Helmets - are you really covered?
- Thread starter jimnobob
- Start date
Dunno, how often did you want your colostomy bag emptied?
moorey
call me Mia
That's for the nursing home to worry about. :clap2:Dunno, how often did you want your colostomy bag emptied?
brendonj
Likes Dirt
I was looking into all of this recently cause I just bought a new lid. From what I read, the performance requirements of the Australian Standard and the other standards (eg snell) is the same. The difference with the Australian standard is that it requires testing (I think destructive) of a sample (helmet or material - not sure) from each batch to ensure that the materials used to make the helmet are the same or better than the one used in the performance test. Whereas the Autralian standard requires every batch to be tested, the other standards only require random testing / auditing.
Small difference really. So a helmet that does not pass is probably just not being tested every batch. But what this does mean is that extra testing could be being performed by and Oz distributor to get the helmets into Australia. Not sure though..... could all be happening back at the manufacturer. There also may be a few other bits of documentation that the distributor needs to attach to the helmet - safety warnings and the like to comply to the Oz std.
Anarchist
Likes Dirt
So how fast does a helmet degrade due to UV exposure? Or exposure to pollutants, smelly farts, cat wee, etc? Let's all break out the 1980s Stackhats, they MUST be safe.
moorey
call me Mia
The inside of my helmet isnt exposed to UV, hasn't taken any hits, has been regularly washed out to rid it of the nasty sweat and abrasive dirt, and I'm yet to hear credible evidence that my helmet is up to the task still.
What can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence
Awaiting flaming:tape:
cleeshoy
Eats Squid
I have a mate who still uses a helmet from the early 90's. I think its called an "Atom" - it has that lovely neoprene like material over the top of the helmet. Given its around 18-19 years old, personally, I wouldn't use that thing to protect my head, as I would have thought the sweat, etc would ahev degraded something in the helmet, but each to their own I guess
Anarchist
Likes Dirt
I like your logic and agree on the evidence point. Along the same lines: A difference that makes no difference is not a difference. Having said all that I'm sure that there are some compelling reasons to replace helmets over a certain period of time as for when that is, definitively, is a tricky question and subject to a whole lot of variability. I bet the manufacturers would like us to renew them with our tyres! So, BOT, what's better an old helmet or a new one that doesn't have a sticker saying it's "safe"? (my bet is, the lawyers among us would say the latter, the prudent ones would say the former)The inside of my helmet isnt exposed to UV, hasn't taken any hits, has been regularly washed out to rid it of the nasty sweat and abrasive dirt, and I'm yet to hear credible evidence that my helmet is up to the task still.
What can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence
Awaiting flaming:tape:
State of the art in 1990:
wombat
Lives in a hole
Close, but not quite; there's a number of tests including hammer impact tests and drop tests that are all about energy absorption as well as all the ones for staps and shit. I can't quote exactly because my copy of the standards has expired, and I cbf printing it. That said, I do remember that I have some pretty big concerns over the areas they test. There's no way I'll believe that those 'uni-size' helmets with big retention rings can do the same job as a shell that's actually the right size, and I think the fact that they get the stamp may have something to do with the fact that the impact tests are centred on the front half of the helmet.
I think you're spot on about the cost of helmets for testing though, I believe it's something like 20 or 50 helmets, of each size required for testing.
shakes
Likes Dirt
Someone gets it!The inside of my helmet isnt exposed to UV, hasn't taken any hits, has been regularly washed out to rid it of the nasty sweat and abrasive dirt, and I'm yet to hear credible evidence that my helmet is up to the task still.
What can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence
Awaiting flaming:tape:
To some of the arguments above, if you bust you femur wearing a non AS helmet you will get paid insurance as the helmet cannot be reasonably argued to have caused or amplified the injury. You may however be denied some or all of your claim if you suffered head/brain/neck injurys wearing the same helmet. You will be unlucky but definately possible.
To you fools that think helmets don't get altered for the aus market you've been given an example above and your still arguing? It may not be many but it does and can happen.
