[ 3 / a / adv / an / asp / cgl / ck / co / diy / fa / g / gd / int / jp / k / lit / m / mlp / mu / n / o / out / p / po / sci / sp / tg / toy / trv / tv / v / vg / vp / vr / w / wsg / x]

/n/ - Transportation

<< back to board
[Delete this thread]

Anonymous 03/21/14(Fri)18:28 UTC+1 No.639259 Report

Why are bicycle helmets so shitty? How is this supposed to protect me from a fall? How about the facial area? Are we stuck with the motocross like helmets?
>>
Anonymous 03/21/14(Fri)18:31 UTC+1 No.639262 Report

There are dozens of different helmet designs.
With or without jaw protection, air vents and visors.
Some of them protect you by absorbing impact energy in foam, others are rigid.
You can choose any you want.

The reason this type of helmet is popular with cyclists is that all others are too hot, so you won't wear them anyway and therefore they don't protect you at all.
>>
Anonymous 03/21/14(Fri)18:34 UTC+1 No.639264 Report

Helmets are dangerous. Death rates are lower where they aren't worn.
>>
Anonymous 03/21/14(Fri)18:34 UTC+1 No.639265 Report

>>639262
Even then they are so flimsy to comparison to other helmet types used in motorcycles. You can have a very snug fit with bicycle helmets but in an event of a fall they can kinda slide off.
>>
Anonymous 03/21/14(Fri)18:38 UTC+1 No.639267 Report

>>639262
This, more protection comes at a cost not worth it for the average cyclist

>>639264
>correlation /=/ causation

Also,
>incoming helmet shitposting thread
>>
Anonymous 03/21/14(Fri)18:38 UTC+1 No.639268 Report

>>639264
Cycling rates are higher where they aren't mandatory.
More cyclists = More safer streets.
>>
Anonymous 03/21/14(Fri)18:41 UTC+1 No.639269 Report

>>639267
If you feel the crushing need to wear a helmet then you have no business cycling but you should wear a helmet at all times. And ride the short bus.
>>
Anonymous 03/21/14(Fri)18:45 UTC+1 No.639271 Report

>>639268
Why would you force more cyclists ?
>>
Anonymous 03/21/14(Fri)18:45 UTC+1 No.639272 Report

What is the point of helmets? I have been riding for over 11 years and I never used a helmet and have never got hit or fell off my bike.. If a car hits you, you are fucked regardless. Plus how often do you actually hit your head if you were to fall off your bike? Most of the time you are going to end up falling on your back or side.
>>
Anonymous 03/21/14(Fri)18:46 UTC+1 No.639273 Report

>>639269
I don't even wear a helmet, silly

>one more step towards becoming another helmet shitposting thread
>>
Anonymous 03/21/14(Fri)18:53 UTC+1 No.639276 Report

>>639273
>implying that's not the OP's intent everytime one of these threads is posted.
>>
Anonymous 03/21/14(Fri)19:00 UTC+1 No.639278 Report

>>639276
Quite likely
>>
Anonymous 03/21/14(Fri)19:31 UTC+1 No.639291 Report

>>639259
All I know is that two years ago when I crashed near the end of a road race if I hadn't been wearing a helmet I would have had to be life-flighted out of there instead of picking myself up and riding back to my car with relatively minor injuries. Make of that what you will.
>>
Anonymous 03/21/14(Fri)19:35 UTC+1 No.639293 Report

>>639272
>If a car hits you, you are fucked regardless

Not really.. I know a girl that got T boned by a car, went up on the bonnet and cracked her head off the windscreen. Her helmet was split in two, almost certainly saved her from a brain injury.

Helmets are like any other safety feature, they are totally useless 99.99% of the time. That doesn't mean they're not worth wearing, especially if you're cycling on busy roads
>>
Anonymous 03/21/14(Fri)19:42 UTC+1 No.639294 Report

>>639293
>almost certainly saved her from a brain injury.

