Just dropped my helmet onto a concrete driveway. Maybe a 30" fall. Paint cracked. Thanks.
According to the Arai specialist tech guy in Leno's garage..... NO.
And according to the rest of the world? Just repaint?
rest of the world is dumb. the key component in the helmet saving ur ass is the shell and EPS. the eps will collapse and deform in even small impacts....but if theres no head in the helmet you could drop it or bang it against something, but long as the shell doesnt crack or bend to much, and the EPS has nothing to press against its good to go.
So as long as u didnt crack the shell, i wouldnt worry about it too much. if u had a minor spill and ur head made contact with the ground, then it is compromised as the eps collapse to absorb the energy.
no point in repainting a helmet. If ur that anal about how it looks, just buy another one. a paint job would cost as much as most helmets.
Helmets are designed for one use only. That being said, I dropped mine once and felt leery about using it. Problem is you wont know if its a good idea or not. Three things can happen 1. you go down, hit your head and all is good. 2. you go down hit your head and end up in a comma (not good). 3. you ride with the conscious of what if. I had the what ifs for some time. Now I have a new helmet. If you are questioning the situation, do your self a favor and buy a new helmet, I would not throw the old one out, maybe keep it as a back up.
Quote from: scduc on May 16, 2010, 11:02:48 AM
Helmets are designed for one use only.
what do you consider 1 use?
I mean, if the US Arai Director of Marketing says no on camera, it should be clear enough. He sells helmets for a living and he has the legal issues to worry about and he still says no ;)
http://www.araiamericas.com/default.aspx?pageid=160 (http://www.araiamericas.com/default.aspx?pageid=160) (about 7:30 into the clip)
Some (or maybe all) of the helmet manufacturers can x-ray your helmet and tell you if it is still safe to wear.
Quote from: He Man on May 16, 2010, 09:51:18 AM
rest of the world is dumb. the key component in the helmet saving ur ass is the shell and EPS. the eps will collapse and deform in even small impacts....but if theres no head in the helmet you could drop it or bang it against something, but long as the shell doesnt crack or bend to much, and the EPS has nothing to press against its good to go.
So as long as u didnt crack the shell, i wouldnt worry about it too much. if u had a minor spill and ur head made contact with the ground, then it is compromised as the eps collapse to absorb the energy.
no point in repainting a helmet. If ur that anal about how it looks, just buy another one. a paint job would cost as much as most helmets.
+1. If the shell is not cracked or compromised and the foam is not compressed it's still usable. Though a small fall like that while wearing it could compress the foam, it's not likely if there's no head in the helmet.
Also, many newer helmets paint the foam on the inside black. This is a really nice feature because when it does compress it also usually gets cracks. The white interior of the foam shows up clear as day through the black paint.
Scott
I seems to remember reading that helmets needs replacing only if it is dropped from a height of more than 3 feet? Can someone verify my memory?
Quote from: CDawg on May 17, 2010, 05:52:55 AM
I seems to remember reading that helmets needs replacing only if it is dropped from a height of more than 3 feet? Can someone verify my memory?
Theres not enough additional force to cause a helmet to deform between 3 feet and say 6 feet especially when these things were designed for high speed impacts. Ofcourse im not the designiner, but it wouldnt make sense. light impacts such as drops will most likely spread the energy over the shell, like its suppose to and it'll do what everything else does, bounce once and rollaround, scratch a lens and piss you off.
i dropped my Shark RSR2 3 times already from either handlebar height, or off a chair. I have no problems wearing it. Actually you could see that the foam hasnt done anything because its sliced like "shark fins"
I wouldn't worry about it. You should see how they test them. A 30 inch drop doesn't even come close to damaging the integrity of the shell or the rest of the helmet.
I'd still trust the helmet over the rag I see Harley guys wear.
Quote from: He Man on May 16, 2010, 11:15:02 AM
what do you consider 1 use?
