# Helmets: expiration date or not?



## BelgianHammer (Apr 10, 2012)

Anybody agree or disagree with the BHSI (Bicycle Helmet Safety Institute) site:

When to Replace a Helmet?


Outside of crashing your helmet (which we all know means immediately replace it no matter what) I was always under the impression, which seems mistaken now, that foam EPS construction broke down over time and thus helmets need replaced. Seems this is not true. From the BHSI site, EPS is a stable material that doesn't breakdown, no matter if it's exposed to copious amounts of human sweat or whatever, and furthermore, since helmets have an outer protective shell, the chances of sun degrading the EPS are also nil.

What is going on? Helmet manufacturers (from Giro, Bell, etc, etc) all say, respectively, to replace your helmet every 2-3 years max. Only manufacturer that I found outside of this range is MET helmets, who actually state they've done real live crash testing, and they say all post 90s helmets are good to go for 8-10 yrs (again, with no crashes) or longer.


I understand helmet manufacturers need us to buy helmets to stay in business, but this 3 year expiration date seen from a lot of them seems a little feckless if it isn't true.


Curious what everyone is wearing and some dates/how long you've been wearing them? I am now wondering if the cache of helmets I have from 4-8 yrs ago are still good to go? Sure, they may be a few grams heavier than newer lids, but I can't tell the difference today between a 250g lid vs a 350g lid. Guess my neck is too thick  Anyhow, these cache of helmets have never seen an accident, still look new, everything on them is functional, but I've been avoiding them (and getting new ones) thinking that damn EPS had broken down after 3 yrs.


----------



## SauronHimself (Nov 21, 2012)

If the foam breaks down enough after 2-3 years to be considered unsafe and warrant replacement, I'd never buy one from that brand.


----------



## MMsRepBike (Apr 1, 2014)

Well let me put it to you like this:

The owner of our shop does his diligence and tells every customer pretty much that helmets are only good for 2 or 3 years. He points them to the statements provided by the manufacturers and then does his best to sell them a new helmet. He will tell anyone who will listen and even those that won't that helmets need regular replacement.


He wears a 2008 Giro Atmos, it's the only helmet he owns.


----------



## ibericb (Oct 28, 2014)

Had a lot of discussion on this late last year. See this thread.


----------



## SauronHimself (Nov 21, 2012)

MMsRepBike said:


> Well let me put it to you like this:
> 
> The owner of our shop does his diligence and tells every customer pretty much that helmets are only good for 2 or 3 years. He points them to the statements provided by the manufacturers and then does his best to sell them a new helmet. He will tell anyone who will listen and even those that won't that helmets need regular replacement.
> 
> ...


I'm not sure I follow. Are you surprised your boss' primary motive (and that of the helmet manufacturers) is making money?


----------



## MMsRepBike (Apr 1, 2014)

I'm not surprised about anything. 

And if you're wondering, I'm on the side of his actions and not his words. I would only replace a helmet if I felt it needed replacement for some reason, not just because of time.


----------



## Peter P. (Dec 30, 2006)

My Bell Ghisallo is a 2007 issue. I only replace my helmets when something breaks, which is usually the plastic on the occipital lobe device.

I'll hazard a guess and suggest if a cyclist gets into an accident and claims the helmet was defective for some reason, the manufacturer will point out the helmet was past its useful lifespan.

I'm really inclined to think these lifespan limitations are set to promote helmet sales.


----------



## Jwiffle (Mar 18, 2005)

I've crashed while wearing helmets over 3 years old. Each time the helmet did its job, breaking instead of my head.


----------



## nsfbr (May 23, 2014)

It is my understanding, based on knowledge of the basic materials, that the concern would be that the helmet gets less absorptive, and more like wearing a very lightweight brick on your head, over time. That probably depends mostly on how you store it, since a helmet spends most of its life not on your head. I'd say that the life ratings are based on accelerated tests that are then extrapolated to worst case conditions - say you storing the helmet in a place that is 100 degrees 100% of the time. 

Since I had a helmet save my life, although with a pretty bad concussion whose effects took more than three or four months to fade to where I felt pretty close to normal, and since it was old and fractured into pieces in the process, I've taken to keeping my helmet inside my house, rather than in my bike shed. Is it necessary? I have no idea. But I'm not really in finding out the hard way by doing the alternative.