No, it almost certainly saved her from a SKULL injury. Brain injuries are caused by your brain smacking into your skull and will happen no matter how well protected the skull is.
>>
Anonymous 03/21/14(Fri)21:31 UTC+1 No.639327 Report

this is long but worth reading http://www.bicycling.com/senseless/index.html
>>
Anonymous 03/21/14(Fri)21:43 UTC+1 No.639331 Report

>>639259

I wear a motorcycle helmet.

come at me fgt
>>
Anonymous 03/21/14(Fri)22:09 UTC+1 No.639349 Report

>>639293
If the helmet splits, it's probably failed to do it's job. check if the lining has compressed after a crash, if it hasn't it's failed and not saved you.
>>
Anonymous 03/21/14(Fri)22:16 UTC+1 No.639354 Report

>>639349
>If the helmet splits, it's probably failed to do it's job
Just the opposite. Foam helmets are one-time use. They collapse and/or split so your skull doesn't have to.
>>
Anonymous 03/21/14(Fri)22:19 UTC+1 No.639356 Report

>>639294
>>639349
>Brain injuries are caused by your brain smacking into your skull and will happen no matter how well protected the skull is.

You don't know how helmet work.

In an impact with a hard surface or object the helmet deforms and spreads out the energy of the collision over a longer period of time. The helmet deforming also removes from energy. It is the difference between hitting a brick wall at 60mph and hitting it at 25mph.

>>639327
>http://www.bicycling.com/senseless/index.html

He underestimates the amount of concussions that doctors diagnose today compared to the past. While concussions are bad, the danger comes from getting concussed multiple times along with other hard hits to the head. I doubt serious road cyclists will experience anywhere near the same level of blows to the head and concussions as a football player gets.

However any attempts to make helmets overall more effective is a step in the right direction. The issues with current helmets and the technology mentioned in the article is applicable to far more than bicycle helmets. MIPS helmets are out there for road and mountain riding, but they are not easy to find nor are they cheap.

Until I can find a MIPS road helmet for <$150 or I break what I have I will keep wearing my current helmet. Better to have some protection if I fall or get hit than to have no protection at all.
>>
Anonymous 03/21/14(Fri)22:31 UTC+1 No.639367 Report

Would world class pros wear helmet if UCI were to remove the helmet rule?
A crash would put you out of commission for at least a few days if not weeks. How much training will actually be lost after a concussion?

>>639272
I was going downhill once and my brakes didn't bite. I hit the curb and landed head first, but of course my hands took some of the impact. I can't imagine how much damage I would take if I didn't have it. My face was bleeding, and now the left side of my face has a tint of purple, hoping it isn't permanent.
>>
Anonymous 03/21/14(Fri)22:37 UTC+1 No.639372 Report

>>639367
>Would world class pros wear helmet if UCI were to remove the helmet rule?
It would be mixed, as it was up til they created the rule. Certainly more than the hairnet days though.
>>
Anonymous 03/21/14(Fri)22:37 UTC+1 No.639373 Report

>>639367
If you crashed during a +100kph descent you could very likely be out for more than just a few weeks.
>>
Anonymous 03/21/14(Fri)22:43 UTC+1 No.639375 Report

>>639291
> I crashed near the end of a road race

Is there any goddamned race on the planet that doesn't mandate the use of a helmet though?
>>
Anonymous 03/21/14(Fri)22:49 UTC+1 No.639378 Report

>>639356
The deformation is in the compression of the helmet lining (typically polystyrene for bicycles). Polystyrene does not retake it's previous shape once compressed.

If it splits and the lining has not been compressed then the force has not been spread out over a longer length of time as intended and therefore the helmet has not been successful in it's job.

It's been known to happen for helmets to split, but not necessarily compress upon impact, providing little more protection than wearing a pot over your head.
>>
Anonymous 03/21/14(Fri)23:40 UTC+1 No.639396 Report

>>639378
>It's been known to happen for helmets to split, but not necessarily compress upon impact, providing little more protection than wearing a pot over your head.

And how often does this happen?

>>639367
>Would world class pros wear helmet if UCI were to remove the helmet rule?

Yes. Sponsors would still require the teams to wear them for image reasons. Many would also wear them for aerodynamics.
>>
Anonymous 03/22/14(Sat)00:03 UTC+1 No.639398 Report

>>639396
>Sponsors would still require the teams to wear them for image reasons. Many would also wear them for aerodynamics.

