Body Armour for XC
Comments
-
switchback18 wrote:Body armour is unlikely to prevent a broken collarbone - this usually happens when you stick you're arm out straight to break a fall - if you're arm's rigid the shock goes up to the collarbone which takes it all.
I'm not sure. I'm pretty certain it happens, but in something like skating, falling is something you do about every 5 mins on average, generally putting your arms out to break the fall, yet collarbones are fairly rare injuries. Generally it comes from a direct imapact to the shoulder, which is often how bikers fall, not finding the time to get their arms out. It's all irrelevant though, either way, body armour probably wouldn't do much.
In fact there's nothing much you can do about most vulnerable area, broken limbs and so forth. I'm guessing armour is mostly designed to protect your back, or stop you from doing nasty damage to your internals, which would easily be done falling on your bike.
Shin guards make a lot of sense for obvious reasons, but it is an interesting question when you're bombing the trails (xc or not), around trees, rocks, etc. What's the difference between and XCer falling at 35mph and a downhiller falling at 35mph?0 -
Can't imagine why you'd want protection (read: body armour) on something as simple as a Merida.
Quite bizarre. Restrictive and hot!
I do a bit of XC riding and racing and maybe 1% max' wear pads and the like (after a while they drop out since they're in the wrong place with all that clobber!) - it really is not necessary.
These same fearful riders seem to have the heavy bikes, large day sacks stuffed with all manner of gear.
Perhaps check out someone like Joolze's photography site to view what XC racers wear. What I can tell you is that 2x bottles, a small under-saddle bag and a top with pockets in the back is the default setting for the front riders. Perhaps an inner taped to the frame and that's about it.
For longer rides, have a look at the Montane Kielder & Merida images. If you're out for a few hours and NOT riding a circuit time and time again, you are, by definition not able to replenish your drinks nor food nor change a layer or two, so consider adding a small Camelbak.
In short: in XC races for either circuits or long loops you absolutely do not need body armour - the course designers are not trying to mangle your body or present you with unmanageable obstacles, just ride and not worry about such irrelevances!0 -
"I've been riding for 15-20 years"
"It's only XC"
...and those sorts of comments....
is bad advice. They won't do anything for you when something goes wrong.
For trail centres:
1. get some protection. Consider: Head, Eyes, Hands, Shins, Knees, Elbows, Back, rest of.
2. before you ride - ask a few people who have just come off the trail how they found it. look at what they're wearing. they'll soon give you some clues as to what protection you might need (conditions/opinions/trails change)
3. Ride within your ability. If you're likely to push that ability, be sensibly prepared....especially if you are self-employed.
Personally - on XC i wear from just fingerless gloves up to shin/knee/elbow pads,hat,gloves,goggles....it is all relative....and very circumstantial.
I would never recommend that protection isn't required....that would be irresponsible.0 -
6ft roll of cotton wool and some wrapping tape too!Shins, Knees, Elbows, Back, rest of
The OP asked about XC riding, not taking on black graded sections for the first time.
Strip away the things that are, more likely than not, preventing you from riding well and not being slowed down by body armour.
If you think you're going to need knee pads, elbow protection, back protectors, goggles, shin pads et al, just what sort of terrain are you classifying as XC riding and where?
We'll see in two weeks time at 2010's 1st Merida, just how many XC riders wear any body armour and then see how useful they are and what sort of bikes they turn up riding! Furthermore, I can't think of a single XC red route in the UK where body armour would be required; not one.0 -
dogsloweverywhere wrote:Furthermore, I can't think of a single XC red route in the UK where body armour would be required; not one.
Who's talking about "required" or "need"?
Anyone can have a moment. I clipped a tree at glentress the other week on the red, on a nice simple bit of trail, just pure carelessness on my part but I was glad for my pads because it meant I just bounced up and carried on without a scrape or a bruise to annoy me for the rest of the ride. And wearing them doesn't make the slightest bit of difference to my riding, so it's hard to see any sensible argument against wearing them.
I'll be wearing them for the 3 Tens as well, again not because I feel like I'll need them but because there's no reason at all for me not to.Uncompromising extremist0 -
Northwind. The need is yours. It's based on personal risk assessment and your own abilities, insecurities & your own confidence. No one can tell you it’s going to be fine if you think you’ll be having a spill every ride!
Take any red, blue or green route out in any trail centre (for example) and you'll find people wearing lids, gloves, spec's and that's all they feel the need for in terms of safety equipment.
If you're tackling routes with grades above your abilities, by all means, wrap yourself in cotton wool, but the majority prefer to be unencumbered by such unnecessary paraphernalia, preferring to be mobile, flexible and not weighted down by pads and armour.
You might also be lulled into a false sense of security tackling new black obstacles if you do think that body armour is the way to prevent all harm.
Just a cursory look through the various magazines on offer tells you there’s a clear division between free ride / down hill riders and their XC cousins, both in kit and bikes.
Travel light, be mobile and flexible and be more confident in your own abilities.
Most likely your bike will out-perform you personally every time, so maybe consider taking some personal skills training to gain the confidence you lack at present.0 -
The pads give confidence though and geuss what, I had taken jumping lessons but came off a tabletop on a blue and would have really badly broken my arm if I wasn't wearing pads.
Also saying pads weigh you down is rubbish. Get some good pads and the only way you know they are there is if you have done them up to tight or if you see them.
Bet you wear a helmet don't you. Well you dopn't always hit your head do you and if you have taken lessons then you are garanteed not to fall off NOTTTTTTTTTTTT!!! :roll:0 -
I can't really find the enthusiasm to properly respond to your post dogslow, let's just say say your assumptions on my riding are exactly as accurate as your assertion that pads restrict your freedom of movement.
It's obvious you have some sort of issue with the idea of wearing pads but you could at least make the effort to get some experience on a subject before making patronising and ill-informed comments . It's also obvious you've never used good pads- which is your choice, and that's fine but why do you feel qualified to look down on those who have?
At the very least, stop talking nonsense about "needing" armour. Nobody needs armour, nobody feels it's a requirement or essential for this sort of riding, and nobody believes it makes them invulnerable- people just choose to wear it just as others choose not to.Uncompromising extremist0 -
And like I said, do you wear a helmet. Why? They are unecissary and make your head hot. They also restrict your sight.
Do you go up to Steve Peat and go you must be useless becuase you wear a full face helmet and knee pads :roll:0
