True, it didn’t slip off before. I read around and people say as soon as you bin the front mech it’ll drop off instantly. Hmm, not sure. Sat in the middle almost all the time before and in fact it was a git to try to drop to the granny.

Could file the chainring but getting thin there between edge and bolt holes, but might just need a small amount and it should stay strong. Or I file the spider. Guess that may be tougher stuff to through.

Don’t have a file however. Got a Dremel but not sure it’s wise to use it for that :D. Else, trip to B&Q.

Can in the meantime go with the current 32t. Standard steel shimano affair, bit heavier. Would like to just fit the 34t and size the chain appropriately for it.

http://www.happydonkey.co.uk do replacement baskets/filters.

I strongly recommend getting the bottomless portafilter however. Excellent coffee and crema and pretty too as it pours out. Many of the coffee sites recommend the ultimate is to go ‘naked’ :D

They also do grinders, tampers and coffee. Plus you can get a backflush basket, which is basically a basket with no holes to clean through the machine. Check if it’s okay to use on your machine, but should be okay on a Classic.

And also for good coffee, try http://www.hasbean.co.uk

Descaling, I live in a hard water area and use filtered water which will help avoid build up. Occasionally you may need to go through the descale process though but should be less frequent. Filtering is also useful if you have high chlorine water to get rid of the nasty tastes from it.

Hora, did you ever manage to get a decent crema from your classic? I have one and I’m struggling, tips please!!

For one thing, if it’s a recent machine it will have replaced the regular filters with a Crema Perfetta filter and one for using those branded pods.

If you’ve got these filters, stop using them and get a standard filter instead.

Better still get a bottomless portafilter.

The Crema Perfetta stuff is basically there to allow you to use rubbish coffee from supermarkets and badly ground coffee. It’s a pressure based filter and does a poor attempt of a crema and taste is not really much better than a £50 plastic machine. Oh and the other filter for pods, which are just stale ground coffee in a pod for an excessive price.

I’m very new to all this but already realised that grinding is key. Good quality burr grinder is essential, if not more so than the coffee machine. Good dosing and tamping techniques, and when using a Classic, it’s a manual machine mostly that needs you to time shots and be careful with the temperature.

If you can get past the posh bloke, this video is a good guide to making coffee with the Classic http://youtu.be/F4RWqaF2F8c

Done a tonne of research on the coffee thing and if espresso is your thing (or any of the milk based ones with espresso shots), then £400 is pushing it for a good bean to cup.

Thing with coffee is it’s essential to get damn good fresh ground coffee for the shots. Pre-ground is no good and anything from supermarkets should be chucked in the bin. Grinding so they say is far more important than the coffee machine, and has to be a burr grinder. No bladed grinders which burn the beans effectively.

Ended up at the budget entry level end myself with Gaggia Classic for £250 for the coffee brewing and an Iberital MC2 grinder (£114), plus various accessories, bottomless portafilter, decent tamper, etc.

Budget around £350 to £400 for manual single boiler machine and basic grinder.

Bean to cup I’d budget a few hundred more.

Seems insane amount of money, especially when you can do filter at a tiny fraction of the price, but from everything I’ve read and from a little experience so far, it’s actually fairly difficult to get a good espresso shot and very easy to get a horrible bitter nasty one.

I’ve had cheap machines before from even some of the more fancy high street department stores, costing £100-ish, and barely used them as the shots were not particularly nice and nothing like a decent coffee. With what I’ve got now, when I get it right (and it is hit and miss), I get some very nice coffee indeed, and I start to realise just why people say Starbucks is actually crap coffee.

@nick1962 – there’d be nothing left! :D

The kit is easy enough. It’s just the brakes that are crap.

God. That means they’ll be made of plastic and selling in the £5 bin in Sports Direct / JJB.

Either that or all the Chavs will be wearing them. Probably both.

Bike like that and seat through the roof!

And no lack of colour can fix an Orange. :P

All you have to do is load it up on your phone and show them at the till.

They can do it on their computer in store. They have a price matching system with all the popular sites listed anyway.

At least that was my experience with the new Guildford branch. I’d forgotten about the price match and just sounded disinterested given the price and they piped up saying they could price match and went over to the computer. Scanned through and found a decent price.

New branch though with positive and enthusiastic staff still.

Could be they only price match against what’s in the approved list also.

Talking of upgrades, when’s STW’s forum upgrade? Needs bringing into the 21st century ;)

If you have’nt bled Avid’s before bring them over – it is a bit of an art!

