Cycling has been changed forever - safer helmet thread

[benb]

I have an S-Works Prevail (older) and a Bontrager Ballista (got it last year) and I can definitely tell a difference in ventilation between those too.

But if I only had ever had the Ballista would I care on a really hot day? I don't know if I would. It's not like the Ballista is so bad I'm overheating and collapsing on the side of the road.

This Wavecel stuff is exciting IF their claims are actually true. The Ballista I bought last year is MIPS, I kind of feel like MIPS is in the same category, it might be better but we're mostly taking the company's word on it. But most of us have ended up deciding to get a MIPS helmet. If Wavecel works as well as they are claiming it is worth trying as they're claiming a much bigger improvement than MIPS. I guess it'd just be nice to see it backed up by more independent tests.

[Climb01742]

Originally Posted by 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

+1
I was lucky to come away from a crash with a mild concussion. I remember hitting my head on both sides. I fell to the right first, bounced, then fell to my left. My helmet and shoulders had dents/scratches on both sides. I was in a fog dragging myself out of the road and calling my wife. The ER confirmed the mild concussion. I'll check out this helmet for sure. I like my brain stirred, not shaken.

[Michael Maddox]

For what it's worth, I have a WaveCel XXX helmet.

I have a "Bell" head, and it fits my head quite nicely. The weight isn't appreciably different, unless you prefer only ultralight helmets. I have typically worn Lazer and Kask helmets up to this point, though I tried a Giro Vanquish this year. None are particularly light.

The WaveCel is covered by a thin liner strip, not nearly so thick as the inserts in most helmets. The strap is super light, and could be MUCH better; I like the faux leather chin piece on some of the other lines as it doesn't roll up and twist, and generally stays adjusted better than the nylon and plastic.

It's definitely a thinner profile. I don't look NEARLY so much like a toadstool as I do in the Vanquish or Catlike helmets...that's a plus for someone with a big head like mine.

So, at first glance, so long as it's protective, I like it. Seems a bit more aero, fits well, and is rather low-key compared to the graphics on some. What's not to like? Just hope it does what it says, if I ever need it to.

Will be road testing this, this weekend.

And no...I didn't REALLY wear it on the trainer.

[benb]

I had one race crash (giant pile up) where I ran over riders in front of me and got sent airborne, did a flip in the air, and hit my head pretty good.

No concussion but it was REALLY scary. The officials were holding me down cause they thought for sure they were going to be sending me away in the ambulance.

So I will definitely be checking these out despite just getting a new helmet last year.. I ride more cold days than hot days, if there is any truth to the claims it'll be worth less ventilation.

[Mark McM]

Originally Posted by ultraman6970

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

Look closer. There's a reason that Trek doesn't call it HexCel or HoneycombCel - this new material is formed in waves, not hexes or honeycombs. The wave shapes allow the material to flex easily in a shearing mode, whereas hexagonal honeycombs don't. And the shearing mode is important, because it reduces the transfer or rotational forces/movement between the head and the helmet outer shell. Studies have shown that the concussions are more common in rotational accelerations, so anything that reduces rotational forces on the head should reduce concussions.

[PSJoyce]

I tried the XXX WaveCel Road today. Short story, probably the most comfortable helmet I've ever worn.

Bontrager helmets fit me well, and I've been wearing the Velocis MIPS for the last year or so and been very happy with it. The XXX WaveCel fits even better, and the straps are re-routed at the back of the helmet in a better way.

Riding, the thing just disappears. No bouncing or shifting around. Not noisier, although it did seem like air was routed right over my ears.

Comparing the XXX and the Velocis, the XXX is noticeably heavier holding them side by side, but I did not feel the weight difference while riding.

For background, over a lot of years I've broken, I think, six helmets in crashes. Assuming the claims of enhanced protection are true, I'll keep riding the XXX WaveCel while hoping there's never a seventh event.

[nooneline]

I keep thinking about my own recent concussion, which wasn't evident at first - I kept racing - and manifested later and led to a few very strange months.

I think about how I once told my partner that if I got more than one concussion, I'd stop racing. and how, with one under my belt, I really don't want to stop racing...

