RE: Solve my Helmet Debate
Login  | |
|
RE: Solve my Helmet Debate - 1/23/2008 8:33:46 PM
|
|
|
Blue Fox
Posts: 4473
Joined: 7/14/2006
From: Las Cruces, NM
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: jerbear
lol no he rides a 97' zx6r and he does where his helmet most of the time for wind and noise reasons he says and also temperature cause its kinda chilly out right now. But he holds to his statement.
^^ He's still f**king retarded. You tell him I said that too.  Show him this thread, and show him what I wrote below..........
JERBEAR'S ROOMMATE IS RETARDED!
< Message edited by Blue Fox -- 1/23/2008 8:37:49 PM >
_____________________________
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Solve my Helmet Debate - 1/23/2008 8:43:07 PM
|
|
|
randyjoy
Posts: 294
Joined: 5/22/2007
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: jerbear
yea he said he can't find the report he did, i know he did i watched him do it. the only statistic or statment i found to support him was at bikersrights.com and toward the bottom they had a supposed quote from snell.
We Asked a Number of Helmet Companies, which of their helmets would provide the best safety benefits Snell "A helmet that can take one of our headforms through these 2 impacts unscathed could probably handle a single impact somewhat greater than 17.3 MPH, but certainly no more than 23 MPH." - Ed Becker, Snell
I understand his logic that there is more weight on you head and it creates more force and potential strain, but i dont see how in a crash over 20 mph would be more benefical to not have a helemt on. Any how i know there is plenty of information out there to support helmet use and i could care less about that i am just interested in information agaisnt helmet use.
That quote is out of context - you have to read the whole letter:
Translating helmet standards into head-on/barrier type impacts is depressing.
Our standards call for impacts with a velocity of about 17.3 mph followed by a second impact at the same point on the helmet at about 14.8 mph. A helmet that can take one of our headforms through these two impacts unscathed could probably handle a single impact somewhat greater than 17.3 mph but certainly no more than 23 MPH.
DOT tests apply two impacts as well, both at around 13.4 MPH implying a single impact capacity greater than 13.4 mph but certainly no more than 19 mph. These numbers all seem pretty dismal compared with even normal traffic speeds but, fortunately, few motorcyclists ever go head-on into a wall.
Most head strikes are glancing blows. The most common accident is the biker is thrown from the bike, falls to the road surface and scrubs off his cruising speed sliding along the roadway. The impact velocity is not his cruising speed but just the downward component picked up in his fall. A fall of two meters (we're metric here) will result in a DOT level impact. If the biker is thrown higher, say up to three meters, it will be a Snell level impact. Of course, with no helmet, a fall of one or two feet can produce death or permanent disability.
What's important is that almost any level of head protection will produce benefits. There are accidents in which even a thick toupee might save someone's life. However, a motorcyclist could not lift, let alone wear, all the helmet he might reasonably be expected to need to survive any reasonably foreseeable accident. For that reason, our standards look to identify all the helmet a rider could reasonably be expected to wear.
This is about the best I can do for an accident description and it requires that you accept our headform and shock measures as a suitable model of human head tolerance. Since motorcycle helmets have been in widespread use since the sixties, it's possible to get a statistical confirmation of their utility. A couple of researchers looked at 14 years worth of data from the Fatal Accident Recovery System and examined accidents involving a motorcyclist and passenger in which one or both were killed. There were a certain amount of these in which one was helmeted and the other was not. When they made allowances for all the other variables, they found that helmet use yields a fifty percent reduction in fatalities for the most serious accidents. They also found that this reduction had been improving steadily over the time of their study. Many interpretations are possible but it seems inescapable that helmets save lives and, reaching only a little further, better helmets save more lives.
Thanks for your interest.
Ed Becker
Snell
_____________________________
"I'd rather sweat then bleed."
2003 CBR954RR
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Solve my Helmet Debate - 1/23/2008 9:09:58 PM
|
|
|
jerbear
Posts: 37
Joined: 9/14/2007
Status: offline
|
Found where he got his information. http://www.bikersrights.com/statistics/goldstein/goldstein2.html#neck%20injury1 from what i read they say helmets riders and non helmeted riders expierence the same risk for serious injury.