And that’s saying something!

Even bled perfectly, they’ll never be like new. They’re not great new either.

Or to look at it another way the unfair aspect is more down to the rights that walkers have gained in the first place. Arguably unfairly both in respect to other users and even against the wishes of the landowners. This wasn’t something done as an act of kindness it was done through an act of civil disobedience.

Biting our tongues and keeping off them to avoid giving us a bad name any further does nothing other than keep the situation as it is. Some walkers will remain hating bikes. They moan about them when they see a bike off on a side trail that they never walk on. They moan when they’re on legal cycle paths far away from the walkers. They just moan about bikes.

That won’t change unless we do something about it.

Problem is many walkers are influential and some are in positions of power. All we’ve got on our side is Boris! (and that’s just road bikes).

if it’s called a FOOTpath then people on foot do not expect it to be used by MTBers or horsists, even if they are permitted by some legal/civil technicality (that most people aren’t aware of, so may as well not exist).

It’s the grant of a right, but does not imply everything else is denied. It doesn’t require walkers to be aware of a specific local bylaw or technicality, it just requires them to understand what Public Footpath means. All they need to know is it gives them a right to walk there. Nothing else. They have no idea if a bike can or cannot be there. That’s down to the land owner.

I refer back again to The Hurtwood[/url]. “More than 90 years ago, Reggie Bray, Lord of the Manor of Shere, granted the public a ‘right to roam’ with ‘open access for air and exercise’ on the Hurtwood – one of the first estates in England to do so. This set a pioneering example of a landowner welcoming the public on to his land and finding a way of working with the public that would benefit both the land and the people. Open access is available to bird watchers, dog walkers, horseback riders, mountain bikers and anyone who enjoys the fresh air!”

This is advertised fairly well, and most people are aware of it and happy with it, even though there are assigned Public Footpaths on the land, which again are still free access to bikes (with a couple of exceptions that are clearly marked).

What I like about the area is usually everyone gets on with each other, walkers chatting and joking with bikers and others. There are some moaners of course, but they’re the ones that get their name in the papers having rants, not the ones actually out enjoying the countryside.

Minion DHFs and High Rollers

This.

2.35

I get that on tow paths (the ones where they permit cycling). As per the instructions on my local one, all signposted, I’m courteous, slow down, stop, give way and always give people on foot priority. I’ll even get off and walk past if it’s a family with little kids or a dog that looks like it will run all over the place.

Still, I get the dirty looks, shouts about not ringing my bell (for one I don’t use a bell, and second they hear me perfectly well and even turn round to look, turn back then shout about the bell situation), and the stubborn folk who see me and proceed to refuse to let me past despite holding back, waiting for them to make room, asking politely. Usually older folk who do it. Miserable gits. Get a life and just enjoy the outdoors with the rest of us.

Actually on the bell situation, when I have used one, with plenty of notice, they pretend to jump out of their skin and proceed to shout at me also or at least a dirty look.

Reminds me of the sob story I got doing snipe bids on ebay. I always do the bid in the last few seconds with an auto-snipe tool, best way and avoid getting yourself into a bidding war. One time I got someone sending me messages about how I’d deprived their poor child of the gift of a lifetime.

Pay some consideration for why it is a footpath and not a bridleway

Aside from what’s addressed already on the difference, the existence of public footpaths at all is thanks to an act of mass trespass by walkers who insisted they should be able to trample all over people’s own land and fields, regardless. Bridleways were a concession to horse riders by the walkers who’d rather they were all exclusive to themselves.

I was ALWAYS under the impression that bicycles were banned from being ridden on the footpath . The only exception is where footpaths have been {ridiculously IMO} designated dual pedestrian/cycle path.

If you’re talking about public footways, which are paths adjacent to a road (pavements basically), yes.

Public Footpaths, as in the ones that go off across fields, woodlands, etc. No. The designation of Public Footpath does not forbid cycles on them in any way at all. It’s definitely not illegal. All the designation provides is a guaranteed right to walk along it and prevents the land owner from blocking the path. Bikes are there purely at the discretion of the land owner. It’s an act of trespass to be there if the land owner says so, but it’s up to them to keep the bikes off their land and if necessary to prosecute them in a civil court.

And thus to the original poster (troll or ranting rambler perhaps?), why should we stay off footpaths if the land owner is perfectly okay with us being there? Example in my local rides round Surrey Hills. The designated Public Footpaths in the Hurtwood controlled area are all open access to bikes by permission of the land owners. With a couple of exceptions where signs are up saying No Cycling.