But more importantly, I think about the brain injury sustained by a rider I knew a decade ago - he's still very impaired in both cognition and mobility. I think about the brain injury sustained by a rider in a race I was in, and the coma he was in for a few weeks. I think about Kelly Catlin - all signs seem to indicate that her suicide was a product of a TBI - and I think about a few other people who've told me that their concussions led to suicidal depression.

I think about all of this stuff and I welcome this product because I really think it has the possibility to change lives.

[19wisconsin64]

It's great that this new technology can help lower the chance of brain injuries, but more than one company needs to use it to help the most people. The technology should not be held by one company, it should be shared..... it's a life saving thing...like when Mercedes and Volvo shared their air bag and other technologies with other manufacturers. It's the right thing to do.

Please read the following written by a long-time racer & rider. I'm sure most of the readers of this forum know or have heard of someone who has also had their lives affected by head trauma caused during bicycling.

Originally Posted by nooneline

I keep thinking about my own recent concussion, which wasn't evident at first - I kept racing - and manifested later and led to a few very strange months.

I think about how I once told my partner that if I got more than one concussion, I'd stop racing. and how, with one under my belt, I really don't want to stop racing...

But more importantly, I think about the brain injury sustained by a rider I knew a decade ago - he's still very impaired in both cognition and mobility. I think about the brain injury sustained by a rider in a race I was in, and the coma he was in for a few weeks. I think about Kelly Catlin - all signs seem to indicate that her suicide was a product of a TBI - and I think about a few other people who've told me that their concussions led to suicidal depression.

I think about all of this stuff and I welcome this product because I really think it has the possibility to change lives.

[benb]

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/trek...ever-designed/

If you can believe the test #s in this article these helmets are a giant step forward.

I agree it should get licensed all over the place if the #s are real.

The meters/sec values for these tests are comparable to the snell motorcycle standard... hard hits.

[54ny77]

Perhaps I'm not smoking what you're smoking, since you missed my point completely. But that aside, be safe out there.

Originally Posted by benb

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.

[mingc]

The cyclingnews article cites an "independent" test. That test was not "independent." The test is from a whitepaper linked on Trek's webpage (https://www.trekbikes.com/us/en_US/what-is-wavecel/) and authored by, among others, the 2 guys Trek credits with inventing the design. It's a terrific design maybe, but great marketing certainly.

[nooneline]

Originally Posted by mingc

The cyclingnews article cites an "independent" test. That test was not "independent." The test is from a whitepaper linked on Trek's webpage (https://www.trekbikes.com/us/en_US/what-is-wavecel/) and authored by, among others, the 2 guys Trek credits with inventing the design. It's a terrific design maybe, but great marketing certainly.

two points though: the paper published by the inventors of the technology isn't a white paper, it's an academic/scientific paper published in a peer-reviewed journal. And, the independent test is testing/scoring done by Virginia Tech, which has a well-respected lab that has done helmet testing and scoring for a good while now.

[josephr]

its a super awesome...and, after picking up my riding buddy off the road last fall after he was rear-ended by a pick-up, I'm certainly glad to see the folks at Trek are taking it seriously...

However, I hope I'm not the only one bummed out about all the marketing hype about something that will 'change cycling forever' which essentially amounts to a safer helmet only for those who can afford $150+ for a helmet. I've heard all the 'whats your brain worth' arguments, but to those I ask if my $90 Giro isn't safe???? Really, with all the hype from a marketing perspective, I would've hope an Emonda SLR with graphene or at least another BB standard.

[Michael Maddox]

I noticed on today's recovery ride that the helmet has more coverage over the forehead and browline. Granted, that may just be how it sits on my head, but I've never noticed a helmet this low on my brow before. With the adjustment tightened up, the helmet was snug, secure, and very comfortable.

Let's see what happens during a Tallahassee summer.

[oldpotatoe]

Originally Posted by mingc

The cyclingnews article cites an "independent" test. That test was not "independent." The test is from a whitepaper linked on Trek's webpage (https://www.trekbikes.com/us/en_US/what-is-wavecel/) and authored by, among others, the 2 guys Trek credits with inventing the design. It's a terrific design maybe, but great marketing certainly.

Shades of Boeing and the FAA