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.

SIDI on protective gear

Discussion in 'General Motorcycling Discussion' started by Deadsy, Feb 21, 2011.

  1. I got a new pair of boots today and noticed this little warning on the booklets that came in the box:

    I've argued over gear and the right a rider has to choose what they wear, in many threads on this forum but that neat little paragraph sums it all up nicely. Perfect. That it comes straight from Sidi, who are responsible for arguably the best boots out there is strangely fitting .
  2. From some one that doesnt Attgatt, Its very fitting,
  3. From my BERIK pants..

    "This garment is not considered to be personal protective equipment as defined by the personal rar rar rar....no liability will be accepted by the manufacturer rar rar rar"

    Just keep it shiny side up :deal:
  4. What's your point? You realise they just do this to cover their asses for any potential law suit? Are you saying they're not worth wearing :-s
  5. No, he's not. Deadsy is on a foolhardy quest to make us all realise gear shouldn't give us a false sense of security :p
  6. Keep reading the paragraph a few times, you might understand the point eventually, toadcat. I don't look down on those who wear less gear than I do, and I don't look up to those who wear more.

    You do realise liability disclaimers tend to just state the obvious, right? Kind of like "Caution: Hot" on coffee cups, this little warning also states the obvious about motorcycling.

    Whether or not they are worth wearing depends on the ride. One thing is for sure, Sidi make sexy boots.
  7. ? Anyone who thinks that wearing motorcycle gear will protect you 100% is an idiot - I won't go any further than that as I don't want to go into a circular never-ending 'squid' forum argument so lets just end it here :p
  8. true though, they are a sexy boot.
    shave down, oil up, and slip into a pair, very erotic
  9. I like it Deadsy. Sidi gets the CE* stamp of approval for common sense.

    *Chef's Experience.
  10. My quick view on this.
    I wear what I seen as appropriate gear for the way I am riding for the day. For example commuting it's jacket and gloves and boots, the boots are simply because I can't feel the shifting properly through steel caps and since i am changing shoes at work it's easy enough. When I am out having a blat I will put on the 2 peice.

    My reason for this isn't to feel safer, I just feel I am more at risk when having a blat and also some of the roads might leave me waiting a while. The only reason I gear up is skin. I figure my body and doctors will have enough work ahead of them if I have a serious off with out worrying about gaping holes in my bodies first line of defence against infection. I expect the armour to cushion a safe fall like my last one in the same way a boxing glove cushions a punch, enough force and something will still break.
  11. Here we go again!
  12. ....these threads are now on par with the fricking nodding threads!! .... Maybe they will get copied over the other forum and have the pi$$ taken... Oh!!... Wait!!....
  13. The big merry go round that is the internet?
  14. Macdonalds do the same. They stick a thermometer in every cup of coffee they sell to make sure the coffee is not hot enough to burn some one
    They had their arse sued out of them because a woman driving down the road spilt it in her crutch and burnt her self,

    Dont drink and drive, Hahahahahahaha
  15. I'm not sure I'd want anyone in a position of transport authority reading tat last sentence.
  16. I like what Sidi have written, even though its obvious to most of us. They just left out one line:

    "Instead of buying these boots you should consider spending the money on additional training."
  17. See your point, but I'd very much like TAC in Victoria to see the rest of it. Their big push to mandate 'approved' gear looks kind of silly when the manufacturers themselves point out that gear is not a panacea.

    (Hey Tweet, if your so bored, why don't you find some posts on another forum and bring 'em back here for us to play with? That should should easily amuse us :roll: )
  18. I think part of the issue in this whole discussion is that people over-state their cases for effect. I think Boris's much-lauded articles did the same thing, and sacrficed clarity for (what he calls) humor.

    The bottom line is that gear and skill are complementary. It's stupid to say that either, by itself, is the key to enhancing safety (and a truism to say there's no perfect safety - nothing in life is perfectly safe).

    And I think, deep down, everyone knows and recognises this.

    This site is very good on defensive riding. The 'Near Misses' thread is a riding school in itself, with the constant refrain of 'what could *you* have done differently to avoid this near miss?'

    Riding perfectly, even having perfect roadcraft and defensive riding skills, won't save you 100% of the time: when we think we have developed idiot-proof evasion techniques, the universe throws up a better class of idiot.

    That's what gear's for: reducing the harm when all the riding technique goes wrong.

    But gear can only ever reduce harm: there's no prang you walk away from without hurting somewhere: except the ones you never have. But if you do prang, then lessened harm, injury and pain is a Good Thing.

  19. Agreed!!... so put a "sticky" on it for newbies to read... and move on....:roll:
  20. Wont solve the problem Tweet, who reads those things anyway?

    I think the name could be the problem.....'sticky'......sounds like something to steer clear of.