Oxford Clothing - Is the reputation fair?
Discussion
Just purchased an Oxford Montreal 2.0 jacket which was awarded a Ride magazine Best Buy and seems really well designed with positive reviews. However, I have seen quite a few negative opinions about Oxford products generally. Is this based on older products and they have now improved (i.e. like Skoda with cars)? I know they are never going to be rukka standard, but their stuff seems great value.
I need to buy some trousers and after trying a few on, I am tempted by the Oxford Titan 2.0 which fitted my short legs really well. Can't find any reviews of these though.
I need to buy some trousers and after trying a few on, I am tempted by the Oxford Titan 2.0 which fitted my short legs really well. Can't find any reviews of these though.
wilbo83 said:
Just purchased an Oxford Montreal 2.0 jacket which was awarded a Ride magazine Best Buy and seems really well designed with positive reviews. However, I have seen quite a few negative opinions about Oxford products generally. Is this based on older products and they have now improved (i.e. like Skoda with cars)? I know they are never going to be rukka standard, but their stuff seems great value.
I need to buy some trousers and after trying a few on, I am tempted by the Oxford Titan 2.0 which fitted my short legs really well. Can't find any reviews of these though.
Don't really know, I have some bone dry gloves that aren't so now use them for gardening. You may need to get Oxford trouser's now though as the connecting zips aren't universal between different brands.I need to buy some trousers and after trying a few on, I am tempted by the Oxford Titan 2.0 which fitted my short legs really well. Can't find any reviews of these though.
wilbo83 said:
Just purchased an Oxford Montreal 2.0 jacket which was awarded a Ride magazine Best Buy and seems really well designed with positive reviews. However, I have seen quite a few negative opinions about Oxford products generally. Is this based on older products and they have now improved (i.e. like Skoda with cars)? I know they are never going to be rukka standard, but their stuff seems great value.
I need to buy some trousers and after trying a few on, I am tempted by the Oxford Titan 2.0 which fitted my short legs really well. Can't find any reviews of these though.
Well feel free OP to keep us updated how you get on, maybe amazingly they have improved you can be the one to tell us. Please tell me you'll stress the kit out correctly all year round all weathers right? I need to buy some trousers and after trying a few on, I am tempted by the Oxford Titan 2.0 which fitted my short legs really well. Can't find any reviews of these though.
My last significant Oxford clothing product was a pair of goretex boots, they holed on the gearchange pad on the left boot letting in water within a year using them for commuting, £130 down the drain. Just not up to the job. This was a long time ago now.
As soon as I switched to expensive more quality brands I suddenly get multiple years hassle free use from them before they fail.
Looking forward to being educated otherwise.
There is no easy answer to this and it also very much depends on what you mean by the reputation being fair.
The primary purpose for most motorcycle clothing relates to accident protection. This can only be reliably judged relative to other products and through controlled repeatable tests. Anecdotal evidence is of very limited value unless it can be backed up through controlled testing.
The second purpose tends to be around weather/elements protection. While, ideally, this should also be tested using controlled repeatable tests which are compared to the results of other products, such comparison tests are extremely rare. Anecdotal evidence has more value here due to both the lack of scientifically controlled testing and the fact that “getting it wrong” does not ever result in a life changing/threatening outcome.
That leaves those who also purchase motorcycle clothing for style and/or value for money reasons. As both of these are totally in the perception of the buyer they are a lot more difficult to measure.
This is a long way of getting to the point that if, the evidence of the protective qualities of the item of clothing, both in terms of accident protection and weather protection meet YOUR requirements, and you’re happy with the style and cost (and the item fits as both 1 and 2 won’t be so good if the item doesn’t fit!) then why listen to anyone else and why not buy it?
The primary purpose for most motorcycle clothing relates to accident protection. This can only be reliably judged relative to other products and through controlled repeatable tests. Anecdotal evidence is of very limited value unless it can be backed up through controlled testing.
The second purpose tends to be around weather/elements protection. While, ideally, this should also be tested using controlled repeatable tests which are compared to the results of other products, such comparison tests are extremely rare. Anecdotal evidence has more value here due to both the lack of scientifically controlled testing and the fact that “getting it wrong” does not ever result in a life changing/threatening outcome.
That leaves those who also purchase motorcycle clothing for style and/or value for money reasons. As both of these are totally in the perception of the buyer they are a lot more difficult to measure.
This is a long way of getting to the point that if, the evidence of the protective qualities of the item of clothing, both in terms of accident protection and weather protection meet YOUR requirements, and you’re happy with the style and cost (and the item fits as both 1 and 2 won’t be so good if the item doesn’t fit!) then why listen to anyone else and why not buy it?
black-k1 said:
There is no easy answer to this and it also very much depends on what you mean by the reputation being fair.
