What is ATGATT?

[bikerdawg]

I went down on my Goldwing last year. I did end up with a broken leg and a couple other fractures. If I wasn't wearing gear I would have lost a lot of skin and the side of my face if not my life.

 

[Garf]

Having been one who has hit a deer @70+ MPH on a 2 wheel BMW and walking away,
I'll stick with ATGATT !

 

[crossbowme]

I too have been down and the full face helmet unquestionably saved my life. However, what happens when you hit the road depends on the material of the road. Some southern and western states use fine materials for the finish on the road. Here in Maine the DOT, and others, use granite chips for ice and snow conditions in the winter (try to imagine a chain saw). When I crashed, I had heavy leather driving gloves on which were stripped off and my hands rashed. I had leather combat boots and chino pants on with out a scratch with either. However, I had a short sleeve shirt on and I got road rash so bad I can still see it on my arms over forty years later.

My point is you need to develop a riding gear plan that works for you, your location and season. If it's 110 degrees out can you wear a touring jacket with armor inserts without having heat injuries? It may be you need lighter clothes to limit heat injuries yet still ride. Riding gear tends to be a series of trade offs, with one exception - always, always wear a DOT approved helmet!

 

[UtahPete]

I too have been down and the full face helmet unquestionably saved my life. However, what happens when you hit the road depends on the material of the road. Some southern and western states use fine materials for the finish on the road. Here in Maine the DOT, and others, use granite chips for ice and snow conditions in the winter (try to imagine a chain saw). When I crashed, I had heavy leather driving gloves on which were stripped off and my hands rashed. I had leather combat boots and chino pants on with out a scratch with either. However, I had a short sleeve shirt on and I got road rash so bad I can still see it on my arms over forty years later.

My point is you need to develop a riding gear plan that works for you, your location and season. If it's 110 degrees out can you wear a touring jacket with armor inserts without having heat injuries? It may be you need lighter clothes to limit heat injuries yet still ride. Riding gear tends to be a series of trade offs, with one exception - always, always wear a DOT approved helmet!

Why do ATGATT adherents always bring up incidents with 'going down' on 2 wheelers? Along with the environmental considerations, you also need to factor in that a Spyder isn't going to fall over! ISN'T THAT WHY YOU BOUGHT IT IN THE FIRST PLACE?

 

[Piratezz]

For me, it all depends on what route I take, I have a beautiful route, along the river, 2 lane, not to much trafic, that i drive in shorts/ t- shirt but with helmet always, but when i go into uncharted teritory, I go full atgatt.
so my 2 cents, drive with caution, be aware, anticipate the road, I am 53 yrs old, and never had an accident, but could have got quite a few.....
I dive, have a 300hp jetski, waterski, and drive motorcycles, and even my spyder.

 

[Peter Aawen]

Why do ATGATT adherents always bring up incidents with 'going down' on 2 wheelers? Along with the environmental considerations, you also need to factor in that a Spyder isn't going to fall over!

They keep bringing it up Pete, cos you seem to be arguing that it's pointless taking basic but proven potentially life-saving steps whenever we ride our Spyders; or that you don't seem to understand that being astride and outside the vehicle you are travelling on at speed means that you are STILL highly likely to fall off or be thrown off in the event of an accident or incident that wouldn't be a concern if you were INSIDE a car!! And if you do get thrown off or fall off at any speed much more than a walking pace, at the very least any exposed/un-protected your skin is likely to suffer in a big way! See my previous post about that. . See other's previous posts about their experiences in saving their skin; saving their heads &/or faces; maybe even visit just about any hospital with a Trauma Center and see the really horrendous results people get from sliding bare skin or even skin covered in 'non-protective materials' along a road surface for ANY distance! :yikes:

