Nollvision
Jag är min egen nemesis.
Storleken på kraften som skyddet släpper igenom.
http://www.sporthoj.com/forum/showthread.php?p=3631811#post3631811
Edit: Länken pekade på fel inlägg.
Last edited:
Bikes ryggskyddstest
- Thread starter TukTuk
- Start date
http://www.sporthoj.com/forum/showthread.php?p=3631811#post3631811
Edit: Länken pekade på fel inlägg.
MrIsak
Allmänt störig
- Gick med
- 13 Nov 2007
- Ort
- Åre/Trondheim
- Hoj
- GSXR600 (skala 1:16), GSXR750 (skala 1:12), TL1000R (skala 1:1)
Den som söker han letar:
Edit: Slö att svara var jag. Störande!
Edit: Slö att svara var jag. Störande!
Last edited:
Jag saknade lite utförligare information om hur varma de är på, en viktig faktor för mig när jag köper skyddsutrustning. Jag mår riktigt dåligt när jag är genomsvett på hojen och blir en sämre förare pga det.
Jag har använt ett dainese i snart två år och det känns väl bra men kardborren i midjan är nästan slut. Oacceptabelt efter så kort tid tycker jag, får se vad mc-varuhuset säger om det.
Jag har använt ett dainese i snart två år och det känns väl bra men kardborren i midjan är nästan slut. Oacceptabelt efter så kort tid tycker jag, får se vad mc-varuhuset säger om det.
MC Doktorn
Guest
Vilken katastrof för etablerade Dainese, Knox mm att hamna efter Lidl B square.
Visar ju en sak hur enormt lurade konsumenter blir
Visar ju en sak hur enormt lurade konsumenter blir
Undrar om det kommer en repris på det som hände förra året...Knox vann ju inte i år heller 
http://www.sporthoj.com/forum/showthread.php?t=159184
http://www.sporthoj.com/forum/showthread.php?t=159184
EQ
back in the sadle again
Kommer att finnas i Lidlbutikerna på måndag (9/6) dessutom ännu billigare (299.
Skynda, skynda
Tack för tipset!
Frågan är bara vilken Lidl butik i sthlm som kommer att ha det!
Helmetrock
Cylindergrinder
- Gick med
- 8 Dec 2006
- Ort
- Uppsala/Orust
- Hoj
- Because real men don't eat sushi, BMW Rockster, hos doktorn och vilar sig....
Ok, så Dainese Wave suger alltså getballe jämfört med allt........
Och jag har ju en hel Dainese skyddsväst med ett Wave ryggskydd......
Men det sitter med dragkedjor, skulle man inte kunna byta ut det mot ett annat ryggskydd? Daineses andra modeller (Bap och Space) Kanske t.o.m passar rakt av?
Är det någon som vet hur de klarar sig mot Wave? De var väl inte med i det här testet?
Och ärligt talat, det resultatet var min första tanke när jag fick det i handen... Men det var det Yamahacenter sålde....
Jag vill inte byta bort hela västen eftersom jag inte har sett någon så smidig som ändå har så stabila skydd!
Kan man läsa testen någonstans? Eller andra test? På Bikes hemsida hittade jag bara recensioner, och de är ju inte sådär jättepålitliga i det här läget
Och Halvarssons som vann, jag tycker det ser väldigt kort ut! Själva plattan ser ut att sluta ovanför bäckenbenet, plattan på mitt Wave slutar långt nere vid svanskotan! Vad säger ni som har det?
Och jag har ju en hel Dainese skyddsväst med ett Wave ryggskydd......
Men det sitter med dragkedjor, skulle man inte kunna byta ut det mot ett annat ryggskydd? Daineses andra modeller (Bap och Space) Kanske t.o.m passar rakt av?
Är det någon som vet hur de klarar sig mot Wave? De var väl inte med i det här testet?
Och ärligt talat, det resultatet var min första tanke när jag fick det i handen... Men det var det Yamahacenter sålde....
Jag vill inte byta bort hela västen eftersom jag inte har sett någon så smidig som ändå har så stabila skydd!
Kan man läsa testen någonstans? Eller andra test? På Bikes hemsida hittade jag bara recensioner, och de är ju inte sådär jättepålitliga i det här läget
Och Halvarssons som vann, jag tycker det ser väldigt kort ut! Själva plattan ser ut att sluta ovanför bäckenbenet, plattan på mitt Wave slutar långt nere vid svanskotan! Vad säger ni som har det?
