# Took a good whack to my noggin... how you determine helmet replacement?



## sbpinnacle (Jul 27, 2009)

My shoulder hit first and is pretty damn sore, but I did whack my head somewhat hard. I was a little dazed for a few seconds as I dragged myself from the ground. I was wearing a ski cap under my helmet, but it was good and snug. So how do I determine if it needs replacing???


----------



## CHUM (Aug 30, 2004)

you wear a helmet?.....pansy 

if you plunged your melon into terra firma hard enough to make you dumber for a bit i'd contact your helmet manufacturer to see if they have a crash replacement program.....so yes, IMHO replace it....

I've replaced 2 after bouncing my head off trees......problem is I've stayed dumb.....


----------



## dnlwthrn (Jan 26, 2006)

If you crashed, and your head hurts, then I'd replace the helmet. Look on the inside for any signs of the foam compressing or cracking. Definitely check for a crash replacement program before springing for a new lid.


----------



## AZ (Apr 14, 2009)

X2 and yes I also stayed dumb .


----------



## zebrahum (Jun 29, 2005)

For what it's worth, the manufacturers will tell you to replace it after any impact. I concur. It is said to be due to invisible cracking and compression of the foam which will reduce the helmet's ability to further absorb impact. 

Be smart about it, I've both kept and replaced helmets after crashes. Use your head, so to speak, and you can determine if it is safe to continue to use your helmet. My last helmet replacement came after I shattered the interior foam core from a very bad head strike (my Giro ski helmet actually).


----------



## Redbeard77 (Sep 9, 2009)

It's still better than nothing, but I consider a helmet good for one impact. This comes from a history of motorcycling, where hits are admittedly more severe. But like others said, all helmets are designed to absorb/disperse the force of an impact, and even if the shell looks good, once the foam is compressed it loses effectiveness.


----------



## ericcc65 (Sep 21, 2008)

Always replace a helmet after an impact, no exceptions. In fact, some say you should replace it if you just drop it to the floor. That may be extreme, but if you've crashed I say replace it.


----------



## emtnate (Feb 9, 2008)

This is a matter of risk assessment that only you can make. The correct answer has been repeated. Helmets are only guaranteed to be effective for one impact. It is recommended to replace them after they have been in a crash.

However, I too have replaced and kept using helmets after hard impacts. If they are cracked or visibly damaged it is a no-brainer to replace them. It's the unseen damage that could become problematic. Replacing a helmet is much much cheaper than a visit to the ER, but I would go broke if I replaced one every time it took an impact. 

For me, reusing a helmet is an acceptable risk. I cannot in good conscience recommend that anyone reuse one after a crash, especially if you still saw stars. 

Of course, I have this constant twitching in my eye and tremor in my hands after a hard hit several years ago...


----------



## ireland57 (Sep 11, 2009)

sbpinnacle said:


> My shoulder hit first and is pretty damn sore, but I did whack my head somewhat hard. I was a little dazed for a few seconds as I dragged myself from the ground. I was wearing a ski cap under my helmet, but it was good and snug. So how do I determine if it needs replacing???


In motor racing if you're dazed, unconscious, etc replace the helmet. It would be the same for this sport.

The helmet's are built to take one impact basically and yours has had a good one.
Never mind what condition it looks like; replace it now. It may fail a real test next time.


----------



## sbpinnacle (Jul 27, 2009)

Thanks to all for the feedback... looks like a new melon protector is in order for me. I just took another look and there was very little impact on outer shell, most was on the compressed foam to the lower right, nice big mud stain for good reference. I can't see any damage but I'm not willing to take the chance at this point. I'm a little klutzy to begin with, I know I'll be crashing again! I'll keep this one around for emergencies, or in case I ride with a "buddy". Thanks again!


----------



## Ken in KC (Jan 12, 2004)

*The why...*



sbpinnacle said:


> Thanks to all for the feedback... looks like a new melon protector is in order for me. I just took another look and there was very little impact on outer shell, most was on the compressed foam to the lower right, nice big mud stain for good reference. I can't see any damage but I'm not willing to take the chance at this point. I'm a little klutzy to begin with, I know I'll be crashing again! I'll keep this one around for emergencies, or in case I ride with a "buddy". Thanks again!