So Public Footpaths don’t = No Cycling.

Oh, and an army of ramblers some 20 strong with big heavy boots in the mud does more damage than the occasional bikes zipping through. Not that churning up mud is much damage at all. Ever seen a path that’s disused for a few weeks? Goes back to nature.

Places I ride tend to be woodlands and forests and issues with visibility are uncommon round my way. My navigation in such areas are typically by memory and I find I have a reasonable mental track of the direction. I usually know roughly where I am and in what direction is the nearest point of reference. Often get it right, but sometimes I get confused by areas that look similar to each other. Pine forests in particular where one area of trees looks the same as another. I keep track of the fireroads that cross them but do sometimes get mixed up when one looks the same as another.

Locally, Tunnel Hill is a good example of an area that gives me problems. An essentially small area of MOD pine woodland land with a lot crammed in, and frequently find parts look the same, and nearby Porridgepot I find is so similar in parts. I sometimes think I’m on the wrong hill. I’ll navigate by the trails I’m looking for when I find them. Compass or GPS is fine to know which way I’m facing, but the maps, even detail OS maps, show little other than I’m in a patch of woodlands. Can easily find my way out, but not always the trails I’m looking for.

I can navigate with map and compass though if necessary. Growing up in Devon it’s essential to learn, especially if you venture onto Dartmoor where you really can get seriously lost in good or bad visibility.

If I go somewhere with a large area that’s utterly unknown to me I’ll make a copy of an OS map section, pop in a plastic pocket and keep it in the bag. Always have a compass in there anyway, despite all the phone GPS stuff. Battery can easily crap out on me, or the phone crashes, GPS signal lost, etc.

Dont we just follow these?

Not many of those round my way. Though there are plenty of Public Footpath and No Cycling. So I follow those. Cheeky trails :D

Too much controversy over sensitive trails in the area. There are only three official trails. BKB, Yog Pots and Summer Lightning. All the rest, including Telegraph, are unofficial and generally natural unmaintained or unofficially maintained trails.

Pitch and Holmbury existing trails are generally fine under the Hurtwood management, but outside of Hurtwood there’s a fair bit of sensitivity. Many are tolerated but as they become popular or advertised a lot the locals and/or landowners start ranting. The press also like to pick up on this siding against us “drunken swearing hooligans” (as we were called in one local newspaper) and “vandals” (again in local and even national news recently, thanks to a certain ranger).

It’s tempting to tell the world about all the trails, but the way things are going, we’ll lose the lot and have armies of influential ramblers on the warpath. It’s better to keep it as it is where the tourists can do the signature trails and anyone who wants more just explores or goes with people who know. It keeps the bulk of the traffic around the maintained areas also.

P.S. A little secret on trails – Strava (specifically segments). I’m in two minds whether it’s a good thing or not though.

Anyway, all that said, Surrey Hills is about the best area for MTB in the south of England in my opinion.

Gave up a long time ago with the true moral principles of freecycle. Few pay attention. It’s like a free car boot sale basically. Everyone out to pick up cheap crap and hoping to flog to someone else for a profit. Either on ebay or another car boot sale. And yes, charities take advantage too.

The main benefit I’ve had with freecycle is to get rid of stuff that’s way too much hassle to take to the tip. Old huge widescreen CRT for example that I couldn’t even lift myself.

I’m wary though when getting rid of stuff. You’re inviting anyone into your home to take away something you don’t want and may be indicating that you’re replacing it with something better, whilst also showing them the security you have in your house ;)

Commented on your tweet, but basically (admitting here I know little about tubeless) I’d assume LUST would not have the sidewall strength for the Minion given the kind of use they get. I get the impression that moving to tubeless, sidewall strength becomes important as there’s no tube inside to hold out against holes in just the sidewall.

But can get plain UST. Is that what they call tubeless ready? (Does that mean LUST can only be tubeless?). Edit: Ah, just seen the replies about this above.

Thinking of going tubeless myself. Got the rims but just running tubes at present. Though only had one flat in 2 years and I run around 30psi.

Is running non-UST tyres good in the long run, or just a quick fix if you don’t have UST handy? Got a couple of standard Minion DHFs and a High Roller and could just reuse them but they’re folding (single ply?).

I tend to avoid crashing into other people and the chances of doing that are very remote, and that’s all the insurance covers aside from their own protection against getting sued by “injury lawyers” representing people who made stupid mistakes.