Last edited:
Eldstorm
Dr Jekyll & Mr Highside
Bara för att Wave kom på 8:e plats i testet så innebär det inte att det med automatik är ett dåligt ryggskydd. Förmodligen är det åtskilligt bättre än den äldre modellen BAP (som jag f.ö. använder sedan 12 år tillbaka med förvissningen om att det är ett bra skydd för ryggen, men kör man av vägen i full fart så finns det så många andra saker som kan ge dödlig utgång att inget ryggskydd i världen skulle ha räddat en i alla fall... ) Så det bästa skyddet är det man har innanför pannbenet.Ok, så Dainese Wave suger alltså getballe jämfört med allt........
...Och jag har ju en hel Dainese skyddsväst med ett Wave ryggskydd......
...byta ut det mot ett annat ryggskydd? Daineses andra modeller (Bap och Space) ?
Helmetrock
Cylindergrinder
- Gick med
- 8 Dec 2006
- Ort
- Uppsala/Orust
- Hoj
- Because real men don't eat sushi, BMW Rockster, hos doktorn och vilar sig....
Min egen privata uppfattning är att Bap och Space är bättre än Wave! Jag tror jag jag har sett ett test på det någon gång.... Men jag vet inte...
Hur som helst har jag svårt att se ett annat sätt att testa ryggskydd än att slå det mot vinklar! Det är ju det som är ryggskyddets jobb!!
Eller vad tänker du på?
Har Halvarssons, inget att klaga på.
Ok, var slutar det? Det ser kort ut!
Har du gjort något funktionstest eller är det bara bekvämt?
Last edited:
Helmetrock
Cylindergrinder
- Gick med
- 8 Dec 2006
- Ort
- Uppsala/Orust
- Hoj
- Because real men don't eat sushi, BMW Rockster, hos doktorn och vilar sig....
Jag googlade lite!
Det här hittade jag bland annat:
http://www.svmc.se/upload/MC-Folket/produkttest/ryggskyddstest _ 06.pdf
Here's some information that I've gathered about back protectors. For me, it takes more than endorsements from paid or poorly informed users to come to a definitive conclusion about the crash worthiness of any piece of protective gear. It seems ridiculous to buy gear based on marketing hype, sponsorship deals, rumors, arbitrary crash experience, looks, feel, and name recognition. Real, scientifically derived numbers should be the first reason for buying a piece of protective gear, always.
There are currently no standards or testing procedures necessary to call a piece of cardboard "the best protection system on the planet" in the North America. However, European CE standards provide us with a means of making a better decision based on some hard evidence that is at least a step in the right direction for our true needs. I'm not convinced that CE provides us with the highest level of protection for the future, but it does provide effective scientifically-based testing for all so-called "protective gear" or "safety equipment". It can be very confusing, but after some discussions and some simple research I have found a number of companies that offer CE certified back protectors and specify compliance with the proper back protector standards and plenty of others that either don‘t claim any crash performance or provide proof of any claims.
The CE standards establish a unified testing procedure to be used by clothing or protector manufacturers who intend to have their products qualified for sale in Europe and who want to offer their protective wear in all countries of the European Union. To gain the CE mark all products have to be tested and approved by an independent, government approved test house. The result of this testing procedure determines whether manufacturers can market the protective equipment as "protectors" or simply "protective padding". All of the certified protectors are only good for a single-use due to the structure and/or crushable materials used to absorb impact, though a few offer better protection for multiple impacts during a crash.
The CE BACK PROTECTOR standard is labeled EN1621-2. The test is performed with a 5kg “kerbstone" dropped from one meter to create the test impact energy of 50 Joules. The standard contains two levels of force transmission performance. 18kN passes LEVEL 1 "basic" compliance and 9kN passes LEVEL 2 "high performance" compliance. So LEVEL 2 protectors allow 50% less force to reach the spine/ribs.
The CE LIMB/JOINT PROTECTOR standard is labeled EN1621-1. It allows joint/limb armor to transmit no more than 35kN of force for all levels. Both of the CE body armor standards(back or limb) use the same amount of energy as a starting point, 50 joules. However, limb/joint armor ratings are based on performance at 50 joules, 75 joules, or 100 joules, leading to 3 levels of performance within this standard. All 3 levels allow no more than 35 kN of force to transmit: LEVEL 1 (50 joules), LEVEL 2 "high performance" (75 joules), and LEVEL 3 "extreme performance" (100 joules).
“Astrene" gel/foam in 8mm non-perforated thickness, “Astrosorb" in 8.5mm perforated form, and T-Pro's four layers of “Armour-Flex" material are all rated to the extreme performance level (100J), making them the highest-rated materials used in limb/joint armor.