I'd throw it out. Everyone else has provided the correct answer. The reason why is that the foam underneath the shell stays compressed after an impact. It's done it's job and it can't do that job again. If someone using that helmet falls and impacts in the same area, they will have no protection in that area.

In addition, the helmet helps protect your melon by diffusing the force generated by the impact across the helmet. On close inspection of the underside of the helmet, you may or may not see cracks in the foam away from the area of impact. They're likely there. The overall structural integrity of the helmet is shot.


----------



## Acende (Dec 17, 2007)

This isn't the time to save money, too many people have made the wrong choice of not wearing a helmet or continuing to use an old or damaged helmet. When you consider the risks a new helmet is cheap insurance. If you have to ask about your helmet being replaced that answer is always yes imho.


----------



## frdfandc (Sep 5, 2007)

The best thing to do is to call the helmet manufacturer for a crash replacement. They will sell you one at a discounted price and will ask you to return your damaged help for product assessment for future helmet safety design/development.


----------



## beenee98 (Jul 2, 2008)

Yep get another one. I face planted and dented the front foam about 1cm in by 2cm wide i guess. Didn't want to risk it cracking or something if i do it (and i will!) again.

And for the record, i too stayed dumb. Maybe its a mtb'er thing or something


----------



## traffic002 (Dec 16, 2008)

You know, there are many places that have quality helmets for $25 on sale (name brands: Gyro, Bell etc.)

Is your head worth $25?

I just crashed last week. Went OTB onto smooth trail. But I found some area of the shell that had pushed the foam in on the outside. No visible signs on the inside. But I did have some red marks on my forehead from the impact. The helmet did its job. Time to reload for next impact.

I tossed the helmet in case I might be tempted to ride in "for a quick ride."


----------



## Blurr (Dec 7, 2009)

if you crashed and your head hurt then yoru helmet was not worth a crap and you need to be looking at a different manufacturer, any time a helmet comes into contact with the ground with your head in it, then it should be replaced. 
loose helmets can actually cause injury, a helmet should be snug, especially for aggressive riding.


----------



## ghashmi (Sep 25, 2005)

Blurr said:


> if you crashed and your head hurt *then yoru helmet was not worth a crap and you need to be looking at a different manufacturer*,


On ocassion your head is going to hurt, regardless of manufacturer. In this instance the helmet did its job, the rider is walking and typing after all. Once the lid is replaced I'm sure the rider will be out on the trails again soon.


----------



## ghashmi (Sep 25, 2005)

Re-read the various posts again. Withiout knowing more about the full nature of Traffic002's crash and "red" forehead marks, my comment may lack proper context. For clarification, did the helmet slide up upon impact exposing your forehead? Were the red marks from the ground or helmet foam? Perhaps the crash came on so fast you don't remember what exactly happened (been there myself). 

I conocur with a snug helmet fit having taken a good digger mid summer. Impact cracked my helmet straight through above the eyebrows; smiley added for effect :madman: . I definetly felt it afterwards, another half inch lower and things would have been uglier. End of story, the helmet stayed in place, did its job, and was replaced before the next ride.


----------



## Ken in KC (Jan 12, 2004)

*Huh?*



Blurr said:


> if you crashed and your head hurt then yoru helmet was not worth a crap and you need to be looking at a different manufacturer...


Incorrect statement. A helmet isn't a get out of jail free card from head injuries. It _helps_ protect your head. No rider should go on a ride the expectation that a helmet will in all cases eliminate head injuries or eliminate headaches.

My head hurt plenty after the one concussion I suffered mountain biking.


----------



## emtnate (Feb 9, 2008)

Blurr said:


> if you crashed and your head hurt then yoru helmet was not worth a crap ...


What do you base this statement on? You are absolutely incorrect. I've treated a number of people with good quality, properly fitted safety gear who have still sustained serious injuries or even been killed as a result of an impact to the head.

No helmet is like a force field which magically protects you from all blunt force trauma. Helmets sold in the US all meet the same minimal standards set by the CPSC. Any helmet, properly fitted, will give you the best chance at walking away from an injury, but will not prevent one in all cases.

Read up on helmet standards, how they are tested, and what kind of protection they offer before making statements like that.


----------



## ireland57 (Sep 11, 2009)

I've made it a policy years ago when a helmet was finished with (or damaged, crashed, etc) I cut it into 2 pieces with a hack saw.

