Concussion prevention and helmets
04-05-18, 07:42 AM
#76
It's MY mountain
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Mt.Diablo
Posts: 10,006
Bikes: Klein, Merckx, Trek
Mentioned: 70 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4360 Post(s)
Liked 3,025 Times
in
1,639 Posts
Even his ultra-conservative caution though, doesn't make any distinction between MIPS and standard helmets. It's a helmet fit thing, not a MIPS functionality thing.
My winter/rain cap is quite a bit more bulky than a Headsweats... I anticipate it won't fit as well under my new MIPS helmet and I'll use my older helmet with the cap... because it'll fit better.
Last edited by DiabloScott; 04-05-18 at 07:56 AM.
04-05-18, 09:19 AM
#77
Senior Member
I decided to do what that original OP did and sent a query off to a couple places (Bell, Giro, Lazer and MIPS). The only response I've received back, is the following nicely put letter from Bell. IOW, technically, everybody is right 
The question: "I have a product question related to your cycling helmets. Can you advise if either MIPs and/or Non-MIPS helmets are safe to use with a helmet liner/cap underneath (eg. headsweats, skull cap, cycling cap, balaclava, etc.)? The literature is unclear on this."
The response:
"This is a great question. Technically, we have to advise against this, as all heads are different, and there are an infinite variety of caps, balaclavas, etc. one can wear under a helmet. However, if the helmet is snug and properly adjusted per the owners’ manual, and the cap is thin (a cycling cap, skull cap, etc., not a thick wool winter hat), we have never seen an issue in our retention testing. There is no research on this issue, perhaps because of the huge variety of caps available.
Certainly any cap will raise the helmet up and reduce the covered area of the head. Thicker caps would raise the helmet substantially more, and in some accidents this could present a serious risk.
I can tell you also that many of us here wear cycling caps or thin skull caps under the helmet, in particular in the winter.
Thanks.
Thom Parks
Senior Director of Product Safety
Bell Sports, Inc."
The question: "I have a product question related to your cycling helmets. Can you advise if either MIPs and/or Non-MIPS helmets are safe to use with a helmet liner/cap underneath (eg. headsweats, skull cap, cycling cap, balaclava, etc.)? The literature is unclear on this."
The response:
"This is a great question. Technically, we have to advise against this, as all heads are different, and there are an infinite variety of caps, balaclavas, etc. one can wear under a helmet. However, if the helmet is snug and properly adjusted per the owners’ manual, and the cap is thin (a cycling cap, skull cap, etc., not a thick wool winter hat), we have never seen an issue in our retention testing. There is no research on this issue, perhaps because of the huge variety of caps available.
Certainly any cap will raise the helmet up and reduce the covered area of the head. Thicker caps would raise the helmet substantially more, and in some accidents this could present a serious risk.
I can tell you also that many of us here wear cycling caps or thin skull caps under the helmet, in particular in the winter.
Thanks.
Thom Parks
Senior Director of Product Safety
Bell Sports, Inc."
In other words, act with prudence. That, of course, is exactly the opposite of what their attorneys are trying to protect against.
04-05-18, 05:07 PM
#78
Advocatus Diaboli
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: Wherever I am
Posts: 8,666
Bikes: Merlin Cyrene, Nashbar steel CX
Mentioned: 14 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4761 Post(s)
Liked 1,542 Times
in
1,011 Posts
), a tiny bit of general awareness that just perhaps a hat or such under a helmet is negatively impacting safety to a slight degree, can't be a bad thing.Things I wouldn't do..
tug on Superman's cape
pull the mask off that old lone ranger
spit into the wind.
04-05-18, 05:34 PM
#79
Senior Member
Nope. I was refraining though from considering a MIPS helmet because I do usually wear a cap/beanie though. I'm still not sold on MIPS though in general. Regardless (or is it irregardless ), a tiny bit of general awareness that just perhaps a hat or such under a helmet is negatively impacting safety to a slight degree, can't be a bad thing.
Things I wouldn't do..
tug on Superman's cape
pull the mask off that old lone ranger
spit into the wind.
), a tiny bit of general awareness that just perhaps a hat or such under a helmet is negatively impacting safety to a slight degree, can't be a bad thing.Things I wouldn't do..
tug on Superman's cape
pull the mask off that old lone ranger
spit into the wind.
btw,
Usage:
Irregardless is widely heard, perhaps arising under the influence of such perfectly correct forms as irrespective, but should be avoided by careful users of English. Use regardless to mean ‘without regard or consideration for’ or ‘nevertheless’.
Irregardless is widely heard, perhaps arising under the influence of such perfectly correct forms as irrespective, but should be avoided by careful users of English. Use regardless to mean ‘without regard or consideration for’ or ‘nevertheless’.
04-05-18, 06:27 PM
#80
Advocatus Diaboli
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: Wherever I am
Posts: 8,666
Bikes: Merlin Cyrene, Nashbar steel CX
Mentioned: 14 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4761 Post(s)
Liked 1,542 Times
in
1,011 Posts
The upside is that is very likely MIPS provides a serious benefit. The downside is really nothing - it won't do additional harm. The price adder for MIPS (or equivalent technology) now is minimal if any so I don't see any reason not to have it and only benefit (perhaps seriously so) if it does work. My bet is that it does.
J.
J.
https://www.bikeforums.net/road-cycl...ding-mips.html
04-05-18, 07:06 PM
#81
Senior Member
You could be right.. I don't know. I did come across this thread though. If it is low-enough cost to at least introduce a line of MIPS-enabled helmets with appropriate pricepoints, why indeed are their helmet manufacturers who won't do it?
https://www.bikeforums.net/road-cycl...ding-mips.html
https://www.bikeforums.net/road-cycl...ding-mips.html
The good news is that safety innovation logjam because of the CPSC standards is, after 20 plus years, finally broken.
At this point, there is no reason to not have this technology. Pricing, fit, ventilation, aerodynamics or any desired combination of this is as good with (if not better) than without.
J.
