Resend my activation email : Register : Log in 
BCF: Bike Chat Forums


All bike gear to be CE labelled from 2018

Reply to topic
Bike Chat Forums Index -> Biking News & Rumours Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next
View previous topic : View next topic  
Author Message

MCN
World Chat Champion



Joined: 22 Jul 2015
Karma :

PostPosted: 13:47 - 26 Apr 2018    Post subject: Reply with quote

Rogerborg wrote:
Also:
https://www.bennetts.co.uk/bikesocial/news-and-views/features/product/ce-motorcycle-clothing-hood-motorcycle-jeans

tl;dr version - Euro diktat results in manufacturing and jobs being moved out of Europe to China. Thanks, Brussels.



Off Topic. Tut Tut

If we all move to China is saves a world of hassle. 😂
____________________
Disclaimer: The comments above may be predicted text and not necessarily the opinion of MCN.
 Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail You must be logged in to rate posts

Londoner2015
Trackday Trickster



Joined: 09 Nov 2015
Karma :

PostPosted: 15:12 - 26 Apr 2018    Post subject: Reply with quote

Back to my question, I don’t understand why this company would have been prevented from selling non-CE jeans. Was it purely a marketing decision (all competitors will make CE jean, we should as well) or would Trading Standards or whatever the entity is called have come down hard on them? I mean, as long as you make it clear the jeans jacket etc are not CE, there’s no deception of the client – what’s the problem? This is what I don’t get.

As for the China and EU comment:
This Hood Jeans guy sounds like a nice chap but for all I know he could be full of ****. Let’s assume he’s not; if we believe him, he moved production to China not to save money by having little toddlers work for him in inhumane conditions, but because his UK manufacturers couldn’t keep up with the pace and level of quality that he now requires. The decision to move to China – again. If we are to believe this guy – has nothing to do with greed or Bruxelles, and all to do with the complacency and lack of competitiveness of British industry.

Also, I find it rather ironic that Brits criticise the EU for CE motorcycle clothing standards, which are, after all, derived from the Cambridge standards, tested on the Cambridge machine. Last I checked, Cambridge was not in Belgium, but this country has had enough of experts innit, so who am I to know for sure?

This is similar to foaming-at-the-mouth Brexiters who criticicse the Europen Convention on Human Rights, unaware that it was derived from the English Bill of Rights!!!

But no surprises here, we live in the age of ignorance and fake news.
 Back to top
View user's profile Send private message You must be logged in to rate posts

Rogerborg
nimbA



Joined: 26 Oct 2010
Karma :

PostPosted: 15:27 - 26 Apr 2018    Post subject: Reply with quote

Londoner2015 wrote:
The decision to move to China – again. If we are to believe this guy – has nothing to do with greed or Bruxelles

If you read his words, it's got everything to do with Brussels. They were quite happily making decent quality gear in the UK, until Brussels mandated CE testing. As a direct result of that, Hood found it uneconomical to continue construction in the UK.


Londoner2015 wrote:
Also, I find it rather ironic that Brits criticise the EU for CE motorcycle clothing standards

I'm all for clear labelling. It's compulsion that irks me.

This is the thin end of the slippery slope to mandated usage of All The CE Gear, All The Time.

Oh, and I confidently predict that it'll lead to reduced payouts for spazzed bikers unless we're CE labelled out the wazoo.


Londoner2015 wrote:
This is similar to foaming-at-the-mouth Brexiters who criticicse the Europen Convention on Human Rights

Perhaps because we've actually read it, and our problems aren't with the protection in it, but the exceptions to those protections.

Londoner2015 wrote:
unaware that it was derived from the English Bill of Rights!!!

In the sense that they both have the word "Rights" in them, that's true.

It's a pity that the ECHR didn't re-assert the right of Protestants to bear arms, sadly. Sad
____________________
Biking is 1/20th as dangerous as horse riding.
GONE: HN125-8, LF-250B, GPz 305, GPZ 500S, Burgman 400 // RIDING: F650GS (800 twin), Royal Enfield Bullet Electra 500 AVL, Ninja 250R because racebike
 Back to top
View user's profile Send private message You must be logged in to rate posts

MCN
World Chat Champion



Joined: 22 Jul 2015
Karma :

PostPosted: 16:35 - 26 Apr 2018    Post subject: Reply with quote

They were quite happily making bike gear until there was a need for armour to be tested.

