I’ve contributed to a few helmet age threads and not wishing to resurrect the debate over replace it 3 or 5 yrs or whatever….

I do replace mine after 3 yrs, largely because I do some coaching and it’s a BC ‘good practice’ and leading be example etc etc

New POC helmet arrived there, with a date of manufacture of Dec 15, which seems a fair time ago. Have been trying a few helmets recently and most seem to be stamped mid 16, which is fine, giving supply, distribute, sell etc.

so, 13 months, into a theoretical 36 month useage span – return or keep ?

It’ll be UV and usage that ages a helmet so starting the clock when you take it out of the box seems reasonable. That said I’d still want a discount for buying an old stock helmet.

In my mind, and from reading some research and my experience in the plastics industry, the 3-5 years is general usage. Not because the material degrades over time. It does, but that is due to being exposed to the elements and general wear and tear.

If I had a big off or a significant head bump then I’d change it for structural reasons. Just because it was manufactured three years ago it doesn’t mean it’s had as much use or exposure as one that’s 6 months old. Only you can be the judge of that.

Most of the change it “science” is manufacturers protecting their market. IMHO.

Why not ask the mfr?

I’m still waiting for any evidence that UV degrades them. As for usage…can’t you see damage by usage?

OP – won’t matter a bean IMO, but MO is the opposite end of the spectrum to yours.

In the box and unused will not cause any degradation and usage recommendations apply from when the product was first used.

^^^^ yeah, that’s kinda what I thought too, it can’t degrade in a box in a warehouse…

was a decent price, so will likely keep if it fits..

As above – they degrade slowly with age, more quickly with UV exposure and sweat contamination. So the 3 or 5 year thing is more of an ass saving measure than a real measure of degradation.

MY helmet ( posh / expensive one) does not get much use and lives in a cupboard. It will not degrade as quickly as one that is in daily use and kept in sunlight.

In your case I guess its used pretty much daily and for long periods of time each day thus 3 years sounds not unreasonable but start the clock when you open the box

^^^^ yeah, that’s kinda what I thought too, it can’t degrade in a box in a warehouse…

So by that logic, are we better off keeping helmets in a cool dark place between rides to extend workable life?
I do, but that’s just a consequence of where I store my bike gear.

http://singletrackworld.com/forum/topic/does-anyone-replace-their-helmet-after-3-yrs-if-undamaged

includes quotes from manufacturer MET (who you’d think would have a vested interest) saying 8 years, and some actual science

http://biomechanical.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/article.aspx?articleid=2497744

“Age Does Not Affect the Material Properties of Expanded Polystyrene Liners in Field-Used Bicycle Helmets”

I do replace mine after 3 yrs, largely because I do some coaching and it’s a BC ‘good practice’ and leading be example etc etc

You teach stuff just because it’s in “the manual” rather than because it has any merit?

Just don’t leave it outside in the rain or direct sunlight.

crashtestmonkey – Member

You teach stuff just because it’s in “the manual” rather than because it has any merit?

not at all, no, however part of the bike/helmet/clothing check that is required at the beginning of a kids coached session includes checking the helmet for signs of damage, and at some stage over a group of sessions, the age of the helmet, with BC guidance being they should be no more than 3 yrs old. There is some discretion applicable in any of these situations, and coaches are always encouraged to lead by example. It wouldn’t be much good if a kid challenged back by asking ‘how old is yours then’, as they do, and you reply 5 years…

I’m still waiting for any evidence that UV degrades them.

As before the straps will degrade the most in UV, see any amount of climbing equipment tests on Dyneema and nylon slings. I don’t know about you but a helmet where the straps could fail isn’t going to be much use in extremis.

The plastic bits of shell and polystyrene are going to be much affected by UV.

Edited for autocorrect of Dyneema to dynamo!

My original point is that the BC guidance has no merit; there is no good reason why you or the kids you coach should be buying a new helmet every 3 years (if kids’ lids actually last that long with being dropped, thrown etc….).

I don’t think its possible to not “resurrect the debate”, as it’s key to your decision making. If you are steadfast on replacing every 3 years then IMHO you shouldn’t accept a 13 month old helmet (especially something as spendy as a POC) as it’s lost a third of it’s life sitting on a shelf.

As I am happy to keep helmets for years if they aren’t damaged, then the manufacturer date is fairly redundant for me- pretty sure my commuter lid which I only bought a month or two ago is NOS and maybe 18 months old?

So is it up to me to suggest we should all be wearing our bike helmets while covering them in a box to protect them from UV and prolong their life? Just make sure the box is aerodynamically teardrop shaped! 😆

CTM has it – you take a side on the debate so any answer has to be affected by that.

Sandwich – Member

I’m still waiting for any evidence that UV degrades them.

As before the straps will degrade the most in UV, see any amount of climbing equipment tests on Dyneema and nylon slings. I don’t know about you but a helmet where the straps could fail isn’t going to be much use in extremis.

How significant is that then?

Not a jot, of course, as it is never trotted out, even by the mfrs.

Fear-mongering at its worst.

If UV damages helmets, then I’m ok to use mine for decades as we never get any bloody sun up here!

