Modern Vespa

Oh, golly, this one's heated up fast.

First there's Ryan F9's take:

Once you're done hyperventilating over that, here's this:

Let's just say the past three years have me coming down firmly on the side of Armor Is Good. Like any decent gear, of course, it's not a magic cloak on invincibility, but y'all probably know that.

(Note to mods: stop me if you've seen this here before.)

Ryan's statement is a classic straw-man argument: that there isn't statistical evidence for armor reducing fractures, therefore it is worthless and just an industry deception.

But clearly, preventing fractures is not the only purpose of armor. And even if it were, I hold it as self-evident that reducing impact energy is still a worthwhile function of armor.

Ryan's attempts at being a contrarian are increasingly looking clownish.

I install fine art for a living, including pieces valued in the hundreds of millions of dollars, but also just regular old stuff in all kinds of places. People will frequently ask, "Is that earthquake-proof?" How do I answer that one?

I want to say, "Well no, obviously; if we could earthquake-proof things we'd just earthquake-proof the whole city and the damn things would be fun."

I used to go into detail and say something like, "There's really no such thing as "earthquake-proof" but there are measures we can take that can help in a situation like that, things that can maybe preserve the artwork and at the very least attempt to keep it from falling on someone and injuring or killing them in an earthquake. So yes, I'll give you some options and explain what they do and you can decide what's right for you. There is, however, no guarantee because in a really big one, who knows what will happen?"

That second answer is how I feel about armored jackets and so forth. You're doing a risky thing, riding a motorcycle. There are an infinite amount of ways to fall off and an infinite amount of results when you do. If you think armor is injury-proofing you, that's stupid. But to say it's just pointless, that there's no middle ground, that it's all just a trick...not a serious position.

Meanwhile, back at the earthquake-proofing scenario, what I say most often these days when someone asks me if the installation I just completed is "earthquake-proof" is: "Absolutely!" It's just easier that way, and it's what they want to hear anyway.

Yes. Absolutely. You've reminded me of the underlying truth of riding a motorcycle: it is inherently dangerous, and we can never, ever eliminate all of the danger. The best we can do is to mitigate the risk as much as practical.

Protective gear -- including armor -- is one of the most obvious and practical ways of mitigating risk if the other mitigations fail.

It's also worth pointing out the YouTube aspect here. The YouTube algorithm rewards engagement -- a lot. Thus, creators are incentivized to do everything in their power to get people to like, subscribe, but also to comment on a video. It doesn't matter if the comment is angry and accusing the creator of malfeasance, incompetence, or lack of integrity -- YouTube rewards the engagement regardless. And with engagement comes money. Especially for a channel with a lot of followers.

When a big-time creator like FortNine says something controversial, you can be certain they are doing so to make bank. And they will.

Credibility and integrity are, it seems, qualities that have been cast aside in the name of the almighty algorithm.

Surely a Canadian with a YouTube channel wouldn't stoop that low.

Surely!

When I had my big crash, every part of my body (every part) that was protected with armor was seriously bruised. Knees, elbows, shoulders, hips, back, hands, feet.

Mild concussion.

No breaks (except the crushed foot that was at the point of impact).

I shudder to think what would it would have been like had I not been wearing all the gear and all those parts had taken the full impact.

Is armor an invulnerable shield? Certainly not.

Did it save me from serious, permanent, even fatal, injury? I have no doubt.

Tissues are incredibly weak, in terms of material strength.
Nonetheless, I will continue to protect my hands with them when I blow my nose.

Such things scale up.

A useful quotation (from the Smthsonian Air & Space Museum). I won't be removing my armour, especially my back armour.

I mean, in theory you're not wrong but... in Fortnine's case it wouldn't make sense.

Assuming FortNine gets the same CPM and RPM as my Canadian motorcycle youtube channel... The 600,000 views they got only made them $3,000.

Fortnine isn't a YouTube channel... It's Canada's largest powersports retailer, which also happens to have a YouTube channel. Would you really expect a retailer in that position to deliberately throw away their credibility for $3,000? Wouldn't that be too ridiculously shortsighted to be credible?

Shirley!

¿Por que no los dos?

I know and understand what FortNine is. But to say that FortNine is not a YouTube channel (at this point in time) is doing a disservice to how incredibly successful it is as a YouTube channel. To 85% of his audience (just guessing here) the distinction is irrelevant, as 85% of the audience (just guessing here) has no access or exposure to the powersports segment of the the FortNine empire. The YouTube channel, for those people, is all there is.

In other words, the YouTube channel far eclipses the reach of the powersports retail arm. Do you have a better explanation for why Ryan seems increasingly intent on playing the contrarian, even when it sounds incredibly stupid to people who actually know something about the subject?

My money says it's the algorithm. I'll bet my money that his money is on the algorithm as well.

He seems to have gone all in on airbags, especially one brand. I don't usually go in for this kind of thing but in this particular case, perhaps he has some sort of stake or commission deal with the airbag people? Less armor/more airbags=somehow better for Ryan?

