Forum home Commuter cycling forum Commuting chat

Why don't commuters and roadies wear these helmets?

jeepiejeepie Posts: 495
edited June 2009 in Commuting chat
Full face type?

For example:

http://www.chainreactioncycles.com/Mode ... elID=24917

Lots of chat on here about helmets. Oh, the helmet debate.

Essentially a lot of people think "normal" style helmets will do you no good if you are hit by a car and also make it more likely that you are hit by a car. Others subscribe to the view that if you fall off you bike and slap the deck you'll be glad you were wearing a "normal" helmet, such at this:

http://www.chainreactioncycles.com/Mode ... elID=30434

My question is why don't commuters are roadies wear a better helmet so that it does protect them from being hit by a car? Would a full face helmet be better?

Jeepie

P.S> I sometimes wear a normal helmet and sometimes don't. I am very much against helmets being made compulsory. I'm just interested........
«1

Posts

  • MassimoMassimo Posts: 318
    Jeepie I take your point but I think this type of helmet would be far too hot to ride in for more that say 30 minutes (especially now the summer has finally arrived) and you wouldn't be able to hear what's happening around you as well as you would with a road helmet. I've found that you use your ears as much as your eyes when commuting in heavy traffic :wink:
    Crash 'n Burn, Peel 'n Chew
    FCN: 2
  • biondinobiondino Posts: 5,990
    If you get hit by a car hard enough no helmet's going to help you, I think that's what people are saying. It's not like regular bike helmets bounce off tarmac but can't deal with metal.

    And, just taking your argument that helmets make you more likely to be hit by a car (something I disagree with fwiw), wouldn't an even more protective helmet pretty much encourage them to ram you off the road?

    The answer will be a combination of the risk/reward ratio, and what manufacturers think they can sell most effectively. Full head helmets will be more expensive, so they'll sell fewer of them. It might even put people off cycling.
  • roger_merrimanroger_merriman Posts: 6,155
    edited May 2009
    full face will be even hotter, one of the main comfort issues.

    bare in mind that full face is very unlikely to be much stronger, ie it only has to pass same tests.
  • Rich158Rich158 Posts: 2,348
    tbh you wouldn't last more than about 10 mins in a full face helmet. I use one on my MTB and tbh it's fine for a 2/3 min run, and then it comes off for the walk back to the top, any more and you're sweating buckets :shock:

    Most of them aren't certified for motor vehicle use either, so I doubt they would offer much more protection in real terms than a normal helmet. They're also very heavy compared to a proper road helmet and I'd imagine your neck muscles would be fecked after 5 minutes or so.
    pain is temporary, the glory of beating your mates to the top of the hill lasts forever.....................

    Revised FCN - 2
  • AidyAidy Posts: 2,015
    You occasionally see commuters wearing full face helmets.
    I'm not sure it would really have any advantages in collisions with cars, but if it makes them feel safer and ride more confidently it counts as a win in my opinion.

    As others have said, it would be far too hot to ride in comfortably for most. Also if you're on a proper road bike they're too built up to be able to see.
  • CiBCiB Posts: 6,098
    I see kids at school wearing tat like this , and despair at the message the parents are sending - that cycling is incredibly dangerous and that if you're on a bike you need to take safety to an absolute limit.

    It's safe. The more I see junk like this peddled in the name of safety when in reality is just more profits for the manufacturers, the less likely I am to wear a helmet at all.
  • always_tyredalways_tyred Posts: 4,965
    Did you start this thread for a laugh?

    How come roadies don't wear one of these - people on horses can clearly use them. Surely they'd be safer. And they are reflective.

    Item%205810%20vintage%20suit%20of%20armour,%20detial%20top%20right.jpg
  • jeepiejeepie Posts: 495
    Yeah - partly :D but also was a bit curious. I mean some guy ended up in a ravine in the Giro last week so it seems helmets are little bit cursory rather than fit for purpose. A suit of armour it is!
  • greg66_tri_v2.0greg66_tri_v2.0 Posts: 7,172
    Did you start this thread for a laugh?

    How come roadies don't wear one of these - people on horses can clearly use them. Surely they'd be safer. And they are reflective.

    Item%205810%20vintage%20suit%20of%20armour,%20detial%20top%20right.jpg

    Ohh, like it.

    Where do I get a lance? Screw scalping. It's jousting for me!
    Swim. Bike. Run. Yeah. That's what I used to do.