Otherwise someone else may be unknowingly using a helmet that can't protect them any longer.


----------



## sbpinnacle (Jul 27, 2009)

The wife suggested I wait until after Christmas to get a new helmet, pretty much insisted. The helmet I'm replacing is a Bell Yukon, it's like $20-25 bucks, no biggie to replace. I may send this one back to Bell if it will help their research. Thanks to all for your input!!!


----------



## Hellrazor666 (Oct 27, 2008)

Well are you going riding before then??? If so ask your wife if she likes veggies ???  Man put your foot down step up be a man  Tell her damn it I'm getting one right now.... Then walk in from the garage and say Hi honey do you need help doing the dishes and forget about what you just told her in the garage


----------



## sbpinnacle (Jul 27, 2009)

She does like veggies and the insurance is well paid up... you may be on to something Hellrazor666. After shoveling 20" of snow from my driveway yesterday, it's unlikely I'll be riding for the next several days, not too mention needing the time to get over my current state of dumbness. Snowblower may be the next big purchase... more time to ride!


----------



## Gasp4Air (Jun 5, 2009)

I make my own helmet for a fraction of the price of a new helmet. I just apply this foam-in-a-can all around my head, give it a few minutes to set up and then hit the trails. Getting it off is a bit of a hassle, though, I have to soak my head in benzene and naptha for about 45 minutes.


----------



## sanjuro (Sep 29, 2004)

Question: Should I get a new helmet?

Answer: Get a new helmet.

It really doesn't matter about the situation. Just sunlight damages the integrity of the helmet, so get a new one.


----------



## Fantom808 (Jul 20, 2008)

All of the times i have had to warranty any of my helmets the company's have not required me to send in the original helmet for verification. best to probably just warranty it with the original manufacturer and get a discounted new helmet.


----------



## Hellrazor666 (Oct 27, 2008)

sbpinnacle said:


> She does like veggies and the insurance is well paid up... you may be on to something Hellrazor666. After shoveling 20" of snow from my driveway yesterday, it's unlikely I'll be riding for the next several days, not too mention needing the time to get over my current state of dumbness. Snowblower may be the next big purchase... more time to ride!


Looks like she got you a helmet and some other riding attire


----------



## sbpinnacle (Jul 27, 2009)

Hellrazor666 said:


> Looks like she got you a helmet and some other riding attire


 That's what I'm talking about baby!!! :thumbsup:


----------



## Blurr (Dec 7, 2009)

emtnate said:


> What do you base this statement on? You are absolutely incorrect. I've treated a number of people with good quality, properly fitted safety gear who have still sustained serious injuries or even been killed as a result of an impact to the head.
> 
> No helmet is like a force field which magically protects you from all blunt force trauma. Helmets sold in the US all meet the same minimal standards set by the CPSC. Any helmet, properly fitted, will give you the best chance at walking away from an injury, but will not prevent one in all cases.
> 
> Read up on helmet standards, how they are tested, and what kind of protection they offer before making statements like that.


I base this statement off of being a Sportbike track rider and having studied motorcycle helmet designs very intensely, as well as spending way to much time in the nuero care unit and taking that opportunity to "pick the brain" of those doctors and nurses working among such injuries. I also have taken the time to actually make helmets for the SCA where one recieves constant blows to the head, IM well aware of a helmet, its function, and the basics of its design. 
A helmet can be to hard in which case it merely makes a protective outside barrier but it does not allow proper give inside for the G forces sustained lets your brain slam against the inside of your skull just as it would without the helmet, not really accomplishing a whole lot, a good helmet will have a softer inside to allow "give" so your head can have some movement slowing down your G forces and chance for a concussion or brain injury. 
If bicycle helmets are such garbage they are not protecting against the "concussion" or minimizing it in a sport where your speeds are an idle then the industry needs to re evaluate how they are made.


----------



## emtnate (Feb 9, 2008)

Well I will fully agree that the industry needs to re-evaluate how bicycle helmets are made. Since they are designed for a low-speed impact they are not designed for how many of us ride. 

Bicycle helmets are not particularly hard on the inside. Not any harder than motorcycle helmets once you pull away the fabric liner. Both have a type of Styrofoam which gives under an impact. 

