veggie_lover

How come nobody in Dahon's bike owner's manual wears a helmet, nor does anyone on their youtube video page:

https://www.youtube.com/user/DahonFoldingBikes

Is this typical of most bike manufacturers, i.e not show people wearing helmets?

mconlonx 

US riders are a minority that think recreational/commuter riders ought to wear a helmet. Most of the rest of the world doesn't. Because Dahon is very much an international company, they are simply marketing to the majority of their customers, rather than the minority US market.

veggie_lover

Ok now to open a new can of worms, why doesn't the rest of the world wear helmets ( assuming they can afford to )?

invisiblehand

Why don't you ask this in A&S?

v6v6v6

I was just about to suggest that, too.

veggie_lover

Well do manufacturers of road bikes show everyone without helmets as well? If so , I rest my case.

somnatash

Lalato

I don't wear a helmet and I live in the US.

v6v6v6

I don't know about the vids, but the 2008 owner's manual only shows one person on their folder and we can't see their head anyway (it's a closeup of the bike). It mentions this about helmets, though:

"Always wear an approved helmet when riding your bike, and follow the helmet manufacturer’s instructions for fit, use and care."

Doesn't seem like Dahon has any anti-helmet agenda.

LittlePixel

From a marketing point of view it's concievable that showing their 'quirky' bikes in conjunction with helmets may make dubious would-be punters conclude that the bikes aren't safe with those strange new-fangled folding mechanisms. Ergo: showing carefree, white teethed happy bikers with no helmets gives the best impression of a bike that wants to look as hassle free, fun and easy to use and safe as humanly possible.

BB49

If you do not promote helmets, you are anti-helmet?

mikesdca

Quick, write letters of outrage to Dahon for putting forth the idea that riding without a helmet is acceptable. The horror of it. Form your Neighborhood Association of Concerned Parents and discuss how best to bring down this evil empire.

somnatash

He who is not for me is against me

-=(8)=-

Civilized countries dont feel the need to violently act out on cyclists.

Only declasse US kutlure tacitly OK's the use of violence against cyclists
because vehicular dominion determines an SUV driver is more important
than a cyclist as is the SUV's right get to, and wait at the next red lite without
you inconveniencing them. Many times the helmets spare people injury whilst
bouncing off the front of said important persons vehicle.

brakemeister

when the Hon family rides their bikes they usually wear helmets ....

thor

to me it just doesnt look right to see the folks without helmets. I dont gospel to use them, each to its own, but I didnt like the helmetless adds either

BikeLite

Look at some climbing magazines. They often show nobody wearing a climbing helmet in their pics.

Bridgestoned

It's pure and simple marketing. Flashy helmets, like tight lycra may deter first time bike buyers. Do I need to look like a 'pro' just to ride my bike? (although some do)

And why promote someone else's product? (there are some marketeers like that)

Whether to wear a helmet? Aah,it's like deciding to wear a condom. Your choice, you decide. Suffer the consequences....

datako

This must be stamped out. Next thing Dahon will be encouraging cyclists to exhale carbon dioxide...

chagzuki

It's to do with the notion of 'freedom' too, I'd imagine, i.e. the whole folding idea is about not being encumbered by physical objects.

PDR

I resisted buying a helmet for a long time due to the way they look and only bought one when I picked up the Dahon MU SL and found myself travelling fast down the hill to the railway station on busy city streets. If I’m going slow on quiet streets I usually hang in from the handle bars.
I bought it to protect my head and not for its looks...... to be honest I still think bike helmets make the wearer look like a knob due to their uncanny resemblance to the head of a penis.

arpeggio42

a piece in the Guardian on Mon said wearing helmets could be more dangerous than not wearing one. A travel psychologist(?) Dr Ian Walker found bareheaded motorists gave him a wider berth, but on wearing a helmet he got hit twice! he said 'that a behaviour intended to reduce risk(ie helmet) might increase ones overall level of risk cos drivers react to its presence by changing their behaviour'
i don't wear one because they only offer protection from a fall from a stationery bicycle(!) and i tried wearing one and found it restrictive (ie dangerous)

ShinyBiker

The enemy of my enemy is my friend.

Simple Simon

I dont wear a helmet, but I make my kids wear one - do as I say, not as i do

mconlonx 

Gee, and I thought you were just curious and asking a question. I had no idea you were making a case or had some kind of agenda...

Road bikes are racing bikes. Racing rules state that competitors must wear helmets. As a result, the marketing follows suit--they are playing on people who want to look like a pro, will buy a pro bike, and all the pro kit... including the helmet of their choice. It's part of the pro uniform, part of the pro culture, so marketing to people who want to emulate pros, they will certainly use helmets in their marketing material.

If the manufacturers of those same road bikes market commuter or liesure bikes as well, there's a good chance that their international marketing material shows people on bikes without helmets, while their US catalogs will show riders with helmets...

veggie_lover

That's exactly why I am confused. Dahon makes many models that are specifically designed for performance. In fact most of their bikes perform very well speed-wise. So why not show more serious people riding them than just dainty people taking it for a stroll through the park? Now if Dahon bikes were just designed for parks then it would make sense. But they are not, hence my confusion..