Replace a helmet solely based on age?
06-06-11 | 09:44 PM
#1
Thread Starter
If I own it, I ride it
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 5,685
Likes: 820
From: Cardinal Country
Bikes: Lejeune(14), Raleigh, Raysport, Jan De Reus, Gazelle, Masi, B. Carré(4), Springfield, Greg Lemond, Andre Bertin, Schwinn Paramount
Replace a helmet solely based on age?
The question arose in my mind while reading a post in another thread.
re: bold italic statement. And not picking on RobbieTunes.
I find this an interesting statement and wonder on what this is based. I have heard others say the same thing. Why would a helmet that has not been crashed and has been well cared for need to be replaced solely due to age?
Giro and Bell (owns Giro) will supply pads, many times free, even though they know your helmets are outdated and should be replaced.
Since I had a similar experience with Giro as Julian did, I've bought a new Giro (Livestrong) helmet. I have one about to be "retired" and will go Giro.
Since I had a similar experience with Giro as Julian did, I've bought a new Giro (Livestrong) helmet. I have one about to be "retired" and will go Giro.
I find this an interesting statement and wonder on what this is based. I have heard others say the same thing. Why would a helmet that has not been crashed and has been well cared for need to be replaced solely due to age?
06-06-11 | 09:51 PM
#2
Senior Member
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 416
Likes: 1
From: california
Bikes: a heavy old steel Frankenbike Gitane, a cruiser (not something I'd buy for myself, but it was a gift, what can you do?), a Greg Lemond, a Specialized Stumpjumper(old, steel, fully rigid), and a Specialized Safire
Something about UV exposure breaks them down over time. I've heard they should be replaced every 3-7 years even if you haven't crashed it.
06-06-11 | 09:58 PM
#3
Ellensburg, WA
Joined: Aug 2008
Posts: 3,791
Likes: 706
From: Lewiston, ID
Bikes: See my signature
We've got a couple that are over 10 yrs old that kids have worn and other than some fading I don't see anything wrong with them.
__________________
1984 Gitane Tour de France; 1982 Nishiki Marina 12; 1984 Peugeot PSV; 1993 Trek 950 mtb; 1991 GT Karakoram, 1983 Vitus 979; Colnago Super, 1989 Spectrum Titanium,
1984 Gitane Tour de France; 1982 Nishiki Marina 12; 1984 Peugeot PSV; 1993 Trek 950 mtb; 1991 GT Karakoram, 1983 Vitus 979; Colnago Super, 1989 Spectrum Titanium,
06-06-11 | 10:18 PM
#4
Senior Member
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 416
Likes: 1
From: california
Bikes: a heavy old steel Frankenbike Gitane, a cruiser (not something I'd buy for myself, but it was a gift, what can you do?), a Greg Lemond, a Specialized Stumpjumper(old, steel, fully rigid), and a Specialized Safire
The 3-7 year figure is probably based on how an average person uses the helmet, how often they ride, and whether they'd notice when the helmet starts to degrade.
I don't think you can actually tell just by looking at it whether the material is breaking down, but they all get UV exposure when you ride outside even if you're storing the helmet indoors. What that does exactly, I'm not sure. In any case, I haven't thought much about it since I've never used a helmet longer than for about 4 years. Usually I crash and break it sometime around when I would have probably had to replace it anyway.
I don't think you can actually tell just by looking at it whether the material is breaking down, but they all get UV exposure when you ride outside even if you're storing the helmet indoors. What that does exactly, I'm not sure. In any case, I haven't thought much about it since I've never used a helmet longer than for about 4 years. Usually I crash and break it sometime around when I would have probably had to replace it anyway.
06-06-11 | 10:19 PM
#5
Thread Starter
If I own it, I ride it
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 5,685
Likes: 820
From: Cardinal Country
Bikes: Lejeune(14), Raleigh, Raysport, Jan De Reus, Gazelle, Masi, B. Carré(4), Springfield, Greg Lemond, Andre Bertin, Schwinn Paramount
My helmet, sad to say, does not have all that much head time. It is wiped clean when necessary and stored inside. The only problem is the pads and rather than get new ones, my sweat band that I wear anyway serves the purpose. It seems to me the helmet manufacturers are just trying to make it seem necessary. If they were to come up with something better, that's different. But all I see is lighter, maybe better ventilation, but no greater protection.