I spend my summers working for guys at a motocross track. Their helmets are designed with higher speeds and greater forces in mind, and there are still plenty of guys that sustain a concussion while wearing a helmet. 

Considering the G-Forces that are sustained in an impact in either one of these sports, you will not find a helmet to protect 100% against these types of injuries. Just because someone had a minor concussion does not mean the helmet design is crap. It most likely lessened the injury considerably.


----------



## zebrahum (Jun 29, 2005)

Blurr said:


> I base this statement off of being a Sportbike track rider and having studied motorcycle helmet designs very intensely, as well as spending way to much time in the nuero care unit and taking that opportunity to "pick the brain" of those doctors and nurses working among such injuries. I also have taken the time to actually make helmets for the SCA where one recieves constant blows to the head, IM well aware of a helmet, its function, and the basics of its design.
> A helmet can be to hard in which case it merely makes a protective outside barrier but it does not allow proper give inside for the G forces sustained lets your brain slam against the inside of your skull just as it would without the helmet, not really accomplishing a whole lot, a good helmet will have a softer inside to allow "give" so your head can have some movement slowing down your G forces and chance for a concussion or brain injury.
> If bicycle helmets are such garbage they are not protecting against the "concussion" or minimizing it in a sport where your speeds are an idle then the industry needs to re evaluate how they are made.


This certainly does not make you an authority on the usefulness of a bicycle helmet. The design considerations are based on the ability of someone to actually operate a bicycle wearing the helmet. You can't sit there and say that motorcycle helmets or any helmet will prevent concussion. There is no practical head protection device that will prevent all injury in all cases. Actual, practical design considerations must be made in order to put a functional product out on the market. You can theorize the best way to decelerate a skull all you want, but the fact is, no one will ride with a 6" thick helmet that weighs 20lbs limits your vision, and doesn't vent.

Your ideas of fit and replacement are dead on, but for all your helmet research, you surely must have realized that you have to actually wear the thing while operating a vehicle that people will cry over 50g of extra weight on.


----------



## PscyclePath (Aug 29, 2007)

Blurr said:


> I base this statement off of being a Sportbike track rider and having studied motorcycle helmet designs very intensely, as well as spending way to much time in the nuero care unit and taking that opportunity to "pick the brain" of those doctors and nurses working among such injuries. I also have taken the time to actually make helmets for the SCA where one recieves constant blows to the head, IM well aware of a helmet, its function, and the basics of its design.


There's a big difference in bike helmets and those for a fantasy sport where you whomp each other upside the head with baseball bats... ;-)


----------



## dysfunction (Aug 15, 2009)

PscyclePath said:


> There's a big difference in bike helmets and those for a fantasy sport where you whomp each other upside the head with baseball bats... ;-)


Having gotten hit in the head wearing a hockey helmet and hit my noggin hard on the boards wearing that very same helmet.. I'd say there's a significant difference in, and nature of, the force applied too. The latter being far more akin to the last time I took a header off of a bike too.


----------



## Blurr (Dec 7, 2009)

zebrahum said:


> This certainly does not make you an authority on the usefulness of a bicycle helmet. The design considerations are based on the ability of someone to actually operate a bicycle wearing the helmet. You can't sit there and say that motorcycle helmets or any helmet will prevent concussion. There is no practical head protection device that will prevent all injury in all cases. Actual, practical design considerations must be made in order to put a functional product out on the market. You can theorize the best way to decelerate a skull all you want, but the fact is, no one will ride with a 6" thick helmet that weighs 20lbs limits your vision, and doesn't vent.
> 
> Your ideas of fit and replacement are dead on, but for all your helmet research, you surely must have realized that you have to actually wear the thing while operating a vehicle that people will cry over 50g of extra weight on.


I never said you can prevent all head injuries, that is foolish, of course, my statement was based in general for the speeds on a bike. 
There is absolutely no reason they cannot make helmets (and I am sure they do) similar to motorcycle helmets in design, and that should be plenty light, with carbon fiber kevlar mixes and the like on the market now. Example the AGV ti tech weighs in at under 3lbs, not bad for a full faced helmet.  
People will always complain, I want max protection personally, personally I think people go overboard on weight (within reason) but that is my own personal opinion


----------



## Blurr (Dec 7, 2009)

PscyclePath said:


> There's a big difference in bike helmets and those for a fantasy sport where you whomp each other upside the head with baseball bats... ;-)


Not really, the same principle applies for the most part, redirect the force of the blow as much has possible, provide a hard outer shell with a softer inside that is not so soft, but not to hard as it transmits energy. 
now your motorcycle helmet for instance, many the shell will also get micro fractures which help dissipate some of the energy, not sure how all that applies as cheaper helmets generally have stick on graphics, while your upper end helmets are painted, yet their is little difference in testing.

