Did not make it home in one piece (VA rally)

[Bill N]

Marty,
I've enjoyed reading your posts here from the first time you joined up. Sorry that this is the end for the beautiful EV. Hope you can salvage some parts and get a replacement of your choice. So happy to know that you are doing OK. I was in Damascus 2 weeks ago, my favorite MC playground. But the roads and hazards are a challenge. Best wishes, Bill

[Sasquatch Jim]

  You are lucky it wasn't hair, teeth and eyeballs on the highway.  Bikes are easier to replace. that one seems broken now.

[davedel44]

Heal quickly.

[Ronkom]

Marty,
BUmmer bummer bummer! Sad to hear of the crash, relieved to hear that your physical damage isn't  worse. I'm sure that all of us reps & organizers who put on rallies, meets, rides, etc. have the "what if" thought in the backs of our heads. All we can do is make whatever is in our control as safe as possible.
Re/helmets, I have 2 flip-up full face & a half helmet out in the garage. Having picked myself up off the pavement twice over the years, I know the value of the full face. But, I find myself using  the half  helmet because it has a vizor. My eyes are deteriorating with age, riding into bright sunlight under trees etc. causes a rapid "flicker" effect that leaves me blind for a micro-second because my eyes can't adjust fast enough. I find that with a visor I can duck my head enough to block the sun & see the road ahead better. I have seen pictures of "full" helmets w/sides that extend forward to cover the back of the jaw, with the chin open. They have the 3 snaps across the forehead where a shield and/or vizor can be attached. I just have to get to a "'big city" shop w/a large accessory dept. so I can try on & find one that fits my big head.
Ron Komoroski   

[mojohand]

Sorry this happened, Marty. Great to meet you at the rally. Hope to see ya as soon as you heal properly.

Get well!

[johnr]

Marty thanks for posting this.
It's great that you got away with bumps and bruises. I suspect that parts of that 'black hole' of memory will come back to you over time. 

I do think though that you are being too quick to write off that bike. It looks totally repairable to me. It would depend on whether the frame is still straight in my book. (though even that is fixable)

I've always been interested in the 'anatomy' of a prang. The hows and the whys. I suppose that's why I'm completely addicted to the Mayday TV program.  If I'm reading what you have written correctly the bike went down before the collision occurred and your bumps and bruises  are from the resultant tumble.  This would mean that you did not yourself collide with the other vehicle.  That would probably have meant a far more sudden stop for you, which would imply far more serious consequences for you.

Bad luck that it occurred at all of course, but good that you are jumping around.

[Lannis]

Marty -

Good to meet you at the rally.   Had no idea (we never do) that this would be next after we waved good-bye on my way out.

I've ridden 133 through Backbone Rock dozens of times and I can see what happened as though I'd been there watching.   

(1)  The degree of "turn" as soon as you pass under it will surprise anyone if they don't know what's on the other side.

(2)  EVERYONE subconsciously edges toward the center of the road as they approach those unyielding rock faces getting ready to skim by their mirrors.   

You're edging toward the center, the truck is edging toward the center, you see him at the last second, overcontrol back into your lane, the road's damp, it hardly ever dries out under there, and down you go.

Good on yer for wearing all the gear!   You kept your outer integument, the road didn't get it.   You got a pass on your face and jaw this time ... maybe something like my Nolan N43 that has an unobtrusive, removable chin bar might be a good idea.   Chin bar off for riding low and slow off-road, chin bar on for the highway ... ?

Looking forward to the next bike story, whether it be a repair of this one or getting a new one up and going .... !

Lannis

[tazio]

Well said, Lannis.
Marty, my Uncle Benny was at tail end of rally coming down from Buffalo area of N.Y. to visit me.
He was on my old 1970 Ambassador (fish Tail exhausts) and remembers you well.
Thoughts and prayers for a full recovery,
and sounds like you have a good woman at your side.

