Is ATGATT overrated?

[glasswave]

Originally Posted by blk-betty

Is ATGATT overrated?

Basically, yes it is, in my view.

Far and away, the best thing you can do to prevent serious injury or death in a moto accident is to wear a helmet. Full face are far superior to other helmet types because in about 40% of fatal head injuries in non helmeted moto accidents the primary trauma originates from front facial area impact.

The second major piece of gear to prevent serious injury is sturdy leather gloves. This is followed closely by over the ankle boots. Studies indicate there is little statistical benefit from wearing heavy MX boots over basic leather boots, but one can only assume that heavier boots offer better protection. My guess is that if you are about to break your ankle, the extra protection from Mx boots often will do little to stop it.

Next comes jackets and pants. The main advantage that these garments offer is abrasion protection. Abrasion injuries, while often painful and scarring are seldom serious (hands, feet & face excepted). I am not suggesting that we all should wear speedos to ride in, but simply that the decision to ride in jeans is not nearly as fool hardy as the decision not to wear a helmet.

Finally, comes back braces and the like. While there is nearly no objective study data, the data that we do have suggests these devices offer very little protection at common moto accident speeds.

We all have to accept risks in life. There is little doubt that wearing full leathers, harness belts and helmets would save lives in auto accidents, yet you seldom hear the agatt crew calling for such measures. These folks all too often will berate someone"s decision to get a low priced jacket and pants saying that if you don't go for a $900 kevlar suit you are being a fool. When realistically, they are tons better than the jeans and t-shirt they were about to replace. Should someone pay for $2000 in safety gear when they can barely afford a $1200 motorcycle. I am not so sure.

I remember in one thread being chastised for my decision to wear my heavy mountaineering boots rather than mx boots when touring internationally (I do a lot of trekking and don't have room for both). It was put forth by several that I trek in trainers and ride in mx boots. This would be a fool hardy decision for me. I would not make it very far carrying a 55lb pack over rough terrain with my flat feet, bad ankles and knees in trainers and I would be risking serious injury in more remote and dangerous conditions, but the agatter's would not relent. $500 mx boots or you're a fool.

[Boon Booni]

Originally Posted by glasswave

I would not make it very far carrying a 55lb pack over rough terrain with my flat feet,

I'm thinking you might need to buy some better camping gear.
Things have gotten much lighter in the last 20 years.

[glasswave]

Originally Posted by Boon Booni

I'm thinking you might need to buy some better camping gear.
Things have gotten much lighter in the last 20 years.

I may have been exagerating a little, but OTH, I carry about 8 lbs of photo gear. I cannot use a poleless tent or hammock where I go and I do carry a book and first aid as well. I think I had about 48 lbs on Torres del Paine loop which was about 12 days with 9 days food.

That said, I cannot carry a 35lb over rough terrain with runners either. I need beefy trekking boots, even for day hikes.

[Celtic Curmudgeon]

Originally Posted by glasswave

These folks all too often will berate someone"s decision to get a low priced jacket and pants saying that if you don't go for a $900 kevlar suit you are being a fool. When realistically, they are tons better than the jeans and t-shirt they were about to replace.

Can the man get an "amen"?

How about "Is ATGATT such an overused/underdefined term that it's becoming meaningless?"

Seriously, 229 posts, yet there's still no consensus. Several have defined ATGATT for them as helmet, gloves, jacket, regular or kevlar jeans and work boots. I think that's a reasonable starting point, and anyone's free to disagree - Just please spare me the smarmy bullshit that anything less than the full "Master Chief from HALO" getup is total failure.

[VxZeroKnots]

Originally Posted by glasswave

Basically, yes it is, in my view.

Far and away, the best thing you can do to prevent serious injury or death in a moto accident is to wear a helmet. Full face are far superior to other helmet types because in about 40% of fatal head injuries in non helmeted moto accidents the primary trauma originates from front facial area impact.

The second major piece of gear to prevent serious injury is sturdy leather gloves. This is followed closely by over the ankle boots. Studies indicate there is little statistical benefit from wearing heavy MX boots over basic leather boots, but one can only assume that heavier boots offer better protection. My guess is that if you are about to break your ankle, the extra protection from Mx boots often will do little to stop it.

Next comes jackets and pants. The main advantage that these garments offer is abrasion protection. Abrasion injuries, while often painful and scarring are seldom serious (hands, feet & face excepted). I am not suggesting that we all should wear speedos to ride in, but simply that the decision to ride in jeans is not nearly as fool hardy as the decision not to wear a helmet.

Finally, comes back braces and the like. While there is nearly no objective study data, the data that we do have suggests these devices offer very little protection at common moto accident speeds.

We all have to accept risks in life. There is little doubt that wearing full leathers, harness belts and helmets would save lives in auto accidents, yet you seldom hear the agatt crew calling for such measures. These folks all too often will berate someone"s decision to get a low priced jacket and pants saying that if you don't go for a $900 kevlar suit you are being a fool. When realistically, they are tons better than the jeans and t-shirt they were about to replace. Should someone pay for $2000 in safety gear when they can barely afford a $1200 motorcycle. I am not so sure.

I remember in one thread being chastised for my decision to wear my heavy mountaineering boots rather than mx boots when touring internationally (I do a lot of trekking and don't have room for both). It was put forth by several that I trek in trainers and ride in mx boots. This would be a fool hardy decision for me. I would not make it very far carrying a 55lb pack over rough terrain with my flat feet, bad ankles and knees in trainers and I would be risking serious injury in more remote and dangerous conditions, but the agatter's would not relent. $500 mx boots or you're a fool.

