Soft or Hard armor? real life experience?

**Zapf** · 1st March 2005, 18:31

Hello everybody....
Just wondering if anyone has a bit of insight as to if Soft armor or Hard armor is better in motorcycle clothing and any real life experience in crashing with Soft / Hard armor and difference?

I have heard on some sites they say hard armor can break and end up causing more damage to the rider, true / false?

Poll: Soft armor better or Hard armor better?

ps. I am trying to decide between wearing my 1 Pcs NON water proof leathers with hard armor OR my "water proof" 2 Pcs leathers with soft armor.... for my South Island trip.

ok. I have a back protector vest as will, so I'll be wearing that regardless of which suit I wear.

**Skyryder** · 1st March 2005, 18:38

No expert on this but the general theory is that softer is better as it 'absorbs' on impact. Came across an interesteing English sight some time ago on this very question. Will try and find it.

Skyryder

**Paul in NZ** · 1st March 2005, 18:41

Hard armour spreads the impact over a larger area....

Best is a combination of the 2. Hard armour with soft inside...

I'd hate to see the impact that would break the hard armour in my Spidi Jacket. I think a few jags from splintered armour would be the very least of my worries..

Paul N

**sAsLEX** · 1st March 2005, 18:43

I would like to point out that on a big trip the difference in comfort will have more bearing on your survival than the slight difference in amour performance.

Your new leathers should be fine, just buy a 80 odd dollar one pice rain suit for them!

**sAsLEX** · 1st March 2005, 18:45

Originally Posted by Skyryder

No expert on this but the general theory is that softer is better as it 'absorbs' on impact. Came across an interesteing English sight some time ago on this very question. Will try and find it.

Skyryder

not quite true I would imagine, a well designed honeycomb etc type design would spread the impact better than say soft foam.

**Grumpy** · 1st March 2005, 18:50

Wear whichever has the back protecter. Had a set of Dianese leathers on when I had a spill a few years ago. All hard armour but no back protecter. Result... every thing that was covered by the armour was good. However, fractured back, punctured lung...etc.

Don't worry about the waterproof thing. Cheap set of wet weathers will sort that.

**Skyryder** · 1st March 2005, 19:13

Originally Posted by sAsLEX

not quite true I would imagine, a well designed honeycomb etc type design would spread the impact better than say soft foam.

Clearly a combination of two where there is both the absorption of impact and protection is the way to go. There was no mention of materials in the original post and I would not use soft foam as armour. However I may have interpertated the question wrong. Go to http://www.flamesonmytank.co.za/Clobber.htm and answer the question In motorcycle apparel tests soft body armour has proved to be less effective in protecting critical areas than hard body armour True or Fasle.

As mentioned previously I came across and English site by a doctor who specalised in repairing broken bones etc, and he had done some tests with the help of a university into body armour material. Unfortunately I have changed computers and do not have the address.

I noticed that the poll ratings show most riders believe that hard is better. I'ts cheaper and the marketeers have produced another myth.

Skyryder

**Motu** · 1st March 2005, 19:19

Make sure your armour has a CE rating,then at least you know it has had some (non human) testing and is not what some one has made to the standard of - ''now that looks bloody good eh?'' There are different CE standards for body and back armour...I have posted them before but can't be bothered finding them again.I have hard and soft mixes,I prefer the hard armour for the low speed impacts I am more likely to get with my style of riding.

**Biff** · 1st March 2005, 19:25

I'm with Paul. Soft armour on the outside acts as a kind of crumple zone while the hard underneath distributes the impact energy.

**Waylander** · 1st March 2005, 19:30

Don't know yet I havn't ridden with either yet. Went and looked at a jacket today that had hard armour for the elbows and shoulders and about mid range stuff for the back and soft around the ribs. Felt comfortable inside of it though it was a size to big for me. So I'm probably gonna go in in the next week or so and get one then later on get the pants to go with it. Will tell y'all what I think then.

**sAsLEX** · 1st March 2005, 19:33

Originally Posted by Skyryder

I noticed that the poll ratings show most riders believe that hard is better. I'ts cheaper and the marketeers have produced another myth.

Skyryder

Doubt its cheaper, wouldn't a slab of foam be cheaper to make than the cast/injection moulded external plastic armour of some leathers??

And that site lacked credible link, references to which tests the soft armour won in

**marty** · 1st March 2005, 20:05

i've had a *ahem* few craashes off my bmx bike over the past few years. i used to use soft armour, but after a particularly nasty hard fall onto my elbow, which split the skin to the bone (thru the armour) i have gone to full hard armour. i had a really hard fall from about 5m at 40km/h onto packed limestone last year, and apart from completly wrecking my race shirt, i got up and rode away. if i wasn't wearing armour, or had soft armour on, i reckon i would have busted a collar bone, maybe some ribs. the violators have hard armour, and i wouldn't have anything else

**onearmedbandit** · 1st March 2005, 20:46

On a different tack, I wear Sidi Race Vertabra's, and before purchasing them I did some research. Quite surprising was some comments along the lines of the firmness of the boot around the ankle area was causing some riders to break their legs as the boots have little 'give'. Just how these riders attributed their injuries to the boot I don't know, but it just goes to show no matter what improvements get made someone will find reason to cast a bad light on them. (This goes with the first comment in the thread.)

**DEATH_INC.** · 1st March 2005, 21:04

Hard with a soft backing (inside)is the only way to go.I've had some bloody good offs both on the road in my Technics and in mx too with hard upper armour and walked away relatively unharmed.Sorry,soft armour don't do jack,at least in my experience.....

**curious george** · 1st March 2005, 21:06

Originally Posted by Motu

Make sure your armour has a CE rating,then at least you know it has had some (non human) testing and is not what some one has made to the standard of - ''now that looks bloody good eh?'' There are different CE standards for body and back armour...I have posted them before but can't be bothered finding them again.I have hard and soft mixes,I prefer the hard armour for the low speed impacts I am more likely to get with my style of riding.

Probably the best advice sofar....
So, hardarmour it is then!