He does wind up briefly pitching this high-end gear he found just lying on the ground at the end of his dissertation.

Don't call me Shirley,

I STILL want jrstone's Helston.

If your life is governed by statistics, you must never get into a bed.
Do you realise just how many people die in them?

Maybe, maybe not. The channel makes about $600,000/yr last I checked... so it's the smaller part of their business.

While working with health care professionals, I got to know few ER doctors, who might disagree with our Canadian profet. They got first-hand opportunity to compare the results ...like, skin or no skin etc.

One in particular shared my interest in motorcycling. He got me thinking about how durable our skin is and how loosing skin/flesh/ what not adds to the insult of breaking a bone, cartilage, muscle etc. It is not very.

To the extend that I feel more comfy with my thick leathers than light weight gear, both with good armour - any additional softness and protection are welcomed when the inevitable takes place. Also, I can't seem to make myself to wear 'riding jeans' anymore, I can so feel the hard tarmac in my bum whatever kevlar they include.

All this said, I can't say none of these choises reduces my pleasure to ride - I'm 'lucky' to live in quite cold climate, where extra gear usually just adds comfort.

Ryan has definitely entered his "I'm gonna be controversial" phase lol.

He's a good dude though. What you see on camera is what you get off camera with him. Videos aside, I like him as a person a lot.

Picture of us checking out a pre-production LiveWire unit:

I always wear the helmet, Armour jacket, gloves and riding boots. The part I leave exposed is my legs. I just have never got into the correct armoured riding pants. I do wear "Duluth Trading Company" firehose pants. They are like the thick material on a fire hose and quite popular amoung two wheelers.

When I was last at this retailer, a clerk told me bikers are buying the pants.

Bob Copeland

Ryans " which type of chain lube is best" is his best work I feel. Physics , good practical tests and lastly a dose of common sense.I think that was made when the channel was just beginning and the need to monetise every minute and like was less important.

I listened to him speak at the UK Abr rally in 2022. As stated by Adri above, he came across as one of the good guys.

Adri, ask him what he was thinking with this video. He starts off by saying it's an April Fool's joke. Maybe it's an April Fool's joke.

he didn't say not to wear kevlar etc

(yes the pad gives some extra skin protection)

he does make me feel less guilty about not sticking knee + hip pads in my jeans. I don't usually as I like to stop for hikes while riding in the country as they just suck then

and yes I do have pads in my jacket and will keep those even though previously they haven't stopped me fracturing my arm

I think his conclusion summed it up, he isn't telling people they should stop wearing armor. In fact, I think he says that not once, but twice in the video. His conclusion simply says he personally stopped wearing it, and he enjoys the comfort.

I can't speak to anyone on this thread, but it's pretty common on youtube for people to see something like "USELESS" in the thumbnail, and the title of the video, and jump to their own conclusions without listening to the careful choice of words being said... but from what I got out of the words he chose, he isn't saying armor is bad. He actually gives examples of where armor is useful, he just also gives examples of where armor is useless.

My takeaway from the video wasn't "Ryan says armor = bad.

My takeaway from the video was "Ryan says

1) armor = could be made so much better, but isn't (see "horse girls" reference)

2) armor = can save you from some damage (bruising scraping), but not from others (broken bones from heavy impacts)"

Overall, Ryan is an adult, taking a calculated risk, by choosing to ride without his armor now, explaining his thought process.

Given that each time each of us choose to ride a Vespa, rather than take a car, we too, are adults, taking calculated risks, maybe we should take a good luck in the mirror before judging the man in the arena?

Strongly disagree. He accused the manufacturers of "regulatory capture". He also misrepresented the studies and the researches he quoted, and fundamentally misconstrued that "horse girl" armor is comparable to motorcycle armor.

Watch the second video above if you doubt this.

All of which strongly says "armor = bad", which I think is just grossly irresponsible and reckless.

PS: I know it's fun to accuse the YouTubers of being money hungry, but food for thought:

Ryan also made a video talking about the advantages to going to the dark side (car tire on motorcycle rim). If I remember correctly, I think he said he was leaving the car tire on in the conclusion of that video.

Given that Fortnine sells motorcycle tires, not car tires, if this channel was really about Ryan selling out, rather than about Ryan sharing his thoughts, why would they not have demonized the car tire option?

Maybe Ryan's just always been allowed to share what he's up to on the channel and this is no different?

Maybe after all of the many videos he's mentioned what his daily riding gear is, since things have changed, he's decided to update us what he's changed and why?

Or maybe he's evil, selling out, and wants the doom of all riders...

What's the most likely option?

Interpretations are always going to be subjective. How I perceive things and how you perceiving things sometimes will align, and sometimes won't.

So why don't we look at the transcript from the video, so we can get it straight from the horse's mouth.

This starts from 5:14 in the video so you can read along with it and see that it's word for word accurate. Hence why my interpretation is that he isn't saying armor is bad, he's saying it could be better, and it can have good effects, and he simply making his own choice.