For an explanation of the current CE Standards: http://www.pva-ppe.org.uk/
Here's an excerpt from that link regarding the current back protector standard:
"There has been criticism of the standard from medical experts who consider the transmitted force levels too severe; citing decades of automotive research which indicates 4 kN is the maximum force the brittle bones which form the human ribcage can withstand before they fracture. Four kiloNewtons is the requirement adopted in standards covering, for example, horse riders' body protectors and martial arts equipment.
Attempts to reduce the transmitted force requirement to 4 kN and to correspondingly reduce the 50 Joule impact energy requirement were strongly resisted by industry, who claimed consumers would be confused by different impact energy requirements between EN1621-1 and EN1621-2.
In truth, it was in the industry's commercial interests to test both types of protector at 50J, since they could then extol the efficacy of back protectors which, when struck with the same impact energy as limb protectors, transmitted only 9 or 18 kN compared to 35 kN. The consumer would be unaware that subtle differences in the impactor and anvil were responsible, and still less aware that 9 kN was still more than double the safe limit supported by medical experts. Furthermore, during the late 1990s, some companies had used the wholly inappropriate EN 1621-1 to CE mark their back protectors. Commercial objectives were given priority over consumer safety.
Despite these concerns, EN1621-2 represents a starting point from wholly unsafe products should be rendered obsolete and unsellable. It will be important, however, for consumers to ensure back protectors are marked with the correct standard number, if they are not to mistakenly purchase an old stock.
Finally, there are a small number of back protectors on the market which have been dual-tested against the requirements of EN1621-2 and also against a 4 kN transmitted force requirement. Reading the manufacturer's technical information will disclose which are the superior products." (Don't we only wish that was true).
So there are two levels that are considered passing, but both of these levels fall within that 1621-2 back protector standard. However, 4kN is the medically recommended level of transmitted force, but is NOT actually required by the current CE back protector standard. Most protectors cannot provide that level at the 50 Joule energy impact level. Also keep in mind that when a protector is just labeled as CE Approved, and no mention is made of the level of performance, it probably implies Level 1 compliance, but the claim should be verified. European-sold models must comply by law, but a few companies have been found to be improperly using the label, or unlawfully associating their products with the standard.
Here's a list of all of the back protectors I have found, starting with the LEVEL 2 rated protectors, followed by some LEVEL 1 protectors, and finally by those that are NOT RATED and/or offer no performance data or verification of claims:
BKS is the only motorcycle clothing manufacturer that I have found to offer back protectors that meet the medically established 4kN energy transmission level with their Astroshock/Suproflex model protector, according to their website information.
BKS also offers limb/joint armor that meets the CE 1621-1 standard's highest rating, the "extreme performance" energy absorption level (35kN@100J).
They seem to have the right attitude and the highest quality merchandise available, but they are also THE most expensive producer of leather motorcycle apparel on the planet. Should we really have to pay $3000.00 for the kind overall protection we need?
Nobody else claims off-the-rack suits that are 100% CE approved as a whole (abrasion, tearing, seam burst, and impact) . Only a few small, custom manufacturers offer complete CE approved leathers at all. Why are there so few manufacturers willing to meet the baseline testing requirements and apply for certification? It's a sad statement about level of respect we are shown as consumers by the majority of gear manufacturers. Only a handful of virtually unknown manufacturers are willing to “walk-the-walk", and the most popular and widely-known brands don't mention any type of performance information in their product descriptions.
Det här hittade jag bland annat:
http://www.svmc.se/upload/MC-Folket/produkttest/ryggskyddstest _ 06.pdf
Here's some information that I've gathered about back protectors. For me, it takes more than endorsements from paid or poorly informed users to come to a definitive conclusion about the crash worthiness of any piece of protective gear. It seems ridiculous to buy gear based on marketing hype, sponsorship deals, rumors, arbitrary crash experience, looks, feel, and name recognition. Real, scientifically derived numbers should be the first reason for buying a piece of protective gear, always.
There are currently no standards or testing procedures necessary to call a piece of cardboard "the best protection system on the planet" in the North America. However, European CE standards provide us with a means of making a better decision based on some hard evidence that is at least a step in the right direction for our true needs. I'm not convinced that CE provides us with the highest level of protection for the future, but it does provide effective scientifically-based testing for all so-called "protective gear" or "safety equipment". It can be very confusing, but after some discussions and some simple research I have found a number of companies that offer CE certified back protectors and specify compliance with the proper back protector standards and plenty of others that either don‘t claim any crash performance or provide proof of any claims.
