Need a cheap hat with a middle pillar for velcro GoPro mount

Discussion in 'Components, Accessories and Clothing' started by jarlrmai, 11 Jul 2018.

  1. jarlrmai

    jarlrmai Veteran

    I stood on my old commute hat by accident, my Kask Protone I use for group rides cannot mount my camera so I need a cheap commute hat that can mount the GoPro. The Giro I stood on was my old ride hat and I don't need to spend that much again on a hat I wear for 10 mins 2x a day.

    Just looking for others who mount Go-Pro's this way and can tell me if it will fit.

  2. I like Skol

    I like Skol Hold my beer and watch this....

    Can you not strap or screw it to your head?

    :tongue: [Tongue firmly in cheek]
    classic33 likes this.
  3. vickster

    vickster Legendary Member

  4. Milkfloat

    Milkfloat Veteran

    What happens when the camera gets snagged or you crash on top of it?
  5. classic33

    classic33 Legendary Member

    3M do skull screws.
  6. vickster

    vickster Legendary Member

    What was the conclusion regarding Schumacher in the end out of interest? No longer in news
  7. sheddy

    sheddy Guru

  8. Have you got room to mount your camera on the handle bars? That is where I have my cam. It is plenty high enough at that level.

    There are all sorts of mounting brackets available.
  9. Slick

    Slick Veteran

    I was asking just the other week, all news just seems to gave stopped. I probably just missed it.
  10. OP

    jarlrmai Veteran

    I do mean a helmet, Giro Foray doesn't have a central pillar.

    Don't make me go to Halfords!!!!!
  11. FishFright

    FishFright More wheels than sense

    IIRC the camera mount was driven through his skull and into his brain.
    Again IIRC was the advice to use a breakaway mount , possibly adhesive, and this reduces the risk somewhat. I moved to a chest mount.
    Slick likes this.
  12. vickster

    vickster Legendary Member

    Just go to a bike shop then although I don't know what is wrong with Halfords if they sell what you want/need

    You'll have to research which helmets meet your needs and try some on if you really need a camera for 10 minutes and can't mount on bike
  13. Slick

    Slick Veteran

    Yeah, I remember that but really nothing since.
  14. glasgowcyclist

    glasgowcyclist Charming but somewhat feckless

    My recollection is a little different; there were numerous, vague suggestions about the possibility of the camera/mount contributing to the injury but nothing more than that. I don't remember, and can't find, a conclusive finding that it did.

    Interestingly, I did find reference to some research by the TRL into the possibility, commissioned by the BBC.

    Here is an excerpt:

    Testing Protocol and Safety Standards

    During the summer of 2015, BBC Safety commissioned the Transport Research Laboratory (TRL) to investigate and report on the potential effects that mounting a mini-camera may have to a helmet’s safety performance i.e. the change to head injury risk. A range of commonly used climbing helmet types were tested (hardshell, hybrid and EPS foam). The cameras were mounted at the front, side and top of these helmets using either sticky mounts or head-bands. The testing protocol was principally based on that in BS EN12492:2012 (the safety standard which all climbing helmets are required to meet to enable their sale within the EU), BS EN1078:2012 (the equivalent safety standard for helmets sold to cyclists and skateboarders) and EU Regulation 22.05 (the equivalent safety standard for motorcycle helmets). These standards helped define a protocol for measuring the transference of energy to the ‘head’ during standard impact challenges and set the level above which the helmet would be considered to have failed the test. Further injury thresholds, defining a >50% chance of either a fracture to the skull or loss of consciousness for less than 1hr, were also identified from scientific literature to provide further comparison.

    Study findings and conclusions

    The results were a little surprising. We had anticipated that the placement of a solid object on the helmet would not only provide a single point of impact on the helmet but would also significantly increase the rotational / acceleration forces on the head when it ‘caught’ or impacted on inclined surfaces. The results were expected to be an increase in the transference of these impact forces to the head, potentially sufficient to exceed, or ‘fail’, the injury threshold of the standards. But this wasn’t the case. In fact, in not one of over 70 tests on various helmet types, mounting types or mounting positions did the presence of the camera cause the helmet to ‘fail’ the injury threshold standards. And this wasn’t solely because the camera broke away on impact (as claimed likely by the manufacturer), because this only happened in approximately 40% of tests. It turns out that, as seen on high speed film, when struck by a heavy weight from above, or when a helmeted head-form is dropped from height onto a solid surface, the deformation of the camera mount seems to actually absorb some of the energies involved, meaning that the camera mount may be providing an additional layer of protection to the head in most, but not all, tests.
    Slick likes this.
  15. Milkfloat

    Milkfloat Veteran

    I wonder if they tested the low branch scenario, where the camera/mount gets caught at 20mph, not something I would like to try out.
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice