I had three old helmets (that had never crashed). I put them in the car, and when I saw someone riding without a helmet, I asked them "Want a free helmet?" It didn't take long to "recycle" them this way.

That's not how the outer shell works - it's not anywhere near thick or strong enough to do that. It's there to keep the stryofoam from catching on the street when you wipe out. (it also looks cooler, too.)

I just replaced my two-year-old helmet with a Scott TAAL, with MIPS. It fits a lot better than my old helmet, and hopefully adds another level of protection.

To the OP, rather than going with the wide range of comments here, from 2 to 22 years, contact the manufacturer of your helmet and ask them. For me, my newest Giro is 3 years old, and the other Giro is 7 years old. Have replaced padding in both a few times.

Helmet? I don't need no stinking helmet! Since I rarely wear a helmet, only for race, club rides and organized ride events, I have several I rotate wearing. Plus I always clean mine after each ride, wiping off the sweat and bugs that collect on it. So to me they seem to last for several years in good working order. It has always been a rule of thumb to replace every 3 years under normal use, (no crash, or extreme drops and such). It's your noggin, protect as you see fit.
Cheers

But the manufacturer has a bit of a conflict of interest.

For all you guys writing about your smelly helmets, I suggest you wash them every once in a while.

The Snell Foundation thinks that they do break down over time, and recommends replacement every 5 years.

https://www.smf.org/helmetfaq#aWhyReplace

No idea how much data they have to back that up, but it seems like a reasonable time frame.

I wonder if Snell receives any grants from helmet companies.
Sounds like a racket to me.

They claim they're independent. However, they get a fee for every helmet that uses their sticker, so they do have skin in the game

"Snell-direct-cost is only a small part of cost related to making Snell certified helmets. Once a helmet has been accepted into the Snell certification program, the Foundation charges the manufacturer for test fees, acquisition cost of random samples, and for each Snell Certification label that goes into each certified helmet"

While there may not be any improprieties there, I'd say that there is at least a hint of impropriety.
And that hint of impropriety should be factored in when considering their recommendation.

It makes sense to me that riding out in the sun, that UV could have some long-term harmful effects. I think they may also be considering how many times they get dropped on the garage floor, thrown into the back of trucks, etc, plus a little bit of CYA/just in case...

Agreed. Note that they cite no evidence supporting the recommendation even though it would be easy for them to run some old helmets through their standard tests.

[Have two helmets, one is 37 years old and the other is 20. Might consider getting a third once MIPS has some real world data on effectiveness.]

I'd like to see that done.
Be interesting, I'm sure

Just don't put it in the washer.

Also, its not a hard and fast rule, just their best guess recommendation - they acknowledge there are a lot of factors involved.
But mainly this...
"...experience indicates there will be a noticeable improvement in the protective characteristic of helmets over a five-year period due to advances in materials, designs, production methods and the standards. Thus, the recommendation for five-year helmet replacement is a judgment call stemming from a prudent safety philosophy."

The idea being that helmets in 5 yrs will likely be more advanced, just as the latest generation MIPS helmets today are (arguably) better than what we had 5 yrs ago. Of course, this assumes the industry is actually pushing the technology and not just working on new vent designs and paint jobs.

Dishwasher seems like it would be acceptable. Washing machine on the other hand doesn't seem like a good idea.

When your dog eats it.... as mine did.

How often?

...whenever Contador changes teams....

Pics or it didn't happen. If no pics of helmet damage a photo of the dog may suffice.

From the Intergoogle (scroll down):

https://autofree.blogspot.com/2009_07_01_archive.html

That fee is necessary to pay for the testing procedures, not a bribe, if it was a bribe every helmet manufacture on the planet would be paying to get their stickers. So no, they do test the helmets and not take bribes, remember too that they test a slew of helmets for all sorts of sports, if it ever was proven that they took bribes they would be opening a serious can of whipass lawsuits going against them.

Found a crack in my helmet just on the weekend, but it has never taken a "crash" impact. New one on its way.

So your saying I shouldn't still be using my Sub-6 and Hammerhead...?


The V-1pro is still good to go though...right.

Oh well, then I guess their word is gold and no proof is needed to support their claims.