What's the life of a helmet?

[OldDog]

Somewhere along the way I heard helmets have a life of about two years due to the degeneration of the styrofoam, probably due to UV exposure.

Does a helmet age and deteriorate while it sits in it's box in a shops stock? Is there an established "shelf life" for a helmet?

[gasman]

Consumer Reports says it is 5 years but that number may come from the manufacturers. I don't recall tehm testing helmets after 5 years.

[Bruce K]

I thought I read somewhere 3 years of use. Shelf life didn't really count if you were buying last year's model (unless the LBS stacked their helemts in the front window.

Helmets degrade from UV and sweat.

Definitely the first crash where the helmet gets any kind of chip, scrape, crack, or sustains a significant impact even if no damage is visible would be the end of a helmet's "life".

Coming from a motorsports background, helmets are cheap protection for my head in the overall scheme of things. Trying to save a couple of bucks vs the value of my head just isn't worth it.

Not an expert opinion. Just mine.

BK

[toaster]

A helmet has no life. It just is and then it was.

You buy a new one if you drop it or when hits the deck. Another rule is replacing it after you've sweated inside of it for about two seasons.

Also, wash it every few rides. Soapy laundry detergent dunking in a bucket followed by cold water rinse dunk and absorbent towels stuffed inside til dry.

[Serotta PETE]

Depending on amount of riding you do, duration, etc...a good rule of thumb that I use is two seasons. I agree with Bruce, that it is cheap insurance to err on the side of caution. Definitely at three years it is my suggestion to replace. There are many good helmets out there for less than $75 if money is tight. (whatever helmet, independent of price - make sure it fits and can not swivel around.)

I actually saw a guy on a bike a few weeks ago with the Bell (think V1) that has been out of production for 20 years.

[BumbleBeeDave]

. . . various estimates of the life of a helmet, but when I think about it, all the info I’ve seen has come from the helmet manufacturers, who obviously have a vested interest in selling you a new helmet. So who do you trust?

I keep all my helmets in a dark closet and rinse the sweat and salt off after any ride where I really get sweaty. I also make sure not to leave them in the car in the sun or any other hot place, and if I do have to leave them in thecar, make sure it’s on the floor with something over them in a shady part of the car.

I also agree with the advice about crashes. If you’ve crashed and the helmet has done it’s job then it deserves to go to helmet heaven. But if you’re on a budget, don’t feel bad. According to Cycling+ (whom I trust far more than the helmet companies) there’s really no material difference between a $30 helmet and a $100 one. The really expensive ones have an internal skeleton that will help hold it together if you crash, but $200 for an Atmos seems to me to be up in “More-Style-Than-Substance“ territory . . .

BBDave

[dehoopta]

Here is a quote from the BHSI. I can't vouch for the institute, but there is some good information at their site and good links:

"In sum, we don't find the case for replacing a helmet that meets the ASTM or Snell standards that compelling if the helmet is still in good shape and fits you well."

http://www.bhsi.org/replace.htm

Cheers!

BTW: I just can't seem to buy a $30 fugly helmet to go with a bike that costs thousands.

[OldDog]

I asked as my Giro is about three years old and I have been looking for another. I visited my local shop and found one, with a manufacture date of 2003. A wee bit old for me, I want a product of new manufacture. I think even in dark cool storage, styrofoam is a limited life material. Especially where my noggin is concerned.

[Bruce K]

There was an old ad for Bell auto/motorcycle racing helmets back when the Star full-faced version first came out.

It went something like: "If your head is worth $25.00, buy a $25.00 helmet. If your head is worth more, buy a Bell."

No matter which brand you prefer, or fits, regular helmet replacement just makes sense, especially when most organizations whose members rely on helmets ALL limit helmet life to just a few years. It is your head after all.

BK

[BumbleBeeDave]

. . . the background of this BHSI . . . I am assuming they are not funded by the helmet companies, since they are not recommending that you replace your helmet after three years.

I totally agree with Bruce K that this is not the place to "cheap out," but I would be much more comfortable about accepting the helmet company's line of advice if I had seen some totally independent, objective research about the true useful life of the kind of foam used in these helmets.

You would not believe how much material we receive here at the paper from all sorts of companies, particularly in the health care field, who cite all kinds of "Clinical Studies" or "Research Institute" work in support of what they are advising the public to do--which invariably includes buying their product. But if you dig a little deeper, it's shocking how much of the supposedly objective research cited is actually funded by the companies themselves in a blatant coflict of interest, or done by organizations that depend in large part on the company's "donations" for their operating budgets.

BBDave

[palincss]

I actually saw a guy on a bike a few weeks ago with the Bell (think V1) that has been out of production for 20 years.

