ADVrider

Go Back   ADVrider > Gear > Equipment
User Name
Password
Register Inmates Photos Site Rules Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 06-21-2010, 02:38 PM   #166
Josh69
Uhhh
 
Josh69's Avatar
 
Joined: Dec 2007
Location: Euroland
Oddometer: 587
Wayne and his gear

OK, I'll preface this by saying I'm planning on buying Motoport gear.

However - I am an engineer, I do stress analysis and impact analysis for a living and Wayne doesn't know what he is talking about when he describes his armor or criticises the European standards.

I believe his armor works very well and I believe this is shown by the numbers of people who have crashed in his gear and walked away, but his technical statements are wrong. His gear works but not for the reasons he claims it works.

From the Motoport website QUOTES IN ITALICS:
http://www.motoport.com/quadarmor
Transfer of energy is not the same as impact absorption. Instead of placing the armor on top of the steel plate, if another steel plate was used as armor instead, even less transfer of energy through the steel plate to the sensors below would occur.

This is wrong. Steel is very stiff. If you want to transfer energy, using a lump of rigid steel to do it is a good way. A plate of steel would be very BAD at absorbing impact. It may have excellent abrasion resistance but it has very poor impact absorbing properties. This is a fundamental mistake in the above statement, which means Wayne does not really understand what is happening.

Direct vertical drop is extremely rare when in a crash (talking about the Euro test standard where they drop a lump of metal on the armor).

Irrelevant. The Euro test is designed to find out how much energy is absorbed. Dropping a lump of metal on the armor is the best way to do it.

If sensors were also placed on the metal anvil along with full encapsulation around the outside edges of the armor, more impact would be measured. Even with more sensors the impact would not be measured the same as crashing a motorcycle.

Wrong. The only thing that matters is the energy transferred. To use the motorcycle crash equivalent, the sensors in the Euro test measure the energy transferred to your body. Wayne's statement is equivalent to testing how much energy the pole you just hit feels by putting sensors on the pole. Who cares about the pole.

Quad-Armor, the Best Impact Protection in the World

This statement is guaranteed. It is possible for you to test it, here at Cycleport, or at your home. Take a piece of armor out of any other motorcycle apparel. Put your fist up against the armor and punch a concrete wall, metal pole or any sharp hard object. Now perform the same experiment with Quad-Armor. This is a primitive test but, in reality, it is better than the impact testing Satra performs. Cycleport performs this same test with customers at Cycleport’s store. Currently the highest rated EN-Certified Back Protector is called the T-Pro Force Field. Cycleport has this T-Pro here in the showroom. After customers punch a sharp aluminum door frame it is evident that the Quad-Armor outperforms the T-Pro considerably. Most customers comment that Cycleport’s Tri-Armor feels more protective than the T-Pro.

Wrong. If you took a pillow and tried to punch out your wall, it would feel pretty soft. Is a pillow a good bit of armor? No. The forces in a bad bike crash are so large that the armor needs to be reasonably stiff - or not feel soft to the touch - to absorb the impact. The energy in a crash is much larger than someone trying to punch out their wall or a door frame. And anyway stastically, people do not crash into anything as small and sharp as a door frame. The smallest thing you are likely to hit is a pole, which is a lot wider than the edge of a door frame.

So - Motoport gear appears to work but you cannot take any note of the technical claims on their website.

Josh69
MIEAust, CPEng
15 years experience in stress analysis including designing impact frames.
__________________
========================
Saigon to Hanoi
http://www.advrider.com/forums/showthread.php?t=348262

Easter Mekong Tour
http://www.advrider.com/forums/showthread.php?t=329194

Streets of Vietnam
http://www.advrider.com/forums/showthread.php?t=335816

Current bike: 2008 Honda CBF-600

Josh69 screwed with this post 06-21-2010 at 11:22 PM
Josh69 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-21-2010, 11:22 PM   #167
makinwaves
Beastly Adventurer
 
makinwaves's Avatar
 
Joined: Jan 2007
Location: Travelling in South America!
Oddometer: 1,883
Quote:
Originally Posted by Josh69
OK, I'll preface this by saying I'm planning on buying Motoport gear.

