TJ you do blame people not reading your post correctly but you do the same with mine. I am not the only one who had problem breathing with the switchblade everyone I know who tried one said it’s fresher and not as restrictive to breath without one.

Juan – I know that. I read your post and understood it. However the logic is that just because that helmet did not work for you (or others) it does not mean there is not a solution.

Also no helmet is designed for forces more than that which is created by a drop with a headform in the helmet from 4 feet. 12 mph with 7 kgs IIRC

is that true? or are no helmets certified for forces more than…

TJ – much of what you say makes sense. I know I risk compensate (not just helmets). I don’t just wear a helmet to save my life though. I wear one to stop me getting a sore head in a more minor crash. However I think part of the point of the thread was to say (in your language) – review your risk assessment – don’t assume you are most likely to have a bad accident on the most dangerous bit of trail – its when complacency kicks in.

you guys just dont get thread drift round here, do you?

TandemJeremy. you keep on mentioning that you can’t prove that helmets save lives, but can you prove that they don’t? I wouldn’t like to be the one to test that theory. In light of the situation and the fact that someone is lying in hospital with a serious head injury i find your arguments slightly disrespectful to the author of the original post, not to mention the person lying in hospital. Also, being a scientist myself i am cringing right now at your rather linear, logic based approach to such a sensitive topic. being able to say the helmet was unlikely to have done him any good because you can’t prove that it did is a futile argument and completely out of place in this thread. Most of the good scientists i know – the REALLY intelligent ones are the people who not only have good logic and reasoning but also common sense, tact and humility to compliment it.

Good point bomberman. I have apologised to the OP at least once on this thread and am happy to do so again.

Sorry to hear that your friend suffered such bad injuries

TJ remarks are rather odd, have’nt read them all as he just keeps spouting on a load of twaddle he has read on the internet and based on reports some 10 – 15 years old. As TJ has not had a major full head impact at speed wearing a helmet he has absolutely no right to even air his opinion on the matter. I have at around 25 miles at hour head first almost straight on, then my shoulder into hard flinty ground… Head survived helmet didnt, collarbone didnt… TJ do yourself a big favour and get off here and comment only when you have experienced it….

As TJ has not had a major full head impact at speed wearing a helmet he has absolutely no right to even air his opinion on the matter.

Better go and tell all the serious researchers to stop bothering, as they can’t possibly come up with any reliable facts if they’ve never personally destroyed a helmet in an accident.

I’ve likely missed a few posts on the subject so apologies if i’m repeating anything.

Whilst I agree that wether or not to wear a helmet is a personal choice made by adults who are aware of the potential risks involved in riding bikes, I do feel that the choice to not wear a helmet could be considered a selfish one.

Whilst people are responsible for their own wellbeing, should that decision to not wear a helmet unfortunately be the wrong one, is it fair to subject your riding buddy’s to having to deal the same situation that the OP was faced with? (although likely worse as fortunately he was wearing a helmet)

/2p

Testing as described above in the snell test uses a 5 kg weight in the helmet dropped from 4 feet. That really replicates accidents does it not?

TJ – you keep conveniently quoting the 4 feet test & seemingly ignoring the fact they they also need to pass a 2.2m [~7’2″] drop test for Snell certification

seemingly ignoring the fact they they also need to pass a 2.2m [~7’2″] drop test for Snell certification

But how many people own a helmet which is Snell certified, and how many actually base a buying decision on that?

I dunno aracer, certainly anyone that wears a Specialized

I’m just pointing out that TJ keep saying they only test to 4ft etc. & at the same time referring to Snell

I dunno aracer, certainly anyone that wears a Specialized

Not necessarily, unless they’ve bought it in the US.

TJ-

Some estimates give up to a 30% chance of rotational forces generated by helmets cuasing more injuries than the helmet prevented.

Whose estimates ?
and even if the estimates are right this statement suggests that you are more than twice as likely to have a milder injury with a helmet than without.

Aracer, do you really believe that a Specialized lid, and one from another manufacturer with near identical construction, coverage and retention are going to significantly differ in the level of protection they provide?

If the manufacturers came up with a more stringent specification, say, being able to protect in an impact of over 20mph, and guard against rotational injuries too, it would certainly have a knock-on effect on how practical they are to wear, and how much they cost to produce. If you’re willing to splash £400, you can get yourself a really good full face helmet and a Leatt neck brace, but is that a practical combination for most riders?

Aracer, do you really believe that a Specialized lid, and one from another manufacturer with near identical construction, coverage and retention are going to significantly differ in the level of protection they provide?

If the Specialized one is designed to pass the Snell test (not all sold in the UK do as I alluded to above), then yes. You obviously appreciate the issue given your second para – helmets tend to sell based on venting, light weight etc., which all make giving more protection harder – and making it give more protection than required to pass the necessary test isn’t a big selling point. If they were going to make a helmet capable of passing the Snell test, you’d think they might get it tested for the extra kudos amongst the small number of people who appreciate such things.

