Trail Centre riders riding without a cycling helmet on !!

Oh. Er, sorry!

Don’t be sorry for me at least it happened doing something I love instead of being randomly knocked down in the street!

Ah the Christmas troll does he have tinsel on his bridge

I’m sitting on the fence wi this one, despite having a few very bad crashes which have totally destroyed my helmets and left me concussed and dizzy etc, i’m pretty sure if i wasn’t wearing a helmet at the time i would be a drooling mess but i’m firmly of the opinion that it’s a choice whether to wear one or not – we used to ride all day/days at a time as kids in the middle of nowhere, up mountains and desolate forest roads, crashing constantly and bouncing back up as we dribbled blood everywhere in argyll back in the 80’s, we never wore helmets then so i don’t see what the fuss is about now – freedom of choice.

I often pop out for a run round my local trails without a helmet, usually wearing earphones – i prob don’t go quite as fast as when i do wear a helmet but it’s my choice.

5yrs old and I used to constantly ride down Woodhouse hill in Hudds. I lived. Tbh most of the time I wear a helmet to please folk. Its liberating riding without one.

Yes Ive suffered a head injury previously too.

Mitigate loss/damage? Get an XBox.

Nearly all the time I wear a helmet. Sometimes an XC one, sometimes a full face. If i am out just pootling with children and dog I don’t bother. it depends where I am riding and how I am feeling, Sometimes have pads and sometimes not. Generally speaking it must be a good idea to have a hat because there is so little inconvenience but the risks are high – see Scienceofficer, hope you are ok and like your stoicism.
Street and BMX is where the problem is. There the fashion is no helmet. Mtb and downhill is 99% helmet wearing.
Don’t think what we did as a kid is relevant, things have moved on.

Isn’t it the case that helmets only assist in mitigating a quite narrow range of serious injuries?

Seems like a topic for those who have to have strong opinions to me.

Don’t think what we did as a kid is relevant, things have moved on.

People have softer heads nowadays?

Isn’t it the case that helmets only assist in mitigating a quite narrow range of serious injuries?

The SNELL test – the toughest helmet test, now phased out – tested at an impact speed of 12.5mph.

That’ll be fine for me then!

Oops!

Just trying to understand the logic of the 12.5mph thing. Does that mean that a 15moh crash would be like hitting a bare head in the ground at 2.5mph? I guess that that’s a direct impact as opposed to the skidding along wearing your skull away type crash though.

The only data for helmet function is taken from road collision models. There’s nothing for off-road, and the data isn’t really transferable. I’ve always worked on the basis that something is better than nothing.

“trying to understand the logic of the 12.5mph thing”
I guess it could assume you get a chance to brake a bit before crashing?

Are Euro Ncap crash tests for cars done at something like 45mph?
I guessed with those they assume some braking before collision?

Just trying to understand the logic of the 12.5mph thing. Does that mean that a 15moh crash would be like hitting a bare head in the ground at 2.5mph? I guess that that’s a direct impact as opposed to the skidding along wearing your skull away type crash though.

No, impact energy goes as the square of velocity – i.e. a 25mph crash is 4x as bad as a 12.5mph one. The tests do try impacts on flat surfaces and edges (like a kerb).

Perhaps your childhood was very safe and controlled but if you had seen/experienced some of the incredibly daft things we did as kids then perhaps you may retract that statement, jumping our bikes into the river avich falls just up the road from our tiny forestry village was a fav in the summertime…sometimes we hurt ourselves pretty badly (broken arms, big gashes, numerous black n’ blue bruises and the occasional fall down the rock face which removed a fair bit of skin) but mostly we got away with it, or towing each other on our motorbikes over the football field so we could see who could jump the furthest, fergus won this competition as his brother owned an xt 250 but he landed on his forks and faceplanted pretty badly which knocked out all his front teeth and broke his nose….our parents told us to be more careful and not be so stupid otherwise they’d take our motorbikes and pushbikes off us.

