So...

Cycling stuff is expensive. Some things worth it to me. I was willing to spend a little more on saddle, sunglasses, clothing etc.

But helmets? If the $45 helmet exceeds safety requirements, some even having that questionable MiPS. What's the argument for $400 helmet? Is it just fashion or are they actually safer? Are they that much well vented?

Best Bell Stratus $150. POC/KASK $400. Really? I don't get it.

Why look any further for an answer?

You'll willingly spend more for sunglasses but balk at spending more for a helmet.

Does not compute.

I doubt expensive helmets are much safer but they are going to be better vented and more aero.

With the exception of the new MIPS (which probably makes a difference), the main issue between a budget helmet and an expensive one are going to be in fit, finish, weight, and comfort. Protection levels probably roughly the same.

Helmets can be such a personal fit issue that they are one of the few items I strongly suggest people NOT buy online but try on in person. Same goes for shoes.

Helmet I'm looking at is significantly more than the sunglasses.

Which helmet are you looking at specifically? Have you tried it on in a shop to confirm it fits and is comfy?

Depends on personal predilection. Some people swear by the better ventilation, lighter, more style. Personally I don't see it, and for me even your $45 helmet is overpriced overkill.

A helmet with MIPS technology to mitigate rotational injuries is worth some extra IMO. Worth an extra $150 - $300, not to me but that all depends on a person's individual risk tolerance.

Subscribed.

Last year I looked for a light (easy on the neck) and well vented (100* here) helmet, and wasn't really concerned with price.


After much searching I decided on the $50 Giro Foray.


Then my bike shop started carrying the Bontrager Ballista which is supposed to be the best ventilated "aero/road" helmet that rivals sliced bread in its best-ness.


I bought one and wore it once. It was like a pressure cooker compared to the Giro, so I sold it and still wear the Giro.


https://www.amazon.com/Giro-Foray-He...rds=giro+foray

That would be the next step. Bell Stratus seems nice. But certainly open to others. Just curious for those who spent $400 on their boutique helmet, what is so special. They aren't particularly light and as poster above noticed, not the best ventilated. Seems to be vanity so far.

As far as safety goes, the only thing that matters is safety certification from independent authorities. As of today that means CE EN1078 and CPSC. MIPS certification is not independent, and the testing performed is determined by MIPS themselves, and as far as I can tell, there is zero independent evidence that it provides measurable safety benefit.

Other than that, the only other factors that come in to play with a helmet are fit (the most important in my opinion), weight, ventilation, and style.

Pick a helmet that is certified, that feels good on your head, and that you think looks cool. Beyond that, whatever makes you feel good about spending all that money.

I had a $50 Bell Volt for the first 2-3 years I got into road bikes. No issues with it, never felt especially hot, really didn't think about it any more/less than the Giro Atmos I have now which was more than twice as expensive as the Bell when I purchased it a couple years ago. Really, I just wanted a black helmet rather than white.

I tend to agree that aesthetics/vanity play the largest role in helmet choice. It did for me. If you really think a Ballista or Air Attack looks cool and have extra $$$, why not? 99.9% of the people who buy them don't ever "need" the aero advantage they offer.

The MIPS thing is open to debate, but they do sell MIPS helmets for under $100.

I want the Lazer Bullet so I can close the vent to inform the 'peleton' when IT IS ABOUT TO GET SERIOUS.

Is a $6,000 bike "worth it"? Is a $6,000 bike 2-times better than a $3,000 bike?

If you can afford a $6,000 (or more!) bike, are you going to be that worried about spending $400 on a helmet?


Just because every helmet meets minimum standards doesn't mean they are all equally good. The problem here is that there is no objective testing beyond the minimum standards.

Can't you send the same message by getting out of the saddle so that they can see it's a Brooks?

I think the point is that there is generally an obvious performance upgrade between a $6000 bike and a $3000 bike. More precise shifting, lighter weight, stiffer frame, more aero, etc.

In the case of helmets, there rarely seems to be much of a performance upgrade between average prices and top-of-the-line. Many times the more expensive helmets aren't any more aero, aren't better vented, aren't any lighter.

I can add my little anecdote that I've crashed with expensive and cheap helmets. One of the most significant impacts I was riding in Utah, caught a goathead in the front tire without noticing, took a corner somewhere around 25-30 mph, the front tire was flat, washed out, and I landed squarely on my forehead (helmet right there). The helmet was a ~$200 Giro, compressed the foam enough that I bruised my brow and got some rash as well. No loss of consciousness, no stars, etc., just changed the tire, got back on the bike, finished my ride, went to the LBS and got a new helmet (Giro, paid ~$130, which I wrecked some years later).

My most recent altercation was with a Ford F-150 almost 2 years ago, wearing a simple $40 "Trek" branded helmet. Same experience as above, with no notable head injuries. Replaced that one with a Propero II.

Anyway, a $40 helmet did just fine, and with the impact I took on my head, wearing no helmet would have been a TBI for sure.

Exactly this was my thought. While a rider like me doesn't need or take advantage all a 5,000+ frame can offer, there is no denying that there is more to offer. Better carbon layup, better carbon, design, more aero, better cable, overall accessory integrations, etc etc. Helmets, considering they have one purpose, protection, the cheapest helmets in US, EU and AU still have to abide by the stringest regulations, still have to guarantee high level of protection. And then you can see helmets like KASK, not particularly light, helmets like POC, not particularly aero, and others just not very well ventilated. The value of these helmets seem largely based on marketing to me.

And anecdotes like this continue to confuse me why $400 helmets are sought after if they don't perform any better. With other cycling gear, I don't need to buy or try to understand the value they have. While I think the name and their ads are moronic, Assos, I can understand where pricetag is coming from. I can't see it from $400 helmets, they aren't using special materials that a $40 bell isn't.

That's a good point.

Expensive helmets are not worth it.

As with most things in cycling, it depends. They all protect your head fairly equally, so the differences are in fit, weight, ventilation, aerodynamics, and looks. And of those factors, some are more important to some riders than others. Find one that works for your priorities and don't be afraid to spend the money. On the other hand, there's no need to waste money on a needlessly expensive helmet. For example, I loved the Specialized S-Works helmet from a few years ago, which was the top of the line then, but found out that the current S3 is essentially the same helmet at a much lower price.

$45 helmet with MIPS?

I'm sincerely asking, not trying to challenge.

Please let me know.


-Tim-

Anecdotes are anecdotes. There are no facts in helmet stories because no one ever offers to repeat the event with varying priced helmets or without one entirely.

Buy whatever your personal risk factor and comfort level is and leave it at that.

Yes, Amazon, PerformanceBike, Ebay, almost all online outlets have them.

$55 Bell Mach MIPS-Equipped Helmet
$30
Bell Draft MIPS Bike Helmet (For Men and Women) - Save 50%