06-07-11 | 03:24 AM
#6
Senior Member
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 12,564
Likes: 2,739
From: Thunder Bay, Ontario, Canada - burrrrr!
Bikes: 1958 Rabeneick 120D, 1968 Legnano Gran Premio, 196? Torpado Professional, 2000 Marinoni Piuma
I found this explanation on another forum. I like the answer and it might help shed light on the OPs question...
1. Exposure to ultra violet radiation (sunlight) and heat in storage.
2. Expulsion of stored gases in the expanded polystyrene material that is designed to absorb the energy of an impact by deforming upon impact. E.P.S. (Expanded Poly Styrene) is the "styrofoam" like material used in bicycle helmets. The helmet is then usually covered with an injection molded polystyrene (not expanded with gas, just regular hard plastic) shell. Increasingly some lightweight, high performance helmets such as the Giro Ionos used an intergrated, molded-in skeletal structure of polystyrene for increased structural integrity. These interior components do not assist in energy absorption during impacts. E.P.S. is basically plastic infused with gases to "puff it up" forming gas voids that compress upon impact. The gas leeches out of the polystyrene over time, reducing the helmet's ability to absorb impact and making it less protective- hence the three year replacement necessity with some models and brands.
3. Overall wear of suspension components such as chin straps, buckles, sizing pads and adjustable hat band sizing components. These things just wear out, especially with frequent use, adjustment, buckling and unbuckling and perspiration residue.
Bottom line: Replacing your helmet in compliance with manufacturer's recommendations is not marketing or some veiled attempt at selling you a new helmet every three years. It is good common sense based on independent engineering tests performed by scientific testing agencies not involved in the helmet sales industry. Generally, they are the ones imposing the recommendations for replacement to reduce liability insurance costs for manufacturers- it isn't the manufactuer necessarily making the recommendations.
2. Expulsion of stored gases in the expanded polystyrene material that is designed to absorb the energy of an impact by deforming upon impact. E.P.S. (Expanded Poly Styrene) is the "styrofoam" like material used in bicycle helmets. The helmet is then usually covered with an injection molded polystyrene (not expanded with gas, just regular hard plastic) shell. Increasingly some lightweight, high performance helmets such as the Giro Ionos used an intergrated, molded-in skeletal structure of polystyrene for increased structural integrity. These interior components do not assist in energy absorption during impacts. E.P.S. is basically plastic infused with gases to "puff it up" forming gas voids that compress upon impact. The gas leeches out of the polystyrene over time, reducing the helmet's ability to absorb impact and making it less protective- hence the three year replacement necessity with some models and brands.
3. Overall wear of suspension components such as chin straps, buckles, sizing pads and adjustable hat band sizing components. These things just wear out, especially with frequent use, adjustment, buckling and unbuckling and perspiration residue.
Bottom line: Replacing your helmet in compliance with manufacturer's recommendations is not marketing or some veiled attempt at selling you a new helmet every three years. It is good common sense based on independent engineering tests performed by scientific testing agencies not involved in the helmet sales industry. Generally, they are the ones imposing the recommendations for replacement to reduce liability insurance costs for manufacturers- it isn't the manufactuer necessarily making the recommendations.
__________________
"98% of the bikes I buy are projects".
"98% of the bikes I buy are projects".
06-07-11 | 05:05 AM
#8
Senior Member
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 2,766
Likes: 7
From: Cleveland,Ohio
I would think that the UV would degrade a helmet over time and a 5-7 year replacement cycle sounds reasonable to me. I kept my first helmet for what seemed like an eternity, and then the replacement one got crashed and replaced. Since I have taken a few spills (car and pedestrian and other bike rider caused) having a known fully functional helmet is a pretty high priority to me so I choose to think of the helmet as a consumable like a set of tires or brake pads.
06-07-11 | 05:43 AM
#10
Senior Member
Joined: Apr 2006
Posts: 2,471
Likes: 1
From: Gig Harbor, WA
Bikes: Surly Long Haul Trucker, Gary Fisher Hoo Koo E Koo, Dahon Mu P 24 , Ritchey Breakaway Cross, Rodriguez Tandem, Wheeler MTB
I have a tendency to not trust company advice to purchase their products due to time constraints, but I believe if one rides regularly, swapping a helmet after 5 or so years is likely going to happen in any case. And as nlerner suggested, its fairly cheap insurance.
