves waiting for me or someone else like me to venture out, but not until I would be given the wisdom of their advice, based on what I am not to sure, just a few thought based on my experiences.

Regards Jim

I was told by a car insurance company that certain 'modifcations' made a car more desirable to thieves, though I questioned that putting a 1600cc engine into a 2 litre badged motor was more attractive to them.

I guess that if you have a half-way decent bike and put, for example, race stickers on it, it may lead thieves to believe that bike is race tuned and therefore a better bget than 'Joe Standards' down the road.

I have also had many arguments over the definition of the word modified, their interpretation being anything that wasn't on the vehicle when purchased. I then asked if I would have to pay more if I did an oil/ filter change or pumped my tyres up. They hung up.........

I believe that MAG fought insurance companies who didn't want to pay out for bikers who did not have any form of High Vis equipment, or even a white helmet, anything that made you more visible. I believe they are missing a trick because they should be INCREASING the policies of anybody who has a SMIDSY (Sorry, Mate Didn't See You) as they obviously present a danger to other road users.......

email (option): stinkypete80@hotmail.com

Ron, nothing to do with law of land, just needing an excuse not to pay out.

As for risk assessments - was on company H&S board for +20 years cos I in charge of 'most dangerous dept. in company' - R&D.

Got sick of doing R.A's for Stairs, use of Car-park (really), Coffee machine, etc. - so called in the HSE.
Nicest bunch of chaps I've ever met, very helpful and spent most of the time telling me things were not necessary - see your insurance company - nearly lost my job when my boss (the MD) heard about it!

Turned out that it was the Insurance Co. not HSE calling the shots.

Ref; biking - I have a friend who had to fight for insurance cover when he was T Boned by a car because he was not wearing 'adequate protection' - he was in jeans.
What the hell that had to do with his accident when stationary and hit by a +90 year old driver who had cataracts (according to the daughter)... I don't know!

We insure our vehicles, not ourselves so unless we have a separate Personal Accident cover with specific exclusions, we're not talking here about our own insurers dictating anything.

However, it is a fact of life that third-party insurers in the event of an accident which is the responsibility of their Insured, will always endeavour to reduce their liabilities by arguing before a court that if you had acted as a responsible person / complied with the law, the injuries would have been less.

I can imagine these days that a court might well accept that someone riding in flip-flops and swimming trunks might be partly responsible for his own gravel-rash but I don' think that there would be a problem for someone riding a 12hp historical artifact in stout trousers.

If there is a serious brain injury though and the helmet is dubious then you would be on a sticky wicket...probably not in a position to care though.

Speedo's and plimsolls! If it's good enough for Rollie Free at 150 mph Ron
%%htmlItem_1%%

email (option): ronpier@talk21.com

I'd like to think he was wearing box.

But they built them HARD back in the day ....

I think the train of thought in my original query is getting lost here in questions of personal freedom, paranoia, etc! It's a fact that we all dress appropriately for various activities and with motorcycling, it is now possible to buy gear that is warm, comfortable, sort of waterproof, and........lending some degree of protection in case of a spill. Now if you wear WW2 DR gear on your bike, you lose a lot if these benefits......fact. The question I am asking is, can this be addressed by addition of clever clobber that does not get in the way of the WW2 wear and is comfortable? In my research, I have found a couple of potential solutions, both expensive; Forcefield under suits that have armour inserts and may well end up making you look like a cross between the Michelin Man and Batman; and Draggin Jeans "K-Legs" which is a woven Kevlar garment that can be worn over or under clothes. The latter seems most promising but you are talking about £350 for pants and top. Now I am not researching this for insurance purposes or with any sense of paranoia, simply that I don't fancy spending weeks in hospital or months of skin grafts at my age..........and I do feel responsibility for preventing possible burden on my long suffering wife and the NHS. I have "normal" motorcycling mates who think I am certifiable riding the Matchless in DR gear.........I accept the risk and ride carefully, but I also accept that I could reduce the risks. Ride carefully!

email (option): Fergusanckorn@icloud.com

I have found that if you are of a rotund waist these Kevlar trouser/long johns they don't make them and reflective waist coats even a bandolier don't do a large size these manufacturers think that all motorcyclists are skinny because with your motorcycle jacket on your larger than normal waist size

email (option): roger.beck@node6.com

Roger, that is very true. It appears, for example that if you are a modest 36 inch waist, then you are only one size down from the largest size of K-Legs. I should also have added that adding a Kevlar layer is great for winter riding but pretty sweaty in summer, especially if you are doing stop-start riding. Price and practicality make me think twice which was why I was interested in getting opinions and ideas from others.

email (option): Fergusanckorn@icloud.com

I've had my black 'Draggin' jeans for some years now and happy to wear them, especially in the colder weather. But to wear them under my DR denims would mean at least another size larger denims and that Michelin effect comes more so to the fore Ron

email (option): ronpier@talk21.com

I have a pair of the green 'Hood' cargo trousers. I'm glad to say that I haven't thrown them up the road yet. They give a certain amount of reassurance but of course they have a 'post-war' look.

http://www.hoodjeans.co.uk/hood-motorcycle-jeans/cargo-jean-mens-green/

I have to say that my bony knees feel supremely vulnerable when covered only by woven woollen BD material.

Kevlar combinations sound ideal.

If you feel you have to have something Riks jeans seem like a reasonable compromise between comfort and Robocop...

Skip the body armour inserts and just rely on the lining for abrasion protection and you probably have it covered for minor spills...Ian

email (option): ian@wright52.plus.com

I have enjoyed reading this thread. As a couple have said, it's really personal preference.
My usual day bike is a Honda VFR 800 which, due to my lifestyle and lack of spare time, spends its life ramming up and down the motorway too and from work with the odd race meeting in between. I would not ride that bike in less than purpose built kit. Textiles or leathers, got them both and needed them once. 35 mph in a 50 zone, bike landed on my back and ruptured my spleen. Fully kitted but still only had 30 minutes life left when the surgeon got stuck in. But at least I didn't get gravel rash eh !

When the M20 finally spits into life however, I will probably have some traditional looking gear ( Bellstaff etc ) for general rides but DR type kit for meets and really take it easy.
My point is, horses for courses and you take your own fate into your own hands. Just remember to smile and you won't go far wrong. It's all a risk, you choose if it's more important to look authentic or wear extra protection.

Darren

chaps anyone with or without frills

email (option): roger.beck@node6.com

Chaps .... reminds me of the Police Academy film scene....

Or a vague memory of a 1980's disco with a builder, policeman etc. etc. no that I condone that sort of thing !

And eternal damage to the YMCA organization ...

I've had two pairs of denim draggins. The second only because I lost the first. Brilliant quality, still excellent condition 8 years after I bought them. Came off the back of a mx onto gravel at speed and had some serious bruising but no bark off. I wear them to an event and during, as they are comfortable and look like normal jeans. They are a bit hot in summer as the kevlar blanketing is quite heavy, but you get used to being hot with jackets and stuff so no big deal. I have armoured plastic gear that I wear for very long rides (several thousand kms) in case of long periods of bad weather (which means bad roads and bad drivers). They are one of the best bits of kit I've ever had and i highly recommend them.

I should also add that I'm a bit of a fat bastard and draggin make sizes much bigger than I wear. The jeans are also a bit baggy so wearing stuff over the top might be a challenge. I think I paid about $100 aussie for mine, but that was a while and it was at the Philip Is races so there might have been a discount. Not nearly as expensive as I reckon they are worth.

Cheers
Brett