The CycleChat Helmet Debate Thread

[shouldbeinbed]

It's usually simply disagreement. People who subscribe to the 'it's just common sense' view of helmets always assume everyone is bound to agree with their view, so it does come as a terrible shock when they don't.

Yes, I contemplated writing a post along similar lines that disagreements are to be expected in these threads and that is Shauns reason for the superthread and strict rules

Interested to hear why Justin thinks it is so disappointing his opinion has been challenged

Also to suggest that as Helmet threads go, this one has been a model of restraint.

 

[GrumpyGregry]

Only person I know who has been seriously hurt cycling is me, though at least one acquaintance has died; in circumstances where no amount of PPE would have helped.

I know several people who have had life changing injuries from playing rugby. And I have a brain injury courtesy of that fine game.

 

[Wobblers]

at the risk of stirring things up, but as we are (still) being fairly civilised, I do wonder if a neat hard shell helmet might actually be helpfull. You'd certainly not have the cracking / breaking / didn't absorb energy problem (if you bashed it hard enough to break you'd likely be f*^$/^d anyway) - and these sort of helmets aren't as big so the " bigger target" issue wouldn't be as severe. I suspect they'd slide more easily, as opposed to snagging, so reducing one of the other risk factors.

That said, this sort of helmet (caving/climbing) is perhaps more for protection from falling rocks than general impact so may or may ot be as shock absorbing. This is what I used to wear before I became sceptical alltogether.

Thoughts?

Where would this hard shell absorb energy? You need some sort of deformable structure to permanently compress and thereby reduce the acceleration. Such a structure is of necessity (physics!) large. A simple hard shell helmet will do very little, as it simply has very little with which to dissipate energy.

 

[Profpointy]

Where would this hard shell absorb energy? You need some sort of deformable structure to permanently compress and thereby reduce the acceleration. Such a structure is of necessity (physics!) large. A simple hard shell helmet will do very little, as it simply has very little with which to dissipate energy.

They have a webbing cradle inside which'll "give" a bit, hopefully dissapating some energy (caving / climbing helmets do anyway).

In caving circles people were questioning stuffing a survival bag inside the helmet as it reduces clearance, hence effectiveness if biffed. I took the view that I'd rather know I always have the survival bag with me and take the risk. Another worry was weakening the shell by driling holes for a lamp bracket - for me I thought caving in the dark would be the bigger problem

Way off topic now, but my point was pros and cons of seemingly sensible ideas

 

[SavageHoutkop]

Never seen a horseriding helmet up close, but aren't they pretty small and hard shelled?

 

[GrumpyGregry]

Was that from the game.... or the beer afterwards?

Who knows? Either way I didn't wake up for several days!

 

[SavageHoutkop]

Yeah probably. That pink thing is pretty big relative to her head...

 

[SavageHoutkop]

Patey's aren't too bad - the Patey Protector has Snell E2001 accreditation...

£495??!!

 

[Wobblers]

They have a webbing cradle inside which'll "give" a bit, hopefully dissapating some energy (caving / climbing helmets do anyway).

In caving circles people were questioning stuffing a survival bag inside the helmet as it reduces clearance, hence effectiveness if biffed. I took the view that I'd rather know I always have the survival bag with me and take the risk. Another worry was weakening the shell by driling holes for a lamp bracket - for me I thought caving in the dark would be the bigger problem

Way off topic now, but my point was pros and cons of seemingly sensible ideas

So a caving helmet works best against point impacts such as rocks, where the actual transferred momentum (and thus energy and acceleration to the head will be low). In this case the deflection of the shell needs to be quite low so that the load is transferred reasonably evenly across the head. Similar to the familiar hard hat, but not very much use when cycling, where energy and momentum will be higher, and exerted over a larger area.

Incidentally, I suspect that the survival bag wouldn't have compromised the helmet (not unless it was a solid lump of metal!).

 

[Mugshot]

You'll need to convince the helmet industry to modify its fearmarketing then.

The accompanying blurb for the Las Victory Supreme 40th cycle helmet in Halfords reads:
"Don't take Jake or Jill`s example and break your crown, instead wear the Las Victory Supreme crown with pride and joy and ride in absolute safety."

I'll repeat that last bit: ".. absolute safety". This is the kind of brazen bullshit that is used to sell helmets.