No, a full face helmet and neck brace isn’t practical for most riders. Even though my biggest crash was one in which a full face helmet would have saved me from a lot of pain I still don’t wear one (and that was riding down a gently downhill, smooth straight fireroad, so choosing to wear such a helmet just for the gnarly stuff wouldn’t necessarily help!) 🙄 You’ve hit the nub of my whole point there – helmets just don’t provide as much protection as people think they do – for that you’d need something far more substantial than the current lumps of polystyrene, more like a motorbike helmet. As you’ve identified, that is too heavy, uncomfortable, hot and expensive for most people riding a bicycle, hence the best compromise is what we have. Yes it helps, and I won’t ride off-road without one, but it only helps to a limited extent.

All the name calling of people for not wearing one isn’t understanding the risk properly – the difference in risk between riding a bike off road with a helmet and not riding a bike off road at all is far higher than the difference in risk between wearing a helmet or not, so we’re all actually stupid whether or not we wear a helmet.

been otb 3 times landing squarely on my head at high speed once from 2m high north shore stuff all 3 times onto hard rocky ground
each time the helmet was trashed

i was left a bit dazed but absolutely convinced that if the helmets hadnt been there it would have been my skull that was split not my lid

ive also had 2 crashes once on some jumps, once riding down some steps with no lid that left me concussed and with large lump on my head

ive also taken to wearing knee pads a lot more as my knees can no longer take the abuse they used to get

helmets are always worth wearing anyone who thinks otherwise is a fool with a slightly higher chance of getting brain damage/ dying than me ; )

Aracer, it’s funny you mention venting, light weight etc. – those features are actually a big selling point of some Snell certified helmets.

Just as a lot of the “never ride without a lid” people are being irrational, so is TJ when he says that helmets with vents, certain types of shells, no chinbar or ones that split in an accident are dangerous or useless, or when you describe a helmet as a “lump of polystyrene”. Comments like “the helmet split – therefore it failed”, “99% of helmets I see are fitted incorrectly” and “a badly fitted helmet will hang you or snap your neck” (all TJ statements from this and previous threads) are even more biased and useless than “one saved my life”.

I say this to those that question the usefulness of a helmet…..

If you don’t think you need a helmet, do a test for us.
Run into the corner of a concrete pillar head first. First with a helmet on and then do it again without a helmet.
I am pretty sure that you won’t have the guts to try it without a helmet.

Nuff said.

or when you describe a helmet as a “lump of polystyrene”.

Sorry – was trying to think of a better phrase but couldn’t come up with one – trying to make the point that it’s not as substantial as a motorbike helmet (to be fair it isn’t actually much more than a lump of polystyrene, but I appreciate the phrase gives the wrong impression).

Sure those Specialized ones manage to combine all attributes – doesn’t mean it’s easy for other manufacturers (and unfortunately I couldn’t get a good fit with one which would have rather compromised it).

Chase – somebody already suggested something similar earlier in the thread. It’s just as worthless a post, and completely missing the point in much the same way theirs was, but without the benefit of (at least for this thread) originality. But then the fact you’re repeating it suggests you haven’t read much if any of the thread…

I can’t be arsed to read the whole thread, but I’ve read the first page and I can see how it’s going to pan out: Same old same old.

I don’t always wear a lid for short pootles to the shops and the like, and I’d defend anyone’s personal choice not to, but you’ve plainly got to be some sort of retard to do any sort of distance, or any sort of ‘performance riding’ without one.
I’ve had 3 BIG crashes on push bikes, all on the road, which have resulted in my hitting the ground/immoveable object head first, all at around 15-20+ mph. And I can tell you for a cast iron fact that the 3 destroyed lids that resulted saved me from injury, maybe very serious injury.
They were 3 differnt impacts – One flat to the face but the brow of the lid took the punishment, one to the right temple area, and one virtually on top of the helmet, (I flew like a javelin!) just slightly to the front right.

Aracer. I read it up to about 8pm yesterday. Got home today and skipped to last page. Sorry if I missed it. Lets face it, nothing startlingly new will have been added.
I still think it is a valid point regardless. The fact is, you are more likely to hurt your head if you aren’t wearing a helmet but nobody in their right mind will go out to prove it.

Let’s look at it another way. A lot of this thread has actually been about the integrity of the helmet following an impact. I will put another spin on it.
I fall off, helmetless, and hit my head. I need a quick check up at A&E and a few stitches – how much has that just cost the NHS?
I fall off, with a helmet on and again, hit my head. I go home and take a couple of paracetamols. Cost 25p and possibly a new helmet?
I know the option I would prefer.

Can’t be bothered reading all the posts, but from what I’ve read I’ll ask this:

All this talk by TJ about rotational injuries, seeing as a lot of people on here have had quite a few nasty crashes whilst wearing a helmet, has anybody actually suffered a rotational injury in a crash? and if so, could you be certain the helmet caused it???