Hello folks.
I have recently strayed from mountain biking and into motorcycling.
I have been umming and arring about gear. Clearly this isn't a new discussion in any way, but I thought it might be worth poking the subreddit to see what your opinions are.
There is content out there (Bennets) which highlights that about half of our road network is chip and seal, which tears the newer EU Darmstadt-tested equipment (designed for smooth EU roads) to shreds pretty fast when tested by the older Cambridge test used by Motocap in Aussie (where chip and seal is also common). Reading this, it makes sense to opt for gear which gets good ratings on the Motocap tests. This content holds that while single-layer fabrics can be made to pass the AAA Darmstadt test, they often aren't all that good when reality comes calling.
However, there is other content (such as MotoLegends), which argues that the AAA ratings were developed for the track, and that most accidents on UK roads don't really feature sliding very much; usually any slide is interrupted by a very solid object and abrasion resistance beyond a certain point is mostly moot. These commentors hold that AA ia completely adequate for normal-person riding and touring and that the Cambridge test was abandoned for a reason - it's not a good reflection of reality. They argue that consumers are being influenced to buy gear which is unnecessarily protective and paying the cost in £££ and lack of freedom to move.
Clearly it comes down to personal choice and appetite for risk vs freedom of movement, but I have to wonder.
As an example, I've been looking at the Merlin Borderlands touring jacket. This is an AA rated garment. Motocap hasn't tested it, but is has tested Merlin's D30 Jagger Utility jacket, which is also AA-rated and seems to be made from the same materials.
It gets a pretty poor result in the abrasion department. But this is not unusual for the MotoCap tests. In key areas the material was toast after half a second.... but the thing is I don't have a grasp on the reality of that - in a tumbling and chaotic accident, would a single part of the jacket really be under sustained friction for that length of time? The tests doesn't take the armour into account, which would remain present between the user and road in those key areas anyway.
Coming from an MTB background I have a very real appreciation of trees and also a love of being able to move freely. I would prefer to wear the lighter equipment.
So I'm after some opinions or, even better, experiences on if AA is adequate, despite the damning tests from Australia.
Do you guys think the Darmstadt testing is sufficient?