Sure, the likely incidence of sliding might be reduced a little cos we are on our more stable Spyders, but since we are still riding astride and outside the vehicle, it IS only a little reduced IF (or maybe more likely WHEN?? :dontknow: ) you have an accident &/or incident!! And because most of us still feel somewhat attached to our skin & retaining its integrity, we are totally gob-smacked by someone who doesn't seem to realise how utterly devastating losing vast swathes of skin can be for any person to the extent that they want to continually raise & argue about the need to basically cover said all-important skin in something a little more protective than a linen shirt cos they might risk getting hot! :yikes: So if you stopped going on about how how silly it seems to you to wear proper protective gear, there's a good chance that many people would stop raising their experiences of why they feel it's BLOODY IMPORTANT to do so & providing you with their very applicable & pertinant experiences, even if they have learned those lessons in the years/decades before they progressed to riding Spyders! The concept is the same regardless of whatever it might be that you happen to ride astride & outside of - ATGATT is a sensible precaution, at least it is if you want to keep your skin &/or remain alive, anyway?!? And there's plenty of ATGATT gear around these days designed to minimise over-heating, even in the hottest of climates, altho some of it might be a little more expensive than the usual gear - but it's still ALL pretty much cheaper than an extended stay in hospital while you wait for the skin-grafts to take! :shocked:

So that question of yours I bolded above really boils down to it being up to you, Pete... if you stop harping on about why YOU don't want to wear protective gear, then it's likely that others won't keep on trying to point out the 'obvious to most' reasons why we all SHOULD wear at least the basic protective gear &/or gear that covers our skin - even if it means spending a little more getting ATGATT gear that's more appropriate for riding in hotter conditions! :thumbup: We all get to make decisions for ourselves, as we generally do when & where we are considering riding based upon the 'perceived risk' facing us... This particular one is your call...

 

[old Timer]

Excellent and well stated post Peter.

 

[UtahPete]

I'm just trying to get ATGATT proponents to explain why they reckon they are only 'slightly' less likely to experience hitting the asphalt on a Spyder than on their two-wheeler. It just seems irrational to me.

I for one will freely admit the reason I laid out 3x what I'd ever paid for a previous bike was simply the safety factor. That's it. I hated giving up forever the 2-wheel experience, but did so for safety considerations. For me then to behave as if I thought the risk of injury was not mitigated at all by going to a Spyder, with all its attendant drawbacks, would be simply irrational.

That said, I realize most humans act upon emotional impulse rather than cold rationality. That's what Madison Avenue (marketers) is built on. For better or worse, I'm not 'most people'. I know that. Which is why I would never be effective in marketing a consumer product or service. People use logic to justify emotional decisions. All the time.

So,you are right, Peter, I'm in the minority with my rational vs emotional views about this issue, as well as many other social issues that come up on this forum. But I thought that's what forums were supposed to be - a place to discuss varying viewpoints not just repeat ad nauseum the majority opinion. What would we gain as a community if only majority viewpoints were permitted?

 

[Wheelman]

Let me start by saying I'm new to this forum and to riding a Spyder, but, not new to riding both street and dirt. Been "down" in both venues and I really enjoy reading all the discussions on this subject cuz' I think it provides really good food for thought. It, ultimately, will be an individual choice but I am reminded of several old sayings that apply to this subject as well as numerous other life events. "Oh, that will never happen to me" or, "It's better have it and not need it than need it and not have it" or "Never say never." Personally, I always dress to ride and I am looking into some mesh gear for the hot weather. Never had any before and may be more comfortable. Stay safe and keep the rubber side down.

 

[Peter Aawen]

..... So,you are right, Peter, I'm in the minority with my rational vs emotional views about this issue, as well as many other social issues that come up on this forum. But I thought that's what forums were supposed to be - a place to discuss varying viewpoints not just repeat ad nauseum the majority opinion. What would we gain as a community if only majority viewpoints were permitted?

But is it rational to ignore the evidence that those riding astride &/or outside a vehicles are far more at risk of losing skin in the event of an accident/incident?? :dontknow:

Is it rational to to spend "...3x what I'd ever paid for a previous bike..." simply FOR the (extra) safety factor, then pretty much completely ignore the safety factor inherent in 'dressing for the Slide, not for the ride' even when there's ample evidence that as a Spyder rider you are STILL at greater risk of 'sliding' than you are if you're riding in a cage?? :dontknow:

And is it rational to expect others not to draw on their own experience & provide those as examples when you ask them why they do something that's so clearly rational to them??? :dontknow:

I'm not sure that your argument is at all rational here! But what you wear or don't wear while riding is your choice - even if your choice of apparel is not the same as that of many (or maybe most?? :dontknow: ) rational people!