    Bike 1
    Bike 2-A
  • Fireblade96Fireblade96 Posts: 1,123
    Just checked the weight of my full-face motorbike helmet -- 1400g. I wouldn't want to be wearing it cycling !

    There's one guy I sometimes see cycling through Reading who wears a FF lid, but I think it's overkill for the road. Maybe it's more a "I'm a hard-core downhill MTBer"* posing thing.


    * and my bike weighs 40lb so that's why I'm so slow :wink:
    Misguided Idealist
  • Rich158Rich158 Posts: 2,348
    I see kids at school wearing tat like this , and despair at the message the parents are sending - that cycling is incredibly dangerous and that if you're on a bike you need to take safety to an absolute limit.

    It's safe. The more I see junk like this peddled in the name of safety when in reality is just more profits for the manufacturers, the less likely I am to wear a helmet at all.

    Most of the kids I see wearing full face helmets are clearly mountain bikers and probably do a bit of DH and dirt jumping where the use of a full face helmet is pretty much essential. Given that most full face helmets cost upwards of £100 it probably seems reasonable to use it to cycle to school as well.

    In my experience it's hard enough to get kids to wear helmets, let alone something like a full face helmet unless there's a significant amount of kudos to be gained from doing so, and any protection is bettet than none.
    pain is temporary, the glory of beating your mates to the top of the hill lasts forever.....................

    Revised FCN - 2
  • CiBCiB Posts: 6,098
    Rich158 wrote:
    I see kids at school wearing tat like this , and despair at the message the parents are sending - that cycling is incredibly dangerous and that if you're on a bike you need to take safety to an absolute limit.

    It's safe. The more I see junk like this peddled in the name of safety when in reality is just more profits for the manufacturers, the less likely I am to wear a helmet at all.

    Most of the kids I see wearing full face helmets are clearly mountain bikers and probably do a bit of DH and dirt jumping where the use of a full face helmet is pretty much essential. Given that most full face helmets cost upwards of £100 it probably seems reasonable to use it to cycle to school as well.

    In my experience it's hard enough to get kids to wear helmets, let alone something like a full face helmet unless there's a significant amount of kudos to be gained from doing so, and any protection is bettet than none.

    I'm talking primary school, 6, 7, 8 year olds who are being indoctrinated with this message that cyclist is just so dangerous that you need to wear all this tat or you'll just die. And the catchment to our school is well served with cyclepaths & mixed ped / cycle paths so for virtually all of the kids there, they don't use the roads at all.

    I've seen numerous incidents where these kids are oblivious to anyone else in their vicinity due to the hearing being reduced and the tunnel vision afforded by full face helmets. From where I sit, full face helmets look completely ridiculous, and make tumbles & falls more likely, for the rider and other children.

    I'd like it if young kids actually stopped wearing helmets. They don't need this stupid layer of TV packaging and plastic moulding for their journey to school, they'd realise quite quickly that when you fall off, it's the hands & knees that take the brunt, and on those rare occasions when a bump on the head results, they [and their ridiculous parents] might realise that it's just a bump on the head, not some life-threatening injury. And my mate's daughter [age 9] wouldn't continually harangue me for not wearing a hat, even though she's been told enough times that me wearing a lump of polystyrene on my bonce isn't going to help if a car hits me, or a lorry runs me down, or if I come off at 30mph.

    We used to fall out of trees, have haystacks fall on us, ride on the back of the baler, go everywhere by bike. Never got hurt. It's all too soppy these days. When aarr wurr a lad etc etc blathers on in similar vein for 12 more paragraphs... con't p 94. Helmets. Phah.
  • always_tyredalways_tyred Posts: 4,965
    jeepie wrote:
    Yeah - partly :D but also was a bit curious. I mean some guy ended up in a ravine in the Giro last week so it seems helmets are little bit cursory rather than fit for purpose. A suit of armour it is!
    Fit for what purpose? That guy was racing at about 80-90kph and fell 60m. Your argument suggests that a seatbelt isn't fit for purpose if someone dies when they drive off a cliff.
  • lost_in_thoughtlost_in_thought Posts: 10,563
    A lighter summer option...

    kendo1.gif
  • always_tyredalways_tyred Posts: 4,965
    KenshiBlue.jpg

    A lighter summer option...
    Does is come in white?
  • biondinobiondino Posts: 5,990
    I'm talking primary school, 6, 7, 8 year olds who are being indoctrinated with this message that cyclist is just so dangerous that you need to wear all this tat or you'll just die.