Excellent site with some good information, geared to the motorcycle helmet of course but a interesting read if any of you so choose.

http://www.motorcyclistonline.com/gearbox/motorcycle_helmet_review/index.html

Great organization doing some testing.

http://sharp.direct.gov.uk/about-sharp/test-protocols/


----------



## emtnate (Feb 9, 2008)

Still, even if they made bicycle helmets conform to the standards and speeds of a motorcycle helmet, yet was still lightweight, well vented, and affordable; you would still have plenty of crashes where you head hurt. You said if you're head hurts after a crash, then the helmet wasn't worth a crap. That's just not true. 

All of your other statements have very valid points, although I think we are a ways off from an affordable helmet with superior protection. I often wonder if the SNELL standards are enough for some mountain bikers. 4 and 8 foot drops are not uncommon among this crowd. The catch is most of the time when you crash, you're not landing with the direct impact on your head, but it still happens.


----------



## Ken in KC (Jan 12, 2004)

*Ah, so you're ignorant...*



Blurr said:


> I base this statement off of being a Sportbike track rider and having studied motorcycle helmet designs very intensely, as well as spending way to much time in the nuero care unit and taking that opportunity to "pick the brain" of those doctors and nurses working among such injuries. I also have taken the time to actually make helmets for the SCA where one recieves constant blows to the head, IM well aware of a helmet, its function, and the basics of its design.
> A helmet can be to hard in which case it merely makes a protective outside barrier but it does not allow proper give inside for the G forces sustained lets your brain slam against the inside of your skull just as it would without the helmet, not really accomplishing a whole lot, a good helmet will have a softer inside to allow "give" so your head can have some movement slowing down your G forces and chance for a concussion or brain injury.
> If bicycle helmets are such garbage they are not protecting against the "concussion" or minimizing it in a sport where your speeds are an idle then the industry needs to re evaluate how they are made.


Your response points out your ignorance of cycling helmets. Your subsequent responses indicate that you're unwilling to actually learn from people who know about the subject.

Your assumptions on what a cycling helmet should and should not do are not correct.


----------



## Blurr (Dec 7, 2009)

Ken in KC said:


> Your response points out your ignorance of cycling helmets. Your subsequent responses indicate that you're unwilling to actually learn from people who know about the subject.
> 
> Your assumptions on what a cycling helmet should and should not do are not correct.


So you have no actual knowledge or ability to rationalize an argument, so this would indeed be your response? lol, and another LMFAO. go away, this is something very serious we all benefit from.


----------



## Blurr (Dec 7, 2009)

emtnate said:


> Still, even if they made bicycle helmets conform to the standards and speeds of a motorcycle helmet, yet was still lightweight, well vented, and affordable; you would still have plenty of crashes where you head hurt. You said if you're head hurts after a crash, then the helmet wasn't worth a crap. That's just not true.


It is true, out of dozens of dirtbike/quad crashes I have never had even a mild headache. If I had a helmet where I did, I would have never touched that model again.



> All of your other statements have very valid points, although I think we are a ways off from an affordable helmet with superior protection*. I often wonder if the SNELL standards are enough for some mountain bikers. 4 and 8 foot drops are not uncommon among this crowd. The catch is most of the time when you crash, you're not landing with the direct impact on your head, but it still happens*.


lol, try being launched several feet in the air doing triple digits then coming down on the asphalt. The energy incurred from falling off a cycle, even down a hill, will not be anywhere near on a motorcycle. Now take other motor sports as well.

Lorenzo, he finished the racing season btw He did incure injuries in other accidents, his head was not one of them. 









Crash compilation, you should watch.






