No CE approved gloves - RIDE article

"We didn't find a single pair of approved (CE) bike gloves for our
test"

Scary sh*t!!!!

Raj

 

Why?
Just because the EU approves something does not mean it is usable or good

And whats wrong with typing shit ?

And why read Dire ?

 

No it isn't.

 

Scary sh*t!!!!

Nope... had thought about this... just that the manufacturers are not
bothering to get their gloves tested because they don't legally have
to. This also means that there is no "minimum standard" to meet.

Noob to biking/biker NG etiquette.

See above!!! ;-) Read BIKE as well though. Then again, at my level
almost any info (even Dire) is useful!

 

Yeah, I'm bricking myself, going to give up biking, find a hole in the
Arctic and live in it. Who gives a ****.

 

So??

 

^^^^^^^^^^^

You won't be needing this then, I'll be 'round shortly to take it off your
hands.

 

<G> It's going in the hole with me as a heater.

 

^^

I never thought I'd see the day.

 

Pretty to look at as well... Kinda like a women, except less talking.

Hrm, I think I'm onto something here.

 

And ? I don't look for CE when buy gloves, I look for what feels nice and
has a good price. If you want a good abresive resitant glove, get a pair
of glass handling gloves.

You're fucked then

Thats crap as well now.

 

Not that scary surely?

There is an arguement that says it's very pleasant to ride the XT600 over
the Devil's Staircase to Llyn Brianne on a sunny day wearing jeans, trainers
and a tee shirt. Whilst in the back of beyond it is very temping to wear
your helmet on your arm and enjoy the sensations you enjoyed in 1966.

John

 

You are going to warm it up ?

 

Yeah, TOG's posting style was a bit so-so, wasn't it?

 

The EU does not issue approvals. Notified Bodies appointed by Member
States' national Governments issue approvals (or, in the case of
"simple design" PPE, such as thimbles and gardening gloves, the
manufacturer self-certifies).

Wrong. Manufacturers *are* legally required to have their gloves tested
and certified if they claim or imply they are protective.

The applicable standard is EN 13594:2002 "Protective gloves for
professional motorcycle riders - Requirements and test methods". The
General Product Safety Directive addresses the "migration" of
'professional' products into non-professional use.

HTH

 

Yer, whatever....

So, moe to the point, they can't be arsed 'cos it is not worth the cost as
people will not buy them

 

The cost of getting a range of gloves tested and approved? £2100.
Hardly going to make a dent in the annual capuccino budget of the
average Italian motorcycle clothing brand, methinks. ;-)

 

Getting them tested, maybe. Improving them so they'll be approved -
possibly a bit more.
--
| ___ Salad Dodger
|/ \
_/_____\_ GL1500SEV/CBR1100XXX/CBX1000Z
|_\_____/_| ..81750../..22169.../..31893.
(>|_|_|<) TPPFATUICG#7 DIAABTCOD#9 WG*
|__|_|__| BOTAFOT #70 BOTAFOF #09 PM#5
\ |^| / IbW#0 & KotIbW# BotTOS#6 GP#4
\|^|/ ANORAK#17 IbB#4 YTC#4 two#11
'^' RBR Clues: 23 Pts: 440 Miles:1738

 

How many pairs of gloves do they launch in a year? It'll all add up...

 

But it's still quite a lot compared with the cost of not getting them
approved. Why should they bother?

And meaning no offence to you or your profession, but we must remind
ourselves that CE approval does not mean that a piece of kit is good,
just that it's been designed to pass certain tests. Conversly,
non-approved kit may be at least as good as, or possibly much better
than, approved stuff.

--
_______
..'_/_|_\_'. Ace (brucedotrogers a.t rochedotcom)
\`\ | /`/ GSX-R1000K3
`\\ | //' BOTAFOT#3, SbS#2, UKRMMA#13, DFV#8, SKA#2, IBB#10
`\|/`
`