You wat m8? You do understand that helmets weren't mandatory until 20 years ago right? Some guys did wear them but not many.
>>
Anonymous 03/22/14(Sat)00:27 UTC+1 No.639410 Report

>>639272
Rule of second impact
>>
Anonymous 03/22/14(Sat)01:04 UTC+1 No.639431 Report

>>639398
it's only been 12 years actually.. it's amazing how long it took really.
>>
Anonymous 03/22/14(Sat)01:11 UTC+1 No.639434 Report

They are cheaper, cooler and offer better periferical vision, so come with plastic protection for jaw in the strap, but they arent really necessary, using gloves is more effective.
>>
Anonymous 03/22/14(Sat)01:40 UTC+1 No.639449 Report

>>639349
Wat. Helmets break when they get a big impact like that so more energy goes into splitting the material. It's like a crush zone on a car. It breaks intentionally so the impact of whatever it's protecting is significantly reduced.

As a matter of fact, there is an example of this from the olympics. Women's Slopestyle. One of the athletes fucked up a landing and caught a back edge, and her helmet cracked and split open. She remained conscious and could snowboard to the bottom instead of getting a bad concussion.
>>
Anonymous 03/22/14(Sat)02:06 UTC+1 No.639461 Report

>>639356
>You don't know how helmet work.

I do. You don't know how brain injuries work. There's a reason that professional athletes are taken out of a game after hitting their head hard, even when wearing helmets. It's because they are now at risk of having a concussion, because the helmet can never fully protect your brain.

The primary things a helmet protects are your skin, skull, and even neck (they cause sliding so your head doesn't stop at the collision site while your body keeps going). Protection from brain injury is not nearly as complete and your friend should have had her brain examined in the hospital after that kind of collision.

Even if a helmet does it's job perfectly, you're still at a big risk for brain injury because nothing prevents your brain from crashing into your skull, even if the helmet does slow the impact (which, again, does much more to protect your bones than it does to protect your brain).
>>
Anonymous 03/22/14(Sat)02:12 UTC+1 No.639463 Report

>>639375
>Is there any goddamned race on the planet that doesn't mandate the use of a helmet though?
No, but that isn't the point now is it? Helmets are mandated by USA Cycling for all sanctioned races because they save people's heads from injury. If that isn't good enough reason for anyone then they can go get fucked, they're idiots.
>>
Anonymous 03/22/14(Sat)02:26 UTC+1 No.639466 Report

>>639463
> they're idiots
>save people's heads from injury
So people who don't use helmets don't need helmets.
>>
Anonymous 03/22/14(Sat)04:31 UTC+1 No.639503 Report

>>639398
>You do understand that helmets weren't mandatory until 20 years ago right?

I do. I also understand sponsors don't like seeing the athletes they sponsor not ride with safety equipment because it makes them look bad.

>>639461
>Protection from brain injury is not nearly as complete and your friend should have had her brain examined in the hospital after that kind of collision.

In the grand scheme of things getting concussed a few times in your life with significant time between concussions and with no long term symptoms won't do much to a person. Getting your brain rattled with some concussions 12 Sunday's in a row from ages 8 to 35 will have long term effects. But if you are willing to front the $3500 for a CT scan for every cyclist who comes in with an injury be my guest. A 30 second test by a doctor, nurse, or EMT can rule out a concussion.

>ate shit on my bike due to my own fault a few years back
>go to hospital
>tell them about injury
>"were you wearing a helmet"
>yes
>"headache"
>no
>"how many fingers am I holding up?"
>does the thumb count?
>"you're good"

>Even if a helmet does it's job perfectly, you're still at a big risk for brain injury because nothing prevents your brain from crashing into your skull,
>even if the helmet does slow the impact

Wot?

Concussions are caused by the brain hitting the skull at a high enough speed. The lower the speed the brains hits the lower the chances of concussion. In the article >>639327 posted even conventional bike helmets reduce the rotational forces on the head that lead to a concussion. Newer helmets with MIPS are superior to conventional helmets.
>>
Velo Uber Alles 03/22/14(Sat)10:31 UTC+1 No.639611 Report

>Why are bicycle helmets so shitty?
Most of them are a compromise of protection, and usability under aerobic activity.

>How is this supposed to protect me from a fall?
It's supposed to take one big, headcrushing critical hit. That's all.

> How about the facial area? Are we stuck with the motocross like helmets?
Look at what downhill racers wear.

>>639367
>Would world class pros wear helmet if UCI were to remove the helmet rule?