They then used that sticker and small print to market their wares as 'protection'.

Riding on the back of the Armour Certification.

Sort of misleading if you do not know what you are looking at. Which brings us back to a need for some kind of legislation for people to trust.

But we can shoot holes in the level of 'protection' offered by CE inspection too if required.

The standards for bike security has been well known to be easily overcome or circumvented. Where manufacturers submit some excellent goods for inspection and test and then sell many sub-excellent items in the day to day normal production run.

The item was very enlightening and there is not much fog around it if you read "Paul Varnsverry, technical director of PVA-PPE Group' wrote.
(I'm on mobile so cannot be arsed posting all the details Embarassed )

The worry is if Gov.com go Full regard and enforce a need for bikers to wear PEE.
It could happen as politicians are idiots.
But it is probably going to be difficult to write the law.
Road users include pedestrians, cyclists, horse-people and cnuts steering Agricultural equipment/s.
If the rule were applied to bikers then logic suggests it should apply to all said users.

Just watch local/regional council road maintenance continue as they are doing and there will be no roads network to worry about before The CE Hammer falls I 2019.

Maybe the condition of our roads will encourage bikers to wear more protective gear. Shrapnel proof leg protectors.
____________________
Disclaimer: The comments above may be predicted text and not necessarily the opinion of MCN.
 Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail You must be logged in to rate posts

Londoner2015
Trackday Trickster



Joined: 09 Nov 2015
Karma :

PostPosted: 16:46 - 26 Apr 2018    Post subject: Reply with quote

Rogerborg wrote:

If you read his words, it's got everything to do with Brussels. They were quite happily making decent quality gear in the UK, until Brussels mandated CE testing. As a direct result of that, Hood found it uneconomical to continue construction in the UK.

No, that’s not exactly what he’s saying. In the text he says:

“It’s hard to say, but the build quality is even better than we’ve been able to do in the past 20 years.”

And in the comments below (oddly, I see the comments from my mobile but not from my PC):

“because of our success we outstripped the capabilities of our UK suppliers and found quality / consistency was getting harder to keep at a level we demanded.[…]The quality [in China] […] much higher than what we have been able to achieve in the UK over the last few years”

Of course he could be full of **** and it could all boil down to the cheap savings of a sweatswhop, but that’s not what he’s saying.

Rogerborg wrote:

I'm all for clear labelling. It's compulsion that irks me.

For once, we agree. That’s why I don’t understand why they had to change their production and why Trading Standards could have shut them down. As long as you make it clear your product does not meet the new CE standards, what’s the issue? You’re being transparent, you’re not deceiving any one. Does any one know the answer?

Rogerborg wrote:

Londoner2015 wrote:
This is similar to foaming-at-the-mouth Brexiters who criticicse the Europen Convention on Human Rights

Perhaps because we've actually read it, and our problems aren't with the protection in it, but the exceptions to those protections.

Such as? I have never had the honour of an answer to this question, just like the Gods have never heard my prayers for an answer to the question of what EU laws are so wrong and hated that you can’t wait to get rid of them. Not. One. Answer.
I mean, it’s one thing to say that the EU is not perfect (lots of stuff about UK laws and bureaucracy is stupid and nonsensical, too…), quite another to say it all sucks so much that it warrants leaving the world’s largest trading block to jump into the void.

Rogerborg wrote:

Londoner2015 wrote:
unaware that it was derived from the English Bill of Rights!!!

In the sense that they both have the word "Rights" in them, that's true.

No, there are a few more details you conveniently forgot: the European Convention of Human Rights was first proposed by Churchill and drafted mostly by British lawyers, so, no, the connection to the UK goes a bit deeper than what you implied. Oh, wait, maybe Churchill was a Belgian bureaucrat, right?
 Back to top
View user's profile Send private message You must be logged in to rate posts

Rogerborg
nimbA



Joined: 26 Oct 2010
Karma :

PostPosted: 17:38 - 26 Apr 2018    Post subject: Reply with quote

Thread derailment, choo chooooo.

Londoner2015 wrote:
Such as [what exceptions in the ECHR]

2. Everyone's right to life shall be protected by law. No one shall be deprived of his life intentionally save in the execution of a sentence of a court following his conviction of a crime for which this penalty is provided by law.

