Best Overall Motorcycle Jacket

[Liveinstyle33]

Sorry i missed the last question, i mean i don't rate the Aero patterns particularly high...
I find them uncomfortable to live with, the four Aeros i have are the most uncomfortable to live with jackets i own.
To me they hang on the neck uncomfortably, they have poor forward/upward reach, and the fit usually relies on a larger than normal pit to pit to try and make up for poor pattern design. (24 to 25" pit to pit on a size 40!). To me Aeros usually feel too small and too big at the same time.
Some people love them, i don't...

Saying that, they are well made for the money and use good materials (other than the zippers), i just don't like how they fit.

Interesting. Well I have 2 Aeros, both fit me pretty well, but I can see where you are coming from with some of those complaints, although I have not had the neck issue at all. I also have a Vanson, so I can compare them to another brand. The Vanson does indeed allow for the most movement between the 3. I really like my Thunderbay though, I ordered it with shoulder gussets for more movement, and although they don't compare to the gussets on the Vanson, they work well enough. Anyway, thanks for the input.

 

[morrison2951]

My problem is mostly with the choice of leather.
IMO none of the leather they use is strong enough for motorcycling. Thedi and FW us a thin veg tan that would be useless on a bike. Aero offers CXL and Vicenza which are also not MC jacket leathers.
The patterns of Thedi and FW are good enough to work on a bike but the leathers are lacking, the Aero patterns are IMO not great on a bike or anywhere else for that matter.

Yep.

If you can find a HH Vanson from years past, get one. It's like wearing armor.

 

[Marc mndt]

Thedi and FW us a thin veg tan that would be useless on a bike.

Thedi's leather selection isn't thin by default, this particular jacket weights 2,8 kg. You're right though that vegetable tanned leather is useless on a bike (unless you live in California where it hardly ever rains). I wore this jacket while riding my Vespa when I got caught in a rainstorm. Within 10 minutes I was totally soaked and my shirt and skin were brown from the flushed out tanines.

 

[Gypsymoth82]

Honestly there is nothing better than dropping a post before you go to bed and having so many answers when you wake up.

Okay I'll provide a bit more background. I've been riding my one and only bike, a Hinkley Triumph Thruxton for the last 10 years or so (leaning forward riding position). I started with a newer armoured Belstaff (made in Asia), swathed to a shitty Triumph jacket, then started buying old Lewis Leathers jackets, but never dialled the sizing (vintage/newer/style etc.). The jacket I currently wear is a newer LL Super Monza that is too long, but works.

But man I broke the zipper trying to open a pocket at a light. WTF. So I know that even though I really love the look of a Lightning, it probably doesn't really fit the bill for a dedicated riding jacket.

Lots of great suggestions here guys. A BIG THANK YOU to everyone,.

Now, Does anyone have a sz 40-42 for a semi athletic 5'11, 190lb guy for sale?

Thanks again,

Morgan

 

[Aloysius]

Now, Does anyone have a sz 40-42 for a semi athletic 5'11, 190lb guy for sale?

If you had posted a week ago I could have hooked you up this past weekend with your choice of jackets.

 

[Bfd70]

Fwiw i don’t factor ”save my ass in a crash” when choosing the on the bike jacket. To take the pole position in that category you have to include armor. I don’t want to do that. For safety i wear a helmet. I know that sounds obvious bit around here it is not required nor particularly common. I’d say 25%. I also don’t look at crash test ratings when buying a car.

 

[Gypsymoth82]

If you had posted a week ago I could have hooked you up this past weekend with your choice of jackets.

Brutal. Nothing left?

 

[Carlos840]

Fwiw i don’t factor ”save my ass in a crash” when choosing the on the bike jacket. To take the pole position in that category you have to include armor. I don’t want to do that. For safety i wear a helmet. I know that sounds obvious bit around here it is not required nor particularly common. I’d say 25%. I also don’t look at crash test ratings when buying a car.

By that logic you might as well go out like this:

 

[Bfd70]

By that logic you might as well go out like this:

Disagree. People will talk about non armored jackets for a crash but wear regular denim pants. Well then why not just wear a type 3. I’ve had 2 get offs. 1 was impact injury. Armor might have helped. 1 was rash. Low side get off. Then if you slide on your side it’s shoulder, hip, knee, ankle. Unless you’re advocating for a full leather suit your suggesting that picture would be better with a LW jacket and still no pants. Top 1/2 isn’t more important than bottom half.

 

[ton312]

Top 1/2 isn’t more important than bottom half.

Sorry couldn't resist

 

[Carlos840]

Disagree. People will talk about non armored jackets for a crash but wear regular denim pants. Well then why not just wear a type 3. I’ve had 2 get offs. 1 was impact injury. Armor might have helped. 1 was rash. Low side get off. Then if you slide on your side it’s shoulder, hip, knee, ankle. Unless you’re advocating for a full leather suit your suggesting that picture would be better with a LW jacket and still no pants. Top 1/2 isn’t more important than bottom half.

To me it's about understanding the dangers and deciding what risks you are ready to take.

Your legs represent 18% of your total skin surface, your torso and arms represent 45% of your total skin surface.
To me it makes sens to protect it as a jacket will cover almost 50% of your body, but pants only less than half of that.

