"Those are theater shoes!"

[clutchslip]

Connie, I'm not wearing moto boots to down town WC to get food...it's just not practical to walk around in Daytonas for food...they're super uncomfortable and I don't ride like a moron on the street. Whoever said we justify things was dead on. I wear full gear when I'm going to be riding quickly, but for just moving from point A to point B, around town, I'll tie my laces tighter. Besides, we're geared up better than the moto cops!

Berto, wtf?
Besides their helmet, the boots and gloves are the only heavy duty thing that they wear. The boots are massive. As one who has had a ankle injury and having seen a very nasty foot injury, I hope you revisit your foot gear choice. I just know you can slide properly, and you do that with your boots, if possible.

As an aside, I actually don't think race boots are that great. They are more for comfort and flexibility and sliding. Stoner should never have broken his ankle at Indy in that crash. It cost him a chance at another 'ship.

CHP gear, unlike my current avi, which would be more stylish.

 

[Reli]

A good race boot has way more torsional resistance than cop boots.

 

[Reli]

Connie, I'm not wearing moto boots to down town WC to get food...it's just not practical to walk around in Daytonas for food...they're super uncomfortable and I don't ride like a moron on the street. Whoever said we justify things was dead on. I wear full gear when I'm going to be riding quickly, but for just moving from point A to point B, around town, I'll tie my laces tighter. Besides, we're geared up better than the moto cops!

Exactly. I honestly think most of the AGATT crowd doesn't run quick errands on their bike. If they did, they'd probably re-evaluate their choices.

 

[clutchslip]

A good race boot has way more torsional resistance than cop boots.

You have some evidence? Did I compare one to the other? Are you suggesting that Stoner with the number one on his bike was wearing shitty AlpineStars?

Exactly. I honestly think most of the AGATT crowd doesn't run quick errands on their bike. If they did, they'd probably re-evaluate their choices.

Maybe the re-evaluation should be the other way. There are plenty of semi-moto-boots these days. Even cowboy boots take less time than anything else and cover your flesh. I had a compound fractured ankle wearing top-drawer racing boots. Daytonas, as a matter of fact.

 

[ZCrow]

Exactly. I honestly think most of the AGATT crowd doesn't run quick errands on their bike. If they did, they'd probably re-evaluate their choices.

Depends, in my 20s/early 30s, if I was riding I always wore by 2 piece First Gear Stealth Leathers as well as boots, gloves and helmet. I was that motorcycle guy.

Today I require a little more flexibility in my dress.

You have some evidence? Did I compare one to the other? Are you suggesting that Stoner with the number one on his bike was wearing shitty AlpineStars?

Maybe the re-evaluation should be the other way. There are plenty of semi-moto-boots these days. Even cowboy boots take less time than anything else and cover your flesh. I had a compound fractured ankle wearing top-drawer racing boots. Daytonas, as a matter of fact.

Aplinestar bashing wagon much? Are you honestly suggesting that motorcycle cop boots provide more protection than Aplinestars Supertech-R Boots s do? Got a study for that one? Because that reads like hyperbole rather than a statement backed with some facts.

 

[Holeshot]

Berto, wtf?
Besides their helmet, the boots and gloves are the only heavy duty thing that they wear. The boots are massive.[/IMG]

Where's our Chippies at!!!

The boots are not great for lateral hits/ torsion that I've seen. Great for abrasion, etc, but what's weird is how there's no one on a bike that spends more time in traffic/ on the street than Motor officers and yet, look at how they dress. The lack of gear is a bit astonishing. So are Sneakers too, though...

I'd be willing to bet that the gloves most riders wear are below par for protection in a hand-down crash. Yet the glove is there...same for many of the quality of boots worn. Let's not kid ourselves Scotland: Much of the gear being produced/ worn these days is pretty terrible. It just looks the part.

I mean, do any of you guys educate a Bilt buyer why you don't want Bilt gloves?

I know the risks of not wearing full boots for a few mile jaunt. Of course I also have a pretty intimate familiarity with putting a bike on the ground. Back/ Hands are almost always the worst of the bunch. The other "of course", I'm not the typical street rider who solves every problem with the throttle. I've always liked the saying "there are two kinds of riders". It's always taken a racing environment for me to put a bike on the ground, period.

I feel like Lou in what I was about to say...

 

[Reli]

Cop boots are simple leather, nothing more. At most, they MIGHT have a hidden ankle armor piece, and a shin pad, IF they're lucky. But that's not impressive. You could get that kind of protection for only $80 from cheap-ass boots like Teknic, Frank Thomas, etc.

$400+ race boots like Daytonas and SIDI Vertebrae go a few steps beyond that. They have tons of hard pieces and are designed to resist lateral twists as well as toe box twists.

Just because some racer was injured in his race boots doesn't prove that race boots aren't superior.

 

[jpoppa]

yeah gear nazi, if i did run quick errands i would get a scooter and then yes more than likely it would be nice helmet, gloves, jacket, jeans and vans on feet. I live up in the hills by Grizzly Peak in Bezerkely so quick errands are not really quick, so when I get on the bike I get in the gear yo, otherwise I feel nekid.

 

[DReg350]

Sounds like few of you ride in 100-plus weather. All that gear nazi stuff goes away so you don't get a heat stroke and pass out while riding.

Naw. I'm always in gear regardless of temp. If it's 100+ I'll just make sure I've got a full Camel Back with me.