4. No one shall be required to perform forced or compulsory labour. For the purpose of this article the term "forced or compulsory labour" shall not include any any work or service which forms part of normal civic obligations.

7. No one shall be held guilty of any criminal offence on account of any act or omission which did not constitute a criminal offence under national or international law at the time when it was committed. Nor shall a heavier penalty be imposed than the one that was applicable at the time the criminal offence was committed. This article shall not prejudice the trial and punishment of any person for any act or omission which, at the time when it was committed, was criminal according to the general principles of law recognised by civilised nations.

8. Everyone has the right to respect for his private and family life, his home and his correspondence. There shall be no interference by a public authority with the exercise of this right except such as is in accordance with the law and is necessary in a democratic society in the interests of national security, public safety or the economic well-being of the country, for the prevention of disorder or crime, for the protection of health or morals, or for the protection of the rights and freedoms of others.

9. Freedom to manifest one's religion or beliefs shall be subject only to such limitations as are prescribed by law and are necessary in a democratic society in the interests of public safety, for the protection of public order, health or morals, or for the protection of the rights and freedoms of others.

10. Everyone has the right to freedom of expression. This right shall include freedom to hold opinions and to receive and impart information and ideas without interference by public authority and regardless of frontiers. The exercise of these freedoms, since it carries with it duties and responsibilities, may be subject to such formalities, conditions, restrictions or penalties as are prescribed by law and are necessary in a democratic society, in the interests of national security, territorial integrity or public safety, for the prevention of disorder or crime, for the protection of health or morals, for the protection of the reputation or rights of others, for preventing the disclosure of information received in confidence, or for maintaining the authority and impartiality of the judiciary.

11. Everyone has the right to freedom of peaceful assembly and to freedom of association with others, including the right to form and to join trade unions for the protection of his interests. No restrictions shall be placed on the exercise of these rights other than such as are prescribed by law and are necessary in a democratic society in the interests of national security or public safety, for the prevention of disorder or crime, for the protection of health or morals or for the protection of the rights and freedoms of others. This article shall not prevent the imposition of lawful restrictions on the exercise of these rights by members of the armed forces, of the police or of the administration of the State.

They keep saying "right". I do not think that word means what they think that it means.

We have rights, unless the State says that we don't.




Bear in mind that the EU thinks that water doesn't prevent dehydration.

Yes, it really does think that.

It took 3 years for paid Eurocrats Carlo Agostoni, Jean‐Louis Bresson, Susan Fairweather‐Tait, Albert Flynn, Ines Golly, Hannu Korhonen, Pagona Lagiou, Martinus Løvik, Rosangela Marchelli, Ambroise Martin, Bevan Moseley, Monika Neuhäuser‐Berthold, Hildegard Przyrembel, Seppo Salminen, Yolanda Sanz, Sean (J.J.) Strain, Stephan Strobel, Inge Tetens, Daniel Tomé, Hendrik van Loveren and Hans Verhagen to come to that conclusion, troughing expenses all the way.

So my conclusion is that the whole lot of them can take their CE labelling and shove them up up their dehydrated diktats.
____________________
Biking is 1/20th as dangerous as horse riding.
GONE: HN125-8, LF-250B, GPz 305, GPZ 500S, Burgman 400 // RIDING: F650GS (800 twin), Royal Enfield Bullet Electra 500 AVL, Ninja 250R because racebike
 Back to top
View user's profile Send private message You must be logged in to rate posts

Londoner2015
Trackday Trickster



Joined: 09 Nov 2015
Karma :

PostPosted: 18:01 - 26 Apr 2018    Post subject: Reply with quote

It all sounds quite reasonable, to be fair. Maybe object to the possibility of a capital sentence? Maybe limit it only to treason by the military? Either way, a rather moot point as capital punishment hasn’t existed in Europe for a while.

The right to free speech is, understandably, regulated differently in different countries.

You don’t like the current wording, but what is the alternative? Can you think of a single, all-encompassing formula? Or of something that can possibly be so clear-cut that it won’t ever be open to the slightest interpretation. I can’t. It’s never black and white. If a preacher starts screaming in the middle of the street: “gays are sinners and will burn in hell” is that free speech or hate speech and harassment? I mention this because the Scottish police arrested an American who was doing just that a while ago!