It's also about protection from the elements, cold wet legs are one thing, cold wet torso are another...

 

[Viking752]

I live and ride in Florida, the land of cruiser bikes and baggers. The guy pictured is the most common riding gear I see out there. I do not subscribe to this level of “I don’t care” but I do wear jeans ,boots and some kind of jacket. Of course a helmet puts me in the minority as well. I wear my Schott 118 or my 141 and I feel safe enough, never tested the theory but so far so good. Any leather jacket is better than none with regards to human flesh versus pavement.

 

[Carlos840]

I live and ride in Florida, the land of cruiser bikes and baggers. The guy pictured is the most common riding gear I see out there. I do not subscribe to this level of “I don’t care” but I do wear jeans ,boots and some kind of jacket. Of course a helmet puts me in the minority as well. I wear my Schott 118 or my 141 and I feel safe enough, never tested the theory but so far so good. Any leather jacket is better than none with regards to human flesh versus pavement.

View attachment 459586

Holy crap, riding in flip flops is madness!
That's how you get amputated...

 

[barnabus]

Holy crap, riding in flip flops is madness!
That's how you get amputated...

The thing that always turns my stomach is seeing people riding with no gloves.

I only have to look at the scraped-up knuckle armour of the gloves I was wearing when I got knocked off to see how much of a no brainer that is.

 

[Guppy]

Disagree. People will talk about non armored jackets for a crash but wear regular denim pants. Well then why not just wear a type 3. I’ve had 2 get offs. 1 was impact injury. Armor might have helped. 1 was rash. Low side get off. Then if you slide on your side it’s shoulder, hip, knee, ankle. Unless you’re advocating for a full leather suit your suggesting that picture would be better with a LW jacket and still no pants. Top 1/2 isn’t more important than bottom half.

There's no way to make a motorcycle rider death proof. It all comes down to trade offs. Generally, the more protection you can get, the better.

But there's also other factors: weather conditions, comfort, ease of donning and doffing, storage needs, pockets, ventilation, visibility, and wearing off bike.

A lot of things to consider.

Other people's choices are not mine, and I make my choices based on my judgment. I don't let what others do change what I'm doing, unless I see someone doing it better than me. I know I'm taking a risk, and I try to do everything I can to reduce that risk.

For me, that means full gear for every ride, head to toe. Someone else might laugh, but I don't care. Someone else might get away with less, but I don't care. I accept my responsibilities and I prepare for them as best as I can.

Not all of my jackets are armored, but my better ones are. Even armor won't prevent everything that could happen to me.

 

[Marc mndt]

The guy pictured is the most common riding gear I see out there. I do not subscribe to this level of “I don’t care” but I do wear jeans ,boots and some kind of jacket. Of course a helmet puts me in the minority as well.

Lol, some perspective: In the Netherlands it's now mandatory to wear a helmet on a 50cc vespa (which has a maximum speed of 15 miles an hour).

 

[barnabus]

For me, that means full gear for every ride, head to toe. Someone else might laugh, but I don't care. Someone else might get away with less, but I don't care. I accept my responsibilities and I prepare for them as best as I can.

This is my attitude too.

People can absolutely wear or not whatever they want for riding, within their local laws, but you'll only ever see me in gloves, boots, helmet, armoured jacket and armoured riding jeans. Although because I carefully buy subtle gear, you probably wouldn't know I was.

 

[Edward]

This is my attitude too.

People can absolutely wear or not whatever they want for riding, within their local laws, but you'll only ever see me in gloves, boots, helmet, armoured jacket and armoured riding jeans. Although because I carefully buy subtle gear, you probably wouldn't know I was.

The market has certainly come a very long way in terms of riding gear even in the last decade; there seems little to no style-based reason to avoid reasonable PPE now. Of course, there will always, within the limits of the law, be those who prefer to avoid riding gear for whatever reason. But then I'm also old enough to remember the days when there was a lobby of folks insisting they were 'better drivers' when not wearing a seatbelt. We'll always have organ donors.

 

[Blackadder]

To me it's about understanding the dangers and deciding what risks you are ready to take.

Your legs represent 18% of your total skin surface, your torso and arms represent 45% of your total skin surface.
To me it makes sens to protect it as a jacket will cover almost 50% of your body, but pants only less than half of that.

It's also about protection from the elements, cold wet legs are one thing, cold wet torso are another...

Interesting assessment and view.
IMO proper risk assessment is based on type of injuries and/or seriousness of the type of injuries. A gunshot to your torso would be more fatal than to your limbs therefore bullet proof vest. It is not based on percentage of skin surface. A head injury is more serious therefore a helmet.
If a person deems road rash to be the injury that he/she wants to be protected from then wearing only leather jacket without chaps is inadequate and irrational. That is because if you skid and roll, your 18% skin surface is left without protection and will certainly sustain 100% damage even though 45% of your skin surface may be unharmed.
Besides a pair of chaps is nothing compared to bullet proof pants.
To me, it is just a trade-off between looking cool and being safe.

 

[Guppy]

Lol, some perspective: In the Netherlands it's now mandatory to wear a helmet on a 50cc vespa (which has a maximum speed of 15 miles an hour).

We have helmet laws for kids on bikes.