An issue I have with the Swinley permit is the majority goes towards the liability insurance and little towards trail maintenance and building. Sure they build good trails anyway, but is the insurance really required? Don’t need it at trail centres in Wales.

Hurtwood money is more about just ensuring we have open access to the land at all. For big open woodlands it’s fairly rare to have such open access, and it’s entirely voluntary to pay anything. It’s a donation, not a permit.

Back in the days when I used to use cheques and got the odd one from the US, Barclays was the place to go.

They used to have no fee for cheques under a certain amount (think for US it was $50, and would be the equivalent for CA). Most other banks charged.

You didn’t have to bank there either, just pop over to the foreign exchange desk of Barclays.

Last time I did it was many years back though so may have all changed.

I’m guessing though the tax refund is going to be a lot more. Still I think the fee was favourable.

Alternatively you could set up an account in that currency and pay it into that, but not much use unless you’re going to spend in that currency. I do that with PayPal to receive US payments as sometimes I’ll buy from US so I just don’t bother exchanging it, but that’s electronic stuff not cheques (have to set PayPal up to accept in local currency by the way, else it converts at a hideous rate).

For those supporting the ‘ it’s only mud’ argument, you’d presumably be happy if none of the MTB trails were hardened?

Yep. Riding mud is fine, sometimes loads of fun especially if it’s downhill :D

Hardened trails in some trail centres can be like riding on roads ;)

But seriously, don’t mind really. Hard, soft, mud, gravel, flint, rocks, roots, leaves. That’s what MTB is about. All the more better when conditions change on more natural trails throughout the year.

And as for snow… ! best thing of all. Now it’s getting colder, bring on the snow I say.

Therefore all “secret/local” trails should be closed :wink:

If it keeps others off and I can have a cheeky ride on them yeah :D

Seems the footprints are more damaging there than the wheels.

But either way, it’s just churning up a bit of mud. It dries out. Not really damage. A lot of walkers rant about the “damage” bikes make but it’s just mud. Ride on the sides and banks cutting into roots, vegetation and so on and that’s another matter, but the impact is little different to a group of heavy boots (and walkers can turn up in numbers in the dozens).

Suggested annual donation was around £25 but up to you. Considering Swinley is £20 and you get infinitely better trails round the Hurtwood, fantastic views and easier to park, it’s not too bad. Though their newsletters are few and far between.

Anyway, P&S in Peaslake has a donation tin now also for the Hurtwood for the odd coins if you pop in and get a free fix from them, and apparently it’s raising loads. Think the village store may have one as well.

As for Winterfold, whilst it may be good to relieve the pressure, it’s bad for Winterfold. It depends where as part of Winterfold is Hurtwood so not much of an issue but many go onto the parts that aren’t Hurtwood and Jim McAllister won’t be happy if more people ride there. He’s not happy as it is.

According to CRC, it’s an Inbred 456. Same colour available even (discontinued now).

http://www.chainreactioncycles.com/Models.aspx?ModelID=8251

White wine with curry? That’s almost like Kryten’s head exploding when Lister asks for Ketchup with Lobster!

Chilled at least, but proper chilled Indian lager is the true compliment to a curry (and Cobra isn’t Indian lager, it’s British ;) ).

Anyway…, getting closer to the dreaded age but no aches generally on a full sus. Assuming I don’t crash. Hard tail for me though is something I’d reserve for tame trails, not many if any roots or rocks kind of places. Light simple for flat fast XC, pottering along tow paths and bridleways and the like. Full sus for the proper stuff.

Probably find Brian May popping up next defending the badgers (he lives not far away).

Any truth in the rumour that the Police have been up on Ranmore showing YouTube clips to riders asking them to identify people in the clips seen riding the now destroyed trails? Rumour also says they’re looking to prosecute someone!!!

If they’re after riders then got to be bull, as the would only be guilty of trespass and for that the police will do nothing at all. The landowner (i.e. the NT) would have to take them to court under a civil prosecution.

Good luck with that and… I refer to the reason why walkers have public footpath rights of way over the country. What’s that? Oh yes, by deliberate act of trespass! ;)

If they want to prosecute loads of people, go ahead and we have more of a case for getting the kind of access they have in Scotland.

Just need to convince NIMBY middle class Daily Mail reading rambler types (gross generalisation here :D ) that people who ride mountain bikes aren’t bored kids with nowhere to go. This is a serious adult outdoor countryside pursuit as every bit as valid as walking (if not as damaging to the countryside).

Tunnel Hill is rideable from my house, though a 30 to 40 min ride, and sometimes just plod along the tow path, local paths and commons and there are some jumps about.