You want stories of bureaucratic idiocy? How about the story of that one country that denied a residency permit to children of legally settled aliens because the children did not have enough proofs of address in their names and couldn't therefore prove that they had, in fact, lived with their parents? Do you know what country it was? This one!

You made a point about dehydration. So what? You want to leave the world’s largest trading block without a clear alternative… because some EU bureaucrats have done something stupid? What makes you think our bureaucracy is immune? Do you want a list of all the British oddities? A council near Devon prevented residents from putting up decorations outside their homes for health & safety
https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/742536/Council-ban-locals-hanging-Christmas-decorations-health-safety-East-Devon
Want more stories? https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/260847/elf-safety-map-251113.pdf

Back to the original topic: maybe it’s just me being thick, but I still fail to understand why a manufacturer can’t just keep producing the same products as before, as long as it shouts from the rooftop that it doesn’t meet the new CE standards and therefore as long as there is no deception of the consumers.
 Back to top
View user's profile Send private message You must be logged in to rate posts

MCN
World Chat Champion



Joined: 22 Jul 2015
Karma :

PostPosted: 18:30 - 26 Apr 2018    Post subject: Reply with quote

Did you read the article from Paul Varnsverry?

That explains your question as to why the cannot just continue to make their CE products.

They only used CE armour. But put a big sticker in the garment about that. They specifically avoided claiming the rest of the garment is CE by adding a disclaimer.

It was misleading. It still is misleading as people do not read the facts.
Save my spelling and read the article.
____________________
Disclaimer: The comments above may be predicted text and not necessarily the opinion of MCN.
 Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail You must be logged in to rate posts

Londoner2015
Trackday Trickster



Joined: 09 Nov 2015
Karma :

PostPosted: 18:41 - 26 Apr 2018    Post subject: Reply with quote

I did read the article, but the question remains the same.
Can a manufacturer not replace the label with a bigger one saying : the halfwits buying these products should know that the protectors are CE but the garment is not and therefore the garment is NOT a PPE protective CE approved whatever?
 Back to top
View user's profile Send private message You must be logged in to rate posts

t121anf
World Chat Champion



Joined: 23 Feb 2007
Karma :

PostPosted: 19:59 - 26 Apr 2018    Post subject: Reply with quote

So being in the market for some new leathers do I go for new CE approved ones or non-CE ones?

Looking at Alpinestars website very few of their listed suits are fully CE.

Fortunate I quite like the full CE ones.

Ignoring price and end of non-CE sales, what’s the recommendation?
 Back to top
View user's profile Send private message You must be logged in to rate posts

MCN
World Chat Champion



Joined: 22 Jul 2015
Karma :

PostPosted: 20:11 - 26 Apr 2018    Post subject: Reply with quote

Londoner2015 wrote:
I did read the article, but the question remains the same.
Can a manufacturer not replace the label with a bigger one saying : the halfwits buying these products should know that the protectors are CE but the garment is not and therefore the garment is NOT a PPE protective CE approved whatever?


No. Simple answer.

Yes almost if the equipment is sold as waterproof garment.

https://www.bennetts.co.uk/bikesocial/news-and-views/features/product/motorcycle-clothing-the-ce-approval-law-explained

The loopholes have been closed.

Read the article in that link where it says all garments sold as motorcycle clothing must be CE.

If you buy a fashion garment it doesn't need CE. But it cannot be sold as motorcycle garment.

There is hardly any grey.

Look forward to the bargains.

Once you own it you can wear it mowing the lawn, at a swingers event or on a motorbike.
Until the build up a case for mandatory CE for riding a motorbike.
____________________
Disclaimer: The comments above may be predicted text and not necessarily the opinion of MCN.
 Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail You must be logged in to rate posts

Ste
Not Work Safe



Joined: 01 Sep 2002
Karma :

PostPosted: 20:11 - 26 Apr 2018    Post subject: Reply with quote

MCN wrote:
mowing the lawn, at a swingers event

Wub
 Back to top
View user's profile Send private message You must be logged in to rate posts

Londoner2015
Trackday Trickster



Joined: 09 Nov 2015
Karma :

PostPosted: 20:31 - 26 Apr 2018    Post subject: Reply with quote

The key os it cannot be sold as motorcycle clothing. What, other than marketing, is to stop a manufacturer from putting up huge labels that say : this is not motorcycle clothing as it's not PPE etc etc.
 Back to top
View user's profile Send private message You must be logged in to rate posts

MCN
World Chat Champion



Joined: 22 Jul 2015
Karma :

PostPosted: 20:57 - 26 Apr 2018    Post subject: Reply with quote

Londoner2015 wrote:
The key os it cannot be sold as motorcycle clothing. What, other than marketing, is to stop a manufacturer from putting up huge labels that say : this is not motorcycle clothing as it's not PPE etc etc.


