View Single Post
Old 10-31-05, 08:39 AM
  #4  
peliot
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Arlington, VA
Posts: 50
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
this is actually worth a little explanation. there are two basic types of helmet designs in sports with two different purposes. The first (of which a hockey helmet is an example) is designed to protect the wearer from repeated light blows to the head. As such it is made to ditribute the force of the impact over a larger area but without any damage to the helmet itself. These helmets (football, hockey, lacrosse, etc) have a hard outer shell to dsitribute the force and a thick foam padding which compresses during the blow and then rebounds (the foam provides a greater deceleration distance for the blow, thus reducing the force on the head).
A bike helmet, in contrast, is designed to protect the wearer from one single, violent blow (instead of repeated light shocks). as such it is designed to absorb that impact but at the expense of the helmet itself. WHile bike helmets have some spreading through the use of the outer shell, their primary function is the crush and shatter to absorb the energy of the impact. So after one crash, a bike helmet needs to be replaced.
all in all, bike helmets should not be replaced with hockey helmets, unless you';re bmx-ing or something where you expect a lot of blows to the head. A hockey helmet will not be effective in a very violent collision.
peliot is offline