obra3

Just out of curiosity- would you race in lightweight armor if:

1. it wasn't too heavy
2. did not restrict movement and was pliable
3. was embedded in your bibs and jersey
4. would be pretty hard to detect (unless you had knee and elbow protection too- although this could be built into arm warmers/long sleeve jersey and/or tights/leg warmers)
5. and would help protect your collarbones in case of a crash and would help prevent road rash.

G0L0UD

After my most recent crash my gf went online and ordered me a pair of Domino crash series bibs. Apparently they have some sort of leather/suede/lycra mix in certain panels to prevent road rash, they feel like they would prevent a decent amount of road rash if I fell onto those particular panels but I have thankfully not field tested their protection level. Anyways it was raining at the race I went to yesterday so I wore them for the first time, I didn't really notice them at all, my only complaint about them is the suspender part of them is a little loose. So to answer your question, depending on how far it goes yes I'd wear a little added protection. Maybe the only other thing would be stronger shoulder material on jerseys since that is my other area I usually cut open.

saratoga

Probably not. Back to that whole risk/reward question.

How would armor plating or integrated padding protect your collar bone just out of curiosity? I raced MX for 10 years and can say there is plenty of protection via padding and chest/ elbow/ knee protectors and braces available for that sport, yet the clavicle still remains one of the most broken bones even in minor crashes.

If you stiff arm a fall, chances are it's getting broken.

J.Lockdown

Probably would if it could meet all those requirements.

One of the major reasons for the bone to be broken in minor crashes is the clavicle is actually a fairly easy bone to break. There is debated about how much force is actually needed to do so, but it is a lot lower of a number then you would think. Along with that just the position and span of the bone probally makes it difficult to protect.

waterrockets 

yes

grolby

You mean, would I wear armor if it had all of the advantages of body armor and none of the disadvantages? In that fantasy world, yes. Alas - no such place exists.

carpediemracing 

I've thought a little about this because I actually crashed and have a recent memory of what it's like to crash.

Keirin racers use padding, and they regularly crash, get back up, and keep racing.

I'd worry that padding would cause racers to be more aggressive. If the racing population knew that they could fall with relative impunity, there'd be a minority of racers who would take advantage of this. Okay, fine, crashes would "hurt less", but that's not what bike racing is about, at least not now.

There have been at least two different body armor systems marketed specifically for road riders. The worse one consisted of actual pads under regular clothing. I never tried it, so that's my answer on that. The pads weren't very big, and unless you looked closely at the racer, you wouldn't know it was there. My roommate/teammate at the time used them for testing purposes. He never fell while using them.

The better one was just shorts, with a double layer of fabric in high-probability road rash areas. This one was interesting, and I actually wore them a bit. They had a heavy weave outer layer of (I forget but it's the material they make panniers with...). Then an inner layer of plain lycra. The idea was that the outer, thicker layer would resist tearing, absorb some impact, and move against the "built in" base layer. The movement would prevent some road rash.

The concept worked relatively well. My roommate/teammate used them too, and actually helped the manufacturer develop them. They modified their double-panel area based on his road rash scars I fell a number of times on the thing when mountain biking, but never on the road. Ultimately the shorts were bad, but I'd wear something like that again if the rest of the shorts were good (padding, fit, etc). If there were jerseys with such panels in the shoulders, maybe elbows (like separate "elbow warmers"), I'd use them too. Definitely knickers and tights, since they need extra insulation anyway.

I think that impact resistance would be difficult. That requires transfer of substantial energy to some other object/s. I read somewhere it takes 8 pounds to break some arm bone, and that's not a lot of force. Usually the objects that absorb the impact are other body parts. With helmets (and even cars), manufacturers use Styrofoam to absorb impact. It would require a lot of material to absorb say shoulder/collarbone impacts. And the surrounding areas wouldn't be protected.