[Lannis]

Well said, Lannis.
Marty, my Uncle Benny was at tail end of rally coming down from Buffalo area of N.Y. to visit me.
He was on my old 1970 Ambassador (fish Tail exhausts) and remembers you well.
Thoughts and prayers for a full recovery,
and sounds like you have a good woman at your side.

Benny's an old-school "character" for sure - I was glad to have met him when he pulled in Saturday night.   He camped right next to Marty, and had no shortage of people welcoming him and asking about the old Ambo ... !

Lannis

[Antietam Classic Cycle]

Benny's an old-school "character" for sure - I was glad to have met him when he pulled in Saturday night.   He camped right next to Marty, and had no shortage of people welcoming him and asking about the old Ambo ... !

Lannis

My friend Dave Bodner and I chatted with Benny late Saturday. Both of us were wondering who the bike used to belong to. I was thinking Ian Adkins, so was kind of right I guess. 

[tazio]

Correct, Ian's old scoot. Uncle Benny got me into bikes. He wanted Ambo for his retirement use, couldn't refuse him. He goes everywhere on that thing now.
He went on and on about how friendly you guys were, I said "That's how they roll !!"

[jetmechmarty]

I sincerely appreciate the offers to retrieve my bike.  I took Smokin' Joe up on it.  He suffered my yakking for 14 hours.  Actually, I enjoyed spending the time with him and it was a good day.

 
 
Fork oil needed to be replaced anyway.



It's now safe in my garage.

[brlawson]

Marty,

It may seem like A total now but if you find that the frame is still straight and would like to fix it let me know. I have a front fender, tubeless wheels, those same valve covers and head guards. 

[jetmechmarty]

I haven't taken anything off for close scrutiny, and I probably won't do anything with it this weekend.  Maybe I'll get a small furniture dolly to put under it, so I can freely move the thing around.

The front wheel might be fine.  One brake rotor is wrecked.  Forks and triple trees are suspect.  The front fender and tank are wrecked.  The rest isn't too bad.  If the frame is OK, she may live on.  For at least a little while, I think I'll cover it up, so my wife doesn't have to look at it.  I won't be riding anything until my knees and ankle heal.

[jetmechmarty]

I remember Uncle Benny, too!  He was camped beside me and we had a nice Sunday morning chat over coffee.  I should have ridden south with him.

Uncle Benny is on the left.

[jetmechmarty]

I've had several comments about my helmet, both online and in person.  I'd like to revisit the ATGATT.

Contusion on my left hip after one week.


Contusion on my right hip after on week.


My knees may be causing me the most grief.

Don't get me wrong.  I am thrilled to have gotten off as easy as I did.  I'm still limping on a slightly swollen right ankle.  I can't sleep on my left side because of the bruise on my hip.  My right side is worse because of my hip, shoulder, and elbow.  My head is fine because my helmet protected it in the crash.

Let's talk about my choices.  First, I chose to take part in the dangerous activity of riding a motorcycle.  I chose a DOT half helmet for this trip.  I chose a leather jacket with no armor.  I chose kevlar lined riding pants with no armor.  I chose heavy nine inch steel toe boots.  I chose riding gloves that completely covered my hands.

Now, about my choices and how things worked out.  My head was protected. My jacket protected my from road rash, but not bruises.  The same for my pants.  My gloves were 100% effective.  My boots may have helped some, too, based upon my right ankle sprain and damaged boot.

If I had been wearing hip and knee armor, I wouldn't have bruised hips and knees.  If I had had armor in my jacket, my elbow might be better and maybe my shoulder, too.  Bottom line is I could have done better with the gear.  As it was, the folks at the hospital seemed very pleased with my level of protection.  I imagine they get plenty of wrecks with riders wearing puddin' bowls, shorts, tee shirt, and tennis shoes.

Any thoughts or comments?  And thank you for all the well wishes.  It helps more than anything.

[Dave Swanson]

I think you came through it in amazing shape!  I have almost done worse on a high speed mountain bike crash.

