|
|
|
|
#1
05-26-2015, 04:25 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Road helmets with good protection
SO, I am in the market for a new helmet. I mostly ride road bikes, but have recently gotten back into MTBing. I am a recreational rider. I owned a wayyy to big Lazer O2 that I recently got ride of and now use an old and battered Bell as my only helmet. I want a nicer/newer/safer one.
I like the looks of the POC Octal, but am put off by the pricetag. I am also a bit leery about using a white helmet off road, as I assume that it will very quickly get disgusting and ugly owing to the terrain and my sweaty face. Are there any helmets *like* the Octal in terms of protection that don't cost $250 and look quite so pristine and fragile? My LBS had a Fox Stryker and a Giro Savant that both felt good, but the Fox looked pretty aggro and the Giro looked just like all the other helmets that I have owned, plus didn't sit as low on my head as the POC and Fox. Any thoughts? I would like to limit cost to $150 if I could. Last edited by d_douglas; 05-26-2015 at 07:05 PM. 
|
|
#2
05-26-2015, 04:36 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Giro Atmos . I purchased my last one for about $125,,, after I 'tested' my previous Atmos 3 years ago. Umm,, it worked. I know the two look NOTHING alike, but for the money and protection..........
Mike in AR 
__________________
2013 Serotta Fondo Ti w/Enve fork
|
|
#5
05-26-2015, 11:15 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
The Giro Savant MIPS helmet claims to be something special with regard to safety, and is in your budget. I've heard a couple people say it's probably the "safest" helmet out there, right now. Hearsay.
And that is the limit of my knowledge on the topic...
__________________
where are we going, and why am i in this handbasket?
|
|
#6
05-26-2015, 11:29 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
I've crashed a few helmets and riders I work with have done in a lot of them. Here are some thoughts on what we've seen.
First, most helmet manufacturers build to meet CPSC testing, and thereafter to make the helmet as light as possible, stylish as possible, ventilated as possible. CPSC is very focused on the top of the head and the back of the head, which is why helmets tend to be tall on top and have big masses high up on the rear. Now what are the most common dangerous crashes? Onto the forehead, onto the occipital region in the rear (down low rear), and the temporal area (just in front of the ears). Temporal crashes tend to bring about the most concussions, occipital crashes cause the most spinal injury, and forehead crashes tend to cause both concussion and, in extreme cases, the most lethal injuries -- very very generally speaking. Compare bike helmets to high end motorcycle helmets and while the needs aren't necessarily the same, you have to wonder why bike helmets are such odd critters. Second, the tests tend to be simple ones -- slam one side of the helmet into a plate of steel and see what happens. But accidents typically involve more movement than that. A case in point: Long-tailed aero helmets have a record of causing bad spinal and concussive injuries because the tail catches the ground in a fall and twists the head around. Big '60's automotive fins on the back of your helmet tend to do the same -- they are cosmetic to make you think the helmet is fast, or they are there to build up the upper rear of the helmet to pass CPSC testing. Most testing is done assuming consumer speeds -- how a helmet performs at 10 mph is a far cry from how it does when you crash at 40 in a field sprint. Third, these helmets shred in a serious accident but they still have to keep together because you may be sliding, ricocheting, bouncing, whatever. It may be the last contact that does the real damage. To make big holes for ventilation and to keep weight down, you have deep but narrow ribs (to pass CPSC tests) and lots of open space between with narrow connecting crossmembers. If those crossmembers break, you no longer have protection. Fourth, most helmets depend on an internal plastic skeleton to hold things together, a certain cross section of foam to pass CPSC testing, and a thin plastic skin on top to limit shredding so the helmet stays together. Once upon a time Giro and others would show you that skeleton; notice that they don't do so any longer? Because they are building to pass CPSC testing, they have marginalized that skeleton. Also, the skeletons can allow cracks in the foam from minor crashes that compromise the helmet in a subsequent serious crash -- better to let the helmet fall to pieces now and replace it. That's especially the CPSC talking -- they know we will often keep using a helmet after a small crash, and they know statistics say not to. But we also have to depend on that skeleton, so the overall strength of the helmet decreases. Fifth, the helmet has to stay on the head in a crash to be effective. CPSC testing is pretty light in this regard. They do test to ensure the strap doesn't separate, but that's not much good if the whole head fitting assembly comes loose. Take an old