Isle of man, the greatest motorcycle road race on earth, 160mph crash into a wall, dont watch if you cant stomach,





motocross crashes





you have guys jumping motorcycles 70ft in the air and eating it when coming down, The snell design may be faulty in some area's as far as the amount of G forces allowed when wrecking, but the helmet shell itself will hold up like no others.
I as many others have went to designs wich allow less force transfer and give up a little sturdiness to help prevent the brain slam into the skull. those standards are DOT, but in racing they are ECE or BSI which are allowed. DoT is not, not because of the design, but because of questionable build quality as DOT does not test very rigely.

How snell came about and a bit on basic testing


----------



## zebrahum (Jun 29, 2005)

Blurr said:


> I never said you can prevent all head injuries, that is foolish, of course, my statement was based in general for the speeds on a bike.
> There is absolutely no reason they cannot make helmets (and I am sure they do) similar to motorcycle helmets in design, and that should be plenty light, with carbon fiber kevlar mixes and the like on the market now. Example the AGV ti tech weighs in at under 3lbs, not bad for a full faced helmet.
> People will always complain, I want max protection personally, personally I think people go overboard on weight (within reason) but that is my own personal opinion


You basically did say you can prevent all injuries by claiming that if your head hurt your helmet was crap. But you're all wrong on this, motorcycle helmet manufacturers do not use 80mph collisions with a wall to determine what is "safe" or "unsafe". The test impact loading for motorcycle helmets is actually much closer to bicycle helmet than you would think.

I did some really quick calculations (so correct me if I've completely missed something) but looking at the Snell standards of bicycle and motorcycle helmet testing, the motorcycle helmets pass standard at 150J impact with 290G's of acceleration max while the bicycle helmet pass standard at 110J impact with 300G's of acceleration allowed.

If you take a 5kg weight (bicycles use 5kg, motos use several head weight sizes but report each) that means that the speed the helmet hits the test apparatus is

Motorcycle: 17.34 mph
Bicycle: 14.83 mph

A difference of 2.51 mph, not that earth shattering. The g-force attenuation that is required is only 3% higher on a motorcycle than a bicycle as well.

So if you can build a better helmet that people will wear, do it. But don't sit and criticize things saying you've done your research when you clearly don't have the whole picture. The bottom line is if you hit your head hard enough, it's going to hurt. A helmet only increases the force your head can strike something at. In the practical envelope of design size and functionality, you can't design a helmet that will keep your head from suffering some kind of injury in all cases. Plenty of people have died from head trauma while wearing a helmet, motorcycle or bicycle. I hope someday there's a helmet that is truly "safe", but until then I'm wearing the one I have because it's saved me plenty of times. At least enough that I can still understand work/force/velocity relations; maybe I should be drinking harder if I still know that stuff.


----------



## emtnate (Feb 9, 2008)

Blurr said:


> It is true, out of dozens of dirtbike/quad crashes I have never had even a mild headache. If I had a helmet where I did, I would have never touched that model again. ...snip...


Is it possible you just got lucky? Are you saying the hundreds of dirt bike / quad riders I've treated over the years I've been a medic all had faulty equipment? I can't imagine they all had the exact same helmet and most people in those sports wear them correctly.

As zebrahum pointed out, the testing for all helmets is subject to some criticism. You still can't relate the needs of a mountain biker to that of a motorcyclist of any type. The nature of the crash and the forces at work are completely different.

I'm just going out on a limb here, but I'm guessing that I have seen the effects of far more crashes of any type than you have. Ranging from complaints of "ouch that hurt" to fatalities. I've seen plenty of crashes happen and have had people die in my arms due severe head injuries. (even with helmets on).

So if you've never had a headache during a crash with a helmet on, I'm guessing your head didn't take the brunt of the impact. Something else hit first.

If you want to prove me wrong, send me one of these magic helmets, I know plenty of people that will be willing to provide a stress test for everyone here.

How does your "ideal" helmet prevent the brain from sloshing around inside the skull? You do know the brains are more or less this jelly like goo inside of a protective fluid and a few tendon like structures right? The brain (and the rest of your organs for that matter) all slam against the bones and sides of the body upon an impact. With a rapid deceleration, you can shear the axons apart from each other causing death to each neuron.


