Welcome to Netrider ... Connecting Riders!

Interested in talking motorbikes with a terrific community of riders?
Signup (it's quick and free) to join the discussions and access the full suite of tools and information that Netrider has to offer.

Back protector - waxing empirical

Discussion in 'Riding Gear and Bike Accessories/Parts' started by mattb, May 15, 2008.

  1. Akin to an empirical thread a while back about open face helmets - empirical in the sense that we asked not for speculation but for what people's actual experience was in a crash - I want to ask the same sort of question of back protectors. So I'm asking for actual experiences of accidents where the presence or absence of back protectors actually made a difference.

    My reason for asking? I've gotten a bit too fat to fit my old large back protector under my jacket, so was looking at getting a small size Alpinestars RC (form insert), but got turned off by the below quote from the Motorcycle Council of NSW. If a squid is a 1 and full race gear is 10, I dress at about 6 regarding protection (full-face, leather jacket, boots, protective jeans, but 70's handed-down gauntlets, and normal jeans for around town) so I'm the sort who will buy and wear something just because "it's better than nothing" or might help, or helps within a very small percentage of cases (I'm not interested in debating this or debating where I ought to sit on the safety gear scale). Hence this below turned me off looking to wear a back protector again:

    "Back protectors and lumbar protectors (EN 1621-2) are intended to provide protection against impacts against edges such as kerbing. However, while some 13% of motorcyclists sustain back injuries in crashes, the majority of these injuries are due to blows to the head or to bending and twisting of the back. A back protector will not prevent these types of injury. Less than 1% of injured riders suffer serious injuries from direct blows to the spinal area, however back protectors will provide protection from more minor injuries such as bruises and strains (EN 1621-2, p. 4)."

    How do other's actual experiences sit with this claim?

  2. I don't know. But you'd hate to be lying there, in hospital, being one of the 1%, wouldn't you?
  3. there is more to being being paralyzed then just not walking....so whether it's just another gimmick with smart piece of advertising or a device that might actually work in a crash i don't know, but i have one and wear it. At least if i crash and i am wearing it and it doesn't work, i know i tried everything i could to avoid such injuries and i won't look back at it as a "what if" situation.

    cheers stewy :)
  4. I crashed last Monday at Phillip Island at around 140-150kmh I would guess. The guy behind me said I was in the air flying backwards after I got off the bike, and I know I came down hard with a bang on my back. Now there is no evidence that the back protection did anything, but I would not have liked to experience that crash without it! I certainly believe it played a big part in my minimal injuries.
  5. I've crashed a dozen or so times wearing my back protector. (in the snow though). I have also crashed when not wearing one. There's is definitely an advantage to wearing one for impact protection.

    Haven't tested it out on the road though.