He also won't agree that a helmet absorbs impact he claims " a helemt when you hit a wall or whatever will cause ur head to snap back harder than if just you head hit the wall resulting in much more neck injury. I argue that helmet will actually reduce neck injury because the helmet itself is absorbing the impact.
Please correct me if i am wrong.
< Message edited by jerbear -- 1/23/2008 9:23:47 PM >
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Solve my Helmet Debate - 1/24/2008 8:20:55 AM
|
|
|
Bumble Bee
Posts: 1323
Joined: 9/19/2007
Status: offline
|
I agree with Fox. Your roomate is a total tard. Hey if he don't like his face-that's fine, but I like mine so I will ride with my helmet.
_____________________________
If it's not jap-it's crap!
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Solve my Helmet Debate - 1/24/2008 8:37:37 AM
|
|
|
Manic
Posts: 169
Joined: 2/22/2007
Status: offline
|
Like someone said, it has to do w/ the SNELL standards.
http://www.suomyusa.com/ssafetya.htm
Summary- Snell doesn't have the same stringent test standards that BSI does. This results with harder SNELL certified helmets (meaning the shell is tougher and less giving on impact). So that's only thing I could possibly try and see your roomates perspetive.
I do agree that testing should be done by running into a wall by your roomate.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Solve my Helmet Debate - 1/24/2008 9:25:00 AM
|
|
|
fishfryer527
Posts: 3607
Joined: 12/5/2005
From: Indian Harbor Beach, Florida
Status: online
|
People race motorcycles at over 20MPH. Every professional racer wears a helmet, it is manditory for a reason.
_____________________________
Best Thread ever!!! http://www.cbrforum.com/m_310096/tm.htm
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Solve my Helmet Debate - 1/24/2008 10:32:09 AM
|
|
|
Bumble Bee
Posts: 1323
Joined: 9/19/2007
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: fishfryer527
People race motorcycles at over 20MPH. Every professional racer wears a helmet, it is manditory for a reason.
Awesome point!
_____________________________
If it's not jap-it's crap!
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Solve my Helmet Debate - 1/24/2008 10:39:45 AM
|
|
|
Jaybird180
Posts: 2580
Joined: 5/12/2006
Status: offline
|
It's not an awesome point to use, "We do it now, because we've always done it." That's not an effective logical argument. We can do better, but sometimes folks need to be wiped from the gene pool to be convinced.
_____________________________
TrackDay Ready 02''F4i
ZG Double Bubble, Galfer SS Lines, PCIIIr, Muzzy s/o, NRC cover, Shift Minder(anyone want it?), Speedbleeders, Vortex sliders, fender elimated, GP Shift
Ohlins, Racetech, Showa Custom Suspension
Teaching Fun and Prosperity
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Solve my Helmet Debate - 1/24/2008 10:42:50 AM
|
|
|
kravguy
Posts: 74
Joined: 11/30/2007
Status: offline
|
buy him a bigger windscreen, a sockhat/skicap/toboggan/skullcap/beanie (or took for those of u north of the border), and a pair of earplugs...then hide his helmet...see how mad he gets when he doesn't have his "protection"...i bet he won't ride w/out it!!!
_____________________________
black '05 600RR
Dennis Kirk flushies
Hotbodies undertail
Sporttech windscreen:chrome w/flames
Pazzo shorties:red/gold
Johar foam grips
OES sliders
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Solve my Helmet Debate - 1/24/2008 11:13:21 AM
|
|
|
SpecR
Posts: 308
Joined: 10/19/2007
Status: offline
|
If you don't wear a helmet, you're an idiot.
And if you think it's your right to not wear a helmet, you're an idiot.
Try to think about the feelings of your family, and the people who have to scrape your brains off the road.'
The argument that helmets break necks is complete fallacy. Your neck is extremely flexibile (except when being twisted at an angle). Your skull isn't.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Solve my Helmet Debate - 1/24/2008 12:17:50 PM
|
|
|
fishfryer527
Posts: 3607
Joined: 12/5/2005
From: Indian Harbor Beach, Florida
Status: online
|
quote:
It's not an awesome point to use, "We do it now, because we've always done it." That's not an effective logical argument.
