I have long been an advocate for higher quality helmets and supported the tougher Snell B95 as being more relevant and appropriate than the weak and feeble EN1078 tests.
Over in the US EN1078 helmets have been unacceptable for racing for some time - Now it turns out that UK Cycling Events also agree with this.
Section 6 of their terms and conditions states:
So in theory if you rock up with a helmet that is only certified as EN1078 and carries neither of these two tougher tests then you can be refused entry.
Interesting though that a major organiser is now insisting on a higher standard in their events than that legally required for sale
Is it time that EN1078 was withdrawn and a higher standard made the legal requirement?
Over in the US EN1078 helmets have been unacceptable for racing for some time - Now it turns out that UK Cycling Events also agree with this.
Section 6 of their terms and conditions states:
It is mandatory that all riders wear a safety approved cycling helmet complying with latest ANSI Z90/4 or SNELL standards.
Any rider not wearing a helmet will not be covered by the event insurance and will be disqualified from the event and could be liable for damages if involved in an accident on that basis. The rider must accept this as a condition of entry. UK Cycling Events reserve the right to refuse entry to the event to anyone with inappropriate equipment or clothing.
So in theory if you rock up with a helmet that is only certified as EN1078 and carries neither of these two tougher tests then you can be refused entry.
Interesting though that a major organiser is now insisting on a higher standard in their events than that legally required for sale
Is it time that EN1078 was withdrawn and a higher standard made the legal requirement?