2WheelFury

Read in another thread about how a helmet might have saved the life of one of the guys on here and it got me thinking - how often should one change their helmet? Nobody ever seems to bring that up. Also, are there ratings anywhere about crash/impact resistance?

This subject comes up all the time on motorcycle forums (for good reason) and I'm surprised that it seems kind of neglected here on a cycling forum where head trauma can be just as bad as a motorcycle accident.

Other questions:

1. On motorcycles, the prevailing school of thought is that a helmet should be retired after about 3 years due to inherent breakdown of the closed-cell foam stuff inside. Same logic for bike helmets? Sooner? (Bike helmets are more exposed to the elements).

2. Does sweat compromise the construction of cycling helmets?

3. How snug should they be? I tend to like mine fairly tight (but not "restrictive" tight). I imagine this would be similar to proper motorcycle helmet fitment?

BananaTugger

1. Every three years is what most manufacturers recommend. If the helmet touches the ground in a crash, replace it.

2. Yes.

3. You should be able to do some headbanging hair band moves and have the helmet stay where you put it.

botto 

a new one every 2-3 years is how i roll.

Pharmr

just got a new Giro Pneumo and like others here have stated, the paperwork inside said to replace helmets every 3 years or if sustains and severe impact.

El Pelon

I don't think the word "severe" should be there. My rule is that if it hits the ground, it hits the trash. I go through about one a year based on that alone. Three years ago, I bought 3. Perhaps excessive, but as long as I am spending thousands on bike and gear, I might as well be willing to splurge a few hundred to ensure the continued vitality of the second most important organ in my body.

cccorlew

Having the helmet manufactures tell me how often to replace my helmet reminds me too much of having the diamond industry tell me how much to spend on an engagement ring.

Helmet makers just picked the lowest number they felt they could get away with.

BananaTugger

I've always thought that if UV Rays breakdown the material the helmet is made of, why not slather some sunblock on it a few times a week?

Even so, I end up buying a new helmet every two years.

2WheelFury

That's what I mean - has anyone actually tested the crash resistance of brand new helmets versus those with a couple years on them to see if there's appreciable degradation?

I agree 100% with banana - it's like relying on an auto dealership to recommend your service intervals and when you should buy a new car. Hardly objective - their business is to sell service and cars just like helmet makers' is to sell helmets.

Anyway I don't want to be overly cavalier with my replacement schedule, but I don't want to throw money away unnecessarily either. It'd be nice to know (1) which is the best brand in terms of crash protection and (2) what is the REAL truth regarding replacement interval.

Case in point, there was an objective study done a while back that tested a whole bunch of motorcycle helmets including some of the supposedly "good" ones that cost on order of $400-$500 each. One of the best performers was actually a "cheapie" (the Z1R ZRP-1). Here's a link to the article (it's interesting, especially if you ride motorcycles too) - some of the information might be applicable to bike helmets too. This is the kind of thing I'd love to see for bicycle helmets - just wondering if anyone is aware of such an analysis...

https://www.motorcyclistonline.com/ge...iew/index.html

travkat

Bear in mind that any helmet sold in the united states and or Europe for that matter has to pass the CE as well as other testing in order to make it to market. Most manufacturers recommend 3 years without impact or excessive exposure. This number is perhaps conservative but think about it from their perspective. 1 they get you to buy more helmets 2 and more seriously, if you crash and the helmet fails they are in for some serious litigation and nobody needs that. 3 when they test these helmets they do test from multiple distances and under different forces. The problems arise when you consider how light and breathable the helmets are now. You can go buy a skateboard style or bmx helmet that is made to sustain multiple impacts but they are heavy and don't breathe well. As to which brands have better impact results I would venture that in the realm of lightweight helmets they all fair about the same.
At the end of the day, don't be one of those Freds running around in a 20 year old helmet with a net on it holding its yellowed and decayed styrofoam together for show. I see far too many of those people who are unwilling to invest 50 -200 bucks once every three to five years to protect their noggins.

bigskyTi

Helmets are like bike parts in that the less they weigh the more they cost and sometimes the less rugged they are, which I would think contibutes to your moto test that the cheap ones offer slightly better protection wile they may be less comfortable.
Like the others posted they all must meet a minimum standard, although I'm not really sure how the testing is conducted. Certainly i'm not sure how some of the cheapies remain on your head in a crash.
I replace mine every few years wether it needs it or not. I select Bell Sweep R for its coolness and the way that it fits. That thing will stay on without the strap (though i always buckle up), and only costs like $100. honestly it may be the least expensive bike related part I own, and it is the only one that has chalked up one confirmed saving of my life.
Bottom line, my melon is worth $100 every couple of years, isn't yours?