06-07-11 | 06:15 AM
#11
Senior Member
Joined: Apr 2010
Posts: 694
Likes: 1
From: Forked River, NJ
Bikes: 1973 Peugeot UE-8, 1985 Schwinn Voyageur, 2010 Trek 1.2, 2012 Bianchi Siempre
Good advice. I believe I'll adopt the 5 year policy. You don't want to find out your helmet isn't at 100% when you're going 10mph over the handlebars!
06-07-11 | 07:22 AM
#12
Thread Starter
If I own it, I ride it
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 5,685
Likes: 820
From: Cardinal Country
Bikes: Lejeune(14), Raleigh, Raysport, Jan De Reus, Gazelle, Masi, B. Carré(4), Springfield, Greg Lemond, Andre Bertin, Schwinn Paramount
Indeed. And for me looking at #1 and the fact my helmet is often left in the car during the summer, then I guess I will invest in a new brain bucket.
06-07-11 | 08:08 AM
#14
Banned.
Joined: Dec 2007
Posts: 27,199
Likes: 1,462
First thing they asked me was the model and year sticker in the helmets.
Of course, one had a sticker that said it needed replacing after X time.
For a second, I realized they may have a liability problem supporting what they consider an "out of date" helmet.
I admitted they were both pretty old, but in good shape, fit, and I liked them.
They sent the pads for newer helmets, but they worked.
I tend to think the real stress is on the straps, connectors, and clips, over time.
I know the straps on one of mine are stretched out, from use and repeated washings to get the salt off.
When the adjustment mechanism on the back gets slippery, and the straps start to go, I simply get rid of it when the pads go.
If it weren't for liability, I'd donate them, but we've been through that around here, and it's best to cut them in half and dispose of them.
I flipped a bike last summer and broke my arm, cracked the helmet a bit in the back. It went to the landfill.
Of course, one had a sticker that said it needed replacing after X time.
For a second, I realized they may have a liability problem supporting what they consider an "out of date" helmet.
I admitted they were both pretty old, but in good shape, fit, and I liked them.
They sent the pads for newer helmets, but they worked.
I tend to think the real stress is on the straps, connectors, and clips, over time.
I know the straps on one of mine are stretched out, from use and repeated washings to get the salt off.
When the adjustment mechanism on the back gets slippery, and the straps start to go, I simply get rid of it when the pads go.
If it weren't for liability, I'd donate them, but we've been through that around here, and it's best to cut them in half and dispose of them.
I flipped a bike last summer and broke my arm, cracked the helmet a bit in the back. It went to the landfill.
06-07-11 | 10:07 AM
#17
Senior Member
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 7,239
Likes: 8
From: Bay Area, Calif.
I found this explanation on another forum. I like the answer and it might help shed light on the OPs question...
"...It is good common sense based on independent engineering tests performed by scientific testing agencies not involved in the helmet sales industry. Generally, they are the ones imposing the recommendations for replacement to reduce liability insurance costs for manufacturers- it isn't the manufactuer necessarily making the recommendations."
"...It is good common sense based on independent engineering tests performed by scientific testing agencies not involved in the helmet sales industry. Generally, they are the ones imposing the recommendations for replacement to reduce liability insurance costs for manufacturers- it isn't the manufactuer necessarily making the recommendations."
https://www.bhsi.org/biker.htm
06-07-11 | 10:14 AM
#18
Senior Member
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 561
Likes: 0
From: Vermont
Just did some quick math and figure my helmet has about 3000 hours on it. Or rather on me. Probably couldn't hurt to replace it. I've actually been meaning to for a few years. Every time it gets hot and my head feels like it's frying, I say 'I need something more vented'.
~kn
~kn
06-07-11 | 10:24 AM
#19
Senior Member
Joined: Oct 2010
Posts: 8,840
Likes: 2,859
I would think that IF there were legitimate tests out there proving that something like this were true then CF riders (myself included) would take notice and at least get educated on the pros and cons. However, judging by your response I guess I would be wrong. It seems there would be a contingent that would stick their head in the sand.
That is IF, there were tests out there. I know every "death stem" I have came across has quickly been replaced.