    You're so baffling sometimes. The alternative, you realise, is kids not thinking cycling is at all dangerous and riding with abandon or ignorance and getting themselves flattened as a result!

    Caution and safety is paramount when cycling and for kids who may not have road sense (or common sense) it needs to be made very clear how to stay safe on the road. The thought that some bit of polystyrene is tipping them over into "oh god it's too dangerous" is laughable.

    Your own weird helmet phobia that results in you wanting vulnerable small skulls to be completely unprotected is kind of disturbing. Glad your kids have a more sensible approach!
  • Rich158Rich158 Posts: 2,348
    Rich158 wrote:
    I see kids at school wearing tat like this , and despair at the message the parents are sending - that cycling is incredibly dangerous and that if you're on a bike you need to take safety to an absolute limit.

    It's safe. The more I see junk like this peddled in the name of safety when in reality is just more profits for the manufacturers, the less likely I am to wear a helmet at all.

    Most of the kids I see wearing full face helmets are clearly mountain bikers and probably do a bit of DH and dirt jumping where the use of a full face helmet is pretty much essential. Given that most full face helmets cost upwards of £100 it probably seems reasonable to use it to cycle to school as well.

    In my experience it's hard enough to get kids to wear helmets, let alone something like a full face helmet unless there's a significant amount of kudos to be gained from doing so, and any protection is bettet than none.

    I'm talking primary school, 6, 7, 8 year olds who are being indoctrinated with this message that cyclist is just so dangerous that you need to wear all this tat or you'll just die. And the catchment to our school is well served with cyclepaths & mixed ped / cycle paths so for virtually all of the kids there, they don't use the roads at all.

    I've seen numerous incidents where these kids are oblivious to anyone else in their vicinity due to the hearing being reduced and the tunnel vision afforded by full face helmets. From where I sit, full face helmets look completely ridiculous, and make tumbles & falls more likely, for the rider and other children.

    I'd like it if young kids actually stopped wearing helmets. They don't need this stupid layer of TV packaging and plastic moulding for their journey to school, they'd realise quite quickly that when you fall off, it's the hands & knees that take the brunt, and on those rare occasions when a bump on the head results, they [and their ridiculous parents] might realise that it's just a bump on the head, not some life-threatening injury. And my mate's daughter [age 9] wouldn't continually harangue me for not wearing a hat, even though she's been told enough times that me wearing a lump of polystyrene on my bonce isn't going to help if a car hits me, or a lorry runs me down, or if I come off at 30mph.

    We used to fall out of trees, have haystacks fall on us, ride on the back of the baler, go everywhere by bike. Never got hurt. It's all too soppy these days. When aarr wurr a lad etc etc blathers on in similar vein for 12 more paragraphs... con't p 94. Helmets. Phah.

    I know the ones you mean, cheap Halfords jobs, that give the overprotective parents (and kids) a false sense of security. tbh I spent my entire youth doing very stupid things on a bike with no helmet and I'm still here. Imho as a society we've become so risk averse that kids grow up never actually having had to asses the danger in anything, and as a consequence are a danger to themselves and those arround them when are they are let out on their own.
    pain is temporary, the glory of beating your mates to the top of the hill lasts forever.....................

    Revised FCN - 2
  • CiBCiB Posts: 6,098
    :)

    I don't recall a steady stream of dead children, victims of cycling mishaps, when we were at school. Kids have a natural sense of self-preservation, much like the rest of us indeed. The point I'm making is that small children aren't subject to the same dangers as older cyclists, through a combination of lack of speed and generally being in safe areas when on the bike so don't need this whole over-the-top attitude to safety that ultimately stunts them into thinking that nothing is safe. It is safe.

    The alternative B is not what you suggest - "...kids not thinking cycling is at all dangerous and riding with abandon or ignorance and getting themselves flattened as a result!", it's kids growing up with an awareness that you can be safe without looking like an extra from Star Wars, and that falling off isn't the end of the world..

    It's the helmet debate again. Let's stop now before it becomes 26 pages of squabble.
  • agnelloagnello Posts: 239
    A waterproof offering with more than a little steampunk allure...


    diving_helmet_1132_yokahama.jpg
    Stumpjumper FSR Comp
    Eddy Merckx Strada
    Gios Compact KK
    Raleigh Dynatech Diablo
    Canyon CF CLX / Record
    Charge Plug 3
    Kinesis GF Ti disc - WIP...
  • rhextrhext Posts: 1,639
    Rich158 wrote:
    ... tbh I spent my entire youth doing very stupid things on a bike with no helmet and I'm still here. Imho as a society we've become so risk averse that kids grow up never actually having had to asses the danger in anything, and as a consequence are a danger to themselves and those arround them when are they are let out on their own.

