Forum menu
24MX.CO.UK Debating one of these for the boy... More Mrs Weeksy than myself... but she may well be correct.
Obviously they're only effective on full face days, but many of his days are FF.
Maybe Mrs Weeksy has read/watched this. In the video Chris Leatt does a great job of explaining how and why they work.
I very much doubt it 🙂 she doesn't do MTB in any way, although she does get lumped in with watching DH world cups when they're on 🙂
TRACTIONERAG.COM Worth a look at.
I had one many moons ago, but found it more of a hindrance when riding, so got rid of it.
The fact that only one or two pro riders use them (Bernard Kerr and...??) speaks volumes to me personally.
There was an orthapedic surgeon specialising in high spinal breaks that because of the number of mountainbikers he treated that had had spinal breaks after crashing in a full face that his conclusion was people should only wear a FF helmet if they also wore a neck brace
Especially with kids MTB style FF helmets can create much more leverage on the neck in a crash and increase the risk of spinal injury. Its the distance the chinbar is from the face that creates this extra lever
Now thats just one professionals opinion based on ( IIRC) around 10 cases so not good data but I see the logic. Personally I would never wear an MTB full face helmet because of this ( but then I am old. slow and wheels on the ground)
IN this guys opinion wearing a Ff helmet without a brace was reducing your risk of serious facial injury but increasing the risk of spinal breaks
The wife used to wear one when she did more DH, it was a first (or second) gen Leatt. No idea if it saved her neck in some big crashes and rag-dolling (because how can you test for that?) but it never hindered riding and didn’t cause any other injuries like clavicle, etc.
The newer ones seem a much more refined design and I think if I was still young and going fast and big(Gish) with a full face I would probably wear one.
here was an orthapedic surgeon specialising in high spinal breaks that because of the number of mountainbikers he treated that had had spinal breaks after crashing in a full face that his conclusion was people should only wear a FF helmet if they also wore a neck brace
That is CLASSIC 'survivor bias'... (or, in this case, unsurvivor..)
Of course he's only fixing thse people with broken necks from FF crashes without neck braces.
Because he's never going to see those who crash in a full face who don't break their neck. Like I did.
DrP
Fair enough DrP
Its just a talking point not a piece of good data. He did also ( and his hospital) deal with all sort of injured folk including MTBers - he was the lead consultant in a major trauma centre covering half the country
Its just a talking point not a piece of good data
Oh agreed...
I just find bias fascinating... especially survivorship bias...
(famous story... in WW1 the planes flying back were often riddled with bullet holes in the body. The army decided "we must beef up these body areas as that's where the planes were getting shot the most". Mathmeticians peeked in and said.. "yup, the planes getting shot in the body FLY BACK... where do you think the planes that got shot elsewhere are...?!".. It was the wings that needed beefing up, NOT the body. But they only saw the planes with body holes and thought THAT was the issue)
DrP
Will he wear it? If so and you're happy why not. The only potential issue I see is that more protection can end up being hotter and create bad judgment, brain fog ime. Its is a balance!
There is an old props interview with a young Mr Morgan Wade (go big BMXer now late 30s) where is parents said he could only ride if he wore full body armour until he paid his own medical bills then it was his choice what he did. You can't use the same argument but you could use a similar one.
Also the risk compensation argument - feel safer take more risks
Its a tricky and nuanced question.
about ten years ago the fashion was for no pads, no gloves, garish pajama's, troy lee D2 and a leatt neck brace.
I haven't been to the DH track for while, is it still the case?
I’ve got an Atlas one and wore it when doing bike park stuff in the Alps. Only had one proper crash with it on and landed on my head, remember getting up and thinking, ooh, surely i should have a stiff neck from that, but nothing.
I quickly forgot i had it on, it does limit your range of movement (that’s what it’s there for!) but you compensate quickly. I’d wear it again if I ever got a DH bike again that warrants a full face.
Will he wear it? If so and you’re happy why not. The only potential issue I see is that more protection can end up being hotter and create bad judgment, brain fog ime. Its is a balance!
There is an old props interview with a young Mr Morgan Wade (go big BMXer now late 30s) where is parents said he could only ride if he wore full body armour until he paid his own medical bills then it was his choice what he did. You can’t use the same argument but you could use a similar one.
That's not a problem.... he'll wear it through choice and not through being forced.
EVERY ride, even on his little scooter he'll do helmet and gloves, every MTB ride he does knee pads and helmet, even if going 200m to the shops. We've never had to ask him, not even once.
Just to chuck in a personal twopenneth…
I wore a FF helemt for the first time last month.
Had no idea what a neck brace was, and didn’t even think to ask for one. I was trying to work out what they were for as I saw so many wearing them at the bike park.
Obvs I felt invinvcible in the new FF headgear, compared to my usual XC ‘patch’ perched on the top of my head.
Anyway, a few days in with the FF, I had my first off, which was not particularly spectacular, but bad enough. And somewhere in the tumble something, be it rock or bike, clunked my head. Generally fine though and got back on and cycled off.
But, that evening, I defintely had mild whiplash that lasted a few days. It was then that I started to see the physics in it all and put two and two together about the neck braces.
