Only One of These Matters: 'CE Tested', 'CE Certified' and 'CE Approved' - Which One? Motorcycle Accessories & Apparels >
Founding Member 7,820 posts V-Twin Founding Member 7,820 posts
V-Twin
Published by: Rick K. for WebBikeWorld


Background

Motorcyclists of the world: you've been had. That means me too, and I don't like it one bit.

We strive to bring you precisely accurate information on webBikeWorld.

That is information for intelligent people to make intelligent, logical decisions on what to buy...

...I'm referring to the European motorcycle clothing safety standards - the only thing we as motorcyclists can count on for even a smidgen of an idea on whether or not our clothing is actually going to do anything to protect us.

So we put together this informational document to try and explain the issues.



CE Tested, Certified or Approved?

First of all, it's important to note that there is a difference between the terms "CE Certified" and "CE Approved". Too many manufacturers toss those terms out hoping, as I've learned, that we won't look too far under the covers.

Manufacturers sometimes state something like "tested to meet CE Level 1". That doesn't necessarily mean the garment was tested in an approved testing facility. or "CE Certified" or "CE Approved", when the only part of the garment that might have been tested, certified or approved is the protectors. This is also false: just having certified or approved protectors doesn't necessarily mean the rest of the garment meets the standards.

Tested: Usually means that the manufacturer tested the garment sample or samples in their own facility to meet (possibly) certain standards. But the sample may not have been sent to a certified testing facility for the official testing procedures.

Certified: Garment samples were tested at a certified testing facility and may have passed specific tests in one or more zones.

Approved: To be "CE Approved", multiple samples of the garment must have been tested by a certified facility and certified to meet or exceed the relevant standards in all zones.

To repeat, here are the cautions: "Tested" usually means the garment was tested in the manufacturer's facility and may not mean the entire garment was tested in each zone. Also, you have to depend on the truthfulness of the manufacturer's claims that the garment was indeed tested according to the specific regimen outlined in the standard.

For "Certified", it's important to know which part or zone of the garment was certified. Also, look for the official documentation from the certified lab. Here is a sample entry from an official report. Note also that multiple samples must be tested for an average.


More Subterfuge

Be very careful when reading a manufacturer's testing claims. Here's a real example; this happens all the time:

Example: A manufacturer of motorcycle pants claims 5.5 seconds of abrasion resistance. What they don't tell you is that result was for one version of their pants only, and then only in one zone. Or, they'll claim a specific performance for all of the versions of a particular jacket or pants, not telling you that the test result was for one model that had different fabrics. Call it what it is: lying! And it happens much too often.

ce-sample-test-results.jpg 


What Does the EN 13595-1 Test Report Look Like?

If the garment really is CE "Approved", then it should have all of the relevant documentation to back up that claim (although the consumer will usually not get a copy of the full official report). Here is a sample .pdf report that illustrates the EN 13595-1 testing regime. The manufacturer and the testing results have been redacted.


And Watch Out for Fakes

We have ranted about the fake CE certifications many times and that's bad enough. But it's usually pretty easy to see through those lies. If you don't get the consumer version of the CE documentation with test results that lists the certifying, approved laboratory and the test results, then your CE "Approved" clothing isn't.

This frequently happens with protectors included in motorcycle jackets and pants. The manufacturer molds a fake "CE" logo on the protector and tell you it's "CE Approved". No documentation? Don't believe it.

how-to-read-a-ce-standards-label.jpg 

Know the Zones!

To achieve a genuine CE Approval, the garment construction as well as the materials have to achieve the performance levels outlined in the standard, including abrasion resistance, cut resistance and burst strength, in multiple zones.

Meeting all the standards will probably make the garment much heavier; for example, a pair of jeans that is truly approved could be as much as 0.5 kg heavier than non-approved jeans. But you will also be assured that it is certified to have passed all the relevant tests.

And there's more: as noted, the manufacturer will sometimes state that the garment "meets", "was tested to", "certified" or "approved" to, say, the CE EN 13595-1 Level 1 standard. But the garment may have only passed the test in one zone.

If, for example, zone 4 passes with an abrasion resistance of only one second, the manufacturer may mislead you by stating the the garment "meets" or is "certified" to Level 1. But this would be highly misleading, as it only applies to Zone 4 and does not mean that garment meets the full CE test.

A pass for Zone 4 is relatively meaningless for the risks faced across the remaining majority of the garment, as Zone 4 areas are those least likely to be in contact with the road when you crash. See the following:

ce-impact-zones.jpg 

ce-impact-zone-descriptions.jpg 


CE Standards for Motorcycle Clothing

Here are the relevant CE standards for Personal Protective Equipment related to motorcycle clothing. NOTE: It's nearly impossible to find actual copies online of the relevant standards - another pet peeve. Taxpayer money is used to develop the standards, then for-profit companies sell the standards documents back to the public. Standards should be free and open so that anyone who wants to manufacture a better, safer product can have the standards available.