    ...that's just a rehash of the 'my grandad used to smoke 60 a day and lived until he was 100' argument sometimes used to support the health benefits of smoking. Life is not deterministic in that way: bad things still happen to people who are cautious, and many reckless people get away with it. What you need to consider is how much trouble and expense you're prepared to go to in order to weight fate's dice in your favour.

    From my point of view, I can easily conceive of being involved in an accident where a helmet saves either my life or considerable discomfort, and there are some situations (particularly offroad) where wearing a helmet has definitely saved me some pain! I can never understand why people feel that the 'standard of proof' for wearing a helmet is whether or not it saves your life. It only takes a minute in a low-roofed cave to make you realise that the main reason pot-holers wear helmets is nothing to do with protecting their lives.

    I wouldn't wear a full-face helmet on the road because it's too heavy and too hot.

    ...and I consider it at least a possibility that the young kids wearing full-face helmets are doing it by choice to emulate the kind of MTBers they see on the telly.
  • kingmhokingmho Posts: 37
    Certification testing for bike helmets is designed to replicate low-speed falls from a bike onto the ground, not impacts against fast-moving cars. You are much more likely to simply fall off your bike, than be hit by a car, so I would evaluate the pros/cons of wearing a bike helmet on that basis.
  • rhext wrote:
    It only takes a minute in a low-roofed cave to make you realise that the main reason pot-holers wear helmets is nothing to do with protecting their lives.

    Agreed, the only time my helmet has been of any use is in the cycle shed where I work which is in a very low basement, and I'm 6' 2". Bloody glad I wear it, to be honest, money well spent.
  • Rich158Rich158 Posts: 2,348
    rhext wrote:
    Rich158 wrote:
    ... tbh I spent my entire youth doing very stupid things on a bike with no helmet and I'm still here. Imho as a society we've become so risk averse that kids grow up never actually having had to asses the danger in anything, and as a consequence are a danger to themselves and those arround them when are they are let out on their own.

    ...that's just a rehash of the 'my grandad used to smoke 60 a day and lived until he was 100' argument sometimes used to support the health benefits of smoking. Life is not deterministic in that way: bad things still happen to people who are cautious, and many reckless people get away with it. What you need to consider is how much trouble and expense you're prepared to go to in order to weight fate's dice in your favour.

    From my point of view, I can easily conceive of being involved in an accident where a helmet saves either my life or considerable discomfort, and there are some situations (particularly offroad) where wearing a helmet has definitely saved me some pain! I can never understand why people feel that the 'standard of proof' for wearing a helmet is whether or not it saves your life. It only takes a minute in a low-roofed cave to make you realise that the main reason pot-holers wear helmets is nothing to do with protecting their lives.

    I wouldn't wear a full-face helmet on the road because it's too heavy and too hot.

    ...and I consider it at least a possibility that the young kids wearing full-face helmets are doing it by choice to emulate the kind of MTBers they see on the telly.

    tbh now I'm an adult I always wear a helmet, out of choice, whether I'm on a MTB or road bike, as I've weighed up the risks and decided it's a worthwhile precaution.

    Most of every weekend is spent on a MTB and I see so many young kids doing realy stupid things completely beyond their skill level it beggars belief. There is a common thread to them - pre-teens, middle class, halfords bikes and overly self confident in the way that only comes from being over indulged by mummy and daddy. It would appear that they have been wrapped up in cotton wool so much that they have a complete inability to asses the risks in any given situation, and consequently do really stupid things putting themselves and other people at risk.

    And I doubt they're emulating the DH MTB'ers they see on the telly, it gets virtually no exposure.
    pain is temporary, the glory of beating your mates to the top of the hill lasts forever.....................

    Revised FCN - 2
  • rhextrhext Posts: 1,639
    Rich158 wrote:
    Most of every weekend is spent on a MTB and I see so many young kids doing realy stupid things completely beyond their skill level it beggars belief. There is a common thread to them - pre-teens, middle class, halfords bikes and overly self confident in the way that only comes from being over indulged by mummy and daddy......