What I'm trying to say is that a helmet's sole purpose is to protect the grey matter in case of a crash. Some protective items are designed to absorb impact and in the process, they are self destructive. Unlike a football helmet or something used in the contact sports, the motorcycle / racing helmet is far more advanced. Clearly if you laid your bike down at 50mph and racked your head against a tree, you wouldn't even think twice about using the helmet again. Even if it only had a scratch. So, in this aspect, I say it is designed for 1 use. Basically it does nothing until needed. Now by saying that , it does many other things than protect in case of crash. Wind, noise, bugs, rain, sunlight, etc. Manufactures have different theories on what constitutes replacement. So, like I said before, if this doesn't bother you, then by all means continue to use. However, I would always have that little bit of doubt and would not be comfortable without replacement..
Quote from: He Man on May 16, 2010, 11:15:02 AM
what do you consider 1 use?
I think the older SNELL was tested to include TWO impacts which is why they've changed their testing for 2010 to include ONE impact to evenly distribute the impact area. Someone posted an article on here about the new SNELL testing.
Define impact here... Their impact is a huge 25 or some foot drop with a 10lb pointed weight. The likely hood of that happening twice is pretty low. Thats like have your bike come at you and the handle bar hits you in the face....twice.
Droping it on the floor is a self weight drop over 3-6 feet spread over the surface of the helmet.
Take it however you want, theres aboslutely no justification in replacing a helmet after you droped it from shoulder height other then to calm your nerves.
Football helmets are just as high tech as motorcycle helmets. In fact, i think they are more high tech. They need to absorb a lot of energy, and dissipate it VERY efficiently for the player to not get a concussion, and they need to do it several times over the course of the game.
Quote from: He Man on May 20, 2010, 05:57:05 PM
Football helmets are just as high tech as motorcycle helmets. In fact, i think they are more high tech. They need to absorb a lot of energy, and dissipate it VERY efficiently for the player to not get a concussion, and they need to do it several times over the course of the game.
Helmets?
Big Bumps of the AFL (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-BOzQwj4fSE&feature=related#lq-lq2-hq-vhq)
Really guys..?! You only get one head! I used to work in a bike shop. Helmets are throw away after one impact... Either get it checked by the manufacturer or replace IMO... They cost very little when compared to life long care after you are brain damaged in an accident. We all know how dangerous it is on the road already. Dont gamble with your life.
Just my 2cents
Quote from: He Man on May 20, 2010, 05:57:05 PM
Define impact here... Their impact is a huge 25 or some foot drop with a 10lb pointed weight. The likely hood of that happening twice is pretty low. Thats like have your bike come at you and the handle bar hits you in the face....twice.
Droping it on the floor is a self weight drop over 3-6 feet spread over the surface of the helmet.
The whole two impact thing and dispersing the impact is why SNELL changed their testing, because like you said, the chances of getting hit twice are pretty minuscule and should be replaced after the first hit (crash vice drop) anyways.
I think Snell was developed in response to early bicycle helmets that tended to break apart after absorbing the first impact, leaving the rider unprotected for successive impacts, same spot or elsewhere. Makes a lot of sense for what used to be just a piece of styrofoam on your head, not so much for a moto helmet that has a strong shell around that holds it together already. I'm glad Snell has changed to what seems like a more sensible standard for moto helmets.
The requirement to meet the second impact in the same spot meant the helmet absorbed less impact and transmitted more for to your head on the first hit. DOT only certified helmets absorbed much more force on the first impact. Since you don't tend to hit your head twice in the same spot this means better helmets for all of us.
Scott
[Football helmets are just as high tech as motorcycle helmets. In fact, i think they are more high tech. They need to absorb a lot of energy, and dissipate it VERY efficiently for the player to not get a concussion, and they need to do it several times over the course of the game.
I beg to differ, Fact is that the NFL is currently investigating the helmet issue. And no other sport/ event carries more concussions with long term damaging effects the American football. Rugby is by far a more aggresive sport with less incidents. Even boxing which some consider brutal has less long term affects then football.
