MOTORCYCLE APPAREL CERTIFICATIONS: CE, EN 17092, EN 13634

A product page that just says “CE rated” doesn’t tell me anything. When I’m shopping motorcycle apparel, I assume the claim is marketing until I can tie it to a specific standard, a level/class, and (ideally) a photo of the actual label.

TL;DR: the certifications I actually trust

If I’m trying to compare motorcycle apparel honestly across brands and price points, I focus on three buckets:

• Impact armor: EN1621-1 for limb/joint armor and EN1621-2 for back protectors.
• Garments (jackets/pants/one-pieces): EN17092 for abrasion, tear, seam burst, and impact protector requirements, with classes A / AA / AAA.
• Footwear: EN 13634:2017 (SATRA) for motorcycle boots/shoes.

Why these? Because they’re the standards that let me answer the real shopping questions quickly: “Is this armor actually Level 2?”, “Is this jacket A or AA?”, “Are these boots certified at all?” Riders constantly ask for filterable safety ratings (including boots), and I get it-certification data is a primary decision driver, not trivia.

One important limit: certification isn’t a promise you won’t get hurt. It’s proof a specific item passed specific tests. Fit, coverage, and how you actually ride still matter.

CE impact armor basics: EN 1621-1 vs EN 1621-2

“CE armor” usually means impact protectors tested to an EN 1621 standard. The two I care about most are limb/joint armor and back protection.

EN1621-1: limb/joint armor

What it covers: impact protectors for shoulders (S), elbows (E), knees (K), hips (H), legs (L), and knee+leg (K+L).

How it’s tested (in plain English): armor is struck at 50J (a 5 kg anvil dropped from 1 m) and measured for how much force gets through. It’s tested across temperatures from -10°C to +40°C.

Levels (what they mean):

• Level 1: mean transmitted force ≤ 35 kN
• Level 2: mean transmitted force ≤ 20 kN

Coverage types:

• Type A: smaller coverage
• Type B: larger coverage

Real-world example I use while shopping: if I’m looking at slim, casual-looking riding pants (or an underlayer meant to disappear under “normal clothes”), Type B knee armor can simply not fit the pocket even if it’s “better” on paper. That’s the tradeoff: Type B gives more coverage, but Type A often fits tighter cuts.

Pros/cons (EN 1621-1):

• Pros: clear Level 1 vs Level 2 thresholds; includes coverage sizing (Type A/B); tested across a meaningful temperature range.
• Cons: Level 2 often costs comfort-more bulk and less flexibility is a real friction point, especially in tight-fitting gear.

EN1621-2: back protectors

What it covers: back protectors, with coverage types like full back, central back, or lumbar.

Test conditions: includes ambient and wet tests; optional high (+40°C) and low (-10°C) temperature tests.

Levels (what they mean):

• Level 1: mean ≤ 18 kN, single strike ≤ 24 kN
• Level 2: mean ≤ 9 kN, single strike ≤ 12 kN

Post-test requirement: it must not fragment or form sharp edges.

Over time, most riders I talk to end up with a preference here: early on, people tolerate whatever came in the jacket; after months of riding, they notice pressure points, heat, and stiffness and start caring about the Level/shape/coverage. Level 2 is excellent on impact numbers, but it can be thicker and less flexible-something you’ll feel on longer days.

Pros/cons (EN 1621-2):

• Pros: very clear performance thresholds; wet testing is baked in; Level 2 numbers are meaningfully stricter.
• Cons: Level 2 can be harder to live with day-to-day due to thickness and reduced flexibility.

Garment protection: EN 17092 and why seams matter

EN17092 is the CE standard for motorcycle protective clothing. It grades garments into A, AA, AAA based on abrasion resistance, tear strength, seam burst, impact protector absorption, and dimensional stability after cleaning.

The part I want you to remember: a garment doesn’t fail only because the fabric wears through. In real crashes, seams can pop and panels can shift. That’s why I treat seam burst and tear strength as just as important as abrasion.

Classes I use in real shopping decisions

• Class A: aimed at urban riding. Abrasion time in risk zones is 0.5-1.0 seconds, with high comfort.
• Class AA: sport/touring balance. Abrasion time 1.5-2.5 seconds, medium comfort.
• Class AAA: track/racing focus. Abrasion time 4.0 seconds+, low comfort.

A concrete scenario: if I’m choosing a jacket for mixed city and highway days, I’m usually comparing AA vs A. Class A can feel great in stop-and-go heat, but it’s explicitly not meant for the same crash severity as AA/AAA. The standard itself makes that tradeoff clear.

Pros/cons (EN 17092):

• Pros: gives a single class (A/AA/AAA) that’s easy to compare; includes seams/tears, not just abrasion.
• Cons: lower classes are legitimately limited; using Class A for high-speed highway riding is a mismatch.

If you want a broader shopping framework beyond certifications (materials, armor placement, abrasion areas), I keep it practical in what to look for in motorcycle apparel safety.

Motorcycle footwear: EN 13634 separates real boots

EN 13634:2017 (SATRA) is the European standard for motorcycle footwear. It’s the one I look for when a listing calls something a “riding shoe” but it looks like a casual sneaker.

What it tests (mandatory properties):

• Minimum upper height (varies by level)
• Impact abrasion resistance
• Impact cut resistance
• Transverse rigidity (crush resistance)

Certification levels: Level 1 and Level 2.

• Level 1 is positioned for urban/casual riding.
• Level 2 is positioned for sports bikes, touring, and adventure riding, where higher impact/abrasion demands are more likely.

