Criticism of helmet reviews in mag and online

Daz555

I think Bikeradar and the associated magazines need to have a rethink with regards to reviewing helmets and other safety equipment.

Today I see a review for the Giro Ionis helmet which states "Giro’s current top lid is a comfort, performance and protection benchmark".

This implies the helmet provided a level of protection that sets it apart from others? Does it? If so, can we have the extensive analysis performed by BikeRadar (or magazine) that led them to come to such a conclusion.

If BikeRadar and the mags are NOT performing industry standard tests (if they exist) on helmets then claims to their strength or the level of protection they will provide should be left out of the reviews. To do otherwise is misleading.

supersonic

Have you a link to the review? Does it refer to the depth of cover of the helmet at the back?

Cunobelin

There is not much point in publishing standards in reviews as not all helmets are tested to the same extent.

Sold in the UK they only require the basic EN1078, a test far inferior to most others, and one of the easiest to pass.

Even when asked the manufacturers are cagey and will not give straight answers.

Giro refuse to state whether their helmets have been tested to Snell B90 or B95 which are the most demanding.

Personally I would not buy a helmet that does not pass Snell testing.

Daz555

supersonic wrote:

Have you a link to the review? Does it refer to the depth of cover of the helmet at the back?

Article seems to have gone walkabout. :?

Dirtydog11

Its here

http://static.bikeradar.com/gear/catego ... s-10-37436

Daz555

Here is another example:

http://www.bikeradar.com/gear/category/ ... t-10-37626

"in-mould technology to fuse the EPS liner to the lightweight hard shell cover, making it a very strong and secure lid that wards off knocks."

Is it? Is it simply a quote from the accompanying marketing material or have BikeRadar tested the helmet to see if it really is "very strong".

supersonic

In the original case it does state the helmet provides extra coverage over certain areas of the head.

The latter - well, most do use in moulding lol.

ride_whenever

I do wish these reviews were done a bit better in general, for things like parts, the reviews tend to be excellent, at least where one believes that the parts actually have been tried!

For things like clothing and nutrition, I'd like to see some actually useful testing. Supply product to a group of say 20 odd people, and see how many they fit, who felt they were an improvement etc. Not exactly hard to do and provides a useful indication of real world suitability.

Daz555

Helmet reviews or marketing pieces?

http://www.bikeradar.com/gear/category/ ... t-11-45251

http://www.bikeradar.com/gear/category/ ... t-11-44892

Isn't it about time we started to see proper online reviews which feature extensive testing of the PRIMARY function of a helmet?