Quote from: ozzys4r on May 21, 2010, 09:46:33 PM
Really guys..?! You only get one head! I used to work in a bike shop. Helmets are throw away after one impact... Either get it checked by the manufacturer or replace IMO... They cost very little when compared to life long care after you are brain damaged in an accident. We all know how dangerous it is on the road already. Dont gamble with your life.
Just my 2cents
This is really the point.
Quote from: scduc on May 23, 2010, 11:09:16 AM
[Football helmets are just as high tech as motorcycle helmets. In fact, i think they are more high tech. They need to absorb a lot of energy, and dissipate it VERY efficiently for the player to not get a concussion, and they need to do it several times over the course of the game.
I beg to differ, Fact is that the NFL is currently investigating the helmet issue. And no other sport/ event carries more concussions with long term damaging effects the American football. Rugby is by far a more aggresive sport with less incidents. Even boxing which some consider brutal has less long term affects then football.This is really the point.
I don't mean to change the subject, but don't most of the football incidents have to do with the size of the guys playing? As in the linemen? I don't follow rugby, but how many rugby players are over 300lbs? But yes football is definately the worst as far as long term effects.
Quote from: scduc on May 23, 2010, 11:09:16 AM
I beg to differ, Fact is that the NFL is currently investigating the helmet issue. And no other sport/ event carries more concussions with long term damaging effects the American football. Rugby is by far a more aggresive sport with less incidents. Even boxing which some consider brutal has less long term affects then football.This is really the point.
I agree that football helmets aren't as effective as they could be. This is because you cannot design a helmet to absorb multiple hits as effectively as one designed to only take only. Simple engineering principle, coupled with the economics of not being able to replace helmets after every hit in football.
I completely disagree about the quote above. No way Rugby is more aggressive than football...at least from an impact standpoint, particularly head impacts. If it were there would be more head injuries, period. American football players are larger and faster than Rugby or Aussie Rules football players, and they impact each other with much greater force (largely due to the equipment they wear and the feeling of invincibility it gives them). The attitude in Rugby may be more aggressive...but the hits (which cause the head injuries) aren't even close.
Also, boxing has just as many long term effects as football. The brain damage associated with head injuries (similar to Alzheimers) was first discovered in boxers. The difference is there are way more people playing football, so the number of injuries is going to be higher. Look at the old boxers (Frasier, Ali)...they all have issues from being hit in the head so many times. I expect these injuries to start popping up in UFC stars within the next decade as well.
On the helmet front...I agree with HeMan. If you drop an empty helmet a small distance (like off of a table), and the shell is not damaged, then the helmet should be fine. Helmet liners are designed to crumple (like a car frame) in an impact; however, there needs to be something inside of them to cause the crumpling...like a head...otherwise the lining should not be damaged. Telling if the shell has been damaged is the magical question.
Quote from: ozzys4r on May 21, 2010, 09:46:33 PM
Really guys..?! You only get one head! I used to work in a bike shop. Helmets are throw away after one impact... Either get it checked by the manufacturer or replace IMO... They cost very little when compared to life long care after you are brain damaged in an accident. We all know how dangerous it is on the road already. Dont gamble with your life.
Just my 2cents
So by your logic, if you drop your helmet from say 10", then you replace it?
Helmets can take some level of abuse that is so far below the crash levels, that it just doesn't have any affect. I guess each of us has to decide, but remember, your helmet was shipped, in an un-padded cardboard box 1000's of miles. It probably saw as much cumulative energy abuse as a once or twice drop from 30".
mitt
Quote from: Triple J on May 25, 2010, 07:11:00 AM
..they all have issues from being hit in the head so many times. I expect these injuries to start popping up in UFC stars within the next decade as well.
I wouldn't put Boxing and MMA in the same category here. I know there has been multiple studies that have proved MMA is much more easier on the noodle than boxing. The gloves are way less padded and guys aren't getting repeated blows to the head for 12 rounds like in boxing. Typically, if your getting hit more than a few good times in the head than your getting knocked out in MMA. Plus, there are multiple aspects like grappling and kicks that boxing doesn't have. Long-term effects remain to be seen but I would say boxing is by far the worst for brain injuries.