Optional properties (not guaranteed): ankle/shin impact energy protection, water penetration resistance, fuel oil resistance of outsole, slip resistance of outsole, water vapour permeability.

That optional list is the friction point: two boots can both be “EN 13634:2017 certified” and still differ a lot in real use (wet weather, slick surfaces, ankle protection). I don’t assume those extras unless the marking or documentation explicitly calls them out.

Pros/cons (EN 13634:2017):

• Pros: standardized testing across brands; covers core boot failure modes (abrasion/cut/crush).
• Cons: optional tests aren’t mandatory, so “certified” doesn’t automatically mean waterproof, slip-resistant, or ankle-protective.

If you want the quick, visual checks I use specifically for boots, I also break it down in my EN 13634 boot safety checklist.

How I verify CE claims (my 5-step check)

This is the workflow I use when a product page is vague. It’s fast, and it usually tells me whether I’m looking at real PPE or a pile of keywords.

1. I look for the exact standard code + year/version. “CE” alone is meaningless. I want to see something like EN 1621-1:2012, EN 17092, or EN 13634:2017.

2. I look for the performance level/class.

   • Armor: Level 1 or Level 2 (and for EN 1621-1, Type A or B)
   • Garments: A / AA / AAA
   • Boots: Level 1 or Level 2

3. I check for a label photo, not a marketing badge. I want a photo of the sewn-in garment label or the armor stamp. r/motorcyclegear regulars consistently complain that safety ratings aren’t clearly displayed; I treat that as a signal that label literacy is part of shopping now.

4. I sanity-check fit and placement, not just the certificate. Certified armor that sits off your knee or floats away from your elbow in riding position is a practical failure. This is where men’s vs women’s cuts matter: I care less about the gender label and more about whether the armor stays on the joint when I bend.

5. If info is missing, I downgrade the claim in my head. No standard number, no level/class, no label photo? I treat it as “uncertified until proven otherwise,” especially with casual-styled gear and underlayers.

Red flags I don’t ignore

• “CE rated” with no EN standard number
• Standard number shown but no level/class
• No year/version when the standard is typically versioned
• No photos of tags/labels/armor markings
• Copy that talks about “protection” but never says what was tested

“CE rated” vs “CE approved” vs meaningless claims

Here’s how I translate common wording:

• “CE rated”: could mean anything. I only trust it when it’s paired with an EN standard and a level/class.
• “CE approved”: also vague in listings. Again, I’m looking for the standard code and the performance result.
• Random standards soup: if a listing throws numbers around without matching them to the product type (armor vs garment vs footwear), I assume it’s there to impress, not inform.

The practical takeaway: the standard has to match the item. EN 1621-2 is for back protectors; EN 13634 is for boots; EN 17092 is for garments. If the mapping doesn’t make sense, I stop trusting the page.

What’s missing from many listings (and what I do)

Two categories are where I see the most missing or slippery info:

1. Casual-looking gear and underlayers. Budget “normal clothes” discussions push riders toward underlayers (Bowtex, Pando Moto) and casual-styled pieces, and certification transparency can be inconsistent. When the whole point is discretion, labels and documentation are often less visible.

2. Anything outside the big three buckets. Even when jackets and pants are clearly EN 17092, listings can be thin on what armor is included, what level it is, and whether it’s Type A or B.

When info is incomplete, I do three things:

• I ask for a photo of the actual label/marking (garment tag, armor stamp, boot marking). If a brand can’t produce that, I treat the claim as unverified.
• I decide what risk I’m actually managing. For a low-speed urban commute, I might accept a comfort-first compromise; for highway touring, I won’t.
• I prioritize fit and coverage once the baseline is real. After I confirm a standard and level/class, I spend my time on armor placement, seam locations, and whether the gear stays put in riding position.

FAQ

What does CE Level 1 vs Level 2 mean for motorcycle armor?

For EN 1621-1:2012 limb armor, Level 1 allows mean transmitted force up to 35 kN, while Level 2 tightens that to 20 kN. For EN 1621-2 back protectors, Level 1 is mean ≤ 18 kN and Level 2 is mean ≤ 9 kN. Level 2 generally means better impact attenuation, with the tradeoff of more bulk and less flexibility.

Is EN 17092 AA good enough for street riding?

EN 17092 AA is positioned as a sport/touring balance, with abrasion time in risk zones of 1.5-2.5 seconds. For many street riders-especially mixed city and highway-it’s the class I see as the “middle ground” between comfort and protection. If your riding looks more like track/racing, AAA is the class aimed at that scenario.

How do I verify a CE claim if the listing has no tag photo?

I look for the exact EN standard code and the level/class in the written spec first. If that’s missing or vague, I ask the seller or brand for a photo of the sewn-in label (garments), the armor marking (protectors), or the boot marking (footwear). If they can’t provide it, I treat the claim as marketing, not evidence.

Do motorcycle boots have a CE standard?

Yes: EN 13634:2017 is the European standard for motorcycle protective footwear. It includes mandatory tests for upper height, impact abrasion resistance, impact cut resistance, and transverse rigidity, with Level 1 and Level 2 certification levels.

What should I do if a brand won’t publish certification details?

I assume the item is uncertified until proven otherwise and shop accordingly. At minimum, I want the standard code (like EN 17092 or EN 13634:2017) plus the class/level, because that’s what makes comparisons real. If the brand won’t share that, I move on-there’s too much certified gear available to gamble on vague claims.