I’d better not tell you about attempt to climb up then cycle down Ben Cruachan either?, three very optimistic 14 yr olds on a week long wild camping trip wearing nothing but shorts n’ t- shirts in the height of a mid 80’s scorching summer riding very dodgy bmx’s and no such thing as spares/camalbaks/pads/gloves/waterbottles etc……we never made it to the top, we never managed to ride all the way down either but we had fun and an adventure trying, we all crashed and we all left blood up there but we survived and that’s what kid’s should be doing in the summertime.

River Avich waterfall, i can still remember the feeling of landing in the water at the height of summer, icy cold and sucked the breath out of your lungs but so much fun. We used to jump off the rocks on the left hand side of the pic as there was a wee run down onto them from the forestry road above.

Each to their own, means more chance of decent healthy organs from fit young uns for us oldies.

Somafunk – spot on. What’s funny is this is about a trail centre – a nice, safe, groomed MTB play park.

Jeez that “Darwinism in action” comments really gets on my tits.
Every time .
Well said Soma.

james – Member

“trying to understand the logic of the 12.5mph thing”
I guess it could assume you get a chance to brake a bit before crashing?

Nah, it’s just an arbitrary number. Some folks believe (choose to believe?) that it means helmets protect up to 12.5mpg then “switch off” which is just gibberish.

Also, importantly, remember that it’s the collision speed that counts- it’s not whether you were going at 12.5mph, it’s whether your head hits an object at 12.5mph.

Just pointing out that the brain trauma is caused from kinetic energy transferred from your mass X velocity, into a small impact area of your thicky bony skull. The heavier you are the worse you injuries will be. This is why children dont get hurt in falls that hospitalise adults.

In terms of hidden hazards and gradients, trail centres are safe trails. Folks get injured in trail centres because you can achieve silly high speeds.

I’m not an expert, but actually I think the trauma is more the brain rattling about inside your skull – so it’s brain mass that matters.

Kinetic energy is also mass x velocity squared – which is why speed is important, a small increase in speed makes a big difference.

I’m not sure why SNELL chose 12.5mph – other standards, including the CEN standards , are more lax.

We went to Scotland a few years back and one of our group from work didn’t have a helmet on I suggested it may be a good idea to wear one, he didn’t agree. Come the end of the week , big crash fractured skull , some time asleep in Itu . That was me btw not him , I had a helmet on he didn’t , but he didn’t crash at high speed. I’m sure there is a moral to that somewhere

Oh yeah it’s: (mass x velocity squared)/2. It was late.

My friend Phil suffered near fatal brain injury from an OTB onto concrete when is steerer snapped on his Jake The Snake. It was all on the front right lobe which was the point of impact. The hemet was in pieces. Two years later and he can work 25 hours a week and his speech is almost normal again. But a chunk of memory is gone forever.

Timely troll. Seeing the photos of my nephew on Facebook last night. Hit a curb. Two holes in his head through to the bone. Exactly where a helmet would have prevented it. Still in hospital with concussion whilst they assess the internal damage. Troll away boys and girls 🙄

To all you Darwinism in action people, do you wear a helmet in the car?

If not then stop being hypocritical. Every argument you use for wearing helmets on your bike, especially on the roads, can be applied to wearing a helmet in the car.

A massive number of fatalities and serious injuries in car accidents are the result of head injuries.

All the “I don’t notice I’m wearing it and it’s no hassle” applies to car helmets.

So please stop being so patronising and hypocritical.

FC guy with us was less impressed as he has to pickbup the pieces, both in his FC role and as a member of the local mountain rescue.

Yeah I know that feeling. You cant change some attitudes which is a shame. Everything is fine until you hit something hard. A bit like jumping out of a plane without a parachute, everything is fine until you reach terra firma.

Each to there own I rode for years without a lid. They only have themselves to blame if they come off and have a head injury.

Yes it is their choice. The trouble is they are making a choice for a lot of other people as well. The person that finds them out cold at the side of the trail. The Ambulance crew that is called out to pick them up. The A&E staff and the friends and loved ones that will be caring for them. But yes they choose to make the choice not to wear one.

so what is worst?

pootling along without a helmet on or hammering it with a helmet on?

