Helmet split and dented, jersey holed, arm gashed, groin strained, yes i've come off

[summerdays]

Nope. They are designed for the polystyrene to deform to absorb the impact and the plastic shell is there to protect the polystyrene because it has so little structural integrity of its own.

If the outer shell breaks, which they normally do because they are designed for looks rather than function, then the polystyrene is no longer in the right place to do what it is meant to do.

Helmets which have to pass rigorous tests do not, generally, split.

Unfortunately, we have several on this very thread who don't "get it". Motorbike helmets do not split. Safety helmets do not split, nor do safety boots. Seat belts do not split. Yet a bike helmet splits and some believe that this proves that they've worked.

My youngest took a fairly big tumble (at speed) on the Family cycle trail at the Forest of Dean. His helmet shell still looks absolutely fine, but the polystyrene has split at the very front - which must have been the direction of hitting the ground as there was a cut on his forehead. (Together with a lot of cuts and bruising across his torso and arms.)

 

[Octet]

you would hope so! cannot imagine there wouldn't be some form of independent assessment or check

Yeah, certainly do hope so!
Just had a look at my helmet, and it does state on the inside that it was tested to EN 1078.

 

[lordloveaduck]

Not all Helmets are the same regardless of EN code. The helmet i have is classed as poor even with the safety standerd rating (only found out later on).

In Cycle Craft It says 'to buy a helmet that meets the Snell B90 or B95 standards as the British/European EN1078 are no gurantee of quality, sample helmets having repeatadly failed independent tests, with some helmets shattering at very low impact forces'

Oh, least mine looks pretty

 

[Norm]

Which what? As far as I am aware, all helmets sold in the UK have to pass either one of those?
Admittedly, a helmet may not withstand the properties it was tested for 'in the field' but it should of been tested.

Tested by the manufacturer? Tested independently in small volumes with helmets selected and submitted by the manufacturer?

The tests are not exactly rigorous and the Met Camaleonte Executive helmet was judged to have failed the tests by Which?. They also thought that, even though the Cratoni C-Air and the B'Twin Kiddy One passed the tests, they didn't offer enough protection so they were also rated as "Don't Buy".

 

[black'n'yellow]

I wasn't comparing the two, I was contrasting the two, but then you wouldn't understand that.

Incredibly, I do understand the difference between 'comparing' and 'contrasting' - and unfortunately for you, I also understand bollox when I read it. Top tip - if you don't know what you're talking about, it's best not to get involved.

 

[summerdays]

Which what? As far as I am aware, all helmets sold in the UK have to pass either one of those?
Admittedly, a helmet may not withstand the properties it was tested for 'in the field' but it should of been tested.

I never understand why they just claim that they have been tested to one of the standards but don't list which one on the box. It's a pain when you are looking for a Snell tested one.

 

[Norm]

Top tip - if you don't know what you're talking about, it's best not to get involved.

Most people do indeed seem to understand that. Others are just able to write it without comprehension. Your comments are out there for all to judge for themselves.

 

[Octet]

I think I shall just end it here before I get into an endless loop.
From my understanding, helmets should compress to slow down the head and crack to dissipate the force.
I believe that all helmets are required to be tested to at least BS EN 1078 in the UK, and I agree that they may not meet up to this standard.

I for one, shall wear a helmet (a new one, not a second hand one) as regardless of how it is tested, it should still reduce some of the impact no matter what. Even if it cracks at 25 Newtons, that is still less of a force that impacts against my skull and so a decreased chance of severe injury.

Anyway, good night.

 

[david k]

Anyway, good night.

goodnight Octet

 

[black'n'yellow]

Most people do indeed seem to understand that. Others are just able to write it without comprehension. Your comments are out there for all to judge for themselves.

As are yours, 'Norm' - particularly the ones about cycle helmets demonstrating/not demonstrating (depending on whether you are comparing or contrasting) the same qualities as a pair of rigger boots.

 

[Drago]

£50 is an adequate amount to spend on a helmet IMO.
They all need to pass safety ratings, and the only thing you are paying for in a more expensive helmet is a more aerodynamic design etc.

Better fit, more effective ventilation, longer effective life, yadda yadda.

 

[classic33]

As are yours, 'Norm' - particularly the ones about cycle helmets demonstrating/not demonstrating (depending on whether you are comparing or contrasting) the same qualities as a pair of rigger boots.

Question on this part.
Would you take a pair of rigger boots from a skip/bin & having only cleaned them up(make them look nice) then go onto expect them to offer the same protection as a pair of the same boots bought new?
There must have been some solid/sound reason for the helmet to be discarded in the first place. If you are going to answer yes to that then I'll question your reasoning.
Using a piece of safety equipment that has been discarded, in the belief that it will continue to offer protection, can often be more dangerous than not using any at all. Biggest problem being the false sense of safety given.

 

[classic33]

Oh if you want a pair of riggers boots let us know. Going to cut one of them lengthwise to show their construction. Discarded by a family member who feels they no longer give the required protection.

 

[Wobblers]

They are designed to, that it has it reduces the impact. If it had remained as a solid piece then the force would of traveled through it and hit his skull.

Or was it sarcasm/joke, I'm not too good with sarcasm

They are not designed to break, they are designed to crush. A helmet absorbs impact energy by crushing. It takes less energy to initiate and propagate a crack or split. If a helmet splits, it has failed in its job to protect you.

 

[Accy cyclist]

Unfortunately i can't send any pics of the helmet, i haven't that capability. After i found it i checked it for any dents or similar and it was ok. It proved that by saving me from a nasty bump! I suddenly came off and that was it. Within a split second my head made contact with the tarmac,and though it was a shock to the system i also felt the comforting feel of cushioned poly' instead of skull fracturing tarmac! Therefore i'm glad that my decision to wear a helmet over the years saved me from potential serious injury.
My injuries didn't however stop me from cycling down to the pub last night, in fact i had to cycle as i couldn't walk....and i wore my helmet!