Cycling has been changed forever - safer helmet thread

[sethjs]

so I'm super excited about anything safety tech. But I'm pretty bummed on the weight. 390g for the large. Compares to 250g for a Met Trenta 3k and 310 for a POC Ventral with Spin.

[whateveronfire]

I’m intrigued enough to try one. It's release timing with the REI sale and dividend and their new listing of Bontrager products is a nice convergence. They only have the $150 road version on their web site (though they have the higher end mountain one). Hmm.

[Bruce K]

54ny77 -

This is Treks first attempt at just what you describe - crumple zones and all.

BK

[ColnagoC59]

You're describing Hexo's helmet a bit

[nooneline]

Originally Posted by ColnagoC59

You're describing Hexo's helmet a bit

a lot of people have been saying this, and also drawing comparisons to Koroyd. But there are differences - this stuff is designed around a sort of multi-step deformation that Trek calls Flex Crumple Glide, and that's what decelerates the head slower.

I've never played with the materials, but one thing I can say that distinguishes this from Hexo and Koroyd is that it was launched with a scientific study, published in a peer-reviewed paper, and with results backed up by a reputable third-party tester who uses established methods to test helmets beyond what's required for certification.

I think that starts to get pretty different.

[GScot]

I'm in the market for a new helmet anyway. I need a long oval fit so I'm unsure of Bontrager but I did head out to the LBS yesterday and tried on a Mountain version in medium that was just a bit small. Ordered in a large $150 road helmet to try and hope to see it by the weekend.

[ultraman6970]

Since when marketing havent tried to make us think that something is innovation being that has been in the market for a while already?

The idea is to sell and differentiate from the other guys, even if you have to come up with a weird arss name for it. That's how marketing works... make you believe in unicorns...

No matter how trek calls it and how super duper it looks like, that stuff is honeycomb to me.

[quickfeet]

Originally Posted by ultraman6970

Since when marketing havent tried to make us think that something is innovation being that has been in the market for a while already?

The idea is to sell and differentiate from the other guys, even if you have to come up with a weird arss name for it. That's how marketing works... make you believe in unicorns...

No matter how trek calls it and how super duper it looks like, that stuff is honeycomb to me.

And all road bikes are steel!

[Bruce K]

I believe the innovation here is 3D printing to control the crush zone in a more optimal/engineered way.

The previous stuff, I believe was just the use of molded honeycomb materials as a first step to control the crushing/impact loads

BK

[chunkylover53]

I'm all for safety, and if these are effective and can come in at a decent price point, all the better. But for something to "change cycling" and be revolutionary, it would have to affect a large percentage of cyclists. And this gets to my question: how common are concussions in cycling? I'm sure people will jump in and say plenty or whatever, but I honestly don't know anyone whose experienced one. I've cracked a few helmets in crashes, but no concussions. If this were a hockey or football helmet, I'd be more persuaded of how it's going to change things. I guess it only takes one time, so fair enough. But in a one time collision with a car, or crash with significant spinal injuries, I suspect this type of helmet won't be a huge improvement.

[Bruce K]

Several years ago my rear wheel caught the edge of a pothole that came up real fast in our group.

Went down hard. Broken helmet. Momentary loss of consciousness. Concussed for days.

Think of almost any crash and there is some type of helmet to something impact involved. Most people don’t really pay attention to post impact helmet issues unless it is major/obvious.

So yes, it happens in Cycling. And probably more than we recognize.

BK

[fbhidy]

Originally Posted by ultraman6970

THat thing looks exactly like smiths helmets to me. Same principle but different shape of the honey comb, even the same color...



If they use the same helmet shape of smith I wont be able to use it at all, same with the size, there is a reason why smith largest helmet is so freaking small, or maybe is may head that is too big? :P

The difference is exactly in the shape. The technology comparison ends with the color and look. Beyond that they function VERY differently in an impact.

I’ve not used either the Smith nor the new wave cell to speak towards air flow, but my understanding is that it’s not an issue.

Bontrager wavecell helmets will have sizes up to 61cm (XXL) which is pretty large.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[wallymann]

agree. all venting is effectively blocked to meaningful thru-flow.

i'll wait for V2 designs to emerge with improved airflow.

Originally Posted by AngryScientist

the thing that concerns me is airflow. they dont look like they breathe very well.

this is no big deal on some days, but when you're climbing at slow speed, deep in the zone, it's not hard to overheat.

[benb]

Originally Posted by 54ny77

I don't understand why bike helmets are still fancy foam coolers on the head, with straps. They should be highly engineered tools with crumple zones, a one and done if crashed. Football helmets are getting there, finally.

A honeycomb-like structure with super lightweight material but impact absorbing. And have the foam inserts/pads be impact foam, like in motorcycle gear. I used to have different Moto gear and the foam tech from even years ago was astounding. No joke, you could punch an elbow or spine pad straight on as hard as possible and the energy radically dissipated, hand not even sore.

I don't know what you're smoking bicycle helmets are way above football helmets in total protective value and are already "one and done" helmets.

Football continues to make the tradeoff to make the helmets less protective so they don't have to constantly replace them. The football (or hockey) helmet feels better below a certain threshold but above that threshold the football helmet allows a severe injury that the bicycle (or moto) helmet will protect against.

Bicycle helmets and motorcycle helmets are already really similar a motorcycle helmet just makes a different tradeoff in terms of weight/ventilation vs total protective capability.

Bicycle helmets actually seem to be more "one and done" than motorcycle helmets because at least in the case of higher end helmets like SNELL they are expecting a severe crash might involve more than one hit before your body comes to a stop since motorcycle crashes happen at higher speeds. (E.x. you low-side, hit your head on the road surface, then slide into a curb and hit your head on the curb.)

Stuff like knee/elbow pads & back protectors on motorcycle suits (I've owned a few) are not the same. You don't have to worry about a brain injury if your knee hits something. They're pretty irrelevant to bicycle helmets. I don't know what the G-force requirement is to break your leg but I doubt it's the same as a head injury and the consequences are different.

[R3awak3n]

its funny, maybe I just have had helmets with good airflow but it has never been something I even noticed and said... wow the airflow on this helmet is so poor. I never even noticed a difference btw different helmets and I have had at least 6.