The CE standards establish a unified testing procedure to be used by clothing or protector manufacturers who intend to have their products qualified for sale in Europe and who want to offer their protective wear in all countries of the European Union. To gain the CE mark all products have to be tested and approved by an independent, government approved test house. The result of this testing procedure determines whether manufacturers can market the protective equipment as "protectors" or simply "protective padding". All of the certified protectors are only good for a single-use due to the structure and/or crushable materials used to absorb impact, though a few offer better protection for multiple impacts during a crash.
The CE BACK PROTECTOR standard is labeled EN1621-2. The test is performed with a 5kg “kerbstone" dropped from one meter to create the test impact energy of 50 Joules. The standard contains two levels of force transmission performance. 18kN passes LEVEL 1 "basic" compliance and 9kN passes LEVEL 2 "high performance" compliance. So LEVEL 2 protectors allow 50% less force to reach the spine/ribs.
The CE LIMB/JOINT PROTECTOR standard is labeled EN1621-1. It allows joint/limb armor to transmit no more than 35kN of force for all levels. Both of the CE body armor standards(back or limb) use the same amount of energy as a starting point, 50 joules. However, limb/joint armor ratings are based on performance at 50 joules, 75 joules, or 100 joules, leading to 3 levels of performance within this standard. All 3 levels allow no more than 35 kN of force to transmit: LEVEL 1 (50 joules), LEVEL 2 "high performance" (75 joules), and LEVEL 3 "extreme performance" (100 joules).
“Astrene" gel/foam in 8mm non-perforated thickness, “Astrosorb" in 8.5mm perforated form, and T-Pro's four layers of “Armour-Flex" material are all rated to the extreme performance level (100J), making them the highest-rated materials used in limb/joint armor.
For an explanation of the current CE Standards: http://www.pva-ppe.org.uk/
Here's an excerpt from that link regarding the current back protector standard:
"There has been criticism of the standard from medical experts who consider the transmitted force levels too severe; citing decades of automotive research which indicates 4 kN is the maximum force the brittle bones which form the human ribcage can withstand before they fracture. Four kiloNewtons is the requirement adopted in standards covering, for example, horse riders' body protectors and martial arts equipment.
Attempts to reduce the transmitted force requirement to 4 kN and to correspondingly reduce the 50 Joule impact energy requirement were strongly resisted by industry, who claimed consumers would be confused by different impact energy requirements between EN1621-1 and EN1621-2.
In truth, it was in the industry's commercial interests to test both types of protector at 50J, since they could then extol the efficacy of back protectors which, when struck with the same impact energy as limb protectors, transmitted only 9 or 18 kN compared to 35 kN. The consumer would be unaware that subtle differences in the impactor and anvil were responsible, and still less aware that 9 kN was still more than double the safe limit supported by medical experts. Furthermore, during the late 1990s, some companies had used the wholly inappropriate EN 1621-1 to CE mark their back protectors. Commercial objectives were given priority over consumer safety.
Despite these concerns, EN1621-2 represents a starting point from wholly unsafe products should be rendered obsolete and unsellable. It will be important, however, for consumers to ensure back protectors are marked with the correct standard number, if they are not to mistakenly purchase an old stock.
Finally, there are a small number of back protectors on the market which have been dual-tested against the requirements of EN1621-2 and also against a 4 kN transmitted force requirement. Reading the manufacturer's technical information will disclose which are the superior products." (Don't we only wish that was true).
So there are two levels that are considered passing, but both of these levels fall within that 1621-2 back protector standard. However, 4kN is the medically recommended level of transmitted force, but is NOT actually required by the current CE back protector standard. Most protectors cannot provide that level at the 50 Joule energy impact level. Also keep in mind that when a protector is just labeled as CE Approved, and no mention is made of the level of performance, it probably implies Level 1 compliance, but the claim should be verified. European-sold models must comply by law, but a few companies have been found to be improperly using the label, or unlawfully associating their products with the standard.
Here's a list of all of the back protectors I have found, starting with the LEVEL 2 rated protectors, followed by some LEVEL 1 protectors, and finally by those that are NOT RATED and/or offer no performance data or verification of claims:
BKS is the only motorcycle clothing manufacturer that I have found to offer back protectors that meet the medically established 4kN energy transmission level with their Astroshock/Suproflex model protector, according to their website information.
BKS also offers limb/joint armor that meets the CE 1621-1 standard's highest rating, the "extreme performance" energy absorption level (35kN@100J).