Nothing.

It just cannot be sold as motorcycle gear as it hasn't been certified to Comply with the laws regarding PPE.

But who wants to buy gear that is not tested?

Unless you are satisfied the gear will offer the protection you think is good enough.
____________________
Disclaimer: The comments above may be predicted text and not necessarily the opinion of MCN.
 Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail You must be logged in to rate posts

Rogerborg
nimbA



Joined: 26 Oct 2010
Karma :

PostPosted: 08:08 - 27 Apr 2018    Post subject: Reply with quote

MCN wrote:
But who wants to buy gear that is not tested?

Who wants to have the choice removed?

Serfs, that's who.
____________________
Biking is 1/20th as dangerous as horse riding.
GONE: HN125-8, LF-250B, GPz 305, GPZ 500S, Burgman 400 // RIDING: F650GS (800 twin), Royal Enfield Bullet Electra 500 AVL, Ninja 250R because racebike
 Back to top
View user's profile Send private message You must be logged in to rate posts

grr666
World Chat Champion



Joined: 16 Jun 2014
Karma :

PostPosted: 09:13 - 27 Apr 2018    Post subject: Reply with quote

I bought some very high spec Kangaroo leather palmed summer gloves last week. Kevlar reinforced, Knox scaphoid
armour sliders to palms, triple velcro fastenings, knuckle guard, memory foam lined knuckle cup, finger and wrist
armour, the lot. No visible CE markings though, so they must be shit then. Rolling Eyes

I did also buy some cold weather gloves as they were a bit of a cheeky snipe on ebay and they have some massive
rubber tag with CE proudly emblazoned on it on one of the gloves.But those ones are 'Bering' gloves and they're French
aren't they? Once again it's all really just kicking the can down the road as usual. They can't keep people from using
their phones at the wheel or taxi drivers from grooming 1000's of kids in broad daylight, so nobody in the foreseeable
future is going to be stopping me to make sure I have CE approved kevlar long johns or have the 'right' kind of
armour in my shoulders either. Besides, if I am forced to buy and wear XY and Z then the insurers will have to
insure XY and Z as well as it will surely carry a higher price, this will just put claims up when you're draped in two
grands worth of Rukka, Sidi and Arai as that will need replaced as well as 'single use' protective items. Even if I'm on
500 quids worth of CG125 at the time. Laughing They will soon tire of paying out more for ruined kit than they have to for most
frequently crashed, L plated small capacity bikes.

But. Who will check when gear is past its service life? Who will perform these inspections, is a broken zip a deal
breaker? What about a slightly unstitched velcro? Does that impact upon the garments effectiveness? How? Says who?

Just wear the one thing you have to and whatever you want for the rest of it. Enjoy the liberty while you have it.
____________________
Currently enjoying products from Ford, Suzuki and Yamaha
Ste wrote: Avatars are fine, it's signatures that need turning off. Thumbs Up
 Back to top
View user's profile Send private message You must be logged in to rate posts

Evil Hans
World Chat Champion



Joined: 08 Nov 2015
Karma :

PostPosted: 12:36 - 27 Apr 2018    Post subject: Reply with quote

grr666 wrote:
Enjoy the liberty while you have it.


Amen to that! Thumbs Up
____________________
Suzuki GSF600S K4. And it's Blue.
 Back to top
View user's profile Send private message You must be logged in to rate posts

MCN
World Chat Champion



Joined: 22 Jul 2015
Karma :

PostPosted: 13:06 - 27 Apr 2018    Post subject: Reply with quote

Rogerborg wrote:
MCN wrote:
But who wants to buy gear that is not tested?

Who wants to have the choice removed?

Serfs, that's who.


Awww... not you too.. Shocked

There is still a choice.

Buy stuff that is not sold as bike gear if you desire.

Until CE must be worn when riding a bike becomes law the choice is still wide open.

You can still buy Arse-less chaps and fring-ed/Tassled Jaikits as is your taste.