The primary purpose for most motorcycle clothing relates to accident protection. This can only be reliably judged relative to other products and through controlled repeatable tests. Anecdotal evidence is of very limited value unless it can be backed up through controlled testing.
The second purpose tends to be around weather/elements protection. While, ideally, this should also be tested using controlled repeatable tests which are compared to the results of other products, such comparison tests are extremely rare. Anecdotal evidence has more value here due to both the lack of scientifically controlled testing and the fact that “getting it wrong” does not ever result in a life changing/threatening outcome.
That leaves those who also purchase motorcycle clothing for style and/or value for money reasons. As both of these are totally in the perception of the buyer they are a lot more difficult to measure.
This is a long way of getting to the point that if, the evidence of the protective qualities of the item of clothing, both in terms of accident protection and weather protection meet YOUR requirements, and you’re happy with the style and cost (and the item fits as both 1 and 2 won’t be so good if the item doesn’t fit!) then why listen to anyone else and why not buy it?
this, i'd say halvarssons was crap, in 15 months zips broke, jacket let in water, storm cuff at throat never fastened correctly, water got under jacket soaking abdomen, never felt warm, braces on trousers never held and yet some people swear blind that halvarssons is better than rukka The primary purpose for most motorcycle clothing relates to accident protection. This can only be reliably judged relative to other products and through controlled repeatable tests. Anecdotal evidence is of very limited value unless it can be backed up through controlled testing.
The second purpose tends to be around weather/elements protection. While, ideally, this should also be tested using controlled repeatable tests which are compared to the results of other products, such comparison tests are extremely rare. Anecdotal evidence has more value here due to both the lack of scientifically controlled testing and the fact that “getting it wrong” does not ever result in a life changing/threatening outcome.
That leaves those who also purchase motorcycle clothing for style and/or value for money reasons. As both of these are totally in the perception of the buyer they are a lot more difficult to measure.
This is a long way of getting to the point that if, the evidence of the protective qualities of the item of clothing, both in terms of accident protection and weather protection meet YOUR requirements, and you’re happy with the style and cost (and the item fits as both 1 and 2 won’t be so good if the item doesn’t fit!) then why listen to anyone else and why not buy it?
black-k1 said:
There is no easy answer to this and it also very much depends on what you mean by the reputation being fair.
The primary purpose for most motorcycle clothing relates to accident protection. This can only be reliably judged relative to other products and through controlled repeatable tests. Anecdotal evidence is of very limited value unless it can be backed up through controlled testing.
The second purpose tends ....
Really? I would say that warmth and water proof are at least as important as protection. Unless they meet these criteria, then I simply CANNOT use them, no matter how excellent they may perform, if I come to grief. Being cold and wet makes an accident more likely. I favour primary protection (avoiding and accident) over secondary. The primary purpose for most motorcycle clothing relates to accident protection. This can only be reliably judged relative to other products and through controlled repeatable tests. Anecdotal evidence is of very limited value unless it can be backed up through controlled testing.
The second purpose tends ....
OverSteery said:
black-k1 said:
There is no easy answer to this and it also very much depends on what you mean by the reputation being fair.
The primary purpose for most motorcycle clothing relates to accident protection. This can only be reliably judged relative to other products and through controlled repeatable tests. Anecdotal evidence is of very limited value unless it can be backed up through controlled testing.
The second purpose tends ....
Really? I would say that warmth and water proof are at least as important as protection. Unless they meet these criteria, then I simply CANNOT use them, no matter how excellent they may perform, if I come to grief. Being cold and wet makes an accident more likely. I favour primary protection (avoiding and accident) over secondary. The primary purpose for most motorcycle clothing relates to accident protection. This can only be reliably judged relative to other products and through controlled repeatable tests. Anecdotal evidence is of very limited value unless it can be backed up through controlled testing.
The second purpose tends ....
black-k1 said:
Each of us has our own specific requirements and to some then weather/elements protection may be the most important (just as to some, cost, value for money, style etc. is the most important). However, given that there is warmer and drier clothing available which offers less crash protection but this is rarely chosen by bikers, and it is not unknown for bikers to wear kit completely inappropriate for the weather conditions “just because of protection” then I would suggest that crash protection (or at least the perception of crash protection) is the priority for most.
Indeed, there are probably 2 camps. those in full leathers and those in expensive textiles.....terry tibbs said:
this, i'd say halvarssons was crap, in 15 months zips broke, jacket let in water, storm cuff at throat never fastened correctly, water got under jacket soaking abdomen, never felt warm, braces on trousers never held and yet some people swear blind that halvarssons is better than rukka
To prove your point, I've had my Halvarassons jacket 18months now and not had any of those issues. I wouldn't say its better than Rukka though, more a rival for the old HG stuff.Oxford has always struck me as the average point of kit, it kinda works for a while, but then its cheap so you can't expect much better? Their luggage always feels tough but am colleague of mine broke his tank bag zip within months (daily use), whereas I still have an old tankbag from years ago that works fine (albeit more occasional use/touring).