 

[ZCrow]

Sounds like few of you ride in 100-plus weather. All that gear nazi stuff goes away so you don't get a heat stroke and pass out while riding.

Nope. When I lived in Sacramento I rode in full leathers and gear all the time. The modification I made was to my behavior not my gear. I.E. I avoided riding on the city streets and stayed in doors as much as possible so must of my Summer riding was at dusk and evening.

 

[antidote]

Thought process: gear cant save me EVERY time, so EVERY time I will ride without gear.

Thats logical. Screw wearing seatbelts too. People still die in car accidents while wearing them. And its so uncomfortable on your shoulder that its pointless to fight those straps cause it might not even save you anyway.

Bilt aint the best but itll do a helluva lot better than your rough man hands will by themselves. Again. Gear isnt for your lack of skill, its for the other idiots on the road lack of skill.

 

[redtail]

Gear isnt for your lack of skill, its for the other idiots on the road lack of skill.

Agreed.

 

[Holeshot]

Agreed.

Agree/ Disagree: We see a considerable amount of riders here on BARF who put their bikes on the ground regularly from lack of skill/ lack of situational awareness. These riders are causing their own accidents regularly.

I believe a scaling back of gear means an equally scaled back riding intensity is needed.

 

[kelsodeez]

here in sacramento, i find myself being the nazier rather than the naziee.

people ride in flip flops, shorts, a t-shirt and a helmet and thats it. fuckin ridiculous

 

[mosquito]

... [W]hat item were you gear nazi'd on by a stranger that you felt was a bit over the top?

I'm pretty much ATGATT, *BUT* how protective the particular gear I choose changes, like I'll wear textile instead of leather if it's cooler and an exceedingly hot day where I'm going to be spending time *not* moving. I might even consider armored shoes instead of boots...

Back to the question though, for me *anything* a stranger says is over the top: I'm an adult, I'm making my own choices, etc etc, so it's none of their business and they don't have a right to presume that *I* am their business.

Friend or acquaintances? Yeah, totally different story.

If the *ahem* shoe is on the other foot? Yeah, I'm privately commenting on under-geared riders all of the time; the difference is that I'm not telling the riders my thoughts. I do have the thoughts, but I don't have the right to intrude upon others for their choices like that. (And, heck, I know that given the same circumstances, I know I can make similar choices that *look* like something I wouldn't like.)

 

[davidji]

Exactly. I honestly think most of the AGATT crowd doesn't run quick errands on their bike.

I do. It's as easy to put on moto pants as non-moto pants. If people wear jeans to run quick errands I don't see how that's about convenience (maybe it's about style?). Boots may take a little longer than for example theater shoes (whatever those are), but it's not a big deal.

Boots come before pants as far as protection from injury, and pants before jacket. I don't see the appeal of choosing only a jacket for a quick errand.

I get not going ATG when speeds are low. I just don't get that gear choice (jacket but no boots or moto pants).

 

[ilikefood]

I do. It's as easy to put on moto pants as non-moto pants. If people wear jeans to run quick errands I don't see how that's about convenience (maybe it's about style?).

Unless you sit around your house wearing just underwear, putting on moto pants is an inconvenience because you have to take off the pants you're wearing and put on moto pants. Or put moto pants on top of your regular pants. And when you get where you're going, you have to take off the moto pants and do something with them. Same thing with boots. I wear an Aerostich and huge boots when commuting because I have a 30-mile commute, but when I run short errands in SF where I live, I'm much more lightly dressed.

As I said earlier, protective gear choice is a trade off between convenience/fun vs. safety, the same way that vehicle choice (motorcycle vs. car) is a tradeoff between convenience/fun vs. safety. If we don't think that choosing a less safe vehicle is a stupid choice, why do so many of us think that choosing less safe gear is a stupid choice?

 

[antidote]

Unless you sit around your house wearing just underwear, putting on moto pants is an inconvenience because you have to take off the pants you're wearing and put on moto pants. Or put moto pants on top of your regular pants. And when you get where you're going, you have to take off the moto pants and do something with them. Same thing with boots. I wear an Aerostich and huge boots when commuting because I have a 30-mile commute, but when I run short errands in SF where I live, I'm much more lightly dressed.

As I said earlier, protective gear choice is a trade off between convenience/fun vs. safety, the same way that vehicle choice (motorcycle vs. car) is a tradeoff between convenience/fun vs. safety. If we don't think that choosing a less safe vehicle is a stupid choice, why do so many of us think that choosing less safe gear is a stupid choice?

Its called risk mitigation. You are already playing Russian roulette by motorcycling (living life...etc)....do you want 1, 2 or all 6 chambers loaded?

 

[Reli]

Or put moto pants on top of your regular pants.

And hope your regular pants don't get wrinkled. Which they will unless they're jeans. So to avoid wrinkles you're basically packing your nice pants in your backpack or case, and changing at work. I could see doing that if work was 30+ minutes away, but if not, I just wear boots.

 

[davidji]

And when you get where you're going, you have to take off the moto pants and do something with them.

No I really don't. In case you missed what I was replying to it was about quick errands. Unless those quick errands are at a nude beach the moto pants can stay.

And I'm not usually sitting around the house in jeans. I could put those on to take the car, or moto pants to take the bike. I can even put on moto jeans to take the bike if I want. So many choices...