There's also the pinned comment at the top of the video: You're welcome to interpret his words however you want. If you want to demonize the stranger on the internet on the assumption he's out to hurt the customers of the people who employ him... have at it

Somewhat related/mostly unrelated: Holy shit, did anyone else notice he did that entire 6 minute video in ONE take, no camera cuts, no edits? Absolute pro.

How long till some get kicked off this thread? 🍿

I was a bit disappointed with this too.

The global academic world provides, sadly, means to back up virtually anything one wishes. Selecting only one side of the story to prove your case is always a thing that raises my neck hair.

Being an overall entertaining fellow, this was a low point for the presenter - it's totally fine if he wishes to ride without protection, but a sad case to misuse the statistics to make this sound like a fully fact proven decision.

It's not what he says in individual sentences, it's how he tells the whole story.

Unlike crashing, he had the option of doing that as often as he needed until he got it right.

I watched the video a few days ago and my take - this is just me - was not that it was a dig at the manufacturers or armor in general, but to get a better grip on the industry standards and where that leaves us from a protection standpoint because, being in manufacturing, I know that even though our quality policy states explicitly that we make a world class product that meets or exceeds our customers standards, the reality is we never exceed unless it's by accident and we often don't meet their standards if we can save money and get away with it.

It was after a couple of Ryan's videos about the DOT and Snell standards that I began questioning HOW safe my gear actually was. It was the driving force behind me buying a lid with the ECE 2206 rating. It made me THINK about the gear I was wearing.

I'm not apologizing or evangelizing. But maybe, just maybe, the video served its purpose in that it made us think and discuss something as critical as motorcycle gear safety.

While I don't agree with F9 or his conclusions on the effectiveness of armor, at least he got people talking about this subject. There is certainly room for improvement in motorcycle armor. I have sometimes replaced the armor that came in my gear with something better. My issue with the armor that comes in Jackets and pants is not so much the armor itself but the fact that it often isn't in the right place. That happens to me a lot with knee pads in riding pants. I often remove the knee pads and use strap on pads instead. I have also replaced the cheap foam back pads in a couple of my jackets with something better.

Another interesting element with this is studies about mandating bicycle helmets. The argument against this is data shows that other vehicles take more care overtaking someone who does visually appear more vulnerable, but also quite often people feel too secure armoured up and so take a lot more risks which can sometimes outweigh the armour in the first place.

Highlighting that armour doesn't help as much as people think, is a positive thing in this regard - if it encourages people to ride differently (more defensively).

It amazed me riding through Italy how I had a big heavy jacket full of armour, boots, gloves and heavy abrasion resistant jeans (while struggling in 37c temps 99f!), and the majority of people I saw were in linen shirts and shorts. I even passed someone with flip flops and shorts - no shirt or gloves!

I have done the same, finding better-fitting (and often lighter-weight) armor that provides the same or better protection.

Yes, also, to placement - knee armor in particular. Proper fit is as important, or even more important, as other factors. Proper fit also increases comfort. Uncomfortable gear is less likely to be worn (though not by me) and is distracting while riding.

I consider the cheap foam pads that come with many jackets to just be place-holders, whether they are intended that way or not.

I have never put much stock in ce1 or ce2 armor being very effective in reducing broken bones or other skeletal injuries in a crash especially at speed. I am not convinced that the standards were seriously put in place to prevent such injuries even though that seems to be the stated intent.

That said, would I remove it from my gear? Absolutely not. I don't find it uncomfortable enough to fuss about and it is obvious that anything between you and the road or some other hard object that more is better. Saving skin in a slide, having a chipped elbow instead of a broken one are just a couple things that come to mind.

Ryan is a bit too glib about it and I think Jess's point about driving viewer traffic by being contrarian is correct. Hopefully he will reconsider this video because he has a lot of followers that put stock in what he says. Something he has earned BTW for making some excellent and thoughtful videos it would be a shame for him to start squandering that.

I watched F9's video about armor padding only because I love all his videos. Will I remove my armor from my Alpinestars jacket? Nope. Am I still picking up a new pair of armored jeans and leaving the armor in? Yup. After falling a few times I just learned, the hard way, that even a bit of armor is better than nothing. I don't find correct fitting armor uncomfortable and accept the extra heat build up in hot weather. I did think it was a April Fools joke though.

Abraision of the skin comes when our soft moisturised bits hit moving tarmac. If you have a single layer jean, it has to tear or transfer burns. A two layer system eg dual layer ( old style) Kevlar aramid jean allows " slip" between the two layers which absorbs energy. A soft or foam armour provides another interference layer to slip and move. Hopefully whilst all this movement is going on, you are slowing down and the risk to abrasion is lessening.

To compare bone strength is tricky, I worked with a 60 year old guy who lifted up his grandchild one day and " shrank" 2" in height as his spine / joints collapsed! If he was hit by a moving subject the Newtons force to fracture his bones would be significantly different to a regular rider who lifts weights.

Im sticking with my modest armour in my jeans and jkt.