I notice in a lot of pictures I see on this board, almost all of the chain guards are removed.

Any reason? Is it a styling choice? What are you opinions on it?

My friends with motorcycles all removed theirs as a styling choice. Mine currently doesnt have one, but that will change soon.

I haven't noticed that many missing.
It really helps keep chain oil and crap from flying all over the place - especially the back of your left leg.
Some have opted for a stainless steel chain guard - stylish, fashionable, elegant and in limited supply.

In some countries and states its the law you must have one. I went with the stainless gs500 option gave the bike some shininess that was lacking

Quote from: PatheticPuma on January 21, 2013, 02:13:04 PM
My friends with motorcycles all removed theirs as a styling choice.

A styling choice?

The internet is full of stories and graphic images of people who have for whatever reason become trapped in moving chains and the consequences of such an event should be obvious to anyone with even the slightest hint of common sense. Why would someone want to deliberately remove a component thats purpose is, amongst other things to protect them from possible injury 

I doubt they will look so `stylish` with a few missing fingers, a skin graft or a permanent limp 

With no chain guard, a broken chain would probably slash your left leg.
That, in addition to chain oil flying all over you....

With the Raask or Gimbel rear sets, you need a chain guard to keep your foot off of the chain. Those rear sets don't have a heel guard.

Safety is one reason I added the shark fins to my bikes. Besides being stylish, it prevents hands from getting pulled into the sprockets when cleaning & oiling the chain or anytime a hand is in that area.