You sir, get it.

[Boon Booni]

Originally Posted by glasswave

I may have been exagerating a little, but OTH, I carry about 8 lbs of photo gear. I cannot use a poleless tent or hammock where I go and I do carry a book and first aid as well. I think I had about 48 lbs on Torres del Paine loop which was about 12 days with 9 days food.

That said, I cannot carry a 35lb over rough terrain with runners either. I need beefy trekking boots, even for day hikes.

There are some pretty nice sub 4lb tents out there these days. Just to name drop the Mountain Hardware Skyledge 2.1, though that's far from the only one. Not much heavier than a fully decked out hammock.

I've been reading around on Hammocks forum as well as ultra light backpacker, it's amazing the lengths those guys go to to shed a few ounces, but all their pack lists and gear reviews can help get your pack weight down to something sane even if it's not the super ultra light weight their shooting for.

I've been using runners now, but I don't backpack off the bike. Day hike, but not much more than that.

[thumpty dumpty]

Originally Posted by glasswave

Basically, yes it is, in my view.

Far and away, the best thing you can do to prevent serious injury or death in a moto accident is to wear a helmet. Full face are far superior to other helmet types because in about 40% of fatal head injuries in non helmeted moto accidents the primary trauma originates from front facial area impact.

The second major piece of gear to prevent serious injury is sturdy leather gloves. This is followed closely by over the ankle boots. Studies indicate there is little statistical benefit from wearing heavy MX boots over basic leather boots, but one can only assume that heavier boots offer better protection. My guess is that if you are about to break your ankle, the extra protection from Mx boots often will do little to stop it.

Next comes jackets and pants. The main advantage that these garments offer is abrasion protection. Abrasion injuries, while often painful and scarring are seldom serious (hands, feet & face excepted). I am not suggesting that we all should wear speedos to ride in, but simply that the decision to ride in jeans is not nearly as fool hardy as the decision not to wear a helmet.

Finally, comes back braces and the like. While there is nearly no objective study data, the data that we do have suggests these devices offer very little protection at common moto accident speeds.

We all have to accept risks in life. There is little doubt that wearing full leathers, harness belts and helmets would save lives in auto accidents, yet you seldom hear the agatt crew calling for such measures. These folks all too often will berate someone"s decision to get a low priced jacket and pants saying that if you don't go for a $900 kevlar suit you are being a fool. When realistically, they are tons better than the jeans and t-shirt they were about to replace. Should someone pay for $2000 in safety gear when they can barely afford a $1200 motorcycle. I am not so sure.

I remember in one thread being chastised for my decision to wear my heavy mountaineering boots rather than mx boots when touring internationally (I do a lot of trekking and don't have room for both). It was put forth by several that I trek in trainers and ride in mx boots. This would be a fool hardy decision for me. I would not make it very far carrying a 55lb pack over rough terrain with my flat feet, bad ankles and knees in trainers and I would be risking serious injury in more remote and dangerous conditions, but the agatter's would not relent. $500 mx boots or you're a fool.

Well said.

[Wraith Rider]

Originally Posted by JimVonBaden

Seriously, we all ride, we all understand that riding has certain inherant risks that we accept. Most understand that a minimum level of gear that includes full face helmet, armored jacket, pants and gloves, plus proper boots help to minimize that risk.

Chosing to take the risk with full knowledge of the consequences is a choice. Choosing to pretend like the risk doesn't exist and riding in flipflops, shorts and no helmet believing you won't get hurt because you wont crash is MY definition of Stupid.

See, so by your definition we all are not stupid. We do understand the risk and how to minimize and when we ride in flipflops and shorts, without helmet, we DO NOT pretend the risk doesn't exist.

[JimVonBaden]

Originally Posted by Wraith Rider

See, so by your definition we all are not stupid. We do understand the risk and how to minimize and when we ride in flipflops and shorts, without helmet, we DO NOT pretend the risk doesn't exist.

Did you ask everyone? Or are you just ASSuming?

Jim

[Wraith Rider]

I hadn't to ask, they all told it here, you only have to read the thread. Did YOU ASSume, that we all understand the inherant risks of riding?

[JimVonBaden]

Originally Posted by Wraith Rider

I hadn't to ask, they all told it here, you only have to read the thread. Did YOU ASSume, that we all understand the inherant risks of riding?

I did, and I am sure it was a bad ASSumption!

Jim

[BuddingGeezer]

I don't think AGATT is over rated. 6 weeks ago it save my life. When the gear looks like ground hamburger, imagine what one's skin would look like with out it.

[DAKEZ]

Originally Posted by Boon Booni

I'm thinking you might need to buy some better camping gear.
Things have gotten much lighter in the last 20 years.

55lbs is the high tech stuff.

[lemieuxmc]

Originally Posted by BuddingGeezer

I don't think AGATT is over rated. 6 weeks ago it save my life. When the gear looks like ground hamburger, imagine what one's skin would look like with out it.

[Boon Booni]

Originally Posted by DAKEZ

55lbs is the high tech stuff.

Check Andrew Skurka, and his 6 month hike/tour around Alaska/Yukon.

Kept his total carried weight at 33lb or less, and actually in the mid to low 20's when he wasn't carrying an inflatable boat.

http://andrewskurka.com/adventures/a...on/gear-lists/