However - I am an engineer, I do stress analysis and impact analysis for a living and Wayne doesn't know what he is talking about when he describes his armor or criticises the European standards.

I believe his armor works very well and I believe this is shown by the numbers of people who have crashed in his gear and walked away, but his technical statements are wrong. His gear works but not for the reasons he claims it works.

From the Motoport website QUOTES IN ITALICS:
http://www.motoport.com/quadarmor
Transfer of energy is not the same as impact absorption. Instead of placing the armor on top of the steel plate, if another steel plate was used as armor instead, even less transfer of energy through the steel plate to the sensors below would occur.

This is wrong. Steel is very stiff. If you want to transfer energy, using a lump of rigid steel to do it is a good way. A plate of steel would be very BAD at absorbing impact. It may have excellent abrasion resistance but it has very poor impact absorbing properties. This is a fundamental mistake in the above statement, which means Wayne does not really understand what is happening.

Direct vertical drop is extremely rare when in a crash (talking about the Euro test standard where they drop a lump of metal on the armor).

Irrelevant. The Euro test is designed to find out how much energy is absorbed. Dropping a lump of metal on the armor is the best way to do it.

If sensors were also placed on the metal anvil along with full encapsulation around the outside edges of the armor, more impact would be measured. Even with more sensors the impact would not be measured the same as crashing a motorcycle.

Wrong. The only thing that matters is the energy transferred. To use the motorcycle crash equivalent, the sensors measure the energy transferred to your body. Wayne's statement is equivalent to testing how much energy the pole you just hit feels. Who cares about the pole.

Quad-Armor, the Best Impact Protection in the World

This statement is guaranteed. It is possible for you to test it, here at Cycleport, or at your home. Take a piece of armor out of any other motorcycle apparel. Put your fist up against the armor and punch a concrete wall, metal pole or any sharp hard object. Now perform the same experiment with Quad-Armor. This is a primitive test but, in reality, it is better than the impact testing Satra performs. Cycleport performs this same test with customers at Cycleport’s store. Currently the highest rated EN-Certified Back Protector is called the T-Pro Force Field. Cycleport has this T-Pro here in the showroom. After customers punch a sharp aluminum door frame it is evident that the Quad-Armor outperforms the T-Pro considerably. Most customers comment that Cycleport’s Tri-Armor feels more protective than the T-Pro.

Wrong. If you took a pillow and tried to punch out your wall, it would feel pretty soft. Is a pillow a good bit of armor? No. The forces in a bad bike crash are so large that the armor needs to be reasonably stiff to absorb the impact. The energy in a crash is much larger than someone trying to punch out their wall or a door frame. And anyway stastically, people do not crash into anything as small and sharp as a door frame. The smallest thing you are likely to hit is a pole, which is a lot wider than the edge of a door frame.

So - Motoport gear appears to work but you cannot take any note of the technical claims on their website.

Josh69
MIEAust, CPEng
15 years experience in stress analysis including designing impact frames.
Thanks for providing a more scientifically defensible response to claims I always knew were over the top and at times, outrageous. Empirical evidence suggests the materials work in terms of abrasion and seam burst strength, as well as impact absorption.

It's unfortunate that the claims made by Wayne or his website serve an injustice to a product that works. Not to mention, an equal injustice to a very rigorous European process that has developed scientifically defensible protective standards.

For the record, I own Motoport kevlar pants with quad armour and I love them.
makinwaves is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-21-2010, 11:22 PM   #168
spaceharrier
Adventurer
 
Joined: Jun 2008
Location: NorCal
Oddometer: 97
Quote:
Originally Posted by Josh69
OK, I'll preface this by saying I'm planning on buying Motoport gear.

...