Some interesting responses that are good food for thought.
The other thing I've just realised and based on the comments above is that the ad in question is using "scare tactics" by not being totally up front.
This ad states the following "In Australia, its illegal to ride a bike without an Australian standard approved helmet.". It does not state anywhere that this applies only to riding on the road yet this ad is in a mountain bike magazine. Perhaps a small detail but when it comes to riding and racing off road then this rule does not generally apply.
I still find this ad offensive in its approach - far too heavy handed.
The other thing I've just realised and based on the comments above is that the ad in question is using "scare tactics" by not being totally up front.
This ad states the following "In Australia, its illegal to ride a bike without an Australian standard approved helmet.". It does not state anywhere that this applies only to riding on the road yet this ad is in a mountain bike magazine. Perhaps a small detail but when it comes to riding and racing off road then this rule does not generally apply.
I still find this ad offensive in its approach - far too heavy handed.
jayjay3032
Likes Bikes
So you think an insurance company will pay up if you're injured while breaking the law? Good luck with that one...
Also definitely* and injuries*
shakes
Likes Dirt
I think you will find that alot of racing rules will refer back to australian law. As those rules have been tried and tested and are easy to enforce.
shakes
Likes Dirt
I KNOW they will pay up, I have seen it first hand on multiple occasions. Re-read what I have written.So you think an insurance company will pay up if you're injured while breaking the law? Good luck with that one...
Also definitely* and injuries*
As a regular racer and somebody that ensures I am covered with this respect I have not once had to wear an Oz standards helmet. The Mont tried to do this last year but backtracked and then decided to relax the rules - I'm not sure if they are enforcing them this year as they had originally stated they would do. Of course I can't speak for all races but would be keen to understand which ones are doing this and if there is a trend to enforce the Oz standards.
pharmaboy
Eats Squid
just like they dont pay up if you break the law in your car and have a crash - you know, fail to giveway, and they'll just walk away? LOLSo you think an insurance company will pay up if you're injured while breaking the law? Good luck with that one...
Also definitely* and injuries*
Anarchist
Likes Dirt
This happened at the Garmin 24hr race last year. No sticker = no race. Even if it is a well known helmet brand or model that is sold in Australia (and is structurally identical to an overseas bought one minus the sticker). I find this absurd.
I have troubles with the minute details that legislators and litigators will seek out to create fear. Has this actually been tested in court? I would really like to see an bona-fide example of an insurance company or other such agency (like the TAC or the police) arguing that because a particular helmet, bought overseas, doesn't have a AUS STD sticker BUT is otherwise available in this country with the sticker, that it does not do the same job, equally well. I'm sure that insurance companies may well try to weasel out of paying under whatever clause or minute detail they can, but in this case they'd have a difficult time of not paying.
If the helmet was bought overseas and only complies with a foreign standard, then that is a different story. It may well be suitable and functional but the argument in the case of relevant (head and/or neck) injury would be far more complex.
shakes
Likes Dirt
Hands up who is willing to take a dive and suffer minor temporary brain damage wearing a non ASA helmet so they can have their theory tested in court?
Even if you do win the case is it worth the 2years or more of stress from the court proceedings and financial stresses in the meantime because you can't work?
What's the most you'll save... $70-$80?
Even if you do win the case is it worth the 2years or more of stress from the court proceedings and financial stresses in the meantime because you can't work?
What's the most you'll save... $70-$80?
For the record I am not a lawyer, not an expert, recognised or other, this is my opinion only based on my interpretation of what I have learnt over the years and discussing this with many so it merely what I reckon, and remember the LAW is the LAW so you make your own call and the stds is here for a reason, but what is that reason now? (sorry had to chuck that in).