Truthfully, do you wear Levis and and duffle coat as bike gear?

I personally only wear abrasion/cut resistant double stitched clothing with armour in.

I know every time I've had an uncontrolled stop on a motorboke the gear has saved me a trip to A&E or weeks off work. Very Happy

But let folk do what they like.

Doing stupid is 2nd nature to some.
____________________
Disclaimer: The comments above may be predicted text and not necessarily the opinion of MCN.
 Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail You must be logged in to rate posts

Rogerborg
nimbA



Joined: 26 Oct 2010
Karma :

PostPosted: 13:56 - 27 Apr 2018    Post subject: Reply with quote

MCN wrote:
Truthfully, do you wear Levis and and duffle coat as bike gear?

I wear (very nearly) all the gear (very nearly) all the time.

None of it is CE certified though, apart from the armour inserts.


MCN wrote:
I know every time I've had an uncontrolled stop on a motorboke the gear has saved me a trip to A&E or weeks off work. Very Happy

Me too, although I've had one, at about 5mph. Thus my issue with being forced into a kangaroo peel because you sportists like to birl yourself off into the geography at best-lap-time speeds.

Mandating the sale of CE gimp suits is the next step towards mandating their use.
____________________
Biking is 1/20th as dangerous as horse riding.
GONE: HN125-8, LF-250B, GPz 305, GPZ 500S, Burgman 400 // RIDING: F650GS (800 twin), Royal Enfield Bullet Electra 500 AVL, Ninja 250R because racebike
 Back to top
View user's profile Send private message You must be logged in to rate posts

Londoner2015
Trackday Trickster



Joined: 09 Nov 2015
Karma :

PostPosted: 14:09 - 27 Apr 2018    Post subject: Reply with quote

I fear that choice will be reduced, in the sense that now a poor Deliveroo rider making less than minimum wage has the choice to buy a dirt cheap RST Oxford or whatever, which is not kangaroo leather, but is still better than non-bike gear (eg it has protectors and Cordura instead of bog-standard cotton). This option will be gone soon, so he'll have to choose between non-protective non-bike clobber and presumably more expensive CE gear.

Or maybe I have got it all wrong, since I see more top-of-the-range Rukka stuff being worn by couriers than by middle-age executives sitting still in traffic on their mid-life crisis GS with adventure panniers

I am lucky enough that I can afford relatively expensive gear so for me, personally, not much should change - methinks.

I'm no expert here, but my 2cents is that the key reason the previous standards failed is that they were too tough to meet; Spidi and Clover did make CE gear, but it got discontinued because it was expensive and didn't sell well AFAIK. I don't think consumers are necessarily opposed to paying a bit more for the certainty that gear meets a certain standard; if you look at he biking jeans market, there's been a clear focus over the last 4-5 years on jeans meeting the old CE standards, or at least on slide times as per the old CE standard being used as a major selling point.
 Back to top
View user's profile Send private message You must be logged in to rate posts

Rogerborg
nimbA



Joined: 26 Oct 2010
Karma :

PostPosted: 14:40 - 27 Apr 2018    Post subject: Reply with quote

It doesn't have to break the bank. Aldi had a CE (substance as well as armour) jacket and trousers a couple of years back for £80 and £60 respectively:

https://www.motorcyclenews.com/product-reviews/leathers-jackets-suits/2015/march/aldi-textile-bike-jacket-and-jeans/

However, that then sets the bar for the minimum cost for gear, and everything else scales up from there.

Like in Scotchland, where we're just about to introduce minimum alcohol pricing. That means the cheapest pre-teen date cider will shoot up to 50p a unit, and everything else will scale up from there.

Also, J&S ratted out to the ASA for still marketing their non-CE gear as motorcycle wear. Whistle
____________________
Biking is 1/20th as dangerous as horse riding.
GONE: HN125-8, LF-250B, GPz 305, GPZ 500S, Burgman 400 // RIDING: F650GS (800 twin), Royal Enfield Bullet Electra 500 AVL, Ninja 250R because racebike
 Back to top
View user's profile Send private message You must be logged in to rate posts

Londoner2015
Trackday Trickster



Joined: 09 Nov 2015
Karma :

PostPosted: 14:56 - 27 Apr 2018    Post subject: Reply with quote

But how wearable is the Aldi CE stuff in the even mild British summer? The countries with the most riders are also the warmest ones (Italy, Spain, France). The Aldi Suit might work for 5-7 months a year in the UK. It's unlikely to work for more than 3 months a year in those countries.
 Back to top
View user's profile Send private message You must be logged in to rate posts

Rogerborg
nimbA



Joined: 26 Oct 2010
Karma :

PostPosted: 15:28 - 27 Apr 2018    Post subject: Reply with quote

Sure, but in the hot sweaty countries (plus Germoney), they just laugh off Euro diktats.