I promised myself that in 2016 I would gear up better than in past years.  I have always enjoyed riding without a helmet, but am wearing my Arai almost all of the time now.  I invested in a fully perforated leather Vanson that fits (somehow my old one shrunk in the closet) so I don't have the excuse to ride without leather.  I recently started collecting my retirement pension and decided I want as many of those payments as I can get! 

I don't ride with armor as of yet, but have been thinking about adding that to the arsenal.  Your get off is making me think about it more. 

The bike will be quite a project to bring back.  There are very nice examples of EV style bikes selling for very small money.  I would probably go that route rather than rebuilding. 

[BadAce]

I sincerely appreciate the offers to retrieve my bike.  I took Smokin' Joe up on it.  He suffered my yakking for 14 hours.  Actually, I enjoyed spending the time with him and it was a good day.

 
 
Fork oil needed to be replaced anyway.



It's now safe in my garage.

Hi Marty, I finally found this thread, sorry to hear it was you that went down! I passed by and It looked like you had torn pants but were reasonably ok. (I didn`t know it was you}  I saw a lot of people around at the time, and cops were there keeping traffic control. I live up in New York, and there`s a smokin Joe, smoke shop and Gas station, he`s pretty big around here. This Just a common nickname? Hope ya healing up! I need to get some better gear for riding also, healing isn`t as fast when ya get older. I hope to see ya`s all again, I think I`m gonna make it a regular thing, at Willville Guzzi Rally, People there were so nice. See ya again!
Ben

[BadAce]

I remember Uncle Benny, too!  He was camped beside me and we had a nice Sunday morning chat over coffee.  I should have ridden south with him.

Uncle Benny is on the left.

Hi Guys! I`m now a WildGuzzi Member, I just found these posts, Tazio told me about them, It was nice talking to ya all! So many good people were there. When I came back though, I stayed at Willville again and met some BMW riders and a guy on a Buell, and a couple other bikers, all nice. Looks like Willville wil be a regular stop for me, Even if I don`t do the whole Blue Ridge!
Ben
P.S.My trip was pretty uneventful, with the Ambo, It did start running and starting rough, I thought it was because of the downpour at Willville on the way back home, but the points had come a bit loose, decreasing spark till it finally wouldn`t go, I tightened them in

a Mini mart lot in Pennsylvania, and down the road I went!

[Kev m]

Late comment on the armor.

I've had a couple of offs over the years.

The high side in rain pants and jeans, but no armor on the legs (Aerostich up top) was a little painful on the knees.

The high side in full Aerostich so armor top and bottom felt like it never happened until I looked at the valve cover on the R65.

I basically ride with MTGATT, but have thought more and more about increasing my protection on the lower body.

Actually looked at a pair of armored jeans just yesterday.

[tazio]

The wifey laughs when I come in drenched in sweat, she asked "why all the clothing"
Having previously explained ATGATT,
 I remind her it's not STGSTT(Some of The Gear Some of The Time)
She just rolls her eyes...I think she laughs at me, not with me.

[donn]

I basically ride with MTGATT, but have thought more and more about increasing my protection on the lower body.

Well, you know what they say, most injuries from the knees down.  It's really nice to have full functioning original legs and feet.

At the point where you're getting armor in there, I'm surprised that jeans would be an interesting option.  They aren't going to be pants you'd be happy to walk around in much, and ordinary motorcycle pants with 500 denier nylon or something would seem more durable, and cooler.  When you get to the real hard core pavement surfing, the armor has to stay in place to provide the good protection, so the gear should fit well and of course the fabric has to hold up.

[Kev m]

Well, you know what they say, most injuries from the knees down.  It's really nice to have full functioning original legs and feet.

At the point where you're getting armor in there, I'm surprised that jeans would be an interesting option.  They aren't going to be pants you'd be happy to walk around in much, and ordinary motorcycle pants with 500 denier nylon or something would seem more durable, and cooler.  When you get to the real hard core pavement surfing, the armor has to stay in place to provide the good protection, so the gear should fit well and of course the fabric has to hold up.

I guess I should explain I have:

1. Leather track pants.
2. Joe Rocket textile pants with hip and knee armor.
3. Aerostich Darien over pants with knee armor.