Me, I am a XC MTBkr who also rides Road. My summary understanding of what I reckon is that in Aust we don’t get all the helmets because of the expensive process is batch testing to secure the Aust Stds Sticker of approval. That is, importers submit multiple helmets over a period of time in a testing process to ensure the quality threshold is met. For example in XC you don’t tend to see the top-line Giro Aeon or MET Synthesis here as they would both retail $400+ if I hazard a guess and the importer has to weigh up the cost of the batch stds process versus how many helmets they sell. Really whether a helmet is available here with its stds sticker depends a lot on this process. Consider also some brands aren’t available here as one importer may no longer be bringing them in and time ensues whilst a new importer steps up or is secured. Also throw in stds changes and helmets that were sold with the old stds sticker as they were on the shelf in your LBS or with distributors. Can you imagine an argument in regard to a helmet you wore that was say 6yo, maintained, washed, never dropped and the box never said you need to replace it in 3years etc etc and you were involved in an accident in which the helmet took the force, did its job, but insurance had to be involved,...well it would have to be a long bow to be pulling out an argument against that helmet.
If you had a helmet that was for example recognised around the world as top line in safety and performance but wasn’t batch tested here in Aust, so did not have the Aust stds endorsement you need to make a guess as to what scenarios you may be inconvenienced if you used one, the decision on risk probability is what you need to consider. Road racing there would be a higher probability that you would be picked up and asked to change your helmet or no race for you, in XC it is remote but you may still be picked up, but remote, again simply due to process of no sticker, not that it may have been unsafe or not capable of meeting the stds via the process. DH you will probably get picked up like Road racing. So in terms of being refused the option to ride, that would happen in the racing environment, I can’t see a copper or council or say State Roads rep pulling you over on the road or in the forest or bush and having a conversation like this.......
OFFICER - “excuse me rider, can you remove your helmet in order for me to check you are using an Aust Stds Endorsed helmet”
RIDER – “sure but you won’t see it as it came off because I sweat like a fat man eating chilly hotdogs in a sauna in the summertime and my sweat ate away all the stickers”
OFFICER – “did you say chilly hotdogs,...oh ah sorry, I meant, please step away from the bike porn, you are not required to say anything, anything you say can and will..................”
JRA - Just riding along on the road on a roadie if you were in an accident you then need to consider whether the helmet comes into the equation and to what extent, did it do its job if your head hit the ground or car etc, or in the worst case did it do its job but something really bad still happened to you and legal and insurance needed to become involved. They would need to prove the helmet was not safe and was a determining factor in what the outcome had been. Insurance companies would have to go a long way to prove a helmet that retails for mega buck overseas and recognised as being safe in Europe, USA etc all of a sudden doesn’t meet the standards here, again the batch testing argument would come into this discussion. Similar on dirt but again less so, but you get my two wheel drift.
Achievement of the Aust Stds Endorsement I believe is largely predicated to protect us for the bulk dumping of less expensive helmets made in areas where quality control is more likely to be questioned and inconsistent.
They would need to argue a long way to prove a $30 helmet here in Aust with a Stds Endorsement Sticker of Approval is going to be more safe that a $400 helmet not currently available locally but purchased from overseas that is a mega brand such as MET or Giro, THE, Bell etc therefore inversely that the expensive overseas purchased helmet is going to be less safe in actual practice situation, as well as then proving that the actual helmet you got was not safe or couldn’t meet the std. Then throw in the helmets that are available here but you bought overseas, that is another argument again, but you can put it into context yourself.
Given the explosion of this global online economy more clarity will need to be provided officially, but when was the last time or first time we heard about an incident involving a helmet without an Aust Stds sticker of Endorsement? People who do use helmets without the Aust stds sticker either are unaware, don’t care or think about it and consider the risk probability and mitigation of the issue being questioned with reference to themselves. It’s not as if we’re talking about wearing a hair net or baseball cap when riding, we’re talking about wearing a built for purpose helmet but considering how it is impacted by a process and the dollar.