----------



## Blurr (Dec 7, 2009)

zebrahum said:


> You basically did say you can prevent all injuries by claiming that if your head hurt your helmet was crap. But you're all wrong on this, motorcycle helmet manufacturers do not use 80mph collisions with a wall to determine what is "safe" or "unsafe". The test impact loading for motorcycle helmets is actually much closer to bicycle helmet than you would think.
> 
> I did some really quick calculations (so correct me if I've completely missed something) but looking at the Snell standards of bicycle and motorcycle helmet testing, the motorcycle helmets pass standard at 150J impact with 290G's of acceleration max while the bicycle helmet pass standard at 110J impact with 300G's of acceleration allowed.
> 
> ...


So basically out of that entire post you failed to actually fully analyze one single thing that I stated, instead, being fully intent on being right, rather than help to better your sport, you chose instead to try to twist things I stated and to find the best possible way to merely try and insult me and hold onto your ignorance, bravo, absolute bravo. 
Now, go and read articles and educate yourself and then we can have a discussion like two adults, you game?


----------



## Blurr (Dec 7, 2009)

emtnate said:


> Is it possible you just got lucky? Are you saying the hundreds of dirt bike / quad riders I've treated over the years I've been a medic all had faulty equipment? I can't imagine they all had the exact same helmet and most people in those sports wear them correctly.


 No, most people do not wear correctly, it is very much a problem for people to buy say a full faced helmet which is to large ,be it intentional or unintentional, there are a multitude of factors involved in helmet selection, one anyone buying a helmet should wear said helmet for ten minutes within the store before wearing, this accomplishes two things, one, to make sure said helmet actually is fairly comfortable, and two, to find out if whatever liner in the helmet will make the persons head itch, this can be dangerouse for two main reasons, one, the person will be inattentive while riding, and two, simply not wear it, or maybe even leave it unstrapped to allow for easier itching. Now we can approach that actual fit itself, there are two types of fitting, one is street fitting, two is race, the first is slightly looser than the second, but should still be snug, its a real problem within the motorcycle community again, of people buying helmets a bit loose, also failing to compensate for the padding to wear a bit again, making the helmet loose and there are many instances where helmets have actually even turned on said rider from the wind, yea, they are wearing them properly :nono: 
Now we can even continue with this and also assume that the vast majority of people also do not buy a helmet which addresses the shape of their head, again, this could cause problems in a crash, how much? we do not know as there is no real testing to verify, but with a little thought, we can see where it can help cause one (sliding down over the eyes from the famous cone head) as one example, we can also understand that with the helmet again, not fitting properly merely from the "gap" that the helmet will not be able to allow said protection do to the give in that area.



> As zebrahum pointed out, the testing for all helmets is subject to some criticism. You still can't relate the needs of a mountain biker to that of a motorcyclist of any type. The nature of the crash and the forces at work are completely different.


 same basic princible for protection that I addressed earlier.



> I'm just going out on a limb here, but I'm guessing that I have seen the effects of far more crashes of any type than you have. Ranging from complaints of "ouch that hurt" to fatalities. I've seen plenty of crashes happen and have had people die in my arms due severe head injuries. (even with helmets on).


 Imagine that now go back and read the first article I wrote and then get back to me why the points in it where important as to the amount of trauma your brain within the skull itself may recieve with snell helmets vs DOT, bsa, and ECE ratings. And of course, it is impossible to completely protect someone from all injury or death, however back to my original statement, we are talking within the cycling community of more than likely single digit realistic impact vs double digit impact and increased energy and force from the motorcycle. Im assuming we do not need to get into the entire physics of it all, as all of us at an elementry level should have learned how force is increased, correct?



> So if you've never had a headache during a crash with a helmet on, I'm guessing your head didn't take the brunt of the impact. Something else hit first.


 Incorrect assumption based upon your own desire to merely be correct.



> If you want to prove me wrong, send me one of these magic helmets, I know plenty of people that will be willing to provide a stress test for everyone here.


 Feel free to click on again, one of the links provided different testing, and to hell, even visit your local race track and talk with people who have been down multiple times with helmets that saved their can.



> How does your "ideal" helmet prevent the brain from sloshing around inside the skull? You do know the brains are more or less this jelly like goo inside of a protective fluid and a few tendon like structures right? The brain (and the rest of your organs for that matter) all slam against the bones and sides of the body upon an impact. With a rapid deceleration, you can shear the axons apart from each other causing death to each neuron.