So - Motoport gear appears to work but you cannot take any note of the technical claims on their website.
Wow. Nicely summarized and much better than I've seen in some of the pissing contests. I'm not currently using any Motoport gear but have in the past, and I was always a little troubled by the ways these threads played out; the gear seemed to work very well in crashes but the explanations given seemed wobbly.
spaceharrier is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-22-2010, 04:48 PM   #169
poonbean
gottago
 
Joined: Jul 2007
Location: Orinda, CA
Oddometer: 44
Quote:
Josh69 - OK, I'll preface this by saying I'm planning on buying Motoport gear.
...

So - Motoport gear appears to work but you cannot take any note of the technical claims on their website.
That is quite helpful - you bring some clarity to Wayne's world. I'm just on my second set of CP clothing and really like it, but never quite bought into all of Wayne's descriptions. As a different kind of engineer and geologist, his descriptions did not make complete sense to me either.

Anyways - I do have a question from your discussion:

You initially say that "Steel is very stiff. If you want to transfer energy, using a lump of rigid steel to do it is a good way."

I think your comments on Wayne mix up the perspective. In this case, the test is using the moving steel to transfer kinetic energy to the armor to see how much energy is absorbed. However, when I'm moving and my kinetic energy hits sufficiently thick steel (a bridge girder comes to mind), instruments on the steel are unlikely to measure much, if any, transfer of my kinetic energy. What little kinetic energy that is absorbed occurs by subtle flexing, friction, heat, deformation, or if it is perfectly rigid, it is transfered to and absorbed by the ground at its attachments. The rest of the energy is, unfortunately, absorbed by the "weaker" item that hit it - the bike, me, and the quad4 armor. Obviously, the less energy the body is asked to absorb the better. If I were to hit a girder, clearly not enough of that energy from that impact would be abosrbed or transfered out of the impact by the girder and I and my quad4 armor would have to absorb the rest. Just like a hammer hitting the girder - the hammer bounces back and absorbs (along with the arm that swung it) much of the kinetic energy in that impact, and just a little kinetic energy is absorbed by the girder in heat or transfered to the ground.

Your steel statement seems to contradict your comment further down that says "The forces in a bad bike crash are so large that the armor needs to be reasonably stiff - or not feel soft to the touch - to absorb the impact."

So, which is it - does steel transfer or absorb?

It does seem to me that armor needs to find that balance between soft/flexible to absorb as much energy as possible while remaining somewhat stiff for durability and strong enough to spread (transfer) what it can't absorb over aa wide an area on the body as possible. All, of course, without sacrifcing comfort and good looks.

poonbean screwed with this post 06-22-2010 at 06:11 PM
poonbean is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-23-2010, 01:27 PM   #170
Josh69
Uhhh
 
Josh69's Avatar
 
Joined: Dec 2007
Location: Euroland
Oddometer: 587
First off, since you were talking about hitting metal bridge beams and I was talking about hitting a pole - if you hit a hard object like these head-on, then the crash is probably not survivable.

Look at it this way: people in cars wrap themselves around poles or trees and with a metre of crumple zone in front of them plus airbags and they still get killed. 20 millimetres of foam padding, no matter how good it is, in a motorcycle jacket is not going to save you.


I'm also going to stop referring to 'energy' and refer to force. Energy absorption is hard to measure which is why the Euro test standard measures force transferred.

The Motoport Quad Armor from what I've read is about 20mm thick.
Case 1: 20mm thick steel plate. It is essentially completely rigid. Whatever you hit it with gets transferred direct to the other side.

Case 2: 20mm thick quilt full of duck feathers. Really soft and comfortable. However even minor impacts fully compress the feathers so it is ineffective as armor.

Case 3: 20mm Motoport armor or EU spec armor. Relatively stiff; takes a lot of force to fully compress it. This is the happy medium which reduces the force transmitted from one side of the motorcycle jacket to your body on the other side.



Wayne or whoever wrote the Motoport website does not appear to understand the physics of impacts. It does however look like Motoport have looked at a very large number of real crashes and even if they don't have much of an idea technically, they have seen what works and what doesnt.






Quote:
Originally Posted by poonbean
That is quite helpful - you bring some clarity to Wayne's world. I'm just on my second set of CP clothing and really like it, but never quite bought into all of Wayne's descriptions. As a different kind of engineer and geologist, his descriptions did not make complete sense to me either.