I have quite a few Oxford products and I'm very satisfied. My star product is a very lightweight day backpack, which folds into a tiny bundle. I've used it daily for more than ten years it accepts a lot of weight and the only sign of wear is the markings are fading away (and even this is a plus.)
Having recently bought and returned Alpinestars jacket after a few months and having my Dianese suit fall apart at the seams after a few years, id have to say are the bigger brands reputation fair?
The Oxford jacket I bought end of last year has a considerably better zip, fit(longer at the back) and from what I could gather before it was returned, material than the Alpinestars jacket.
The Oxford jacket I bought end of last year has a considerably better zip, fit(longer at the back) and from what I could gather before it was returned, material than the Alpinestars jacket.
Goretex textiles in winter and chilly days. Tends to be well made, my textiles are 100% waterproof proven time and time again. The armour is also very good (I've tested it)
I use leathers on hot days, furygan two piece for touring and rideouts I have a one piece for track. I think furygan leather kit is top notch. Personally think alpinestars leathers are not a quality product unless you have the top top £1000+ stuff. I don't have a downer on them though as my goretex kit is alpinestars and it's fantastic.
There is little point in scrimping as I know full well eventually running sub standard kit will bite you in the arse.
I use leathers on hot days, furygan two piece for touring and rideouts I have a one piece for track. I think furygan leather kit is top notch. Personally think alpinestars leathers are not a quality product unless you have the top top £1000+ stuff. I don't have a downer on them though as my goretex kit is alpinestars and it's fantastic.
There is little point in scrimping as I know full well eventually running sub standard kit will bite you in the arse.
Just thought I'd post that I've recently bought an Oxford Mondial jacket and am very, very impressed. To put it into context I had my 18 month old mid range alpinestars jacket zip break so needed a replacement jacket. Temporarily borrowed my dads Rev It jacket which was handy as it bought me time but I did not get on with it at all. Decided that I've now been riding for around 2 years and could justify spending a bit more on a replacement, looked at Rukka and was seriously considering a Halvarssons Walkyr as well. Then I came across the Oxford and the spec sheet looked great and it was Ride recommended. Thought it would probably feel crap in the flesh, but when I went to try it on I was immediately even more impressed. I asked about warranty and was advised it was 1 year, so this seemed to be the catch. But at a quarter of the price of the Rukka and half the price of the Halvarssons I thought I'd take a gamble. Immediately rode home in it and thought it was great. When I got home I was going through the various labels etc that came with the jacket and I discovered it actually has a 3 year warranty, result!
I've now had it about a month and can say the following about it:
-great in the cold, and the liner has a clever flap that stops wind going through the zip
-completely waterproof and water beads off it superbly
-excellent ventilation when it's been warm recently
Additionally I have been complimented (by two women) on what a lovely jacket I have. I went for the tech green and it to me it just looks right, not too bikery but looks the part.
Very, very slight niggles are the waterproof zips by the cuffs ride up a few cm every few days but a very small inconvenience. I wish there was a waterproof chest pocket for my phone on the outside (there's an internal one), which is a pain if I need to quickly check directions or something and I need to unzip the jacket to get to it. Lastly with my back protector in place the fabric it slots into is slightly ajar, seems a slightly poor design and could do with a velcro closure- that being said it does feel secure and hasn't moved or come out at all. But if the jacket was being updated this is one thing I'd look to change.
So in conclusion I am definitely a convert (so far) and have been very impressed. I think I will go for the trousers in the winter as well but for now I'm happy with my hood jeans while it's warm.
I've now had it about a month and can say the following about it:
-great in the cold, and the liner has a clever flap that stops wind going through the zip
-completely waterproof and water beads off it superbly
-excellent ventilation when it's been warm recently
Additionally I have been complimented (by two women) on what a lovely jacket I have. I went for the tech green and it to me it just looks right, not too bikery but looks the part.
Very, very slight niggles are the waterproof zips by the cuffs ride up a few cm every few days but a very small inconvenience. I wish there was a waterproof chest pocket for my phone on the outside (there's an internal one), which is a pain if I need to quickly check directions or something and I need to unzip the jacket to get to it. Lastly with my back protector in place the fabric it slots into is slightly ajar, seems a slightly poor design and could do with a velcro closure- that being said it does feel secure and hasn't moved or come out at all. But if the jacket was being updated this is one thing I'd look to change.
So in conclusion I am definitely a convert (so far) and have been very impressed. I think I will go for the trousers in the winter as well but for now I'm happy with my hood jeans while it's warm.
Gassing Station | Biker Banter | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff