The CycleChat Helmet Debate Thread

[theclaud]

Moleskin?

Doesn't sit too well with the greased-up-like-a-cross-channel-swimmer regime.

 

[shouldbeinbed]

There's a couple near us who have a trike with built in child seat - kind of like a child trailer but in the front and joined onto the back half of a conventional bike - I'm sure someone will know chapter and verse. I notice that their child, strapped in to the inside of the "trailer" bit, which itself has an all-round framework, was wearing a helmet. I was idly trying to imagine what sort of impact could make a helmet conceivably useful....

Bird strike

 

[swansonj]

No, but I can can understand why parents feel reassured by helmets when kids are learning - they do occasionally fall off in just the sort of unlikely ways that helmet-testing seems to imagine, and if he's happy enough wearing it then I wouldn't try and talk you out of it. I'd say the skater type helmet is a more sensible choice than the mushroom-head-type lid, and looks cooler. That said, I think, in a general sort of way, that it is better for children to grow up seeing cycling as a normal, everyday activity, and not a risky extreme pursuit. I'd also agree with Greg and Mugshot, that a rational approach to injury prevention would put gloves higher on the list than lids. And it's utterly dismaying to see how many parents allow their children to climb around on playgrounds and tree-houses with a lid on - nothing is a clearer indication of the fact that the fashion for lids is nowt to do with safety. Lid or no lid, your lad looks at home on the bike already - I reckon he might be a natural.

We made our children wear helmets while cycling when younger and less experienced (because it takes more courage to buck the pressure for your children than for yourself). I told my elder daughter she could stop wearing it as soon as she could give me a plausible argument why cycle helmets are not a good thing. Her first few attempts were along the lines of "every time I fall off, I've never banged my head", which I did not allow, although I couldn't deny her evidential basis. Then, age about 13 or 14 I guess, she told me they gave the wrong impression of the nature of cycling, discouraged potential cyclists, and where was the evidence they were effective? Since then she has never worn a helmet, with my blessing.

 

[MarkF]

Me & Mrs F (non-helmet wearers) discussed the matter at length before sending all 3 of our kids, sans helmets, tottering off on bicycles. Now at 14, 17 & 21 they all still cycle, to school, college and work, I am struggling to think of any of their friends who cycle, anywhere, to my kids it's a normal and cheap means of transportation not something they have to "prepare" for.

 

[Justinslow]

So the lesson is not to try and do 3 different things with 2 hands then, particularly not as a young and inexperienced practitioner of the skill you are undertaking.

Good lad for getting up and getting on with it & I'm happy he's ok.

Yep he learnt a valuable lesson in bike control!

 

[Justinslow]

How about some gloves?

Yep, mentioned that aswell, no cuts this time but they did "smart" a little bit.

 

[MarkF]

Glad I have pics of my kids like this, normal. This was in Holland, about 6 years ago and for the first time they saw nobody wearing a helmet, that has always stuck with them.

 

[glasgowcyclist]

Why does your other kid look like a tree?

GC

 

[MarkF]

Why does your other kid look like a tree?

GC

Joe never liked his pic taken, he's not hiding a helmet or owt! Barcelona 2013.

 

[MarkF]

They are 3 times more likely to end up in hospital from a dog attack, I don't worry about those either.

 

[ClichéGuevara]

But what about a high speed sole failure?

Flat feet?

 

[Mugshot]

They are 3 times more likely to end up in hospital from a dog attack, I don't worry about those either.

I don't think I've heard that one before.

 

[ufkacbln]

Can we compromise with the Mods bey discussing a Tilley / Helmet Hybrid?

Lacks the style of the Tilley though

 

[ufkacbln]

http://www.explainthatstuff.com/how-bicycle-helmets-work.html
How does a bicycle helmet work?

At first sight, a cycle helmet looks much like any other hat, but look more closely and you'll see a lot more thought—and science—has gone into the design. A typical helmet has two main parts: a hard outer shell and a soft inner liner. The hard shell is designed to spread the force of an impact over a broader area so your skull is less likely to fracture, while the soft liner is meant to squeeze inward and absorb the impactenergy, so less of it is transmitted to your head.

Bicycle helmets are a good example of how the right material can make all the difference to how well something does its job. Shells are typically made of composite materials like fiberglass or lightweight carbon fiber, or very hard plastics such as polycarbonate or ABS. Liners are usually about 20cm (0.8 inches) thick and made of two layers of foam: a soft, bouncy layer that absorbs small bashes and bumps and a stiff layer that permanently deforms to absorb very hard impacts. Some helmets are now incorporating energy-absorbing plastics like D3O® that are soft in normal use but harden instantly the moment you hit them, but most still use cheaper and simpler materials like expanded polystyrene (EPS) or expanded polypropylene (EPP).

Photo: How a helmet saves your life: When you bump your head, the hard outer shell (black) spreads the impact over a wide area. The whole of the soft inner liner (orange) then absorbs the energy evenly so (hopefully) there's minimal damage to your head. Without the helmet, the entire impact would be concentrated on a tiny part of your head, very likely fracturing your skull and quite possibly damaging your brain too.

A couple of points about "modern" helmets

Original cycle helmets (as opposed to "hair nets") were a fairly thick chunk of polystyrene with the ability to absorb energy.

As design has progressed, fashion and ventilation have become a greater priority in design,at the cost of effectiveness

When you put a vent in the helmet it removes the absorptive material and reduces the amount of energy that can be absorbed. Additionally the material that is left has to be denser and stiffer to support the helmet design.

Modern helmets really compromise the basics of helmet design.

Then you get to a stage where the little material that is left is unable to (even in the denser form) support the design and a stiff uncompressible carbon fibre or other sort of material is introduced to support the design shape.

.. and all that is before you get to the other design faults such as "snag points"

Isn't it rather ironic that we have such a vociferous pro-helmet who are advocating an inferior product and not questioning the decrease in effectiveness

Could this be the reason so many modern helmets "crack" - there simply isn't enough stiff material to support the structure in and impact and the frail bars snap

Note how these random examples from a Google search have all failed at a frail cross piece in the design

 

[Dan B]

Doesn't sit too well with the greased-up-like-a-cross-channel-swimmer regime.

Margarine?