You are hereForums / By Discipline / Mountain (off road) / MTB Gear / Helmet
Helmet
NB: Originally posted elsewhere on the Global Riders Network and appears via syndication.
After a rather nasty OTB "incedent" I'm in need of a new helmet. Is it a case of best fit and light weight, or is there more i should look for?
- Login to post comments
- Bookmark & share
Tags
I have had a look at all areas with which I could weight weeny my bike - including my noggin. I was suprised that my $40 helmet wasn't much if at all heavier than $300 ones. Or was I just drunk when I thought that? The carbon ones seem to have more vents (and as is the secret motive for lightening my bike with carbon bling - they make you look much more professional).
The $50.00 helmets are the same weight as a $300.00 helmet but they have less vents too , it comes down too your budget & how you like it to sit on your head , I'm looking for a new one too the sweat that comes out of mine is shocking my pads are still wet after 1 hour when I get home after a ride
I wouldn't spend less than $100 dollars on the only thing stopping the squishy bits of my head from escaping when I crash. Giro Zen or Met Kaos.
covers more of your head, especially at the back, and is fully encased in polycarb, unlike the cheaper ones which leave the back of your head covered only in naked styrofoam.
In an impact the styro pretty much goes to granules - that's how it dissipates the kinetic energy. The downside is that as you tumble those bits will depart the scene unless they have some kind of shell they're bonded with to keep them in place. This is from first-hand experience - I've destroyed a few.
There's a risk that a second impact to the same area will connect directly with your brainbox and dissipate the kinetic energy there. Not what you want.
Helmets without the polycarb shell extending all the way around leave me feeling pretty naked. Fully encased automatically puts you in high $100+ price territory, unfortunately.
I use a Giro, always have and my next one probably will be too.
I've noticed that alot of the cheaper helmets, the plastic covers come off very easily, some I've seen have just fallen off. Not something i'd consider very safe, if the plastic is part of the structual integrity of the bike, keeping the styrene from breaking apart totally in an impact. The mid to top end helmets are expensive, but it's the research and development that the companies go through to produce a aerodynamic, well ventilated and impact absorbing helmet. The better the design, the better the impact distribution throughout the structure of the helmet, dissapating the impact around your head, rather than through it.
That being said it is, as has been said, a budget type purchse like everything. Though I'd ensure there is a little more funding for the ol' noggin project.
I second the Fox Flux, great lid for the money and good protection. If you wear a sweat gutter underneath no drippage in the eyes either.
http://www.bellbikehelmets.com/productDetail.asp...
Excellent helmet with awesome ventilation. If you have a ten dollar head, buy a ten dollar helmet!
And the peak comes off so i can use it on my road bike too. bonus.
Is there any evidence that a $500 helmet gives you much more protection than one less than $100? All helmets in Australia have to pass a certain standard to be sold right?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bicycle_helmet
Have a look at wiki. I think a helmet needs to look nice as well as have great ventilation.
"A cycle helmet should be light in weight and should provide adequate ventilation, because cycling can be an intense aerobic activity which significantly raises body temperature, and the head in particular needs to be able to regulate its temperature"
"A helmet's ability to absorb energy could be improved by increasing the volume of expanded polystyrene, but this would make it thicker, heavier, and hotter to wear. Another concern is that a thicker helmet increases the risk of rotational-type brain injuries (discussed in more detail below). Ultimately, every helmet design represents some sort of compromise"
"Is there any evidence that a $500 helmet gives you much more protection than one less than $100? All helmets in Australia have to pass a certain standard to be sold right?"
all cars registered in NSW need to pass rego inspection too, but I wouldn't want to be in alot of them if they had an accident
Well cars are subjected to crash tests and given ratings that we can then make a purchase decision on.
However with helmets it seems all a bit more vague.
I wear a $150 Fox Flux and I'm happy with that as it seems to give more protection at the rear than some. However there are plenty of helmets that cost more than twice that much and seem to have less protection.
So are the heads of people that buy $300 helmets twice the value of my head? Do they offer more ventilation at the expense of protection? Is it simply a fashion statement?
I think you also need to factor in comfort and to what extent you can adjust the helmet... some brands allow for pad replacement too.
That being said, I wouldn't be choosing a KMart special over a branded helmet...
My opinion is that the more expensive helmets although they have less material, they are designed to use that minimal material more efficiently in the result of an impact.
Manufacturers of more expensive helmets spend money in developing designs that maximise air flwo and head cooling, whilst making it as light as possible and as impact absorbing as possible.
On the flip side, manufacturers of cheaper helmets, spend money in copying more expensive designs of years gone by, although they may be good enough to protect your head to Australian Standards, it doesn't necisarily mean that they are the best.
A helmets ability to hold together on impact is only part of the helmets duty. The main part is to slow the initial impact down gradually and redirct the impact around the head, rather than through it. This is where the money spent by the more expensive manufacturer. In crash test simulations, wind speed simulations etc.
A cheaper helmet will in most cases serve as good a purpose as a more expensive helmet, but when the larger more critical impacts occur, I preferably want to be wearing a helmet that's had time and money spent on it's development.
I don't buy a more expensive helmet because it's more expensive, I buy it because if the good brand and it's great reputation, that's been built up over decades.
Giro E2 is a great helmet - I had a cheaper Catseye one previously which was light and all good but not very cool. Especially on longer rides the additional venting is so worth the extra dosh - I noticed a massive improvement in internal temperature.
for all the info, Ended up with a lowish end hat for the moment. [Nearly 3 gorrilas on a new bike last week and the financial controller said "you need how much for a new helmet"] even tried the $10 head line. Limar 575 seemed ok today.
I'm in the market for a new helmet and the savings on buying one from CRC (on a Bell / Giro) for example are pretty good. I realise that you need an australian approved helment when racing, has anyone here ever had their helmet checked at a race ???
Nope, I've also never been checked for a whistle either.
the only people that will check if it is australian approved is the insurance company when they are going to make a payout..... an O/S helmet is not worth the risk.
I've always thought that more expensive helmets have more features, ie adjustability, greater air flow etc. I never assumed that a more expensive helmet would keep me safer, however you could always argue that a well ventilated (more expensive helmet) keeps your head cooler on hot days, which in the long run could manage fatigue better therfore being safer in the long run.
I don't think its as clear cut as this, nor should it be, but I often wonder if anyone's actually been done over by an insurance CO because they were not wearing a helmet (or a non approved one) and had a bike stack resulting in a brain injury that's required some compensation?
Still does not make a lot of sense to me that I can go to Kmart and buy an AUS approved lid for bugger all, and in reality it probably offers me bugger all overall protection when compared to some of the non AUS approved ones I see many cyclists wearing these days, by overall protection you might consider other things like rider comfort and fit nearly as important as the standards testing criteria, example is the ability to avoid an accident because you weren’t bothered by the sweat dripping into your eyes because the (AUS approved) helmet was not actually designed to deal with a sweaty head.
Still I don't wish to be a legal test case.. so lets all obey the rules that our overlords have imposed upon us and we’ll all be safe