It's only dafties like us that actually care about them.


(J & S now ratted out to Citz Advice / Trading Standards)
____________________
Biking is 1/20th as dangerous as horse riding.
GONE: HN125-8, LF-250B, GPz 305, GPZ 500S, Burgman 400 // RIDING: F650GS (800 twin), Royal Enfield Bullet Electra 500 AVL, Ninja 250R because racebike
 Back to top
View user's profile Send private message You must be logged in to rate posts

MCN
World Chat Champion



Joined: 22 Jul 2015
Karma :

PostPosted: 20:32 - 27 Apr 2018    Post subject: Reply with quote

Londoner2015 wrote:
I fear that choice will be reduced, in the sense that now a poor Deliveroo rider making less than minimum wage has the choice to buy a dirt cheap RST Oxford or whatever, which is not kangaroo leather, but is still better than non-bike gear (eg it has protectors and Cordura instead of bog-standard cotton). This option will be gone soon, so he'll have to choose between non-protective non-bike clobber and presumably more expensive CE gear.

Or maybe I have got it all wrong, since I see more top-of-the-range Rukka stuff being worn by couriers than by middle-age executives sitting still in traffic on their mid-life crisis GS with adventure panniers

I am lucky enough that I can afford relatively expensive gear so for me, personally, not much should change - methinks.

I'm no expert here, but my 2cents is that the key reason the previous standards failed is that they were too tough to meet; Spidi and Clover did make CE gear, but it got discontinued because it was expensive and didn't sell well AFAIK. I don't think consumers are necessarily opposed to paying a bit more for the certainty that gear meets a certain standard; if you look at he biking jeans market, there's been a clear focus over the last 4-5 years on jeans meeting the old CE standards, or at least on slide times as per the old CE standard being used as a major selling point.


The difficulty here is reading all gear worn has to be bike gear and therefore must be CE.

That is not what the new rule is saying.

It is only saying gear 'sold as bike gear' must be CE.

You can still wear your bike-show bought leathers and denies and synthetic gear.

It just cannot be sold as bike gear.

Coz it is at a bike-show won't mean it is bike gear either.

And same if online or high street.

Bike shops all sell gear that is not CE.

This is what was said that article Rogerborg linked to.

I do not think legislation that you must wear CE to ride a bike will happen for a long long time.

It has taken years to get the rules this far.

The manufacturers profit from dodging the rules.
And are pulling the Kevlar over our eyes.

Most 'decent' bike gear will pass CE.

It's the cheap shite that needs to be washed out of the system.

I need new leather troos as mine are over ten years old.

I am sure they won't survive another spill before the stitching fails.

That would be something to legislate on too. Worn gear. 😂
____________________
Disclaimer: The comments above may be predicted text and not necessarily the opinion of MCN.
 Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail You must be logged in to rate posts

Ste
Not Work Safe



Joined: 01 Sep 2002
Karma :

PostPosted: 20:37 - 27 Apr 2018    Post subject: Reply with quote

MCN wrote:
And are pulling the Kevlar over our eyes.

Hand

It's not genuine Kevlar, it's some cheap mix of similar materials and there are just patches of it on your knees and hips rather than the whole garment being made from it.

Those people are going to have to stop selling it as motorcycle gear and instead start flogging it as Dagmar-esq dungeon gear. Shifty
 Back to top
View user's profile Send private message You must be logged in to rate posts
Display posts from previous:   

Post new topic   Reply to topic    Bike Chat Forums Index -> Biking News & Rumours All times are GMT + 1 Hour
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next
Page 2 of 3

 
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You cannot download files in this forum

Read the Terms of Use! - Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group
 

Debug Mode: ON - Server: discovery (www) - Page Generation Time: 0.24 Sec - Server Load: 1.68 - MySQL Queries: 16 - CDN Objects: 53 - Page Size: 158.03 Kb