When I started riding as a kid we were not compelled to wear helmets, there were no helmets, now I feel naked without a helmet and won’t go anywhere without it. Having just returned from road riding in France and Italy I was in a the vast minority of people wearing a helmet. Whilst off road everyone wore a helmet, on road almost no one wore one, or rather only internationals wore helmets, the locals didn’t. I’d be riding at 2800m amongst the locals and the only one with a helmet. Whilst I can understand climbing for 80mins in mid-summer up a Euro mountain may be more comfortable, you still have to come down. When I asked why no one wore a helmet they said, “we’re not riding MTB, we don’t need it!” Descending @ up top 90km with these guys I am the only one with a helmet. I don’t think it would make much a difference if we all came off @ that speed but I just felt better with my helmet on nonetheless. I’ll always wear one!
This should at least get you thinking so you can feel comfortable with whatever decision you end up making, but I do think people should try and support their LBS where possible here in Aust. You may find if things are tight and if you chat to your LBS and they know you, and know you are loyal to them and are not cashed up, that if you ask they will attempt in many cases to meet or reduce the difference in price of the same helmet against the one on the net.
Have I used an overseas bought helmet, well I have done and I will again, but I also possess locally bought helmets.
Remember, money talks, cash screams and there are many in the value chain locally and around the world from governments, manufacturers, distributors, importers, retailers, insurance companies, lawyers, customers, freight, consumers etc, all who potentially are in line for a cut of the dollar on the item that is the topic of discussion in this thread, and everyone wants a bit more of that dollar. It is reasonable to think these players will have influence, so too do we as consumers within that value chain.
Whatever you decide remember you made the decision and will need to be comfortable with it. This thread is about putting up opinions with information and perspective to help those who may not know what to consider, actually make a decision that makes them feel comfortable.
I’m pretty comfortable.
Mars.
Me, I am a XC MTBkr who also rides Road. My summary understanding of what I reckon is that in Aust we don’t get all the helmets because of the expensive process is batch testing to secure the Aust Stds Sticker of approval. That is, importers submit multiple helmets over a period of time in a testing process to ensure the quality threshold is met. For example in XC you don’t tend to see the top-line Giro Aeon or MET Synthesis here as they would both retail $400+ if I hazard a guess and the importer has to weigh up the cost of the batch stds process versus how many helmets they sell. Really whether a helmet is available here with its stds sticker depends a lot on this process. Consider also some brands aren’t available here as one importer may no longer be bringing them in and time ensues whilst a new importer steps up or is secured. Also throw in stds changes and helmets that were sold with the old stds sticker as they were on the shelf in your LBS or with distributors. Can you imagine an argument in regard to a helmet you wore that was say 6yo, maintained, washed, never dropped and the box never said you need to replace it in 3years etc etc and you were involved in an accident in which the helmet took the force, did its job, but insurance had to be involved,...well it would have to be a long bow to be pulling out an argument against that helmet.
If you had a helmet that was for example recognised around the world as top line in safety and performance but wasn’t batch tested here in Aust, so did not have the Aust stds endorsement you need to make a guess as to what scenarios you may be inconvenienced if you used one, the decision on risk probability is what you need to consider. Road racing there would be a higher probability that you would be picked up and asked to change your helmet or no race for you, in XC it is remote but you may still be picked up, but remote, again simply due to process of no sticker, not that it may have been unsafe or not capable of meeting the stds via the process. DH you will probably get picked up like Road racing. So in terms of being refused the option to ride, that would happen in the racing environment, I can’t see a copper or council or say State Roads rep pulling you over on the road or in the forest or bush and having a conversation like this.......
OFFICER - “excuse me rider, can you remove your helmet in order for me to check you are using an Aust Stds Endorsed helmet”
RIDER – “sure but you won’t see it as it came off because I sweat like a fat man eating chilly hotdogs in a sauna in the summertime and my sweat ate away all the stickers”
OFFICER – “did you say chilly hotdogs,...oh ah sorry, I meant, please step away from the bike porn, you are not required to say anything, anything you say can and will..................”
