deronmoped
10 kW
- Joined
- Oct 6, 2008
- Messages
- 706
v-tach
Sorry, my bad.
Deron.
Sorry, my bad.
Deron.
Best helmet in the world is this one
http://www.schuberth.de/index.php?id=22
I have one which I use for my motorbike but Im seriously thinking of using it with my bicycle too - it is very very (shockingly) light, has amazing side visibility, built in sunglasses and chin bar protector.
kazbluesky said:Best helmet in the world is this one
http://www.schuberth.de/index.php?id=22
I have one which I use for my motorbike but Im seriously thinking of using it with my bicycle too - it is very very (shockingly) light, has amazing side visibility, built in sunglasses and chin bar protector.
One problem - costs an arm and a leg
I don't think anybody expects their computer monitor, DVD player or plasma screen TV to survive falling off the back of a lorry at 30MPH.monster said:most bicycle helmets have too many ventalation holes for my liking! surely they weaken the helmet design? i shoved extra styrene into the vent holes in my helmet cos i wanted to be extra safe and i don't need vent holes on an ebike. what do you think?
knightmb said:So when I see a study that claims that helmets don't make a difference, to me it's just a spin on numbers. You can make data stay anything you want with enough spin on the math. You can also get brain damage at 8 MPH if you head hits a solid wall, so I think any speed *can be dangerous* on a bicycle. Not because we aren't careful, but because we can't plan for the unexpected.
deronmoped said:You know what I get from your post is, what a bunch of idiots.
What was everyone doing following so close that they ended up crashing (besides you of course) after someone fell in front of them? Were they fair weather bicyclist, have they not seen the crashes like this in bicycle races?
Like you, I would have given the idiots plenty of room knowing any little mishap would spell disaster.
Helmet, smelmet, there should have been someone in charge, with a bike meeting at the start of the event explaining how to ride safe and give yourself plenty of reaction time to avoid people around you.
Any common sense among the group?
Deron.
deronmoped said:You know what I get from your post is, what a bunch of idiots.
What was everyone doing following so close that they ended up crashing (besides you of course) after someone fell in front of them? Were they fair weather bicyclist, have they not seen the crashes like this in bicycle races?
Like you, I would have given the idiots plenty of room knowing any little mishap would spell disaster.
Helmet, smelmet, there should have been someone in charge, with a bike meeting at the start of the event explaining how to ride safe and give yourself plenty of reaction time to avoid people around you.
Any common sense among the group?
Deron.
knightmb said:It's a common thing to draft and these types of lines have been done for years without incident. The problem was, it takes a lot of practice to do a pace line.
When the rider fell over in the front, it sent his bike flying backwards into the others behind him like a missile. That's what started the chain reaction. I know you may be thinking everyone was riding wheel on wheel, but they don't ride that close. Each rider keeps about a bicycle length between each other. The problem was, at that speed, reaction time isn't quick enough, plus I know of lot of them panic and slid off to the side which caused other accidents along the way.
So needless to say, they no longer do pace lines that long anymore, it's broken up into smaller groups. So regardless of how bad of an idea it was for everyone to try it, it doesn't negate the fact that the helmets did what they were designed to do. That group along could have been it's own statistic for crashes if no one was wearing any helmets.
To me, it's not different than the 30 car pile ups that happen on the Interstate. It doesn't mean all those people wanted to crash or were stupid, it just means a bad situation affected a lot of people at once.
Normally I would agree, but break out some math (spin) on it and things change. Large car pile ups, unless people keep a 300 feet driving distance, your vehicle can cover the distance at highway speeds every second. So even given reaction times, your speed, coupled with the fact that brakes don't stop you instantly (that would be bad of course if they did), and then reaction time for something unexpected, you just have too many variables to make a safe assumption on how everyone would react.The Stig said:knightmb said:It's a common thing to draft and these types of lines have been done for years without incident. The problem was, it takes a lot of practice to do a pace line.