But generally it’s Surrey Hills for me, and whilst it is rideable, it’s a long ride so I drive, 20 mins in the car. Plus 30 mins the other direction to Swinley and a number of other things scattered about. A fair amount around me that I consider ‘local’, just it’s a bit less hassle with a car.

When I build the HT I’ll be doing the local stuff out the door more for a bit of classic XC.

Who are Williams? Are they affiliated to Nirvana Cycles? I highly doubt it somehow

From their web site…

“In association with Nirvana Cycles of Westcott, Surrey”

The whole event is part of the “Nirvana Cycles Surrey Hills Gravity Enduro Series”. Though I have to admit I’ve not heard of it before.

I think it’s being somewhat unfair on Williams (and by implication Nirvana). Arguably there’s a short sightedness here, but look at the truths here and you’ll see the NT ranger is being way over the top, or at least maybe it’s the local press. Putting aside the lies, if it’s a case that the ranger doesn’t approve of the event then it’s the NT at fault for approving it without consulting him first!

What should have happened is a full consultation with all involved and they’d come back saying they can’t have it in that specific location, but perhaps they could set aside some land for approved use. As for existing trails, I seriously doubt the ranger never knew about them, or if he didn’t then he’s not doing much of a job to keep tabs on the land. But even then they were harmless. Cheeky perhaps, but walkers don’t use those kinds of trails, they don’t involve damage to the trees (despite what the press claims), and they’re generally in low use compared to the tourist trails on Holmbury.

If they permit access and the rider has an accident I imagine he could pursue the land owner as its his liability (unless there was a disclaimer on the land stating otherwise?).

Which is why I feel we need an “at your own risk” permit system in this country.

Some kind of notice on lands which says the land owner is absolved of any liability and the people using it are responsible for any recovery off the land if they get into trouble.

More land owners would be less objecting to MTB perhaps then.

NT is another matter as they fuss about conservation, but even the stuff highlighted by the press here is barely making an impact. Piling a few already existing logs on the ground for a jump is not chopping down trees. Taking in a digger and digging out big gap jumps, possibly cutting into roots is a big impact but I don’t see that here from the photos.

As for Winterfold… shshhh!

Sadly it will happen though, and when they see some of the stuff they, it’s going to be ballistic.

Maybe it’s expected you’re a BoB to ride them and would therefore know ;)

But yeah, don’t know. Is it actually true or just an Internet rumour?

Doesn’t matter as there’s plenty of other things in Swinley. Not sure what more they’re doing to Stickler though. Just hoping they’ve found an additional rock to make it two rocks in the rock garden :D

Having the same problem myself with my Charge. 10st12 so don’t think my pie eating is much of a contribution either. Seat is virtually new after destroying my old Bel Air in a crash. That one creaked also. Seat post also new and is an Easton Havoc which I’d bought for something solid, sturdy and to see if it fixes the creaking as it’s got big chunky solid clamps.

Dismantle and refit and the creaking will go away for a bit but a ride or two and it comes back and just gets worse as time goes on.

Will try copper grease next, but I’m not convinced it’s creaking from the rail/clamp part and not from the seat itself.

Personally I am a “Friend” and I’m happy to stay as such. For me it’s not about having new trails built for us, it’s about the fight to keep access.

If you want expensive trail building then go to a trail centre, or semi-trail centre like Swinley and put up with the likes of BoB lording it over the place ;)

The way I see it is there is a lot of vocal and possibly high profile pressure against MTB in the Hurtwood at the moment and one of the reasons for this is few of us join the FOTH or attend the meetings. The result is we are branded “drunken swearing hooligans” and the pressure could be on to rid the hills of bikes…

http://www.surreyhillsmtber.co.uk/239/surrey-advertiser-article/

With less representation from the MTB folk and less money to support us, even if it’s just to allow us access, the risk is we get kicked off.

As for trail building and maintenance, whilst building new trails without permission is no go*, the invite is open to get involved with official building by contacting mtb@hurtwoodcontrol.co.uk. I’d say go get involved instead of moaning.

* – be fair, would you like some kids to come and dig up your garden to build some jumps without your permission?

Some neurosurgeons won’t wear helmets at all because of the rotational injury issue causing greater trauma.

So you’d rather trust a neurosurgeon who probably doesn’t ride a mountain bike, over mountain bikers who have actually been in many accidents and know the real results.

complete and utter rubbish. Head injuries are rare. This is one of the common bits of nonsense spouted by the helmet evangelists.