Anyways - I do have a question from your discussion:

You initially say that "Steel is very stiff. If you want to transfer energy, using a lump of rigid steel to do it is a good way."

I think your comments on Wayne mix up the perspective. In this case, the test is using the moving steel to transfer kinetic energy to the armor to see how much energy is absorbed. However, when I'm moving and my kinetic energy hits sufficiently thick steel (a bridge girder comes to mind), instruments on the steel are unlikely to measure much, if any, transfer of my kinetic energy. What little kinetic energy that is absorbed occurs by subtle flexing, friction, heat, deformation, or if it is perfectly rigid, it is transfered to and absorbed by the ground at its attachments. The rest of the energy is, unfortunately, absorbed by the "weaker" item that hit it - the bike, me, and the quad4 armor. Obviously, the less energy the body is asked to absorb the better. If I were to hit a girder, clearly not enough of that energy from that impact would be abosrbed or transfered out of the impact by the girder and I and my quad4 armor would have to absorb the rest. Just like a hammer hitting the girder - the hammer bounces back and absorbs (along with the arm that swung it) much of the kinetic energy in that impact, and just a little kinetic energy is absorbed by the girder in heat or transfered to the ground.

Your steel statement seems to contradict your comment further down that says "The forces in a bad bike crash are so large that the armor needs to be reasonably stiff - or not feel soft to the touch - to absorb the impact."

So, which is it - does steel transfer or absorb?

It does seem to me that armor needs to find that balance between soft/flexible to absorb as much energy as possible while remaining somewhat stiff for durability and strong enough to spread (transfer) what it can't absorb over aa wide an area on the body as possible. All, of course, without sacrifcing comfort and good looks.
__________________
========================
Saigon to Hanoi
http://www.advrider.com/forums/showthread.php?t=348262

Easter Mekong Tour
http://www.advrider.com/forums/showthread.php?t=329194

Streets of Vietnam
http://www.advrider.com/forums/showthread.php?t=335816

Current bike: 2008 Honda CBF-600
Josh69 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-23-2010, 02:06 PM   #171
TallRob
Beastly Adventurer
 
TallRob's Avatar
 
Joined: Apr 2010
Location: Agoura Hills ,Ca
Oddometer: 1,395
If memory serves, I believe wayne told me that the quad armor works on deceleration of an impact first and then spreading the force second. Whereas armor that has a hard plastic does not decelerate and impact nearly as much and can move internally much easier due to its slick surface. It made sense to me as when I crashed My hard plastic CE pads moved and actually speared my knee and elbow. They were tightly bound in the jacket and pants but the poppers to seat everything down came undone in the crash. Series 2 Transistion Jacket and Pants. Dont buy'em.The bruises were not fun to deal with for the following month. Obviosly i am not an engineer. Nor did I stay at a Holiday Inn.
Quote:
Originally Posted by spaceharrier
Wow. Nicely summarized and much better than I've seen in some of the pissing contests. I'm not currently using any Motoport gear but have in the past, and I was always a little troubled by the ways these threads played out; the gear seemed to work very well in crashes but the explanations given seemed wobbly.

TallRob screwed with this post 06-23-2010 at 02:16 PM
TallRob is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-23-2010, 02:10 PM   #172
TallRob
Beastly Adventurer
 
TallRob's Avatar
 
Joined: Apr 2010
Location: Agoura Hills ,Ca
Oddometer: 1,395
"you bring some clarity to Wayne's world."

Way!, Yeah Way! Pshah! Awesome!
TallRob is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-22-2010, 12:51 PM   #173
poonbean
gottago
 
Joined: Jul 2007
Location: Orinda, CA
Oddometer: 44
Well - I just finished up a 2.5 week 5,500 mile trip from San Francisco to Alburq to Helena and back to SF. The trip north was with Rawhyde on their northbound Great Divide Ride - roughly 2,200 miles along the Continental Divide and I'll guess 500 or so miles on slab, the rest on dirt, gravel, mud, roads, water crossings, two track, and single track. Awesome fun and challenging.