helmet and rip hard -- all the adjustments points in some helmets come loose and the assembly either loosens or comes completely off. We've seen this particularly in some of the smaller Euro brands. See a thread here? It's a rather artificial test, making about as much sense as how UCI tests frames or wheels. There have been some helmets subject to more testing -- the Specialized Decibel (with Snell ratings), the Casco Warp (no ventilation; mostly for track, though Kask and others have copied aspects of it for road and tri use), and the new POC Octals. I'm not saying that Snell (which is a widespread standard for testing helmets for motorcycles and certain other sports) is the right choice, but it is a better conceived testing procedure and ultimately is more demanding for real-life situations. The Specialized Decibel is a legend in helmet demand for the protection it offered without compromising ventilation; it did end up being pretty heavy, and not fitting everyone. Some of us are on the new POC Octals, and I have to say that -- at the potential sacrifice of aesthetics -- they are cool, light, and very high quality protection. Of helmets today, that's the one I'd recommend. The strap and adjustment system are tightly embedded in the body of the helmet, very similar to the Decibel. Other helmets? Giro designs seem to favor a very small bridge dead center at the front of the helmet. This bridge was so small on the Pneumo that they would crack there just in regular daily use. It's part of the design model they use, partly the cosmetics and airflow they strive to achieve. But I tend to be careful of some of their helmets where I can snap that bridge in my hands, without much effort. Again, looking at the old Decibel, it had a broad horizontal vent to cool the forehead and allow a much more substantial bridge there. Over the years, accident records showed that it handled frontal impact better than almost any other helmet. After cautioning about Giro helmets, I do have to say that for racing, the Air Attack is one of the best thought out helmets from a safety standpoint. It won't injure you if you slide, it'll stay together better than almost any other helmet, and it offers a high index of protection against both impact and abrasive crashes. It may not be ventilated enough for some riders, but it appears to be one of the most protective helmets out there. There are so many helmets, that every maker has one that does a pretty good job and probably one that's a bit sketchy. Plus, remember that different sizes may work quite differently -- a minor compromise in a bridge in one size will degrade its protection while other sizes are very good. I wish we -- all of us -- had good data on all of this. We rely on a CPSC sticker, but we really need to think it out a bit better than the government does.
|
|
#8
05-26-2015, 11:53 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
They say they do impact testing at 7 and 14mph... seems really useless for guys crashing at 25-50mph
__________________
where are we going, and why am i in this handbasket?
|
|
#9
05-27-2015, 01:10 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
Every other rider will accept what you look like no matter what helmet you wear. Every non-rider will think you look ridiculous no matter what helmet you wear. So why even consider looks? When I shop for a helmet I ignore looks and price, and just search for a helmet that's so comfortable I forget I'm wearing it. I can vouch for the Giro Atmos if you like the fit. I recall "testing" an Atmos: as my body sailed over my head and my head contacted the pavement, I remember thinking, "This helmet's great! It feels like a pillow!" You can pick up an Atmos for as little as $90 if you find one on sale. Last edited by dgauthier; 05-27-2015 at 01:29 AM.
|
|
#10
05-27-2015, 01:43 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
I ride a white helmet mtb. it doesn't get any dirtier. the dust shows up but it just wipes off. same plastic up there as any other color helmet, it's not like it stains.
as for the POC, if it offers the coverage you want and you like the fit, just save up and buy it. by all accounts its a great helmet if you're into the aesthetic. i'd have one myself but my head shape doesn't play nice with the POCs. if you really want an alternative, i'd look to the specialized line as mentioned. even the 'mid' level helmets are fantastic. essentially just their top tier helmets from a few years ago getting bumped down the hierarchy as newer models take the throne. see here: http://www.specialized.com/us/en/ftr...untain-helmets
|
|
#11
05-27-2015, 01:44 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
 lololol
|
|
#12
05-27-2015, 02:11 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
Personally the way giro looks, it's like most of their helmets are a little too recessed in the front/forehead area but I have no experience falling on my face in one!
|
|
#14
05-27-2015, 07:41 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
__________________
chasing waddy
|
|
#15
05-27-2015, 07:45 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