They seem to have the right attitude and the highest quality merchandise available, but they are also THE most expensive producer of leather motorcycle apparel on the planet. Should we really have to pay $3000.00 for the kind overall protection we need?
Nobody else claims off-the-rack suits that are 100% CE approved as a whole (abrasion, tearing, seam burst, and impact) . Only a few small, custom manufacturers offer complete CE approved leathers at all. Why are there so few manufacturers willing to meet the baseline testing requirements and apply for certification? It's a sad statement about level of respect we are shown as consumers by the majority of gear manufacturers. Only a handful of virtually unknown manufacturers are willing to “walk-the-walk", and the most popular and widely-known brands don't mention any type of performance information in their product descriptions.
Ni med Dainese-skydd!
Jag fattar inte varför Dainese skickar deras NYA ryggskydd för testning. Dainese har ett nyt skydd som säljs även i Sverige, som är CE-klassat "Typ 2", alltså Level 2. Detta är dessutom BILLIGARE, 1095kr.
På papperet så är detta ett ryggskydd som borde vara i toppen ock fajtas. Jag har kännt på det det och jag är grymt sugen på ett köp!!
Wave är gjort tunnt för att vara luftigt, och därför hamnar det inte i topen...
Se det nya skyddet:
http://www.dainese.com/ita/articolo.asp?cat=1,2,3,7&nome=BACK_SHIELD_AIR_7/8&articolo=1875933
http://www.sporthoj.com/forum/showpost.php?p=3274319&postcount=4
Jag fattar inte varför Dainese skickar deras NYA ryggskydd för testning. Dainese har ett nyt skydd som säljs även i Sverige, som är CE-klassat "Typ 2", alltså Level 2. Detta är dessutom BILLIGARE, 1095kr.
På papperet så är detta ett ryggskydd som borde vara i toppen ock fajtas. Jag har kännt på det det och jag är grymt sugen på ett köp!!
Wave är gjort tunnt för att vara luftigt, och därför hamnar det inte i topen...
Se det nya skyddet:
http://www.dainese.com/ita/articolo.asp?cat=1,2,3,7&nome=BACK_SHIELD_AIR_7/8&articolo=1875933
http://www.sporthoj.com/forum/showpost.php?p=3274319&postcount=4
Last edited:
Dom kommer antagligen säga att så är det så det är ingen ide att du får ett nytt på garantin punkt slut.
Jag fick en kompis att sy ditt riktiga karborreband istället för skiten dainese använder. Blev kanoners. Dock har tyget kring "knapparna" som håller ihop den nedre delen med den övre tokpajat så jag har repat det med snöre. Dessutom började "hängslena" repa upp sig ganska snart.
Nä något Dianese blir det inte för mig nästa gång
Last edited:
GSX-R-Mikko
Vill mycket, Kan inget...
Ok, var slutar det? Det ser kort ut!
Har du gjort något funktionstest eller är det bara bekvämt?
Har oxå Halvarsson track. Det täcker svanskotan på mig så även om det ser kort ut så är det tillräckligt långt att täcka ryggen din. Finns i 3 storlekar oxå
Sitter bekvämt, kan bli aningen varmt dock!
vOLt
aeronautica militare
Har haft dainese innan och det bara åkte upp när man satte sig på hojen. Nu åker jag med Halvarsson track och det är helt jävla underbart!
Skydd i västformat löser det problemet. Sitter bättre på alla sätt och vis samt är lättare att få av och på. Bonus är dessutom skydd för bröstkorgen.
Nyheter
|
Piaggio-gruppen tar över importen av Piaggio, Aprilia, Moto Guzzi och Vespa
Det händer en hel del när d... |
|
|
Katalogen börjar ta form!
Stora Motorcykelkatalogen 2... |
|
KTM och Husqvarna återkallelser
Pressreleaser från KTM och ... |
|
Provkörning pågår: KTM 1390 Super Adventure S EVO
Vulkanen Teide vakar över o... |
|
Äventyr i Algeriet
I januari åker Allt om MC t... |
|
Mästerlig presentation, KTM 1390 Super Adventure S EVO
I ett maffigt bergsområde, ... |
|
Mästerlig presentation, KTM 1390 Super Adventure S EVO
I ett maffigt bergsområde, ... |
|
Lite fler live foton på KTM 1390 Super Adventure S EVO!
Direkt från Teneriffa! Förs... |
|
CIAO ITALIEN!
Pressrelease från KTM: ... |
|
Nu jobbar vi med Katalogen!
Idag startar vi det digra a... |