The motoport gear performed extremely well, took a beating, saved my knees, back, elbows, and shoulders and survived some pretty solid impacts to gravel and rock and dirt and sage brush without a scratch - unlike my KTM, which looks even better, now. I crashed at least 6 times on day one, perhaps 3 on day two, and once or twice on days 3 and 4 - then no more dumping after I got my skills dialed in. Last year during 4 days in the Mojave I wore a compression setup with strap on knees, and neither I nor the geared faired nearly as well.

The cycleport marathon jacket and overpant setup, all air mesh, was super comfy, breathable and cool in CA, NV, NM, CO, and WY and with the liners was fine in the rain and wind above the snow line in WY and MT and ID. I blasted through death valley at noon on Aug 3 and was fine - of course moving at about 95-105 mph helped, too. This gear now replaces my shorter and tighter air mesh jacket and street jean setup - currently for sale. Highly recommended.[FONT='Verdana','sans-serif'][/FONT]

poonbean screwed with this post 08-22-2010 at 01:00 PM
poonbean is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-16-2013, 04:21 PM   #174
frog13
Beastly Adventurer
 
frog13's Avatar
 
Joined: Feb 2007
Location: SW Ohio
Oddometer: 1,227
Quote:
Originally Posted by mdloops View Post
First off it should be known that I ride a 2007 Yamaha R6, and with any sport bike the seating position is aggressive.

Protection:

These pants are extremely protective and by far the most durable mesh pants available on the market. There isn't much that needs to be said besides the fact that they are above and beyond anything. Truely amazing.

Fitment:

These are not for anybody owning a bike with an aggressive seating position. The material bunches up and the will dig into the area behind your knees. They have a very high waist, meaning they are meant to be worn "urkle style" around the belly button. They are overpants so they will be baggy. The "seat area" is ridiculously baggy when standing straight up, but when sitting down works well. When I say baggy, I mean BAGGY, like when you are stadning up you look like you have the butt of a 400 pound man.

Practicality:

For those of us who commute to college or go out with our friends these pants are about as impractical as it gets. I have a tank bag, tail bag, and north face backpack and none of them are even close to being big enough to hold them. Unless you have large saddle bags you will be carrying these around with both arms. Additionally, I am a smaller guy 5'8 170 LBS, so I can't even imagine trying to cart around a larger pair.

Armor,

I have read many threads with Wayne saying how Tri-Armor is the best out there, and I think from looking at it that it is sufficient for protection, but CE is better. This armor is above average, but by no means excellent. Do I have proof that CE is better? No. However, any reasonable person can decide for themselves. THE HIP ARMOR IS AN ABSOLUTE JOKE. Literally, it is about 3/8 inch thin and is the cheapest stuff you can buy. SAFE YOURSELF $50 and DO NOT BUY IT. I can't really take pictures because it is sewn in, but I am willing to bet a good amount of money that it will be useless in a crash.

Overall Product

The material is the best I have seen, besides leather. However, it is terribly implemented. Maybe there is a reason why no other company uses this material for the entire piece of gear. I think I know the reason, because it is impractical, uncomfortable, and overly bulky. The product is very well put together from a quality control standpoint.

I like Wayne and think he has a good heart in making this gear, but the threads on this board are way too optimistic about this product. I will hopefully be posting pics soon that may illustrate my point, and if anybody wants to shoot me and email in the meantime I will try and answer any questions. I will be sending these back and taking my chances with the other mainstream companies' products. Again, this product is not comfortable on bikes where you need to grip the tank with your legs. For what it's worth, I have crashed before and know how hard of an impact one could sustain.

Mark
mdloops83@hotmail.com
Sounds like you should have done more research.I have the overpants and there just fine.Wayne advises on the site as to which pair fits in a particular way.....you should of done better homework!.
frog13 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Share

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

.
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump


Times are GMT -7.   It's 10:47 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.5
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ADVrider 2011-2014