    I'll not argue with that. At the end of the day, no amount of armour is going to protect you from the side-effects of rank stupidity. Most of them will simply end up hurting themselves enough to learn their limits (as I seem to recall I had to do when I was young - the scars still sometimes give me a twinge ;-)

    And as far as my own kids are concerned, they still seem able to inflict the same kind of injuries on themselves as I suffered despite the copious protection we supply them and which they wear religiously (when my back's not turned, that is). I guess the lesson is that no matter how risk averse the parents are, the only way kids are going to learn that helmets might have a use in life is by getting themselves a really big lump on the head.
  • Rich158Rich158 Posts: 2,348
    rhext wrote:
    Rich158 wrote:
    Most of every weekend is spent on a MTB and I see so many young kids doing realy stupid things completely beyond their skill level it beggars belief. There is a common thread to them - pre-teens, middle class, halfords bikes and overly self confident in the way that only comes from being over indulged by mummy and daddy......

    I'll not argue with that. At the end of the day, no amount of armour is going to protect you from the side-effects of rank stupidity. Most of them will simply end up hurting themselves enough to learn their limits (as I seem to recall I had to do when I was young - the scars still sometimes give me a twinge ;-)

    And as far as my own kids are concerned, they still seem able to inflict the same kind of injuries on themselves as I suffered despite the copious protection we supply them and which they wear religiously (when my back's not turned, that is). I guess the lesson is that no matter how risk averse the parents are, the only way kids are going to learn that helmets might have a use in life is by getting themselves a really big lump on the head.

    Exactly, it's how I learn't, and how both of my kids did. I actively encouraged them to take calculated risks, and still do, it's good for them and is part of growing up.
    pain is temporary, the glory of beating your mates to the top of the hill lasts forever.....................

    Revised FCN - 2
  • Stuey01Stuey01 Posts: 1,273
    Rich158 wrote:

    Most of every weekend is spent on a MTB and I see so many young kids doing realy stupid things completely beyond their skill level it beggars belief.

    .

    Aren't they just doing this?
    Rich158 wrote:
    tbh I spent my entire youth doing very stupid things on a bike with no helmet and I'm still here.

    How is kids being stupid on bikes today different from you being stupid on a bike when you were a kid? Arguably if they are wearing helmets then they are less stupid than you were.
    Not climber, not sprinter, not rouleur
  • biondinobiondino Posts: 5,990
    the only way kids are going to learn that helmets might have a use in life is by getting themselves a really big lump on the head.

    Or by falling of their bike while wearing a helmet, smacking their head really hard and becoming VERY clear almost instantaneously why they're wearing one.
  • biondinobiondino Posts: 5,990
    (I had an accident when I was a kid - not on a bike - where I was messing on a ladder, lost my grip and fell off, backwards, onto a concrete floor from about 6 foot up. My head hit the floor incredibly hard - or at least it would have if I hadn't been wearing, um, a bowler hat I'd been dressing up in :oops: )
  • Rich158Rich158 Posts: 2,348
    Stuey01 wrote:
    Rich158 wrote:

    Most of every weekend is spent on a MTB and I see so many young kids doing realy stupid things completely beyond their skill level it beggars belief.

    .

    Aren't they just doing this?
    Rich158 wrote:
    tbh I spent my entire youth doing very stupid things on a bike with no helmet and I'm still here.

    How is kids being stupid on bikes today different from you being stupid on a bike when you were a kid? Arguably if they are wearing helmets then they are less stupid than you were.

    Absolutely right, you've just spotted the fatal flaw in my argument. In my defence the point I was making was that I learn't from a very early age what hurt and what didn't (well not very much), and that affected my judgement as I moved into my teans. There doesn't seem to be that progression these days, and all of a sudden kids are let loose on the world in their early teans with no idea how to judge risk because they been shielded from it up to that point.

    And tbh when I was a kid, 30 odd years ago there weren't bike helmets, or if there were they weren't an issue.
    pain is temporary, the glory of beating your mates to the top of the hill lasts forever.....................

    Revised FCN - 2
  • rhextrhext Posts: 1,639
    biondino wrote:
    the only way kids are going to learn that helmets might have a use in life is by getting themselves a really big lump on the head.

    Or by falling of their bike while wearing a helmet, smacking their head really hard and becoming VERY clear almost instantaneously why they're wearing one.

    You must have different types of kids from me. Mine seem incapable of making that connection! Apart from that they don't seem particularly thick, but that could be just the proud parent in me!
Sign In or Register to comment.