CE Level 1 vs Level 2 Armour: What the Numbers Actually Mean

Level 1 and Level 2 armour both pass a genuine, recognised CE impact test. Neither is a failed or substandard product. The difference is how much force each is permitted to transmit through to the body during that test, with Level 2 held to a stricter threshold. Understanding what that actually means, and why online sources often quote inconsistent numbers, makes the distinction useful rather than just another spec to skim past when buying motorcycle armour generally, whether that's shoulder and elbow protectors or a separate back protector.

EN 1621 armour testing uses a weighted striker dropped onto the protector at a defined energy, with the armour positioned over a rigid anvil that simulates the body part underneath. Force transducers measure how much impact energy actually transmits through the armour to the anvil. A lower transmitted force means the armour is absorbing more of the impact itself rather than passing it through to the body, which is the entire basis for the Level 1 / Level 2 distinction. The test is run multiple times and both a mean (average) transmitted force and a maximum single-impact force are measured, with both needing to stay under their respective thresholds to pass.

Searching for the exact kN thresholds turns up genuinely inconsistent figures across different sites, and it's worth explaining why rather than just picking one number and presenting it as settled. EN 1621 is split into separate parts for different body zones, with EN 1621-1 covering limb protectors (shoulders, elbows, hips, knees) and EN 1621-2 covering back protectors specifically, and each part has its own, different pass thresholds. A number of otherwise reasonable articles online quote one part's thresholds while describing armour testing generally, without making clear which specific part of the standard the figures apply to, which is almost certainly the source of the inconsistency riders encounter when researching this themselves.

Given this genuine inconsistency across sources (including some reasonably detailed, recent articles that directly contradict each other on the specific kN figures for the same standard), the more reliable approach is to understand the relationship rather than memorise a specific number that may be misattributed to the wrong part of the standard. What's consistent across every source: Level 2 has a meaningfully stricter transmitted-force threshold than Level 1, roughly half in most cited figures, regardless of which specific numbers a given source attributes to which part of the standard.

Level 2 armour transmits meaningfully less force to the body in the same standardised impact than Level 1 armour does. It's not that Level 1 fails to meet a safety threshold. It's a genuinely certified, legitimate level of protection, just one that performs less well in this specific test than Level 2. For context, Level 1 is common in road-focused and touring gear where bulk and flexibility are prioritised alongside protection; Level 2 is more common in race-oriented and serious trackday gear, where the certified performance ceiling matters more than the added thickness or reduced flexibility that can come with achieving it.

The trade-off buyers should actually weigh isn't "Level 1 is unsafe." It's whether the marginal protection improvement of Level 2 is worth any difference in bulk, flexibility, or cost for their specific use. For serious track use, Level 2 is the sensible default; for general road riding, Level 1 remains a genuinely certified, reasonable choice.

It's worth being clear that limb armour (EN 1621-1) and back protectors (EN 1621-2) are tested under separate parts of the standard, with different anvil and striker geometry to reflect how each body area is actually struck in a crash. A "Level 2" rating on a shoulder pad and a "Level 2" rating on a back protector both represent the stricter of the two levels within their respective tests, but they aren't being measured against identical numeric thresholds. This is another reason a single universal kN figure for "Level 2 armour" generally is more likely to mislead than clarify.

A genuine EN 1621-certified protector carries a label identifying the specific standard part (1621-1 for limb, 1621-2 for back), the body zone code (for example SE for shoulder/elbow, or the specific letter codes used for other zones), and the level (1 or 2). Checking all three pieces of information matters, not just the level number alone. A "Level 2" label without a clear standard-part reference doesn't confirm which specific test the protector actually passed, and a reputable manufacturer's labelling should make this unambiguous.

It's also worth checking that armour is actually certified at all, rather than simply described as "CE level 2 style" or similar marketing language that implies certification without stating it directly. Genuine certification is a specific, testable claim; vaguer language sitting near it on a product page is worth reading carefully rather than assuming it means the same thing.

Talk to NFmoto directly about the specific armour level fitted to your build. This can vary by suit model and customer preference. See our CE certification guide for how garment-level certification (EN 17092) relates to the separate armour certification covered here.