Always wondered why “dress for the slide, not the ride” didn’t apply to bicycles.
this post was submitted on 09 Jul 2025
106 points (97.3% liked)
Bicycling
2805 readers
15 users here now
A community for those who enjoy bicycling for any reason— utility, recreation, sport, or whatever!
Post your questions, experiences, knowledge, pictures, news, links, and (civil) rants.
Rules (to be added on an as-needed basis)
- Comments and posts should be respectful and productive.
- No ads or commercial spam, including linking to your own monetized content.
- Linked content should be as unburdened by ads and trackers as possible.
Welcome!
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
At the pro level, adding 100 watts to your apparel just won't work.
For commuters, reducing comfort, increasing sweat, and spending more just doesn't fly. It's hard enough to get people to wear helmets.
Same as above for recreational riders.
I say that as someone who wore full on motorcycle equipment while riding an e-scooter that could go 50km/h, but I kept it legal at under 25 km/h. Overkill to the max.
It's challenging enough to dress comfortably and without sweating too much while cycling normally. I can't imagine adding an armored jacket or pants to the mix. MTB and downhill riders do wear stuff like that, though.
If safety equipment was mandatory at the pro level like it is on MTB, everyone would have that added increase. More research and development would go into lighter, breathable, rip proof fabric and lightweight, aerodynamic hard protection. Sure, time would go down, but I don’t see why you should sacrifice safety and health for a few seconds off your times.
The downside to time cost is nobody will every break the records of old. (though we also know that in the past drugs, blood doping, and other things that are not allowed was done so breaking records may not be possible anyway)
Na there will be a beast in 15 years that'll come out of nowhere to smash it with pads on and set a new standard.
(Now is “the past” of tomorrow 😉)
If safety equipment was mandatory at the pro level like it is on MTB, everyone would have that added increase.
I do agree. More equipment = fewer people getting into the sport. And if you do it for road, then you have to do it for gravel races...
It's a tough call. I guess if a large number of pros want it, then it should be done.
Change the rules, the sport will adapt as will the training adapt to the changes in equipment.
I agree it's a bit dumb but they're absolutely cooking out there. If they want it, let them have it, or those that want to, allow them to.
You are the power source for your travel on a bike, you need to be able to dump heat. Also generally the top speed isn't all that high
I mean, I have worn some pretty breathable crotch rocket gear in the middle of summer. I get where everyone is coming from with needing to dissipate heat from a human powered mode of transportation, and keep it as light as possible, but simply saying “no protection cause speed must be fast” is just not a phrase that makes sense with today’s and tomorrow’s technology and textiles.
In cycle racing that's all of it, they cannot wear protective gear as it would slow them down and they would lose to people who don't wear it
In recreational cycling it hardly matters, speeds aren't all that high.
My experience with heat is different to yours. In winter I wear shorts and short sleeves and gloves. In summer it's the same but the gloves don't have fingers.
First thing I thought of was all it takes is one person not wearing it to gain an advantage and everyone else will follow.
This is a sport where people take EPO to increase red blood cells and it thickens to blood so much it can cause heart disease, stroke, and cerebral or pulmonary embolism. They voluntarily train for a 21 day torture test totaling ~3500km going up mountains and at the end look like survivors of famine.
If they could remove some organs and add a third lung with a 50% chance of survival, they'd do it.
In cycle racing that's all of it, they cannot wear protective gear as it would slow them down and they would lose to people who don't wear it
it could just be made mandatory, like in other sports with protective gear.
Yes, that is the OP article's point is
@psud @snekerpimp honestly the gravel rash you can get at 40kmph is pretty significant, and hills to get that much speed aren't weird.
My experience is on recumbent bikes where you're not falling far and not going over the handlebars. I think the most skin I have abraded was in a 50kph crash on concrete and grass where about a 2cm circle of the skin over the thumb mound of my left palm was gone. That would have been prevented by gloves
@psud I really should try a recumbent bike one day, I enjoyed my trike but the bikes always scared me. But I should give one a try.
It took a few hours on a grassy hill to learn to balance it
My fast bike is an M5 carbon high racer
It got too easy to ride, also I don't trust carbon composites to last a long time in Australian sunlight, so I also now have a steel (CrMo) shockproof 559
@psud I got enough skin taken off my knee at 20kmph to make dancing at my wedding 6 weeks later sketchy.
Although that was gravel.
I reckon if the sports organisations required pro cyclists to wear protective gear it'll be more common for amateurs to also use PPE and make that stuff easier to get
But it kind of is? The Tour de France is really a different beast from you riding around - they are averaging at over 41km/h for the whole tour with all those brutal climbs. You can imagine how fast they are going at flat sections. They are reaching 100km/h+ at descents.
But even for me as a unfit guy the speeds can get crazy. If I go down the hills around here and if I do not brake, I will reach 70km/h+ easily. Which is kind of insane just wearing a helmet and short lycra clothes.
I can pedal my carbon fibre recumbent up to 53km/h on the flat, and I pass cars in a 70kmh zone on a downhill exit ramp, so yeah speeds can get pretty high. It would be good if cycle racing organisations required road racers to wear appropriate PPE so ventilated protective gear could get into the general population and be seen as reasonable
OTOH I don't think riders of slow bikes should be required to even wear helmets (they are required to in Australia)
Some people used to laugh that I wore JoeRocket motorcycle gloves for my bicycle commute to work, and in colder weather I would don large leather motorcycle pants. (And low friction shorts over top because seat leather on pant leather is horrible)
But they work and after a high side flip turning downhill, it was the gloves ruined and not my hands.
And the motorcycle pants had thick hip padding.
Good call on the gloves, I took that same downhill header and broke both my hands, a bunch of fingers, and lost a lot of skin. Highly recommend motorcycle gloves if you're planning to go fast
Or just MTB gloves. I don't leave home without those on bicycle
Can't wait to see what interesting aero designs they would come up with for knee and elbow pads.
But also I could see this increasing the aggressiveness in the peloton similar to how american football impacts are harder and more injury prone than rugby impacts because american football players wear much more protective gear than rugby players.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Risk_compensation
a theory which suggests that people typically adjust their behavior in response to perceived levels of risk, becoming more careful where they sense greater risk and less careful if they feel more protected.
It is a theory, but as you read the article you discover many of the examples given have not checked out.
Quite a bit of environmental storytelling in that photo.
Because I am pretty sure you're not gonna be hit by sticks, pucks, or slammed into walls by the other riders?
Though, now that you bring it up... I wanna see that version of the race. Road Rash it up! I'd go with the chain. The chain was the best weapon.
A couple of years ago they were talking about some of the teams implementing Dyneema sections into parts of the jersey where road rash was most common, or problematic.
Haven't heard a peep about it since.
Cause you'll be slower, pretty fucking obvious.
He addresses that directly. He says that there's absolutely no point in telling competitors to take fewer risks if risky behaviour is faster, so you need to regulate for safety
No, you really shouldn't, aside from spectators. If you've decided it's too unsafe for you, repsect that and take up curling.
I am specifically talking about competition.
I'd never do cave diving for example, i definitely don't want others to stop doing it becase i think its unsafe though.
how many people will need to die to convince you that safety needs to be prioritized and regulated?
Great Point! Just look into the history of F1 for how that goes, it was a blast in the olden days! /s obviously
From what I can read the argument is mandatory safety gear.
Terrible article but great point.