Jesus do you people simply jump at anything in order to prove you are correct? once again, this was addressed in my earlier post and in the first article I posted up which talked about different standards which focused more on creating a softer inside to help decelerate your brain slamming inside the skull as well as various hard outer shells and how they help to dissipate said crash, would you like to take this further and completely dissect various materials and how they shatter? I covered the basics already but maybe your ego is to large and you desire to continue. I dont know.
If you would like to talk more about how the brain sits inside the skull we can as well, and then we can also continue to the factor of age, and various health conditions also contributing to the amount of force which it may take to "shake the brain" loose in each individual, but then we would end up covering far to many and suddenly liver disease among other things would come into play as well, or would you like to get back on track and talk about someone basically falling down and getting a headache where they should not have in the first place on an average level with your average healthy individual? 
Should we also go on to cover how piss poor half helmets are to begin with? shall we also get into full faced vs half helmets? why are three quarter helmets better than half helmets still? would you like to get into studies showing half helmets can also cause further injury?
Shall we also address back to the very first thing that some of you seemed to agree with, having a proper fitting helmet is not going to be as possible when people insist on buying a helmet that adjusts to fit a head, (not going to be proper) and that some are made from piss poor materials not meeting any real standard to begin with? 
I would love to sit and have a rational discussion, and to better a sport that we all are on this forum to enjoy. or you can continue to beat yer chest and insist there is not a problem where indeed, there is one,that we can actually come together to better and make things a bit safer in the end, would that not be a better conclusion to all this?

This is a great thread for you to read on probably the largest sportbike site on the net, crash tested gear reviews. http://www.sportbikes.net/forums/riders-gear/263389-crashed-tested-gear-reviews-2.html


----------



## emtnate (Feb 9, 2008)

I never said nor implied that helmets are perfect they way they are. As far as I am concerned, whenever the average guy takes an average impact and still sustains an injury there is room for improvement. In the ideal world, we would have a helmet that was well vented, lightweight, offered superior protection, and was affordable. It is a lofty goal that is very likely to be unobtainable due to the myriad ways we invent to hurt ourselves.

I do believe we agree on most of your points. The only statement you've made that I continue to have a big problem with, was your first comment about the helmet design being crap if you have a headache after an impact. I think there is plenty of room for improvement, but I wouldn't go as far as calling a model crap just because someone had an accident that exceeded the level of protection it was able to offer. 

With the G forces involved in direct impact to the head you can have complete "failure" of the structure of a helmet, exactly the way it was intended to fail and yet not redistribute enough energy to prevent a concussion.

edit:

Blurr send me a PM or something if you want to continue this discussion. I'm always willing to hear others point of views about safety. This is getting a little beyond the original intent of the thread.


----------



## Blurr (Dec 7, 2009)

> With the G forces involved in direct impact to the head you can have complete "failure" of the structure of a helmet, exactly the way it was intended to fail and yet not redistribute enough energy to prevent a concussion.


you are absolutely correct, nothing is 100 percent and no accident is identical only similar with far to many factors to consider, I think we are coming to where we need to be. :cornut: 
merry christmas


----------



## Ken in KC (Jan 12, 2004)

*You're funny...*



Blurr said:


> So you have no actual knowledge or ability to rationalize an argument, so this would indeed be your response? lol, and another LMFAO. go away, this is something very serious we all benefit from.


I have plenty of knowledge and rational ability, just no interest in engaging with you.

Yes, it is important. Which is why it's important we discuss facts and not opinions couched as facts. This one, for example: "if you crashed and your head hurt then yoru helmet was not worth a crap ..."

And this post is rather ironic: "Jesus do you people simply jump at anything in order to prove you are correct?" when you consider the only point people are really disagreeing with you on is "if you crashed and your head hurt then yoru helmet was not worth a crap ...". It seems like you're suffering from a little Pot/Kettle/Black syndrome.


----------



## BigSwede (Aug 25, 2009)

Gasp4Air said:


> I make my own helmet for a fraction of the price of a new helmet. I just apply this foam-in-a-can all around my head, give it a few minutes to set up and then hit the trails. Getting it off is a bit of a hassle, though, I have to soak my head in benzene and naptha for about 45 minutes.


Just use a can of PAM cooking spray,underneath the foam,and that way you can just pop it off with a crowbar at the end of the ride.Of course sometimes you gotta use a chainsaw if it's a-little stubborn.......:yikes:


----------