  • EN 13634:2011 (formerly EN 13634:2002) - Protective footwear for professional motorcycle riders. Requirements and test methods. Superseded by .
  • EN 13594:2008 - Protective gloves for professional motorcycle riders. Requirements and test methods.
  • EN 1621-1:1998 - Motorcyclists' protective clothing against mechanical impact. Requirements and test methods for impact protectors.
  • EN 1621-2:2003 - Motorcyclists' protective clothing against mechanical impact. Motorcyclists back protectors. Requirements and test methods.
  • EN 1938:1999 - Personal eye protection. Goggles for motorcycle and moped users.
  • EN 13595-1:2008 - Protective clothing for professional motorcycle riders. Jackets, trousers and one piece or divided suits.
  • EN 13595-2:2002 (2008) - Protective clothing for professional motorcycle riders. Jackets, trousers and one piece or divided suits. Test method for determination of impact abrasion resistance.
  • EN 13595-3:2002 - Protective clothing for professional motorcycle riders. Jackets, trousers and one piece or divided suits. Test method for determination of burst strength.
  • EN 13595-4:2002 - Protective clothing for professional motorcycle riders. Jackets, trousers and one piece or divided suits. Test methods for the determination of impact cut resistance.

For abrasion resistance (EN 13595-1), Clause 5.4 is relevant. Cut resistance (EN 13595-1), Clause 5.5. For burst strength (EN 13595-1), Clause 5.6 is relevant. The combined report for full CE approval is all of EN 13595-1 (currently :2002).

Also, CE 13595-2 is the same as CE-13595-1, Clause 5.4. CE-13595-1 when used on its own means all the tests combined. For example, CE 13595-1 means 13595-2, 13595-3 and 13595-4 together. CE 13595-1 clauses 5.4, 5.5 or 5.6 identify each section of the test: Impact, Cut and Burst.


What to Look For

Does the manufacturer list a CE zone diagram and explain exactly how the clothing item was tested, certified or approved?
Do they explain the meaning of the times they recorded for the Level 1 and/or Level 2 tests?
Do they explain that certified means tested but not Approved?
Do they provide the necessary documentation listing the certified testing facility and the test results?

If a manufacturer claims that a jacket, pants, jeans, gloves or helmet is "CE Approved", ask to see the proof. Tell 'em no proof, no sale! We can force this issue and get them to change.



This is a truncated version.  For full article, please visit: http://www.webbikeworld.com/Motorcycle-clothing/ce-certified-vs-approved.htm
Melbourne, Victoria
Quote 2 0
V-Twin Founding Member 7,820 posts
V-Twin
Granted, abrasion during a slide is different to regular wear and tear but you decide if you think these gloves would have protected me.

I purchase Dainese X-Strike Gloves... they cost well $270.  After only about 3 months, signs of wear appeared.  By around 6 months, it developed a hole in the finger.  I did not come off wearing these gloves.  It was worn daily and the hole developed from using the clutch lever.  I have had stacks of Dainese gloves and they have never done that.  I guess their contracted manufacturers were trying a new leather supplier!?

I still have a few pairs of Dainese from the past but I am not sure if I would invest in Dainese gloves again.  The question is, other brands any better?  They are probably all outsourced to the same group of manufacturing plants in China or Thailand?


dainese-gloves-develop-a-hole.jpg 


dainese-x-strike-ce-certified-ad.jpg


And now we know what "Certified to CE2" really means, don't we???    [rolleyes]
Melbourne, Victoria
Quote 2 0
1854cc Full Member 167 posts
1854cc
I have to say that over the 30+ years I have been riding and buying stuff I have never bothered to look at any kind certification.  I have just assumed that gear that is sold as bike gear in a bike shop is up to the standard that it was manufactured for.  Obviously I wouldn't expect that for gear you buy in Bali on the beach.  Goes to show how they can muddy the waters, even for those that did bother to look. 
Good article.  Makes you wanna ride American style (T-Shirt, Short and no helmet).  Just kidding [smile]
Quote 1 0
V-Twin Founding Member 7,820 posts
V-Twin
1854cc wrote:
I have to say that over the 30+ years I have been riding and buying stuff I have never bothered to look at any kind certification.  
I hear you!  What you are talking about is 'trust'.  At the risk of sounding old (me), I think things have changed.  There was a time when manufacturers took the time to make things properly.  These days, to satisfy shareholders, products are made as cheaply as possible.  Continuous cost cutting meant quality degradation.  That is where we are at now.  At the beginning, only one or two companies made sub-standard products... but they flourished while other, 'quality' manufacturers struggled to make a profit or stay in business.  In the end, everyone had to make things 'off shore' to survive.  We are just starting to wake up to the impact of 'cheap products' (cheap to manufacturers, not to consumers).  The way the manufacturers have been misleading us.
Melbourne, Victoria
Quote 1 0
crash Founding Member 2,565 posts
crash
V-Twin wrote:
I hear you!  What you are talking about is 'trust'.  At the risk of sounding old (me), I think things have changed.  There was a time when manufacturers took the time to make things properly.  These days, to satisfy shareholders, products are made as cheaply as possible.  Continuous cost cutting meant quality degradation.  That is where we are at now.  At the beginning, only one or two companies made sub-standard products... but they flourished while other, 'quality' manufacturers struggled to make a profit or stay in business.  In the end, everyone had to make things 'off shore' to survive.  We are just starting to wake up to the impact of 'cheap products' (cheap to manufacturers, not to consumers).  The way the manufacturers have been misleading us.