For example, with wrist and ankle guards, the weak joint becomes the strong one, and the impact force gets absorbed by the neighboring areas, the arm and leg. It's like putting a reinforcement on an extension cord end - now that the end is reinforced the cord will fray just beyond the guard. My brother, a "Masters" skater and a big believer in safety gear, snapped his lower leg (shin) bones cleanly when he landed just wrong. His ankle stuff (shoes, padding, whatever) protected his ankle well. Problem was that it just transferred the impact to his leg. You'll see this with ski boots too - you almost never break an ankle skiing because the ski boot protects you. But you break legs.

The reality is that there will be a tradeoff between bulk and effectiveness when dealing with impact resistance. For now, it seems unlikely that there's a system to protect bones. Well, other than the head bone

Ultimately, if there were a system that would prevent broken bones, was relatively invisible, and, say, lowered your insurance premiums, of course I'd use it. And so would the military, car racers, and all those other high risk folks.

cder

jwible

After crashing on motorcycles at 60 and 90mph on race tracks I would say hell yes. In both crashes I was unscathed as far as road rash goes. I'm thinking light high density foam for fitted over shoulders, shoulder blades, hips, elbows, ankles, knees would be worth while in a crit. Something similar to what the Keirin guys wear but with better airflow perhaps?

crispy010

Even if this supposed armor system did nothing about impact damage and broken bones, something that would reduce road rash I would definitely be interested in.

So my answer is yes.

ericm979

I'm not bothered much about road rash- it heals pretty easily. But having gone down face first and smashed in a bunch of teeth, I'd like a lightweight and well vented helmet that protected the face. It'd need a folding chin bar so one could eat and drink.

I'm not sure that useful armor could be made cool enough for hot weather racing, and I'd worry about chafing.

Doggus

Yes.

I've always wondered why bike racers don't at least wear some sort of armor around the joints areas. Road rash heals, but I saw a guy cut his arm open literally to the snow white bone underneath and he didn't even know it - yet. It ended his racing as he now has problems with that arm.

obra3

Thanks for the feedback. This is really interesting for me. I have a meeting with an apparel manufacturing group next week to come up with something to those specs. I've pretty much gotten sick of nursing road rash- and there's some on my shoulder right now that hasn't healed for about 3-4 weeks. (Plus I've got a penchant for getting nasty dark purple keloids that appear with the deeper road rash).

I do understand that piece about increasing aggressiveness but fortunately, we do have enforceable rules. But that's another discussion.

I do wonder about face protection sometimes- since I've seen a number of face-plant injuries.

jwible

I've seen an open face motorcycle helmet that has a bar much like the old kicker's helmet facemask that basically protects against a chin / face impact. The main difference is that MC helmets tend to be much more robust and more difficult to role off the head.

Check out the Bohn bodyguard system. It's designed to be worn under clothing and is form fitting. Something similar to what you're thinking about.

https://www.bohnarmor.com/

Oh, the helmet is the Schuberth J1 if you want to check out their implementation of face protection.

carpediemracing 

The abrasion resistant material is cordura. Just remembered.

cdr

ElJamoquio

I only need #1 and #2.

carpediemracing 

When I did a season of downhill skiing, I stopped because I fell relatively hard on icy, landing on my head/face. I was pretty banged up but essentially unhurt. However, I stopped for the day, and ended up never making it back to the slopes that year.

Back then helmets were just for kids, but shortly thereafter a bunch of famous people died from head injuries while skiing. However, I decided that if I went skiing again, I'd wear a full face helmet, and screw whatever people thought of me. I thought of different design requirements and decided that a bike helmet would probably work well, a BMX or a "downhill" helmet. Ultimately I never skied again, so I never got to do what I said I'd do, but apparently folks wear helmets when they ski, at least more so than a while ago.

I think it's possible to have a bigger helmet that protects the face, improves aerodynamics, and is reasonably ventilated. The heat/vent thing will come with time, just like hard shell helmets did. I think it'd take some serious rule changes to get them to fly, but if, say, USAC made face protection mandatory, it would drive helmet design. When USCF made ANSI approved helmets, we went from the Bell Biker to whatever we have now - huge difference.

I think the same thing for clothing with protection from abrasion and minor impacts. For a while I raced in high top mtb shoes to protect my ankle. I had a deep gouge in it (like I do now) and I didn't want to crash on it again. My mtb shoes were perfect for it so I used them.

cdr