Research has shown that helmets don’t degrade with age unless they have suffered an impact or chemical contamination. The UV debate is a bit spurious. You can’t compare a bit f climbing tat that is left out 24 hours a day every day with a chin strap. Ho much UV really gets onto helmet straps?

If you have no defence to that and you are intent on keeping within the BC guidelines then the question you are asking is irrelevant. The only one that matters is; are you prepared to pay that much for a helmet that you’ll be throwing away in less than two years time? If not, then send it back.

scotroutes, yes, I agree with that.

I guess a better question may have been ‘at what age after manufacturing should helmets be discounted’ ?

OK – if you assume that they don’t degrade in any way while in storage then they should only be discounted when a replacement model becomes available and the distributor/retailer needs to punt them on.

It wouldn’t be much good if a kid challenged back by asking ‘how old is yours then’, as they do, and you reply 5 years…

Surely the answer to this is ‘1 year’ regardless of how old it is..

😀

If you’re determined to play by the BC made up rules, then there doesn’t appear to be anything specifying when the helmet is “born”. First use would seem a sensible point for that given the arse covering nature of the guidance.

You can of course ignore all the sensible advice, stick to the rules and send it back if that makes you feel better.

I guess that depends whether they’re selling it to a BC coach?

Al that rather suggests they haven’t done the research. There’s a large body of climbing, rope access and lifting research on the materials typically used in helmet strap material. Better ambulant and slightly poorer than a dribbling vegetable. But it’s your head.
Ianc has no choice ‘the rules’ say 3 years. If he coaches someone who gets injured wearing a helmet deemed to be too old I wouldn’t give much for his chances when his day in court arrives.

aracer, as I said earlier. If it fits I’ll keep it, having tried it after work it does so I will.

Still, am interesting discussion point though ?

I don’t know what the guidance is based on, one would like to think there was substance to it surely ?

Given that you’ll be landing on your noggin again soon enough, I wouldn’t worry too much about degradation….

Good point downshep 😀

There’s a large body of climbing, rope access and lifting research on the materials typically used in helmet strap material.

None of which that I’m aware of suggests you have to retire after only 3 years – I’ve certainly never come across the idea that you have to replace a harness that often if it’s not otherwise worn, and nobody I’ve met does.

If he coaches someone who gets injured wearing a helmet deemed to be too old I wouldn’t give much for his chances when his day in court arrives.

Somebody else gets injured when he’s wearing a helmet which is out of date? That would certainly be an interesting piece of evidence.

Aracer, as I said earlier on, the expectation is lead by example…… That said, I reckon the idea of 3 yrs from first use, as suggested by some posters makes a lot of sense and could be easily defended in the worst case. I’m going to work on that basis and not the date of manufacture I reckon.

I reckon the idea of 3 yrs from first use, as suggested by some posters makes a lot of sense

I think that was me – see I can be helpful as well as argumentative 8)

Pragmatically it seems a reasonable way to interpret the rules whilst applying some common sense

It probably was 😀

TBH I think the rule is a bit crap too, however, that aside, I am a little miffed that a brand new helmet is dated year before last, not that it really matters 🙂

But we’ve established that there’s no Use By date for helmets. Most non-perishable goods are sold without a manufacturing date. Maybe the it’s the idea of having a date on a helmet that’s wrong.

scotroutes, yes, totally agree. Given that they will usually be in a warehouse etc and not on a sunny window display until purchase..

Although the construction of motorcycle helmet is different to a cycle helmet some of the following may relevant.
I used to work for the UK distributor of Arai helmets and they did a lot of research into degradation of their product. The soft foam and inner liner are the bits that degrade and these are the elements that absorb most the shock in an impact. These parts degrade mostly from contact with the natural oils in your skin and hair and sweat. Arai recommend that you replace a helmet every 5 years in normal use use and 7 years for light use.
Some outer shells were left outside the factory in direct sunlight for 10 years and when tested still passed the relevant impact tests.
Whoever decided that you need to replace a helmet 3 years after the date of manufacture rather than first use, needs their head examined.
Ooh, did you see what I did there?

Would you/wouldn’t you??

http://www.slanecycles.com/met-stradivarius-helmet-red-2009-p-18239.html

So the buyers are making up the excuses for marketeers poorly thought out sales ploy.

Awesome!

#afoolandhismoney..

someone suggested asking the manufacturer, so I did. here’s what they replied with, by email :

thanks for contacting us regarding your Tectal helmet.
The manufacturing date should not have a negative effect on the safety performance of the helmet as long as it has always been stored in good conditions (warehouse preferably).

We like to recommend a 3 year life cycle for our helmets, starting with the day you first put them on. All lot of outside factors like UV light, humidity, and normal wear and tear work to degrade the safety of the helmet. Our in house testing has determined that on average after 3 years the safety of the helmet starts to decrease, hence the recommendation to replace it after this time period.

Best regards,

BS bingo!

So, why do manufacturers put a date on them at all if, as POC have stated, it’s irrelevant? Is it a legal requirement – something to do with the standards process perhaps?