Re: Helmet efficacy test

On 4/8/2025 5:25 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:

On 4/8/2025 3:43 PM, Zen Cycle wrote:

On 4/8/2025 2:52 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:

On 4/8/2025 1:53 PM, Zen Cycle wrote:

On 4/8/2025 12:18 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:

>

If you had a logical reason for driving your bike to the start of a ride while leaving your helmet on the seat instead of protecting your head, you'd give us that reason.

>
I have given that reason several times (it's cleverly hidden in place sight, even in this message). You just don't like the answer.

>
No, you're playing games. If you had a good reason explaining why you drive without wearing the helmet you have in the car, you'd have given it explicitly.

>
I did, several times.

Since I apparently missed it, why not state it concisely here and now?
>

>
I've decided the benefits far outweigh the detriments ("if there comes a time when you do crash, a helmet/seatbelt can be extremely beneficial.")

 That's a rather vague and very general statement, especially with the very low standard of "can be."

As noted previously, I answered the question, just not to your satisfaction, which is irrelevant.

 It's vague enough to apply equally well to knee pads, elbow pads, chest protectors, steel toe shoes, hearing protection and probably much more.

yup

It certainly doesn't address why you use that to justify a seatbelt but not a motoring helmet.

You don't see the detriments of trying to drive while wearing a bike helmet?

 

--
Add xx to reply