----------



## ibericb (Oct 28, 2014)

Not so much sales, as to reduce or eliminate liability should an old helmet prove to be defective as a result of degraded material properties (e.g., impact strength, etc.).

The problem with waiting until obvious failure is that, if the failure is a result of loss of material properties arising from aging or exposure to any number of substances, the key properties associated with protection were likely lost long before you could see anything. There is no way of knowing how much loss has occurred over time other than destroy the helmet. If you visibly see the effects of lost integrity, then that helmet is long, long gone - it won't even hold together absent stress.


----------



## TheManShow (Jun 9, 2015)

In the good old days I need to crash replaced my BELL brand helmet twice, I sent it in, and got a new one for free. Today a crash replacement is a courtsey 30% discount off full list. Goine are the days of free crash replacement.

Both my helmet are over 5 yesrs old, show no sign of cracking. I push hard with a finger one in a while, and there is no movement.

FYI Helmet like all bicycling stuff has got very expensive in recent years.


----------



## mfdemicco (Nov 8, 2002)

There was an independent test done recently that tested old helmets to the ANSI or Snell standard, and they passed.


----------



## MisterMike (Aug 12, 2004)

Peter P. said:


> My Bell Ghisallo is a 2007 issue. I only replace my helmets when something breaks, which is usually the plastic on the occipital lobe device...


 But why does that part, or any other, fail? Was it significantly weaker/degraded than it was when the helmet was new? The article does seem to imply it's not the case because of various "UV inhibitors" and other things manufacturers do to prevent degradation. So if we all seem to wait until "something breaks" I tend to think that's too long and would question how such a helmet might actually perform in a crash. Would the straps fail and the helmet come off all over some small plastic bit that was just old and brittle?

Full disiclosure - I too wear a Ghisallo (love that helmet model) with a Jan '10 sticker in it. I'm not criticizing, just wondering if there is a point where replacement is prudent even if it's not the shorter 2-3 years manu recommends.


----------



## TheManShow (Jun 9, 2015)

mfdemicco said:


> There was an independent test done recently that tested old helmets to the ANSI or Snell standard, and they passed.


I wish you would post that link. Reason is a couple of days ago I called Bell seeking a replacement pad kit, I was willing to pay for. Lady I spoke with kept insisting helmet was too old, unsafe, and push hard to make a sale.

In the end I said it is my life, beside your company has changed, and is not the old Bell. Reminding her of the days of FREE CRASH REPLACEMENT.


----------



## Jwiffle (Mar 18, 2005)

TheManShow said:


> I wish you would post that link. Reason is a couple of days ago I called Bell seeking a replacement pad kit, I was willing to pay for. Lady I spoke with kept insisting helmet was too old, unsafe, and push hard to make a sale.
> 
> In the end I said it is my life, beside your company has changed, and is not the old Bell. Reminding her of the days of FREE CRASH REPLACEMENT.


But the free crash replacements were only during first three years if I recall correctly. After that, they expected you to buy a new helmet.


----------



## Peter P. (Dec 30, 2006)

MisterMike said:


> But why does that part, or any other, fail? Was it significantly weaker/degraded than it was when the helmet was new? The article does seem to imply it's not the case because of various "UV inhibitors" and other things manufacturers do to prevent degradation. So if we all seem to wait until "something breaks" I tend to think that's too long and would question how such a helmet might actually perform in a crash. Would the straps fail and the helmet come off all over some small plastic bit that was just old and brittle?
> 
> Full disiclosure - I too wear a Ghisallo (love that helmet model) with a Jan '10 sticker in it. I'm not criticizing, just wondering if there is a point where replacement is prudent even if it's not the shorter 2-3 years manu recommends.


It's a skinny little strip of plastic no thicker in diameter than a pencil lead, and I'll speculate that all plastics tend to get brittle with age. Even when this part of the "Roc Loc" (Giro's trade name) or whatever trade name it's given, fails, the helmet is still wearable-helmets were manufactured for many years before the occipital lobe retainers came on the market.

It's too bad that the foam or the shell don't provide obvious signs of degradation such as crumbling, powdering, cracking, etc. In fact, you could say that the lack of those indicators are by themselves indicators that the helmet is still useful. But sometimes that degradation is not visible to the naked or untrained eye.