The article in the mag now makes perfect sense to me (and my crappy sample of one)!
The wife used to wear one when she did more DH, it was a first (or second) gen Leatt. No idea if it saved her neck in some big crashes and rag-dolling (because how can you test for that?) but it never hindered riding and didn’t cause any other injuries like clavicle, etc.
My understanding is that it does not absorb force, only redistribute it, and therefore if you didn't break clavicle, ribs sternum etc then you didn't have enough force to break the neck anyway.
about ten years ago the fashion was for no pads, no gloves, garish pajama’s, troy lee D2 and a leatt neck brace.
*pyjama trousers and branded cotton T-shirt/vest, you are otherwise correct.
Current fashion I think is a big moto style roost guard+back protector, worn on top of your jersey or shirt. Big logo, preferably FOX, mandatory.
^having now read that article, it seems that Chris Leatt is in complete disagreement with me.
He does sell neck braces but he's also a doctor so on balance I'd beleive him and not me on the subject.
There was an orthapedic surgeon specialising in high spinal breaks that because of the number of mountainbikers he treated that had had spinal breaks after crashing in a full face that his conclusion was people should only wear a FF helmet if they also wore a neck brace
As with the hans device in motorsport.
I personally don't like them for mtb, always found on steep trails they restrict your ability to look down. I use one for motocross and don't notice it then. For reference mine was an Atlas
Had been considering this a few years ago but couldn't afford 300 quid. However having seen one on that site for so little i think i will give it a punt. I like the look of the atlas over the leatt though
my boys wear EVS foam neck rolls on the bike park. I see these as a largely un-invasive way of reducing hyperextension/hyperflexion without transferring the force to another part of the spine/shoulders/clavicle.
They also wear troylee upl body armor.
I am however NOT a doctor or educated in any way about biomechanics so it serves only to make me feel like I have made the most appropriate decision for my kids - the only job that's important?
This is enough for me at this point and there would have to be a significant case made that anything beyond this is important for their still relatively flexible bodies.
Efficacy information is hard to find relevant to mtb. If someone like Whistler Bike Park were to log protective gear specifics and publish all their accident stats then there might be a useful data set.
For me, and having conversations with a few bike park patrollers as to their thoughts suggests this strategy is good for my kids right now. (fair note that one patroller didn't start skiing in a helmet until mandated by his job, who has also previously broken his back, clavicle, ribs and collarbone when skiing into a tree at high speed)
At >16 racing DH, perhaps it'll be a different strategy, but knowing first hand the goggle effect (not just the FF helmet effect) then as above I'd wonder if it mentally encourages riders to ride potentially outside their manageable ability.
Full marks for exploring the options though and the support you're giving your lad is first class!
I have worn and crashed a leat, the only thing that I have found is when crashing it was harder to chage direction mid flight. Without one I was able to flick my head and tuck to start a roll, with I felt more like a missile and hit things head on.
On ballance still not convinced either way.
Me, no, if my kid was little and doing big jumps and drops, yes.
The fact that only one or two pro riders use them (Bernard Kerr and…??)
I actually noticed he wasn't wearing one this year, but yeah he used to. Can I name any others...err no I cant off the top of my head think of any.
I enjoy watching the supercross in winter. I remember one year when one rider turned up wearing a neck brace. Everyone looked at it and next race they all had them on nd it wasn't a fashion statement.
I actually noticed he wasn’t wearing one this year, but yeah he used to. Can I name any others…err no I cant off the top of my head think of any.
It's an interesting one isn't it... There's so so few pros who wear them you sit and think 'why'
@bearback I think we discussed foam roll type protection off camera with Dr Leatt. My recollection is that he said these could potentially be problematic because you don’t want to restrict the neck movement too much as movement is somewhat protective, and restrictions can cause a transfer of load to another spot on the spine. The transfer/unintended consequences factor is why it took so long to make the neck brace - you need to have break away points so you spread the load and slow the impact but don’t redirect it to another weak spot.
Those following this thread might find this study interesting, linked via the Leatt site but I believe is an independent study:
and if you want to go deep dive, there’s this:
I'm not sure the pros argument holds much water- they often wear the least protective kit they can, seeing it as a disadvantage. Remember all the fuss when some races required back protectors, or elbow pads? I wear more protective kit than the average dh pro a lot of the time, because I don't care if it makes me 1/10th slower, but that stuff is important to them
jam-bo
Full Memberabout ten years ago the fashion was for no pads, no gloves, garish pajama’s, troy lee D2 and a leatt neck brace.
My recollection is that he said these could potentially be problematic because you don’t want to restrict the neck movement too much as movement is somewhat protective, and restrictions can cause a transfer of load to another spot on the spine
Interesting as that's exactly why I chose foam rolls as they enable almost complete head and neck motion within the normal riding head movement and vision scenario and only restrict and slow motion at the extremes of the range... like a really skinny tyre insert diffusing pinch flat load on the rim whilst not touching the tire sidewall.
What's written above sounds like what's bad about early generation neck braces rather than foam rolls.
@bearback sounds like what you’ve got isn’t as tight as what we were talking about.