Back Protector Test - Ride! June, 2008

[COWBOY]

Here is some empirical data from the recent (June 2008) issue of Ride! magazine.

Someone asked for back protector recommendations a while back and asked why others and I felt so strongly about the Forcefield protectors.  Here's their review of the test winner (tied with 2 others but won on price UK80 v. UK120)

"Road testers found the Forcefield extremely reassuring and comfortable because it moulds to the contours of your back as it gathers heat escaping the body and feels as if it would absorb impacts well.  The feeling is supported by the protection tests, with high levels of impact absorption, achieved consistently across the protective area with no weak areas.  Because of it is relatively slim, getting leathers over it is easy too.  The average force transfer across the seven impacts was 5.6kN comfortably under the 9kN limit for Europe's higher Level 2 standard."

The score is comprised of 2 Areas : Protection and Road Test.  Here's how they performed the test (direct quote from the article).

"It's fairly obvious what a back protector should do - absorb the force of an impact.  There are European safety standards on how much force it should absorb and we have adopted a similar procedure for our testing.

Each protector was placed over an anvil containing sensors that measure how much force is transmitted to it.  A striker is dropped onto the protector from a pre-determined height and the sensors in the anvil record how much force is transmitted through it.  We impacted each protector seven times, in five predetermined positions and in two positions identified by the tester as possibly weaker than the remainder of the protector.

There are two levels of performance in the European standard, with an 18kN or less force transfer qualifying as level 1, and (better) protectors transferring 9kN or less being rated as level 2.  we scored protectors out of 20 on a sliding scale.  We've included the  average force transfer figure in the text relating to each product.

But impact absorption is only part of the stroy as it has to be practical and comfortable for use.  If it isn't, the rider won't wear it.  To check its usefulness on the bike, we put hundreds of miles on each back protector on the road and also on the track, with a testing session at Rockingham circuit.  Each tester was asked to comment on the protector's comfort, and note any particular problems.  These assessments contribute to the road testing element of the scores, with each protector scored out of then."

Here is the list with overall score, breakdown and avg force transfer (less is better).

1.   Forcefield Pro L2    Prot.  20/20  RT 9/10 Total 29/30  5.6kN  TEST WINNER
1.   Halverssons Track  Prot.  20/20  RT 9/10  Total 29/30  5.7kN (made by Forcefield for Halverssons) RECOMMENDED
1.   Held Recia/Salvo    Prot.  20/20  RT 9/10 Total 29/30  4.9kN  RECOMMENDED
4.   Oxford Max Prote   Prot.  18/20  RT 9/10 Total 27/30  8.6kN
5.   BMW Back Prot 2   Prot.  14/20  RT 7/10 Total 21/30  9.1kN
6.   Alpinestars Bionic   Prot.  12/20  RT 8/10 Total 20/30  10.8kN
7.   Knox Gilet Fastbck  Prot.  12/20  RT 7/10 Total 19/30  10.6kN
7.   Knox Contour        Prot.  12/20  RT 7/10 Total 19/30  10.8kN
9.   Knox Ricochet       Prot.  12/20  RT 6/10 Total 18/30  10.4kN
10. Knox Stowaway     Prot.  10/20  RT 7/10 Total 17/30  17.6kN
10. Hein Gericke HiPro Prot.  10/20  RT 7/10 Total 17/30  11.2kN
10. Held Solid             Prot.  10/20  RT 7/10 Total 17/30  10.5kN
10. Dainese Wave        Prot.  8/20   RT 9/10 Total 17/30  13.8kN

Some special notes on 2 specific models:

Held Recia/Salvo "Average force transfer, at 4.9kN, was lower than the Forcefield protector, but it misses the Best Buy triangle because of the additional price.  The Recia is the womens model (UK 115), but the Salvo is the men's version and costs UK120."

The Dainese "The protective material was too narrow in the scapular region when compared t the recommendations for the size givn on the label, the average force transfer was 13.8kN, but one impact point recorded 27kN, which is higher than would be allowed in a full CE test."

[DoubleEagle]

Thanks for that very informative bit of information. No excuse now for someone not to get and wear a back protector.

I'm very surprised that the Dainese did so poorly. I have the Dainese and the BMW and I would have never thought the Dainese would score that low from my own personal experience . I knew the BMW met the Level 2 Protection, that was the reason I bought it.

[sbrguy]

that held salvo looks good too bad you can't find anyplace in the US to buy the thing looks like it has really great shoulderblad protection and is in the form of a vest style carriage to put on.

[ducwrx]

Thanks for the write up, it's been on my to do list. Looks like I'll get the rebranded Tpro by Joe Rocket.

[Spider]

Thanks for the write up, it's been on my to do list. Looks like I'll get the rebranded Tpro by Joe Rocket.

really? got a link?

I'm impressed with my Tpro - but am waiting to see what happens in Summer (I'm down under)

[Palooka]

Forcefield has a PDF of RIDE's review on their website. Here's the link:

http://www.forcefieldbodyarmour.co.uk/reviews/Ride_June_2008_Best_Buy_Back_Protector.pdf

I'm told they are pretty good but I'm also told they keep you nice and warm. I'll get one when they make a more vented version but for now I'll stick to my Dainese Wave for my sub-tropical climate.

Cheers
Palooka

[RodeoClown]

Thanks for the info

This helps me narrow it down pretty easy!

[Popeye the Sailor]

I wish they would've tested a helimot one.