I pretty much never wear 1, only sometimes wear 2, and generally wear 3 in cooler months or as rain pants.

Meaning I wear just regular jeans the vast majority of my riding. So I was looking at some of the motorcycle specific reinforced jeans with integrated armor as an option to wear MORE OFTEN than a do now.

[redrider90]

Out of all the things I would change about your gear is a full face helmet. Your head was nominally protected and you even reported a headache.
A half helmet is just that half and think of all the parts of the head that are not protected. Not to mention that a decent full face probably would have had more protection for the hit you took regardless that you did not damage your ears, nose, chin etc. that a full face would have protected.
Look where you hit: right on the margins of the edge of the helmet. A slightly different angle and you are in the unprotect zone.

[redrider90]

Well, you know what they say, most injuries from the knees down.  It's really nice to have full functioning original legs and feet.

Interesting quote "most injuries from the knees down". Not many people die from a road rash or a broken leg but as far as deaths are concerned its comes down to 2 parts. 1. Those injuries which are so severe (high speed/high impact/) that no amount of armor would help.
2. Head injuries
From this very good article https://www.msf-usa.org/downloads/imsc2013/Oct17_Session2-Thom_Ouellet_Smith_Hurt-Helmets_and_Neck_Injuries_in_Fatal_Motorcycle_Crashes_PAPER.pdf

" Helmet vs helmetless reveals the effectiveness of helmet use in
preventing death and severe brain injury has been demonstrated over and over (e.g.,
Liu et al., 2009; Crompton et al., 2011).  As just one example, Ouellet et al., reported
that about half of fatally injured riders would die of their injuries outside the head/neck
region.  Of the half whose below-the-neck injuries are likely survivable, helmet use
could prevent about 80% of deaths.  This estimated reduction is the risk of death (80%
of half, or 40% of the total) corresponds closely to Deutermann�s (2004) estimate that
helmet use reduces the risk of dying in a motorcycle crash by 37%." 
Roughly one in six unhelmeted riders died in crashes where the worst below-the-neck
injury was no worse than a scraped knee or broken toe.

From this study out of Brazil they found open face half helmets were little to no better than no helmets.
http://www.motorbiketimes.com/feature/gear/helmets/study-open-face-helmets-offer-as-much-protection-as-no-helmet-$21383483.htm

The study found open-face helmets offered little protection against brain injury. Of the 156 riders without helmets, 108 suffered a traumatic brain injury (TBI). That equates to 69.2% of patients.
Shockingly, 39 out of the 51 patients who wore an open-face helmet also suffered a brain injury. This is a mammoth 76.5% of people in the study, suggesting little or no difference between wearing an open-face helmet and nothing at all.

[Kev m]

From this study out of Brazil they found open face half helmets were little to no better than no helmets.
http://www.motorbiketimes.com/feature/gear/helmets/study-open-face-helmets-offer-as-much-protection-as-no-helmet-$21383483.htm

The study found open-face helmets offered little protection against brain injury. Of the 156 riders without helmets, 108 suffered a traumatic brain injury (TBI). That equates to 69.2% of patients.
Shockingly, 39 out of the 51 patients who wore an open-face helmet also suffered a brain injury. This is a mammoth 76.5% of people in the study, suggesting little or no difference between wearing an open-face helmet and nothing at all.

It's a good look at potential differences.

However a quick look at that article and the data leaves me with a few questions regarding the conclusions.

1. Their definition of open face? It seems to lump half shells and 3/4's together. It's my causal observation that most people where half shells to fulfill the legal requirement to wear something, and those people tend to care little about the fit and quality of a helmet. I'd have wonder if isolating 3/4 helmets would change the data.

2. The difference between FF and open face for a TBI (Tramatic Brain Injury) was actually less than 25%. So I'm not sure how significant I'd call it.

3. A TBI sounds bad. But it appears their definition is pretty loose including ANY loss of consciousness or memory loss. Though not things to shrug off too lightly they are the types of things that can happen from a concussion or sports injury in a lot of other pursuits in which many of us participate and not necessarily signs of life threatening or permanent deficit injuries.