Wow. I must be special then. I had a serious head injury just the other week. Someone else I know had a fairly serious head injury also a few months back. Came across a kid with a bit of a head injury some months back also. The folk over of MTB Britain that I sometimes ride with found someone with a head injury very recently in the same location I did mine.

Sure it’s semi anecdotal. There are a lot of anecdotes in mountain biking. Most are factual also and aren’t based on statistics generated from perhaps even more vaguely anecdotal information. I mean, from my own experience I have doubts that accurate information is actually recorded in accident situations. Ambulance crew & ICU staff are more interested in saving your life and ask limited questions about what happened. In my case they know it involved a mountain bike although I doubt that is actually recorded. They also know I had a helmet on. Is that recorded? It’s not on the records they gave me. It all contains a basic summary and a long list of the drugs administered, CT scan, x-ray and so on they had to do.

As I’ve said before, it all depends what we are talking about here. Road or off-road, or is this discussion being general and ignoring the actual use? Given the nature of this forum I would have thought there’d be more of an off-road bias, but maybe not.

Personally I’m of the opinion that on-road and off-road helmet benefits are entirely different. I have little interest in on-road cycling myself anyway, but I would assume that the actual number of incidents are relatively very low compared to off-road and likewise the benefits of a helmet in a road incident is perhaps lower.

Off-road is a very different situation, although it partly depends what kind of riding you do (saying that I’ve seen serious incidents on a tame trail as much as on serious trails). Personally I think you’re mad to go doing things like downhill stuff without a helmet, and ideally full face.

I don’t insist anyone has to wear one, it’s up to you, but just about everyone I know wears a helmet for what they believe is a very good reason. Many as a result of having an accident or their wearing is reinforced by an accident they’ve had or witnessed

What I will say is if a particular location is private and demands a fee or membership to ride, and if they say helmets are required to ride there, then you wear a helmet. End of.

I have serious doubts that those who are fairly anti-helmet have ever actually had an accident or witnessed someone who has had one. I would seriously like to know the experience and opinions of those who have had one (mainly off-road) and whether they still believe in helmets. Personally I believe front line experience from those involved counts far greater than cold academic studies based on sources that aren’t fairly comparable or accurate, or the studies are somewhat generalised. Just saying that a helmet has a certain percentage effect in reducing the risk of a head injury, doesn’t paint the entire picture about the benefits or otherwise of a helmet itself. The way I look at it is you are very likely to sustain a head injury in a crash, helmet or not. That is not what I look at out of a helmet. I’m more concerned about whether I will survive and/or avoid ending up paralysed. If I get a head injury that is recoverable from and live another day, then the helmet is doing the job. In my opinion, and based on personal experience.

The company is American, so whatever they say about pronunciation is wrong anyway. :P

There’s a simple test to take. Have a big crash with a helmet. I’ve done that myself.

Then have one without (try to reproduce the same crash). Report back if you survive :D

I don’t think these studies tell us much though given the level of inaccuracies. Yes, they could be right in that the percentage figure is lower. What does that tell us about helmets? Does it say that helmets don’t save lives as some seem to want these reports to say? No. Does it say that they reduce or increase injuries? No.

I still maintain though that the best people to speak to are those who have actually had a serious accident with one, and medical staff who have treated those who have had such an accident. I’ve had experience of both of these and have made my mind up clearly as to the benefit of a helmet, even if they are not perfect.

I have, though one based on past research demands a fee to view it.

However all the links cycle round back to the single study by Dr Elvik of Norway. Whilst it’s a piece of academic study, it needs independent review, and back up from alternate studies.

Also, I can’t see what casualties he’s looking at. Specifically are these road causalities, or (as I assume of main relevance here), MTB. Two entirely different disciplines. It’s one thing bumping your head onto a flexible bonnet of a car, and an entirely different thing crashing down a hill head first over the bars, into a tree.

To quote the NZ Hearald’s summary though…

* New research indicates wearing a helmet reduces the risk of head injury in a crash by 43 per cent.

* Previous research found the risk reduction was at least 60 per cent.

* The new findings are disputed.

Fairly simple then. I don’t even dispute the reduction of risk may be true. That doesn’t change my statement about the massive benefit of a helmet. The risk of getting a head injury is one thing, but this study does not go into the subsequent damage caused. Risk could still be 43 per cent, but with a helmet your life could be saved, without you could die or have more severe damage. Either way you have a head injury, just your prospects may be much better with one.