A week without a helmet.

Status
Not open for further replies.
Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.
U

User6179

Guest
Ironically the Casco Carbon Warp is not legal in Australia where helmets ARE compulsory!

Like many countries the Aussies do not recognise EN1078 and use their own standards.

I don't think you have mentioned Snell yet !?:smile:
 
I don't think you have mentioned Snell yet !?:smile:

Unlike the Snag Points, have you actually had the courtesy to read previous posts this time?
 
When I had an accident and put my head through a window the helmet looked fine, but I binned it. What difference does the type of ride you are doing make as to whether the helmet will or will not work? Surely if it is junk, it is junk? Regardless as to whether you are on a short journey or a "proper" ride?



How does aero grade carbon fibre protect your head if you fall off your bike? Just curious as I "only" have a helmet that is EPS. I know how they absorb the damage, if the helmet has no shock absorbing qualities, would it only be any good for stopping things penetrating the shell?

The shell is designed to pervent penetration, and take a load of energy out of the hit by sacrificial destruction of the CF. This process is very effective at absorbing big energy. The internal structure of the lid is designed to cushion the head from whatever energy is left or lower speed / lower energy hits (it has layers of thermo formed foam which are there for cushioning). It is a very well designed bit of kit. The type of ride as to which lid is used is just down to the time exposed to danger and relative risk, and things which I'm likely to hit. I wouldn't be too concerned about falling off and hitting a path at low speed / or a bit of shrubbery, which is the worst I could expect on my short hop routes, with the Warp sprint. I wouldn't trust it to take another belt from a vehicle however. I believe the 'official' line from Casco, regarding testing standards, is that there is only a naff standard to test against as far as cycle lids are concerned, they can't test it against a higher standard, if there isn't one. They don't want to test it against a motorcycle lid standard, because it isn't a motorcycle lid.
 
..... But as Eddy helpfully pointed out there are higher standards

All the countries that refuse to recognise the feeble and worthless EN1078 have them

Ironically the wearer seems totally unaware of which tests this helmet has passed including some of them
 

Fab Foodie

hanging-on in quiet desperation ...
Location
Kirton, Devon.
Indeed :ohmy:You get what you pay for however. The warp sprint took a hard whack from 2 and a bit tonnes of car, it appears to be fine, except for a mark where the mirror hit it, but once it's done it's job, it's better to be safe than sorry, and replace it. I'll probably still use it for short runs and tootling about, the speed time will be the lid for proper rides.
:thumbsup:
Maybe cut down on the speed stuff, God seems to be trying to tell you something ....
 

Fab Foodie

hanging-on in quiet desperation ...
Location
Kirton, Devon.
This threD is turning out to be quite a classic.... Not had the like since the glory days of simoncc, nickm and Linf .....
 
The shell is designed to pervent penetration, and take a load of energy out of the hit by sacrificial destruction of the CF. This process is very effective at absorbing big energy. The internal structure of the lid is designed to cushion the head from whatever energy is left or lower speed / lower energy hits (it has layers of thermo formed foam which are there for cushioning). It is a very well designed bit of kit. The type of ride as to which lid is used is just down to the time exposed to danger and relative risk, and things which I'm likely to hit. I wouldn't be too concerned about falling off and hitting a path at low speed / or a bit of shrubbery, which is the worst I could expect on my short hop routes, with the Warp sprint. I wouldn't trust it to take another belt from a vehicle however. I believe the 'official' line from Casco, regarding testing standards, is that there is only a naff standard to test against as far as cycle lids are concerned, they can't test it against a higher standard, if there isn't one. They don't want to test it against a motorcycle lid standard, because it isn't a motorcycle lid.

I fail to see how the carbon fibre can be designed to stop penetration and absorb impact. Surely if it is stopping penetration it would be a very stiff material and not have any give in it, which is what you would need for it to spread the force around the shell? I would have thought Kevlar would be a better material for this?
One in 3 accidents happen within a mile of your home. If a helmet has been in an accident and it absorbed any force (which is a contentious issue with all cycle helmets), then it will not be any good if you get hit in the same place again. If you are not worried about the helmet not actually working in the "short" journeys, why wear a helmet at all? Your thinking seems to be the helmet is not good enough to sustain any impact (otherwise you would have no qualms wearing it all the time) so only wear it on short trips (where you are pretty likely to have an accident according to statistics) At the end of the day it is your head and how you choose to protect it is up to you, but I really dont get the idea of using a helmet that has been in an accident for any journey.
 

Wobblers

Euthermic
Location
Minkowski Space
The shell is designed to pervent penetration, and take a load of energy out of the hit by sacrificial destruction of the CF. This process is very effective at absorbing big energy. The internal structure of the lid is designed to cushion the head from whatever energy is left or lower speed / lower energy hits (it has layers of thermo formed foam which are there for cushioning). It is a very well designed bit of kit. The type of ride as to which lid is used is just down to the time exposed to danger and relative risk, and things which I'm likely to hit. I wouldn't be too concerned about falling off and hitting a path at low speed / or a bit of shrubbery, which is the worst I could expect on my short hop routes, with the Warp sprint. I wouldn't trust it to take another belt from a vehicle however. I believe the 'official' line from Casco, regarding testing standards, is that there is only a naff standard to test against as far as cycle lids are concerned, they can't test it against a higher standard, if there isn't one. They don't want to test it against a motorcycle lid standard, because it isn't a motorcycle lid.

No. A material can only absorb energy by deforming, which is what the metal in a car's crumple zone is designed to do, or by cracking. If your CF shell deforms, then it'll be deforming into your skull, which I suspect isn't a desirable outcome. Except of course CF doesn't deform, it's brittle so cracks. But not in the way that expanded polystyrene foams do, by forming any thousands of microcracks which create the new surface area that absorbs energy. No, it'll shatter into large, sharp shards. Which absorb very little energy, but will gain considerable kinetic energy of their own. Not the sort of thing you really want to have spinning around your head and eyes...

Of course, it's also possible that they don't want to test it against a tougher standard because they know it won't pass. After all, the amount of energy any structure is capable of absorbing can be calculated by anyone who can use an engineering finite element model analysis package.
 
Last edited:
Don't forget the valve cap dilemma. Caps or not? What colour? Do they have to match? :smile:


Where do you stand on helmet valve caps?

il_340x270.663322921_enp5.jpg
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom