The CycleChat Helmet Debate Thread

[MarquisMatsugae]

Stating that everyone that doesn't wear a helmet is one has to be considered likely to invoke a certain response. It is inflammatory, rude and provides no meaningful addition to 300+ pages of debate.
Aggressive ad-hom entry to the debate on the pro side +1. Apocryphal argument within first few comments +1.

I value your opinion and I will endeavour to mend my ways.

 

[Brandane]

Not at all.
Just didn't expect the unexpected.
Has not happened since and still going fast

And you rely on a plastic hat with polystyrene lining for protection? Good luck, you'll need it. They're tested to approx 12 mph..

 

[newfhouse]

Stating that everyone that doesn't wear a helmet is one has to be considered likely to invoke a certain response.

I have no doubt that he knows this. I wonder if drink has been taken.

 

[booze and cake]

Being unable to react to the unexpected sounds the same as going too fast to me.

 

[Mugshot]

I have no doubt that he knows this. I wonder if drink has been taken.

Exactly what I was thinking.

 

[Tim Hall]

I have no doubt that he knows this. I wonder if drink has been taken.

Chucking out time at the Rover's Return innit.

 

[Roxy641]

And you rely on a plastic hat with polystyrene lining for protection? Good luck, you'll need it. They're tested to approx 12 mph..

As high as 12 mph. :-)

 

[MarquisMatsugae]

And you rely on a plastic hat with polystyrene lining for protection? Good luck, you'll need it. They're tested to approx 12 mph..

I've already had the luck and the plastic and polystyrene made it possible.

 

[Brandane]

As high as 12 mph. :-)

5.5 metres per second. 330 metres per minute. 19.8 kilometres per hour. 12.3 miles per hour .

 

[Brandane]

I've already had the luck and the plastic and polystyrene made it possible.

You were indeed lucky.
You took a low risk activity and turned it into something more dangerous by your own recklessness, while wearing a helmet conforming to a basic safety standard in BS1078. Your bike fell on top of you, you were wearing a helmet, yet your head still needed stitched up. Strangely enough, I'm still not convinced about their effectiveness.

 

[MarquisMatsugae]

You were indeed lucky.
You took a low risk activity and turned it into something more dangerous by your own recklessness, while wearing a helmet conforming to a basic safety standard in BS1078. Your bike fell on top of you, you were wearing a helmet, yet your head still needed stitched up. Strangely enough, I'm still not convinced about their effectiveness.

Well the chainring hit the helmet,so what would have happened if the helmet was not there ?
Who knows,but I still thank the much maligned plastic and polystyrene for being there..

 

[Justinslow]

5.5 metres per second. 330 metres per minute. 19.8 kilometres per hour. 12.3 miles per hour .

This is a common argument, just because they are tested at that speed doesn't mean they may not work at increased speeds. How do any of you know how a particular helmet will fair at higher speeds? And MTB helmets are often much more robust with extra coverage coming down the sides and at the back

 

[screenman]

Also, that you may come off at 30mph but by the time your head hits the deck you may only be doing 10mph.

 

[swansonj]

Well the chainring hit the helmet,so what would have happened if the helmet was not there ?
Who knows,but I still thank the much maligned plastic and polystyrene for being there..

I could believe that a chainring hitting the skull is an instance where a helmet might do some good. The relative velocity of head and bike is likely to be rather less than that of head and ground, and the kinetic energy to be dissipated even more so. The impact on the skull is likely to be more at a single point than the impact with the ground. The helmet could plausibly spread the impact over a larger area as well as absorb some of the energy.

Thing is, though, that particular impact strikes me as vanishingly rare. In thirty years of cycling, I've had perhaps twenty offs. Three of them left left scars,in one case caused by chainring on shin. One damaged the helmet I was wearing. One broke a bone. But never once have I come remotely close to getting a chain ring in the head. So, in the list of things to consider taking routine precautions against, that scenario is completely off the bottom. I have had more - tens, hundreds, probably - comparable impacts with tree branches while walking or gardening, or walking into open cupboard doors, so we come back to the same unanswered argument: why helmets for cycling not other riskier activities?

 

[Brandane]

Well the chainring hit the helmet,so what would have happened if the helmet was not there ?
Who knows,but I still thank the much maligned plastic and polystyrene for being there..

A freak set of circumstances in which your helmet may have helped prevent a worse injury. I hope you have learned your lesson and are now wearing a full face helmet. A chainring to the face could be nasty. Body armour too; you need to protect your meat and 2 veg; knees; elbows etc..