I saw someone last week wearing one of the original Bell Bikers, circa late 1970s. Here's what the Bicycle Helmet Safety Institute has to say about that:


The better 1970's helmets were reasonably good ones, but were not quite up to current standards. It is probably time to replace that old Bell Biker, Bailen, MSR, Supergo or similar model from the 70's or early 80's. (We have a page up on replacing the Bell Biker.) The hard shells were great, but the foam liners were not thick enough to meet today's ASTM or Snell standard. The Bell V-1 Pro was designed to today's standards, but the foam is very stiff, and if you are over 65 you probably should replace that too. If you have one of the 1980's all-foam helmets with perhaps a cloth cover, we would recommend replacing that one. Lab tests showed some years ago that bare foam doesn't skid well on pavement, and could jerk your neck in a crash. The cloth doesn't help much. In addition, some of them had no internal reinforcing, and they tend to break up in a crash. That's not serious if you just fall, but if you are hit by a car the helmet can fly apart in the initial contact and leave you bare-headed for the crack on the pavement.


Specifically regarding the age question, BHSI goes on to say:



Way back in the 1980's the Snell Foundation tested a Biker for us that was about ten years old, and had yellowed from the sun. It still performed essentially like a new one at that time. Bear in mind that 20 additional years have passed, and Bikers may have gone downhill in the interim! We have not tested one that was any older than that, and Snell doesn't test for us any more, so you are on your own as to whether or not the EPS foam and Lexan shell have hardened or become brittle with age. I would guess that the EPS foam has not changed much if at all. But the Lexan has probably aged more, and probably is becoming more brittle. Although it seems likely that the helmet would not have lost a lot of protective capacity over the years, the Biker just did not perform quite as well when they were new as today's helmets do.



Not that anyone on this list would be caught dead wearing a Bell Biker...

[flydhest]

One thing to keep in mind, however, is that the ANSI/Snell testing that is done is the widely accepted test of a helmets effectiveness. There are $25 helmets that meet this standard. Given those facts, Bell's statement about "if your head is worth $25 . . . " shows quite clearly that the words of the companies selling these things are not to be trusted.

A helmet that fits your head and passes the Snell testing should be your priority if you wear a helmet. Spending an extra $75 to $100 on top of the cheapest one is for looks or more holes.

[palincss]

A helmet that fits your head and passes the Snell testing should be your priority if you wear a helmet. Spending an extra $75 to $100 on top of the cheapest one is for looks or more holes.

I've been wearing helmets since before there were bicycle helmets. The best fit I've ever gotten -- and every time I buy a helmet, I try them all on without looking at the price tags -- was with the Giro Torrent, which if I recall correctly was aboug $35, the cheapest one in the store at the time. The "one size fitzall" adjustable band system this helmet (and its femme companion, the Venus) uses happens to fit my head better than anything else out there.

[dehoopta]

. . I would be much more comfortable about accepting the helmet company's line of advice if I had seen some totally independent, objective research about the true useful life of the kind of foam used in these helmets.

You would not believe how much material we receive here at the paper from all sorts of companies, particularly in the health care field, who cite all kinds of "Clinical Studies" or "Research Institute" work in support of what they are advising the public to do--which invariably includes buying their product. But if you dig a little deeper, it's shocking how much of the supposedly objective research cited is actually funded by the companies themselves in a blatant coflict of interest, or done by organizations that depend in large part on the company's "donations" for their operating budgets.

BBDave

The same can be said for medicine. Pharmaceutical companies are constantly talking up their product and talking down their competition, but when reviewed with the scrutiny of the tenets of Evidence Based Medicine (my interest) they all shrink in comparison to their claims. So I agree that if independent testing shows that a helmet is good 5 or 10 years later, then use it if you like it. If it is now fugly or doesn't go with your cool paint scheme on your CdA (read, mine), then get a new one, but be honest about why you are doing it. Except in my case where I used the, "Honey, I think it is time to replace this old helmet because of the known chemical decomposition of the materials here in the Ohio valley."

[Tom]

I suppose I ought to replace mine because I'm starting to get mold and bacterial infections growing on my head where the helmet touches me.

[BumbleBeeDave]

Oh. I thought you had just started dying your hair. :rolleyes:

BBDave

[OldDog]

I suppose I ought to replace mine because I'm starting to get mold and bacterial infections growing on my head where the helmet touches me.


Tom - you can post your helmet with the "used shorts" from the other thread...

[b3bicycles]

I have a rule about 4 things of cycling that I spend as much as needed on:
Helmet, saddle, shorts and tires. These are things that all effect how safe my ride is going to be. Research and make these choices as important(or more) as the choice of your bike.