That is IF, there were tests out there. I know every "death stem" I have came across has quickly been replaced.
06-07-11 | 10:29 AM
#20
Senior Member
Joined: Jul 2009
Posts: 11,128
Likes: 39
Bikes: 1986 Alan Record Carbonio, 1985 Vitus Plus Carbone 7, 1984 Peugeot PSV, 1972 Line Seeker, 1986(est.) Medici Aerodynamic (Project), 1985(est.) Peugeot PY10FC
Plastics/polymers used on helmets degrade both with UV exposure and outgassing. So although I think it is a slower process, it is possible that outgassing of plasticizers can possibly affect the helmet's performance as the rigid shell parts becom more brittle and might not provide the function intended in a crash, which is to keep the crushable expanded foam components of the helemet and the whole helmet in one piece. The expanded foam portion of the helmet degenerates similarly. Anyone can remember seeing simialr expanded foam materials eposed to the lelments for long periods of time, like as found in junk on beaches turns into something that is dried out and frangible into foam dust. Now whether one can pinpoint the amount of time when a helmet degrades to uselessness is a question, but the rough estimates put out there by helemt manufacturers or around 3 to 5 years is, I suspect, well within the safe side to minimize liability/litigation.....plus maybe flavored with a bit of marketing to urge some turnover and new sales.
Chombi
Chombi
Last edited by Chombi; 06-07-11 at 10:34 AM.
06-07-11 | 10:39 AM
#21
Crawlin' up, flyin' down
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 6,726
Likes: 4,374
From: Democratic Peoples' Republic of Berkeley
Bikes: 1967 Paramount; 1982-ish Ron Cooper; 1978 Eisentraut "A"; two mid-1960s Cinelli Speciale Corsas; and others in various stages of non-rideability.
06-07-11 | 10:46 AM
#22
Senior Member
Joined: Jul 2009
Posts: 11,128
Likes: 39
Bikes: 1986 Alan Record Carbonio, 1985 Vitus Plus Carbone 7, 1984 Peugeot PSV, 1972 Line Seeker, 1986(est.) Medici Aerodynamic (Project), 1985(est.) Peugeot PY10FC
06-07-11 | 10:47 AM
#23
Banned.
Joined: Dec 2007
Posts: 27,199
Likes: 1,462
There's an old motorcycle study out there, conducted when the helmet makers wanted people to stop buying them at Kmart.
The study showed it mattered less which helmet than if there was a helmet being used. I remember one of the cycle magazines saying something like "$50,000 study shows what a $2.95 hammer can show," or something like that.
I look mine over pretty good each spring, and it seems like one of them always has to go, maybe because they look pretty bad by the end of a hot summer. I wear cycling caps under the helmet on hot days, and these tend to tear up the pads more.
The study showed it mattered less which helmet than if there was a helmet being used. I remember one of the cycle magazines saying something like "$50,000 study shows what a $2.95 hammer can show," or something like that.
I look mine over pretty good each spring, and it seems like one of them always has to go, maybe because they look pretty bad by the end of a hot summer. I wear cycling caps under the helmet on hot days, and these tend to tear up the pads more.
06-07-11 | 10:56 AM
#24
Senior Member
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 1,248
Likes: 6
From: Hills of Iowa
Bikes: all diamond frames
I would think that IF there were legitimate tests out there proving that something like this were true then CF riders (myself included) would take notice and at least get educated on the pros and cons. However, judging by your response I guess I would be wrong. It seems there would be a contingent that would stick their head in the sand.
That is IF, there were tests out there. I know every "death stem" I have came across has quickly been replaced.
That is IF, there were tests out there. I know every "death stem" I have came across has quickly been replaced.
06-07-11 | 12:25 PM
#25
Senior Member
Joined: Oct 2010
Posts: 8,840
Likes: 2,859
I must have misunderstood so I apologize!
So what I am reading is that I MUST go out and get a new helmet since mine is about 10 years old. And when my wife see me with the brand new shiny one on I can point to this study and thread? I wonder if that would work for other goodies such as bikes, parts, clothing, etc?
So what I am reading is that I MUST go out and get a new helmet since mine is about 10 years old. And when my wife see me with the brand new shiny one on I can point to this study and thread? I wonder if that would work for other goodies such as bikes, parts, clothing, etc?