----------



## mfdemicco (Nov 8, 2002)

TheManShow said:


> I wish you would post that link. Reason is a couple of days ago I called Bell seeking a replacement pad kit, I was willing to pay for. Lady I spoke with kept insisting helmet was too old, unsafe, and push hard to make a sale.
> 
> In the end I said it is my life, beside your company has changed, and is not the old Bell. Reminding her of the days of FREE CRASH REPLACEMENT.


Try http://www.helmets.org/up1505a.htm

I think if you take care of your helmet, like not storing it out in the sun or the heat, replacing it every 2-3 years is overkill.


----------



## ibericb (Oct 28, 2014)

mfdemicco said:


> I think if you take care of your helmet, like not storing it out in the sun or the heat, replacing it every 2-3 years is overkill.


Keep it stored in a reasonably cool, dry place, avoid contact with things like sunscreen, solvent vapors, etc., and it should still retain its material properties for well beyond 3 years (like 10 years). The problems come when they get left in cars, hot garages, get contaminated with sunscreen, solvent vapors, etc. The idea is to replace the helmet BEFORE it becomes sufficiently degraded that it wouldn't pass the test. There is no way a helmet manufacturer can predict how any helmet will be cared for, thus there recommendation will be based on a reasonable worst-case scenario, and the expected loss of properties that would follow.

FWIW - every child car safety seat comes with an expiration date that is ~ 3-4 years from the date on manufacturing, for the very same reasons that bicycle helmet replacement at 3 years is broadly recommended.


----------



## Special Eyes (Feb 2, 2011)

Styrofoam is forever. So is your helmet.


----------



## ibericb (Oct 28, 2014)

Special Eyes said:


> Styrofoam is forever. So is your helmet.


But, there isn't any Styrofoam in bicycle helmets. None!


----------



## Special Eyes (Feb 2, 2011)

Then I wonder what the technical term is for that material that looks just like styrofoam.


----------



## Oxtox (Aug 16, 2006)

Bicycle Helmet Liners: Foam and more


----------



## ibericb (Oct 28, 2014)

Special Eyes said:


> Then I wonder what the technical term is for that material that looks just like styrofoam.


Expanded polystyrene foam.

Styrofoam is a trademark of The Dow Chemical Co., limited to extruded polystyrene foam board.

You also need to consider the other materials in a helmet - polycarbonte, ABS, polyurethane, ...


----------



## Oxtox (Aug 16, 2006)

I tend to replace mine when they become seriously out of style.

have a Giro Pneumo that's easily 6-7 yrs old.

still looks fine.


----------



## PBL450 (Apr 12, 2014)

From a profit standpoint, the manufacturer wants you to buy a new helmet sooner rather than later... It's good business. From a safety standpoint the manufacturer wants you to buy a new helmet sooner rather than later to ensure that you are wearing a melon guard that boasts the latest and greatest advances in technology. Too old is last decades tech... Even if only minor changes show up to be improvements they would prefer you have that advantage.


----------



## BelgianHammer (Apr 10, 2012)

PBL450,

I guess this is the conundrum I face every time I walk in and pick out which bike I am going to ride. I stare at my latest whizzbang high-tech rides, yet somehow I keep pulling the 25 yr old Colnago Technos off its rack and throwing my leg over it. Guess I am bad for business, lol. Now, with my older helmets (4-8 years), I am going to start entering them back into wearing rotation as I realize I've been foolish all these years replacing them every three years. Within a decade period (and most probably longer), EPS or any of its variants simply does not break down at all when a helmet has been properly cared for and not crashed. It's more likely some other part of the helmet will fail first (a worn out strap, plastic retainer, etc, etc) before the helmet's EPS becomes unsafe to ride.


----------



## ibericb (Oct 28, 2014)

Your helmets are probably fine if they've been properly cared for. But, it's not just the EPS. It's also the outer shell material, the straps, and those little plastic retainers. All are necessary for the helmet to function properly. I suspect the most likely component to fail are the retainer clips, but that's a complete SWAG.


----------



## mfdemicco (Nov 8, 2002)

PBL450 said:


> From a profit standpoint, the manufacturer wants you to buy a new helmet sooner rather than later... It's good business. From a safety standpoint the manufacturer wants you to buy a new helmet sooner rather than later to ensure that you are wearing a melon guard that boasts the latest and greatest advances in technology. Too old is last decades tech... Even if only minor changes show up to be improvements they would prefer you have that advantage.