Helmets are a lot better on the weight/aero/protection ratio now. It would be a stage by stage basis. UCI has rules against too much helmet. You'd see people skipping helmets on steep hill climb stages, sometimes have them passed out by the support cars mid stage for descents/the finish.

Anon's pic? That's a serious hill climb. >>639398

>>639375
Nothing serious. Just people screwing around. Tweed races, alley cats.

>>639466
If you're riding at zone 1 heart rate speeds on segregated paths or with Japanese polite traffic on a mamachari, you don't need the helmet. Also, mandatory helmet laws are counterproductive.
>>
Anonymous 03/22/14(Sat)11:55 UTC+1 No.639616 Report

>>639463
Helmets don't save shit and only fools who keep their children on leashes wear them. They don't compress and they barely insulate your noggin from the ground. Might as well not wear one and risk getting road rash on your scalp since that's all they can really protect you from.
>>
Anonymous 03/22/14(Sat)18:27 UTC+1 No.639727 Report

>>639466
>So people who don't use helmets don't need helmets.
Yep, I'm OK with that. Call it evolution in action.
>>
III 03/22/14(Sat)18:30 UTC+1 No.639728 Report

>>639616

>2014
>being this stupid

I bet you think cigarettes can't hurt you either.
>>
Anonymous 03/22/14(Sat)18:35 UTC+1 No.639731 Report

>>639616
>They don't compress and they barely insulate your noggin from the ground
Apparently you don't know how to read: I crashed at a road race 2 years ago and if it wasn't for the helmet I was wearing I would have severely injured my head and most likely would have had to be taken away in an ambulance instead of finishing the race and driving myself home. For WEEKS afterwards I kept finding damage on myself from the crash. A YEAR later I was still finding damage to the bike itself I hadn't noticed initially, things like bent handlebars.

The helmet itself had to be replaced because it had *cracked* the shell on impact *as well as* compressed the shock-absorbing material.
I WILL SAY IT AGAIN: IF I HAD NOT BEEN WEARING A HELMET I WOULD HAVE ENDED UP IN AN AMBULANCE WITH A SERIOUS HEAD INJURY.

..but please, go right ahead and keep not wearing a helmet; keep telling yourself "it looks dumb so I'm not going to wear it regardless" and keep lying to yourself and everyone else about it's value to protect your head from injury. We'll use you as yet another example of evolution in action if you get in a crash and end up dead or permanently a drooling idiot from head trauma. We'll hang a sign around your neck that says "Didn't wear a bike helmet" so people can see what will happen to them if they get in a wreck without one.
>>
Anonymous 03/22/14(Sat)18:41 UTC+1 No.639734 Report

>>639728
Guys like that, assuming they get out of their teenage years without getting seriously injured or dead, generally have to have an accident where they get injured in a way that the helmet would have prevented it. Either that, or if they survive long enough to reproduce, they suddenly have a hormonally-driven desire to protect their offspring, in which case they're sent out to ride their bikes up and down the sidewalk not only in a helmet, but knee and elbow pads, if not full armor.
>>
Anonymous 03/22/14(Sat)19:59 UTC+1 No.639756 Report

>>639731
You didn't notice bent handlebars for a whole year?

Come on man, DYER?
>>
Anonymous 03/22/14(Sat)20:27 UTC+1 No.639763 Report

>>639756
What the hell is a DYER and why do I keep seeing this term thrown around?
>>
Anonymous 03/22/14(Sat)20:29 UTC+1 No.639764 Report

>>639763
Do You Even Ride?
>>
Anonymous 03/23/14(Sun)04:17 UTC+1 No.639947 Report

>>
Anonymous 03/23/14(Sun)04:18 UTC+1 No.639949 Report

>>639262
>Some of them protect you by absorbing impact energy in foam, others are rigid.
The latter offers much less protection. Single-impact helmets are safer.
>>
Anonymous 03/23/14(Sun)10:42 UTC+1 No.640080 Report

>>639949
I never implied otherwise.
>>
Anonymous 03/23/14(Sun)10:44 UTC+1 No.640081 Report

>>639947
I'm pretty sure wearing that on my daily commute, which includes a 20 minute climb, in summer, would hurt my brain almost as much as a fall.
All the content on this website comes from 4chan.org. All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster. 4chanArchive is not affiliated with 4chan.