When the rider fell over in the front, it sent his bike flying backwards into the others behind him like a missile. That's what started the chain reaction. I know you may be thinking everyone was riding wheel on wheel, but they don't ride that close. Each rider keeps about a bicycle length between each other. The problem was, at that speed, reaction time isn't quick enough, plus I know of lot of them panic and slid off to the side which caused other accidents along the way.
So needless to say, they no longer do pace lines that long anymore, it's broken up into smaller groups. So regardless of how bad of an idea it was for everyone to try it, it doesn't negate the fact that the helmets did what they were designed to do. That group along could have been it's own statistic for crashes if no one was wearing any helmets.
To me, it's not different than the 30 car pile ups that happen on the Interstate. It doesn't mean all those people wanted to crash or were stupid, it just means a bad situation affected a lot of people at once.
My view is it's an avoidable situation. There is no reason to be that close together in a pace line when going down hill. If they had left more space between each other that all could have been avoided, just as a pile up on the interstate could be avoided by leaving more space in front of you. Helmets prevent head injuries, smart and safe riding prevents accidents and I think if someone really cares about safety they should think first about the latter then about what they're gonna wear on their head. I'm just saying safe riding is more important.
In Copenhagen, a bicycling city, there is a law saying you must have lights on your bike at night, not only is there no law enforcing helmets but hardly anyone wears them. Albeit the bike safety standards there above and beyond anything we could dream of here, they have bike lanes everywhere there and they have safety in numbers.
You don't need 100% formation, that's why the distance allows for flexibility so you can speed up or slow down to prevent collisions.deronmoped said:I still think they were quite stupid.
Anyone depending on the guy that is one bicycle length in front of them and one bicycle length in back of them to ride in perfect formation with 100% concentration during this type of ride is fooling themselves. Heck if you have done any riding at all, you find out real quick that to follow or lead even one person with little spacing leads to near collisions.
Actually, the cause of the crash was mechanical. The front fork had one of the sides break, so the wheel bent sideways (became a brake basically) and it sent him flipping over his bike and of course it went right into the riders behind it. So if you want to get technical, the cause of the crash was more of the bike than the riding skills of it's rider.Here is where I going to throw something at you guys that you will probably deny.
The helmets contributed to the crash!
It has been shown that when people feel safer they take more risks. This has been proven to be a human trait. Take cars, with some of the safety features and perceived safety they added, people took more risks. Better brakes, steering, road handling, decrease in perceived speed... have all changed the way people drive their cars. No longer do they drive like they did in 50's, 60's and 70's, speeds have gone up, following distances have gone down, people take more risks...
Helmets are no exception, people feel safer when they put a helmet on, so they have a tendency to take more risks.
Ask yourself this: Would you be more likely to ride at high speeds in a big group with bicyclist within a bicycle length you with a helmet on? "I have my helmet on, so that will protect me".
Now ask yourself this: Would you put yourself into the same situation without a helmet on? Or would you say to yourself, "Man, I left my helmet at home, I do not want to risk it".
Deron.
Zoot Katz said:I don't think anybody expects their computer monitor, DVD player or plasma screen TV to survive falling off the back of a lorry at 30MPH.
They're packed in thicker, and often more resilient, foam than found in bicycle helmets. FWIW
vanilla ice said:Zoot Katz said:I don't think anybody expects their computer monitor, DVD player or plasma screen TV to survive falling off the back of a lorry at 30MPH.
They're packed in thicker, and often more resilient, foam than found in bicycle helmets. FWIW
I think this is the first time I've taken issue with anything you've had to say Zoot, but I've worked in a warehouse. The Styrofoam used in packing is not as compressed as the stuff used in helmets or car bumpers. Totally different properties even though it looks the same. You can poke your finger right in to packing Styrofoam. Try that with a helmet.. its way too compressed for that. Anyway, I've handled plenty of bike helmets, motorcycle helmets, auto bumpers, and packing materials, and this has been my experience.
philf said:I still just *love* the streamlined GE unit... It's a work of art, that. I just get so gooey every time I see it...
*sigh*.
Zoot Katz said:And as a signed limited edition work of art, it has its price.
I do have an unworn second one.
You wanna start a bidding war?
Zoot Katz said:These 1967 GE kettles are scarce now.
This one went for $120