What you are saying is very true.  The mentality nowadays (at the risk of sounding old - damn, I have become my dad without even knowing it) is for product that looks good and is disposable.  It's not intended to last a long time and it may not even be fit for purpose but so long as it's cost effective.
I can imagine that if manufacturers produce a product that is too good, they won't sell too many of them which is counter intuitive for a company that relies on sales (all manufacturers do).  The people are demanding cheaper - because they can get a "similar" product at the market for 1/2 the price - looks the same, smells the same, feels the same so must be the same hey.  For the manufacturer to compete in this space they are saying "well, we have to do what it takes" and "if that's what they want then so be it".  Whilst I understand that it is driven by the manufacturer to bring the costs down, it is ultimately driven by the consumer looking continuously for the "bargain" price.

A classic example of this is bali where I can buy a rolex for $15.  It says rolex on the front and the back so it must be a rolex, right?

Unfortunately it does not pay a manufacturer to make things properly.  If they do then there is little return custom because their product lasts a lifetime.  Sure, they may pick up the odd extra sale from word of mouth but their purchase also lasts a lifetime.  So it is in the manufacturers best interest to make the product with a shelf life so that people will return to buy another.  If this means reducing the quality of the product to a lower level then so be it - I can reduce the cost of the product from $200 (for a lifetime product) to $100 for a product with a shelf life of 5 years.  This way I am likely (over a 20 year period) to have earned $400 by reducing the quality - it's still reasonable but not as good so people will still come back for another.

An example of this would be a leather jacket.  I was bought one when I was 21 (and still got it) but the leather was sub standard.  It looked the part at the time of purchase but over a short period of time the leather surface separated from the body of the leather and looked pretty shabby.  At one time, this leather would have been rejected but in this case it was deemed good enough for a motorcycle jacket.  I dread to think what would have happened if it went down the road - probably would have disintegrated on impact.

Alpine star gloves is another example, There is a particular type that I like to wear however after purchasing my first pair (which were really good I thought), I bought 7 more pair (because everything that I like appears to be discontinued when I go back to buy more).  But the ones that I purchased seemed to have been put together with inferior cotton and they have a tendancy to develop problems with the stitching coming apart.

Wouldn't it be nice to buy a pair of gloves (or two pair) and know that the quality of the manufacturing and the quality of the materials will ensure that the product will hold together for a reasonable time frame and when they do fail, you are able to get them repaired.

Why do you think warranties were introduced? to ensure that the product at least lasts for a reasonable period and is fit for purpose.

I fear that we are (as a nation) becoming the "victims" of our own desire to find a bargain.
Ulysses #30673
IMRG #AU100394
Current: RoadMaster (ebony and ivory)
Highett Victoria Australia
Quote 1 0
V-Twin Founding Member 7,820 posts
V-Twin
crash wrote:
I fear that we are (as a nation) becoming the "victims" of our own desire to find a bargain.
I agree with everything you said, except 'bargain'... I would say the driving force is actually greed.  😟

How can we, as shareholders, demand 5% growth every year?  Maybe in the first 5 or 10 years of business but to achieve something like that forever?  It is not possible without retrenching workforce or reducing cost or increasing sales.  Increasing sale is fine, but other two options are receipe for sub-standard products.  What do we do when a company doesn't perform?  We punish them by selling their stock!  So what choice do they have?

What's worse, big companies outsource.  Indian leather jackets are made in Vietnam by a company that put in the cheapest tender!  I've got Indian Racer jackets as part of the bike purchase... zipper on both mine and my wife's had to be replaced already.  They weren't even two years old and hardly worn.

I hope we can change, when we realise the full impact of 'that extra dividend' we so desire...
Melbourne, Victoria
Quote 1 0
V-Twin Founding Member 7,820 posts
V-Twin
Mark Hinchliffe shared a link to his articles with me today.

https://motorbikewriter.com/call-end-confusion-protective-clothing/

and

https://motorbikewriter.com/protective-rider-gear-confusing/
Melbourne, Victoria
Quote 1 0
bazwp Junior Member 10 posts
bazwp
I am a big fan of Resurgence gear.   https://www.resurgencegear.com.au/  give a go its top notch.
Quote 0 0
V-Twin Founding Member 7,820 posts
V-Twin
People are catching on to ‘CE’ labels and false claims.  If interested, please fast forward to 7:15 on the following video.

If you are interested in buying quality helmets, watch the video from the start.
Melbourne, Victoria
Quote 2 0
Tezza Full Member 394 posts
Tezza
Great post V-Twin.

IMRG  AU101238
Ulysses  25368

2016 Indian Scout
2013 Boulevard C50T
Penrith, NSW
Never lose your sense of humour.  [smile]
Quote 1 0
Washbrook Full Member 271 posts
Washbrook
Great video.
Norman Hall [aka Washbrook]
Man of Few Words
2017 Indian Roadmaster [Willow Green over Ivory Cream]
1999 Vulcan Drifter
Quote 0 0