4. Sample size was pretty low on FF and open face riders.

[redrider90]

It's a good look at potential differences.

However a quick look at that article and the data leaves me with a few questions regarding the conclusions.

1. Their definition of open face? It seems to lump half shells and 3/4's together. It's my causal observation that most people where half shells to fulfill the legal requirement to wear something, and those people tend to care little about the fit and quality of a helmet. I'd have wonder if isolating 3/4 helmets would change the data.

2. The difference between FF and open face for a TBI (Tramatic Brain Injury) was actually less than 25%. So I'm not sure how significant I'd call it.

3. A TBI sounds bad. But it appears their definition is pretty loose including ANY loss of consciousness or memory loss. Though not things to shrug off too lightly they are the types of things that can happen from a concussion or sports injury in a lot of other pursuits in which many of us participate and not necessarily signs of life threatening or permanent deficit injuries.


4. Sample size was pretty low on FF and open face riders.

Granted the 2nd article (not a scientific paper) was a poorly written piece and I probably should not have used it.
The 1st article by the MSF was much better. But if you really want to sink your teeth into something scientific that breaks down the 3 helmet types.,
1/2, 3/4 and full face then this one from the International Journal of Epidemiology has what I would be looking for.
Granted it might put many people to sleep trying to get past "conditional logistic regression analysis" but the quote below tells us what we as MCists already know. FF is the by far the best protection.

As to your 2nd. point "The difference between FF and open face for a TBI (Tramatic Brain Injury) was actually less than 25%. So I'm not sure how significant I'd call it." I would say that a 25% difference in morbidity/mortality in any medical science study is a HUGE difference with it be drugs, operation procedures, or MC helmets. Consider a new drug that would reduce mortality by 25% in say breast or lung cancer. That would be considered a massive improvement in outcome. Take your own motorcycle and reduce its stopping distance by 25% just by changing the pads and calipers and you would be 1st in line to order them. So your statement that 25% reduction of TBI for FF is not significant, really is significantly wrong.
See this paper if you want some real analysis.
"Effectiveness of different types of motorcycle helmets and effects of their improper use on head injuries"
http://ije.oxfordjournals.org/content/early/2011/03/08/ije.dyr040.full


Results A conditional logistic regression analysis showed that compared with helmeted motorcyclists, non-helmeted motorcyclists were more than four times as likely to have head injuries [odds ratio (OR) 4.54; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.25–16.5] and ten times as likely to have brain injuries (OR 10.4; 95% CI 1.82–59.2). Compared with motorcyclists wearing full-face helmets, those wearing half-coverage helmets were more than twice as likely to have head injuries (OR 2.57; 95% CI 1.50–4.40) and brain injuries (OR 2.10; 95% CI 1.01–4.38). Compared with motorcyclists with firmly fastened helmets, those with loosely fastened helmets increased their risk of head injury (OR 1.94; 95% CI 1.33–2.82) and were more than twice as likely to have brain injuries (OR 2.50; 95% CI 1.47–4.25).

Conclusions Of the three helmet types, half-coverage helmets provided motorcyclists the least protection from head injuries. Furthermore, wearing a loosely fastened helmet may compromise any potential protection.

[LowRyter]

I am glad you're reasonably OK and are going to recover. 

So long as you mentioned your gear, do you think those heavy boots might have contributed your ankle injuries?  Motorcycle boots have armor and protection but are made to be light (and usually don't offer much support for walking).

Padded riding pants or over pants might've protected some of the bruising.  It appears the helmet did it's job.  That's the main thing.

I hope you get it all fixed, body, mind and bike and going on down the road soon. 

[Kev m]

Granted the 2nd article (not a scientific paper) was a poorly written piece and I probably should not have used it.
The 1st article by the MSF was much better. But if you really want to sink your teeth into something scientific that breaks down the 3 helmet types.,
1/2, 3/4 and full face then this one from the International Journal of Epidemiology has what I would be looking for.
Granted it might put many people to sleep trying to get past "conditional logistic regression analysis" but the quote below tells us what we as MCists already know. FF is the by far the best protection.

