Re: Helmet efficacy test

On Tue, 8 Apr 2025 13:37:38 -0400, Frank Krygowski
<frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:

On 4/8/2025 12:34 PM, AMuzi wrote:

 
In fairness, the present bicycle helmet standards are not enforced by
any law

>
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bicycle_helmet#History_of_standards
>
"United States Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) created its own
mandatory standard for all bicycle helmets sold in the United States,
which took effect in March 1999.[1]"
>

The truth is more probably that the present impact amelioration levels
are clustered around the nexus of weight, price, vision and
effectiveness where some viable volume of sales will support them.

>
When the (eventual) CPSC standard was first written, back in the 1970s,
there were immediate criticisms that it was far, far too weak. (And that
was long before the importance of rotational acceleration was realized.)
Many articles complained that it produced no effective protection
against crashes with cars, which have always been the main cause of
bicyclist deaths.
>
The defense by the standard writers was "This is the best we can
practically do." IOW, anything more protective would be to large, too
heavy, too unventilated to convince people to wear.
>
So we're left with helmets that lots of people think are not too
bothersome to wear, but that offer insufficient protection for most
serious crashes.

If that's a problem for you, let me suggest:

https://www.revzilla.com/motorcycle/bell-qualifier-helmet

--
C'est bon
Soloman