Saying people deserve injury for not wearing a helmet is like saying you deserve a broken jaw for not wearing a full face helmet, a broken knee for not wearing knee pads, etc.

We all have our own level of acceptable risk, why not accept that everyone else’s won’t necessarily be the same as yours?

As an aside, can I suggest that we take a page from bikeforums’s book and make a sticky helmet thread like this one:

http://www.bikeforums.net/showthread.php/771371-The-helmet-thread

It seems necessary to have this conversation, so I’m starting a new thread for it. You can argue as strenuously as you want, but insults are not allowed and anyone guilty of insults may find their posting privileges here to be adversely affected. If you find yourself typing one of the the words “idiot” or “stupid,” you might want to reconsider hitting the submit button. I can assure you, some post in this thread will raise your blood pressure unless you have the patience of a saint. Be forewarned.

This is the only thread where a discussion of the pros and cons of wearing a helmet will be discussed. Others will be locked or deleted.

It feels like most of us are just hitting copy/paste now anyway.

+1 And has already been pointed out, you’re choosing to descend a bump, rocky, root-covered track on a mountain bike. Stand back a bit and think how that looks to the casual observer, non-biking paramedic etc.

Ive been lurking on this forum for a few months now and this thread has spurred me on to sign up so here’s my view.

Started mtb’ing through a mate who insisted I get a helmet before he would take me along, I insisted I didn,t need one but brought a cheap £14 one from Argos or somewhere to appease him.
Second time out got a very simple descent wrong off piste at Cannock, and got thrown off the bike backwards landing on my back bouncing my head off the ground.
Result? I got up and walked away from it but had one very sore back for about a month and one very dented helmet which would have been the base of my skull had I not been wearing one, best 14 quid I ever spent.

Wouldn’t dream of riding without one now. BTW I used to be a steel erector and would reguarly walk around the steel 30 to 40 foot up with no harness clipped on so not averse to taking the odd risk (couldn’t do it now though, too old and sensible) 😆

Andy-do you know a helmet wetld have stopped concussion? (“Of course it would” is not an answer!)

As I understand it, the helmet tests were based on the speed achieved by a child falling to the ground, and Snell went “a bit better”. I think the test only relates to whether the helmet stays in one piece on impact.

Couple this logic with the limitations on the weight we will put up with on our heads, and it seems clear to me that helmets are no panacea.

I have had crashes both whilst wearing a helmet and not wearing a helmet, at various occasions I hit my head during these crashes.

I’m still here?

And do fell runners wear helmets? They go quite fast?

Andy-do you know a helmet wetld have stopped concussion? (“Of course it would” is not an answer!)

Al – who can say one way or another? In my nephews case it would have prevented the holes looking at the photos but hard to say either way about the concussion. I suspect it would have lessoned the impact. But of course I cant prove that.

Any kind of protection is risk mitigation. Risk is all about the impact if it happens. The impact of a head injury is probably a bit more severe so it justifies additional protection

As Onion says

you’re choosing to descend a bump, rocky, root-covered track on a mountain bike. Stand back a bit and think how that looks to the casual observer,

. Very true!

It’s more a case of trying to choose what colour to go for

http://www.koolstofcoaching.com/which-helmet-

druid omitted “uninformed”.

It’s irrelevant what a casual observer thinks, it’s not a PR exercise.

I’d always wear and recommend one,

But its your head at the end of the day, I’m not going to cancel a ride with someone if they choose not to wear one.

Obviously massively differing opinions on this thread. Agree that ultimately it is down to the individual to decide. That said, given that our hobby involves descending mountains/hills at speed, in close proximity to trees, rocks and drops, I’m of the belief that anyone who doesn’t wear a helmet is nuts. With regard to other areas of body protection, I wear a backpack with integral (allegedly) spine protection. I figure that the two potentially life-threatening/changing injuries are head/spinal injuries and if I can mitigate a little against that risk, then I’d be crazy not to. Does that make me in any way morally superior to those that don’t? Of course not, but I still think that people who don’t need to have their head examined 😉

Id wear one of these.

Cardboard hat[/url]