As to your 2nd. point "The difference between FF and open face for a TBI (Tramatic Brain Injury) was actually less than 25%. So I'm not sure how significant I'd call it." I would say that a 25% difference in morbidity/mortality in any medical science study is a HUGE difference with it be drugs, operation procedures, or MC helmets. Consider a new drug that would reduce mortality by 25% in say breast or lung cancer. That would be considered a massive improvement in outcome. Take your own motorcycle and reduce its stopping distance by 25% just by changing the pads and calipers and you would be 1st in line to order them. So your statement that 25% reduction of TBI for FF is not significant, really is significantly wrong.
See this paper if you want some real analysis.
"Effectiveness of different types of motorcycle helmets and effects of their improper use on head injuries"
http://ije.oxfordjournals.org/content/early/2011/03/08/ije.dyr040.full


Results A conditional logistic regression analysis showed that compared with helmeted motorcyclists, non-helmeted motorcyclists were more than four times as likely to have head injuries [odds ratio (OR) 4.54; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.25�16.5] and ten times as likely to have brain injuries (OR 10.4; 95% CI 1.82�59.2). Compared with motorcyclists wearing full-face helmets, those wearing half-coverage helmets were more than twice as likely to have head injuries (OR 2.57; 95% CI 1.50�4.40) and brain injuries (OR 2.10; 95% CI 1.01�4.38). Compared with motorcyclists with firmly fastened helmets, those with loosely fastened helmets increased their risk of head injury (OR 1.94; 95% CI 1.33�2.82) and were more than twice as likely to have brain injuries (OR 2.50; 95% CI 1.47�4.25).

Conclusions Of the three helmet types, half-coverage helmets provided motorcyclists the least protection from head injuries. Furthermore, wearing a loosely fastened helmet may compromise any potential protection.

Thanks for the follow up, I'll go through that new study when I have a moment.

But I have to reply to the 25% discussion.

We're not talking about mortality. The study showed that in an accident THAT INCLUDES INJURIES 2 out of 4 wearing a FF helmet will get a TBI that could be anything even as relatively "minor" as a concussion, but 3 out of 4 with an "open face" would suffer the same.

And as I said, we don't know what percentage of that difference was crap, loose-fitting half shells or quality fitting 3/4's.

It seems that your latest study suggests fit is important, so it's reasonable to question the significance of the 25% data.

But my main point was simple risk assessment.

[ITSec]

I've had several comments about my helmet, both online and in person.  I'd like to revisit the ATGATT.

If I had been wearing hip and knee armor, I wouldn't have bruised hips and knees.  If I had had armor in my jacket, my elbow might be better and maybe my shoulder, too.  Bottom line is I could have done better with the gear.  As it was, the folks at the hospital seemed very pleased with my level of protection.  I imagine they get plenty of wrecks with riders wearing puddin' bowls, shorts, tee shirt, and tennis shoes.

Any thoughts or comments?  And thank you for all the well wishes.  It helps more than anything.

It's good to see you doing what may be the most important thing - examining how you got to where you are, and whether there might be better approaches in future.

If I'm outside my home city, it's full armor everywhere, protective riding boots (Sidi or Alpinestar) and a modular helmet. If I'm inside the city, I may forgo the armored pants and wear khakis, and I usually just use leather shoes with a steel shank (Rockports) or low riding boots. The armored jacket, gloves, etc all stay, and the helmet is at least a 3/4. Even with this, I've been pretty bruised by a get-off - but I've never missed more than one day of work.

And on a related note, my helmets are all properly fitted and I retire them after about 5 years or one impact (greater than a bump). In my view, a half-helmet (even properly fitted) is too easily hooked and pulled out of position, and leaves too much of the brain-stem area exposed.

I guess I'm AATGATT - (almost) all the gear, definitely all the time.