The only advance in technology in bike helmets in the last 10 years has been MIPS, and it remains to be seen if it is hype or not and if more manufacturers will adopt it.


----------



## PBL450 (Apr 12, 2014)

mfdemicco said:


> The only advance in technology in bike helmets in the last 10 years has been MIPS, and it remains to be seen if it is hype or not and if more manufacturers will adopt it.


Like I said... Even if something very minor is improved they want you to have that improvement. The same applies to other safety oriented products. Getting older stuff out of the game in favor of newer stuff is what they are after. This is the case in a ton of industries. Manufacturer assumes the worst and makes recommendations based on worst case scenario. You leave your helmet in your 120+ car and never clean anything, you have hit it on the ground at least once, and they think they improved the buckle last year... Maybe they even considered a recall for something that happened and they are biting their nails? It's not rocket science. And, of course, there is the profit bonus. 

I'm not saying old helmets aren't able to do their job, I'm telling you what the manufacturers are thinking.


----------



## ibericb (Oct 28, 2014)

PBL450 said:


> I'm not saying old helmets aren't able to do their job, I'm telling you what the manufacturers are thinking.


I think they're more concerned about plaintiff's attorneys when you are are seriously injured or killed as a result of head trauma, and were wearing one of their helmets.


----------



## PBL450 (Apr 12, 2014)

ibericb said:


> I think they're more concerned about plaintiff's attorneys when you are are seriously injured or killed as a result of head trauma, and were wearing one of their helmets.


No. Having been a safety inspector, you might be surprised that people would actually like you to be safe. Yes, they have a stake in that, no doubt... But I also worked with tons of people who actually wanted their workers to be safe... Not everything comes down to the lawsuit liability. And if that's the way you want to live your life, good luck bro. But you are less of a minority than you think... As a housing inspector of many years you might be shocked to know that property owners would like tenants to be safe. And yes, I am not an idiot, there are slum lords... But they are 1 in 100. Most people are just trying to make a living like everyone else. And they don't want anyone to get hurt toward that end. Sure, I am applying the same logic I learned in the field to cycling helmets, but I think it's perfectly transferable... I worked with a few awful property owners, but I worked with a ton of great ones. People who balanced long term profitability with safety and health. If you only see the world through lawyer colored glasses I feel for you. I don't want to live like that...


----------



## ibericb (Oct 28, 2014)

PBL450 said:


> No. Having been a safety inspector, you might be surprised that people would actually like you to be safe. Yes, they have a stake in that, no doubt... But I also worked with tons of people who actually wanted their workers to be safe... Not everything comes down to the lawsuit liability. And if that's the way you want to live your life, good luck bro. But you are less of a minority than you think... As a housing inspector of many years you might be shocked to know that property owners would like tenants to be safe. And yes, I am not an idiot, there are slum lords... But they are 1 in 100. Most people are just trying to make a living like everyone else. And they don't want anyone to get hurt toward that end. Sure, I am applying the same logic I learned in the field to cycling helmets, but I think it's perfectly transferable... I worked with a few awful property owners, but I worked with a ton of great ones. People who balanced long term profitability with safety and health. If you only see the world through lawyer colored glasses I feel for you. I don't want to live like that...


To be sure, there are many (if not most) in the world who want to see everyone safe and sound at all times. I generally hold that view. I am certain that is at the heart of places like the Snell Foundation. But a commercial corporate policy, warning and admonishing that your helmet needs to be replaced every three years is, I suspect, driven by the desire to mitigate product liability. Ask yourself two questions:

1. If it weren't for product liability issues, well established in American law, would those recommendations be so advanced; would the stickers noting the need to be replaced in three years be applied to helmets and/or their packaging?

2. If a company like Specialized wanted to assure you were safe, why do they limit their crash replacement discount (20% at Specialized) to helmets less than 3 years old?


----------



## Jwiffle (Mar 18, 2005)

ibericb said:


> 2. If a company like Specialized wanted to assure you were safe, why do they limit their crash replacement discount (20% at Specialized) to helmets less than 3 years old?


Precisely TO assure you were safe. By limiting the discount to three years, it encourages you to buy a new, supposedly safer helmet within three years.