Professional Hockey didn't always require Helmets. There was a time when some of the veterans would play without while rookies had to play with. Downhill skiing didn't always require helmets. NASCAR didn't always require the HANS device, after Dale Earnhardt needlessly died it became manditory.
_____________________________
Best Thread ever!!! http://www.cbrforum.com/m_310096/tm.htm
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Solve my Helmet Debate - 1/24/2008 12:29:13 PM
|
|
|
Ty
Posts: 251
Joined: 8/2/2007
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: jerbear
He also won't agree that a helmet absorbs impact he claims " a helemt when you hit a wall or whatever will cause ur head to snap back harder than if just you head hit the wall resulting in much more neck injury. I argue that helmet will actually reduce neck injury because the helmet itself is absorbing the impact.
Please correct me if i am wrong.
That issue was addressed already in the article that Nauree posted. It is false. There is no real circumstance in which a helmetless rider is better off. You can put together these weird scenarios when a helmeted rider would die of helmet-induced neck injuries, but for it to actually happen the same accident would produce massively fatal wounds to the head of a helmetless individual. He is arguing that somehow an accident can occur where certain very specific requirements are met but at the same time assuming that the rest of the crash is not included. Any helmetless rider would die in an identical accident that killed a helmeted rider, period.
My foot could be ripped off by my boot if it gets hooked just right on the peg when I highside, should I ride barefoot?
My jacket could become caught as I slide under a semi and rip my arms and head off, should I ride without it?
My gloves could snag and rip my hand off, should I ride without those too.
There are ways to say that any piece of protection can produce negative results. The difference between us and your idiot roommate is being able to recognize that there will never be an accident that fits his criteria for a helmetless rider to be better off. If he doesn't want to believe it, tell him to take off his jacket, shoes, gloves, and anything else that could kill him.
_____________________________
If speed was a drug I'd be dead by now. Wait...that doesn't make any sense...I'm hooked on all sorts of sh*t and that never killed me. OK...if speed negatively reacted with drugs and alcohol....DAMMIT!!
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Solve my Helmet Debate - 1/24/2008 2:03:22 PM
|
|
|
oreo
Posts: 320
Joined: 9/5/2006
Status: offline
|
Hey, in my accident, the metal nuckles on my gloves, ripped my skin when the glove itself started ripping, would I have been better off without gloves...
HELLLLLL NOOOOOOOO,
the impact would have probably broken a couple of bones in my hand and the ammount of road rash on my hand would have been enogh to severely restrict movement now. so ill take a gear induced injury any day twice, than a road induced one without gear.
Same goes for helmet. I would probably be faceless if it wasn't for mine.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Solve my Helmet Debate - 1/24/2008 4:49:10 PM
|
|
|
cbr1000rrick
Posts: 10
Joined: 11/9/2007
Status: offline
|
When I put my bike in the ditch a couple years ago, I went sliding down the ditch face down. While watching grass, dirt and rocks going by my face' I thought to myself "this is kinda cool". If I wasn't wearing a helmet (along with my leathers), I don't feel I would have the same impression of the incident.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Solve my Helmet Debate - 1/24/2008 6:54:15 PM
|
|
|
kravguy
Posts: 74
Joined: 11/30/2007
Status: offline
|
ur right...it would have been impressed all over ur face instead of ur helmet...
_____________________________
black '05 600RR
Dennis Kirk flushies
Hotbodies undertail
Sporttech windscreen:chrome w/flames
Pazzo shorties:red/gold
Johar foam grips
OES sliders
|
|
|
|
 Today's Posts
Most Active Topics
Make A Donation
Forum Rules & FAQ
RSS Feeds
Advertising Info
|
Contact Us |
Advertising |
Automotive Directory |
About Us |
Archive |
Honda CBR Motorcycle Links |
Legal |
Privacy Policy |
© CBR Forum
CBR Forum .com is not affiliated with or endorsed by Honda Motor Company.
|
Printable Version