 

[UtahPete]

But is it rational to ignore the evidence that those riding astride &/or outside a vehicles are far more at risk of losing skin in the event of an accident/incident?? :dontknow:

Is it rational to to spend "...3x what I'd ever paid for a previous bike..." simply FOR the (extra) safety factor, then pretty much completely ignore the safety factor inherent in 'dressing for the Slide, not for the ride' even when there's ample evidence that as a Spyder rider you are STILL at greater risk of 'sliding' than you are if you're riding in a cage?? :dontknow:

And is it rational to expect others not to draw on their own experience & provide those as examples when you ask them why they do something that's so clearly rational to them??? :dontknow:

I'm not sure that your argument is at all rational here! But what you wear or don't wear while riding is your choice - even if your choice of apparel is not the same as that of many (or maybe most?? :dontknow: ) rational people!

The difference is, I think, in how we evaluate risk, not just our individual risk tolerance. I decided, based on my evaluation of the risk, that I and my passenger were FAR less likely to suffer any sort of ejection related injury on the Spyder, and that was the determining factor for me. We still wear head protection at all times, and I've taken, and continue to take, steps to reduce the risk from others, including lighting and horn upgrades.

This is how I evaluate and manage THIS risk; others evaluate and manage it differently. Other risks, particularly financial risk, I evaluate and manage on their own merits.

For instance, I am insured for property, liability, health and Long Term Care far in excess of what others feel necessary, because I don't fear death so much as living in poverty due to catastrophic conditions beyond my control. That's factoring in my own past personal experiences, the litigious nature of our society, the ridiculously expensive health care in our country, the lack of social safety net, and the terrible but very real, if rare, stories of citizens who have lost everything they have worked their entire lives for.

I never meant to imply I was the only rational one.

 

[pidjones]

The question that I always get is "isn't it hot?"

Ever slid on asphalt?

 

[crossbowme]

I don't know what planet you live on! I just had a cousin who was killed when he ran into a stopped vehicle and was thrown thru the air and hit head first. He was riding a Spyder.

No, I did not even consider the Spyder's inability to not "fall over" in my purchase of my vehicle because that theory is false!

 

[UtahPete]

I don't know what planet you live on! I just had a cousin who was killed when he ran into a stopped vehicle and was thrown thru the air and hit head first. He was riding a Spyder. No, I did not even consider the Spyder's inability to not "fall over" in my purchase of my vehicle because that theory is false!

You just validated what I've been saying all along. In that kind of collision protection against road rash is irrelevant.

Do what you want...I really don't care. I've not been trying to convince anyone to think like I do. I'm just putting it out there as an alternative way of thinking.

This isn't supposed to be a debate or football game. There don't have to be winners and losers. Is that too difficult a concept to grasp?

 

[trikermutha]

I live on Neptune. Everything is wonderful. :shocked:

Now if I would start drinking again I could jump to another planet. :hun:

 

[cruisinTX]

The question that I always get is "isn't it hot?"

Ever slid on asphalt?

When I get asked that question, my response is, "yeah, but I'd rather sweat than bleed." Some get it some don't.

As for making protective gear work on hot days, I've been wearing mesh jacket and pants on bikes since 2003. Along about 2007 or so, I discovered wearing an evaporative cooling vest under the mesh jacket will reduce my body temp considerably. Without sophisticated sensors, I'd guess in the 20° range. A couple of drawbacks to the vest is you have to stop and re-wet it about every 90 minutes to 2 hours. The other is it is not particularly good for the 9mm under my left arm. :riding:

 

[Peter Aawen]

I don't know what planet you live on! I just had a cousin who was killed when he ran into a stopped vehicle and was thrown thru the air and hit head first. He was riding a Spyder.