JRA - Just riding along on the road on a roadie if you were in an accident you then need to consider whether the helmet comes into the equation and to what extent, did it do its job if your head hit the ground or car etc, or in the worst case did it do its job but something really bad still happened to you and legal and insurance needed to become involved. They would need to prove the helmet was not safe and was a determining factor in what the outcome had been. Insurance companies would have to go a long way to prove a helmet that retails for mega buck overseas and recognised as being safe in Europe, USA etc all of a sudden doesn’t meet the standards here, again the batch testing argument would come into this discussion. Similar on dirt but again less so, but you get my two wheel drift.
Achievement of the Aust Stds Endorsement I believe is largely predicated to protect us for the bulk dumping of less expensive helmets made in areas where quality control is more likely to be questioned and inconsistent.
They would need to argue a long way to prove a $30 helmet here in Aust with a Stds Endorsement Sticker of Approval is going to be more safe that a $400 helmet not currently available locally but purchased from overseas that is a mega brand such as MET or Giro, THE, Bell etc therefore inversely that the expensive overseas purchased helmet is going to be less safe in actual practice situation, as well as then proving that the actual helmet you got was not safe or couldn’t meet the std. Then throw in the helmets that are available here but you bought overseas, that is another argument again, but you can put it into context yourself.
Given the explosion of this global online economy more clarity will need to be provided officially, but when was the last time or first time we heard about an incident involving a helmet without an Aust Stds sticker of Endorsement? People who do use helmets without the Aust stds sticker either are unaware, don’t care or think about it and consider the risk probability and mitigation of the issue being questioned with reference to themselves. It’s not as if we’re talking about wearing a hair net or baseball cap when riding, we’re talking about wearing a built for purpose helmet but considering how it is impacted by a process and the dollar.
When I started riding as a kid we were not compelled to wear helmets, there were no helmets, now I feel naked without a helmet and won’t go anywhere without it. Having just returned from road riding in France and Italy I was in a the vast minority of people wearing a helmet. Whilst off road everyone wore a helmet, on road almost no one wore one, or rather only internationals wore helmets, the locals didn’t. I’d be riding at 2800m amongst the locals and the only one with a helmet. Whilst I can understand climbing for 80mins in mid-summer up a Euro mountain may be more comfortable, you still have to come down. When I asked why no one wore a helmet they said, “we’re not riding MTB, we don’t need it!” Descending @ up top 90km with these guys I am the only one with a helmet. I don’t think it would make much a difference if we all came off @ that speed but I just felt better with my helmet on nonetheless. I’ll always wear one!
This should at least get you thinking so you can feel comfortable with whatever decision you end up making, but I do think people should try and support their LBS where possible here in Aust. You may find if things are tight and if you chat to your LBS and they know you, and know you are loyal to them and are not cashed up, that if you ask they will attempt in many cases to meet or reduce the difference in price of the same helmet against the one on the net.
Have I used an overseas bought helmet, well I have done and I will again, but I also possess locally bought helmets.
Remember, money talks, cash screams and there are many in the value chain locally and around the world from governments, manufacturers, distributors, importers, retailers, insurance companies, lawyers, customers, freight, consumers etc, all who potentially are in line for a cut of the dollar on the item that is the topic of discussion in this thread, and everyone wants a bit more of that dollar. It is reasonable to think these players will have influence, so too do we as consumers within that value chain.
Whatever you decide remember you made the decision and will need to be comfortable with it. This thread is about putting up opinions with information and perspective to help those who may not know what to consider, actually make a decision that makes them feel comfortable.
I’m pretty comfortable.
Mars.
Derka Derka
Likes Dirt
Helmet
Mars- that comment on the Chilli dogs cracks me up..still laughing!
Not sure about the insurance stuff on the threat. Doenst insurance mean that if you injure someone else it will cover their costs and not your costs. How does the helmet relate to this unless you have some mega-flash policy that covers every possibility?
Mars- that comment on the Chilli dogs cracks me up..still laughing!
Not sure about the insurance stuff on the threat. Doenst insurance mean that if you injure someone else it will cover their costs and not your costs. How does the helmet relate to this unless you have some mega-flash policy that covers every possibility?