GC

I was intrigued by this so I emailed Halfords yesterday about it to see what was meant by "absolute safety". Unfortunately they must be pretty busy as I hadn't heard back off them so I thought I'd use the online chat function, this is what was said;

Chris: Hi, can I start by taking your name and phone number or email address, please?
You: Richard
Chris: Hello Richard, how can I help you?
You: Hello. I emailed you yesterday but haven't heard back from you yet. I have a query regarding the Las Victory Supreme 40th
Chris: I'm sorry about that, do you have a case reference please?
You: ref:_00D20CMz._500w0ylXrH:ref would this be it?
Chris: I found your case, that's no problem, reference 02467188.
You: Lvely thank you, should I leave youto reply via email then?
Chris: No, I can answer you now. From what I can see, it is just marketing speak, but it is fully compliant with EU crash safety regulations.
You: Which regulations would they be? "Absolute safety" is quite a big claim.
Chris: It would withstand the kind of impact you would expect from other helmets, but it does seem to imply that safety has not been compromised in the pursuit of aerodynamics.
You: So you're not sure which level testing it's been subjected to then? Would you like me to leave it with you to check what is meant by "Absolute safety" and you could maybe email me, I assume that's why I haven't heard back from Halfords as yet?
Chris: It would meet the minimum requirements set by the European Commission for crash impact forces, but I will try and get some information from you. Is there anything else I can help with?
You: No that's fine for now, thank you Chris. Do you have an idea when I may receive a reply to my email, I'm sure it's difficult to give detailed information on a chat like this.
Chris: Of course. I will try and get some information to you in the next couple of days.
You: Thank you very much
Chris: No problem. Take care Richard, I'll talk to you soon.

So now you know, however when I receive my detailed email I post that up too.

 

[glasgowcyclist]

I was intrigued by this so I emailed Halfords yesterday about it to see what was meant by "absolute safety". Unfortunately they must be pretty busy as I hadn't heard back off them so I thought I'd use the online chat function, this is what was said;

Chris: Hi, can I start by taking your name and phone number or email address, please?
You: Richard
Chris: Hello Richard, how can I help you?
You: Hello. I emailed you yesterday but haven't heard back from you yet. I have a query regarding the Las Victory Supreme 40th
Chris: I'm sorry about that, do you have a case reference please?
You: ref:_00D20CMz._500w0ylXrH:ref would this be it?
Chris: I found your case, that's no problem, reference 02467188.
You: Lvely thank you, should I leave youto reply via email then?
Chris: No, I can answer you now. From what I can see, it is just marketing speak, but it is fully compliant with EU crash safety regulations.
You: Which regulations would they be? "Absolute safety" is quite a big claim.
Chris: It would withstand the kind of impact you would expect from other helmets, but it does seem to imply that safety has not been compromised in the pursuit of aerodynamics.
You: So you're not sure which level testing it's been subjected to then? Would you like me to leave it with you to check what is meant by "Absolute safety" and you could maybe email me, I assume that's why I haven't heard back from Halfords as yet?
Chris: It would meet the minimum requirements set by the European Commission for crash impact forces, but I will try and get some information from you. Is there anything else I can help with?
You: No that's fine for now, thank you Chris. Do you have an idea when I may receive a reply to my email, I'm sure it's difficult to give detailed information on a chat like this.
Chris: Of course. I will try and get some information to you in the next couple of days.
You: Thank you very much
Chris: No problem. Take care Richard, I'll talk to you soon.

So now you know, however when I receive my detailed email I post that up too.

I'm disappointed, I thought (considering the price tag) it offered a full defensive shield capable of repelling a Romulan Warbird.

GC

 

[Mugshot]

I'm disappointed, I thought (considering the price tag) it offered a full defensive shield capable of repelling a Romulan Warbird.

GC

Well, don't be too downhearted just yet, we haven't seen what they say in the email so you never know.

 

[ufkacbln]

Not much of a debate, is it?
I think people with my views (and I know many people share my views) know what they are going to get when the come into a thread like this, which is a shame.

A debate requires participation


It will never be much of a debate if people do not participate


Instead of ignoring or refusing to discuss the pints that they find difficult these individuals could contribute by relying

 

[ufkacbln]

Where would this hard shell absorb energy? You need some sort of deformable structure to permanently compress and thereby reduce the acceleration. Such a structure is of necessity (physics!) large. A simple hard shell helmet will do very little, as it simply has very little with which to dissipate energy.

See the earlier post linking the (pro helmet) Bicycle Helmet Safety Institute design of a cycle helmet

 

[shouldbeinbed]

I've got a Bern pish-pot style helmet I bought to learn to longboard in. I wear it every time I go longboarding. I smack it hard into the tarmac every time I go longboarding, sometimes several times in a session. I am cr@p at long boarding. Sometimes I've been black and blue from hip to knee the day afterwards. Longobarding finally convinced me that cycle helmets are utterly superfluous on the road for the sort of riding I do on the road.

Amongst the tiny % of helmeted riders in cph such skate style helmets are quite popular, along with the ones disguised as hats. Riding a sit up and beg three speed in the latest top end road race helmet really does look very very stupid.

I put up a thread on the incongruous look, to my thinking at least, of a standard style bike helmet on a Brompton (or insert utilitarian folder/dutch type bike of choice)

There does seem to be some agreement that some bikes are not as attuned to wearing a helmet on than others

Apropos of nothing really, I'm still unlikely to wear a polystyrene bowl on the Brommy just because it looks like a deerstalker.