No, I did not even consider the Spyder's inability to not "fall over" in my purchase of my vehicle because that theory is false!

You just validated what I've been saying all along. In that kind of collision protection against road rash is irrelevant.

Do what you want...I really don't care. I've not been trying to convince anyone to think like I do. I'm just putting it out there as an alternative way of thinking.

This isn't supposed to be a debate or football game. There don't have to be winners and losers. Is that too difficult a concept to grasp?

But THAT's where your misconception is Pete! :shocked: You are thinking that's an emotional response, but most see that as a rational response to empirical experience and are expressing profound amazement that YOU CAN'T see it too! :shocked: There are others here who've expressed their consideration of the risks & their choice to ride in shorts & tank tops, but none of them have created anywhere near the astonished response that you have! So to me, that suggests that it's not really your decision or their decision on what to wear when riding their Spyder which is at issue, it's more your seeming in-ability to make the connection between the 'riding astride & outside' meaning that you are still at risk of parting company with your machine AND therefore more exposed to injury/road rash etc, and your ability to completely gloss over what everyone else sees as being patently obvious! :lecturef_smilie:

In the example above, the rider hit head first & died, so to most, it's a rational & verifiable conclusion to draw that in any somewhat less traumatic event/outcomes, the rider would've likely slid along the road/ground/whatever for some distance, continuing at or near the same velocity they had until the external forces of the accident/incident were applied, and they'd keep on doing that UNTIL the friction between them & anything they eventually came into contact with, which due to the currently considered irrefutable laws of physics is very likely to be a hard object or surface, eventually causes them to either suddenly STOP (stop dead maybe?? ) &/or slide along that harder than them surface until the increased friction and abrasion between them & said surface converts their velocity into things like abrasion, torn skin, heat, pain, and injury! :yikes: So those rational people out there recognise that risk and take whatever steps they feel appropriate/necessary to minimise the potentially nasty out come. But it seems you want them to ignore all that & consider "an alternative way of thinking"?!? :banghead:

You asked earlier "Why do ATGATT adherents always bring up incidents" like this - that's because most of us can look at these extreme events and thru experience &/or learning draw the conclusion from them that we are STILL EXPOSED in much the same way on our Spyders, so we take what we consider to be rational & reasonable steps in response to that exposure to mitigate the impact (pun intended! ) - but then you keep on raising their decision as an issue & asking us to consider your preferred alternative way of thinking! It's ONLY an issue because you keep on arguing that the risk isn't STILL there, so we don't need to consider it; and it's THAT which simply gob-smacks everyone else and prompts them to keep on coming back to it! :yikes: Is that too difficult a concept to grasp?!? :dontknow:




Putting my Moderator hat on, I think we should leave this discussion - others have made similar decisions to yours that've been quietly accepted by most; most of us have made our own judgement call upon what to wear & when, and for many, that's some level of ATGATT; and you're now telling us that you are not trying to change anyone else's mind, so surely there's an end to it, at least for now! :lecturef_smilie:

 

[bigbadbrucie]

Ahmen!!!

 

[UtahPete]

But THAT's where your misconception is Pete! :shocked: You are thinking that's an emotional response, but most see that as a rational response to empirical experience and are expressing profound amazement that YOU CAN'T see it too! :shocked: There are others here who've expressed their consideration of the risks & their choice to ride in shorts & tank tops, but none of them have created anywhere near the astonished response.

Putting my Moderator hat on, I think we should leave this discussion - others have made similar decisions to yours that've been quietly accepted by most; most of us have made our own judgement call upon what to wear & when, and for many, that's some level of ATGATT; and you're now telling us that not trying to change anyone else's mind, so surely there's an end to it, at least for now! :lecturef_smilie:

Please delete all my posts on this thread. Thank you.

 

[UtahPete]

The question that I always get is "isn't it hot?" Ever slid on asphalt?

For the record, yes I have. High-sided off a Honda 450 on an exit ramp covered with oil slick. In the 70s. Broke my elbow. Was wearing a leather jacket and helmet.

All irrelevant to the discussion.