----------



## ibericb (Oct 28, 2014)

Jwiffle said:


> Precisely TO assure you were safe. By limiting the discount to three years, it encourages you to buy a new, supposedly safer helmet within three years.


Then why don't they extend the 20% discount to those replacing a good (not crashed) current Specialized helmet less than 3 years old with a new Specialized helmet? If they truly wanted to keep everyone safe, they would extend that policy to good helmet replacement before expiration, and not limit it to just crash replacement. Of course you could slam your good helmet on some pavement, falsely claim crash damage, then take it in for replacement.


----------



## PBL450 (Apr 12, 2014)

ibericb said:


> To be sure, there are many (if not most) in the world who want to see everyone safe and sound at all times. I generally hold that view. I am certain that is at the heart of places like the Snell Foundation. But a commercial corporate policy, warning and admonishing that your helmet needs to be replaced every three years is, I suspect, driven by the desire to mitigate product liability. Ask yourself two questions:
> 
> 1. If it weren't for product liability issues, well established in American law, would those recommendations be so advanced; would the stickers noting the need to be replaced in three years be applied to helmets and/or their packaging?
> 
> 2. If a company like Specialized wanted to assure you were safe, why do they limit their crash replacement discount (20% at Specialized) to helmets less than 3 years old?


Of course their attorneys write their warnings and their job is to protect their employer from damages resulting from litigation in the situations you mention... That is their job. But that doesn't mean the warning is limited to protection from lawsuits. It means it was written by a lawyer... The manufacturer wants the product to do its job as best it can.


----------



## ibericb (Oct 28, 2014)

PBL450 said:


> ... The manufacturer wants the product to do its job as best it can.


Absolutely. Having worked for a very large industrial manufacturing company for many years, I can attest to that fact. They do want the product to work as intended.


----------



## Shuffleman (Sep 4, 2013)

I recently struggled with this as my helmet is 6 yrs old and pretty faded. I normally error on the side of caution but feel like this is partly marketing hype and partly liability focused.
I live in Florida and keep my helmet in the garage. I also clean it by tossing it and my gloves into my pool after a ride. This is probably why it is faded. Either way, I bought a new helmet a few weeks ago just in case. I did keep the old one and use it for mtb now, which probably makes no sense. 
I guess that we all have to do what we feel is right. I don't spend a terrible amount on a helmet and it is not going to hurt me financially to buy one ever few years so I think that I will probably do just that. I will probably not count the days but I will be cautious within reason.


----------



## PBL450 (Apr 12, 2014)

ibericb said:


> Absolutely. Having worked for a very large industrial manufacturing company for many years, I can attest to that fact. They do want the product to work as intended.


And of course, the lawyers are there to protect them...


----------



## SpikedLemon (May 15, 2015)

Referring back to Motorcycle helmets: I've always replaced them around 5 years or so. It falls on the Snell approval cycle which, coincidentally, the latest Snell approval is commonly the requirement for many local racetracks.
I find, however, after 5 years the helmet may look find but the fit has changed. It's far more noticeable on a motorcycle helmet having it able to wiggle more than it used to.

Quick link to Shoei's site (motorcycle helmet manufacturer) doesn't list "date" as a determining factor for helmet replacement. They do, however, note a 5-year warranty. I would consider motorcycle helmets to be subject to more demanding conditions than a bicycle helmet due to higher speeds and requirements to meet tougher standards.
SHOEI North America | Safety-Sizing, Handling, And Care


My bicycle helmet is a 10 year old Luis Garneau. Fit is getting loose but I've not crashed it - i'll consider a replacement soonish.


----------



## ibericb (Oct 28, 2014)

When should I replace my helmet?

The answer is , it depends. Apparently most manufacturers currently use 5 years. Bell appears to be the exception.


----------



## Corenfa (Jun 9, 2014)

Solution - ride crits and replace your helmet whenever you crash. You're almost guaranteed to never have a helmet last more than 2-3 years.


----------



## pmf (Feb 23, 2004)

Look on the back of any shampoo bottle -- what do you see for directions -- lather, rinse, repeat. If you were a shampoo manufacturer wouldn't you do the same thing? Kind of the same thing with helmets, except they use that safety angle, which is probably more effective than a dandruff problem.


----------



## chickenfried (Sep 5, 2007)

Thanks, found this thread trying to find that link I remembered I saw it somewhere. I think it's darn funny that some in this thread expect companies to care less about money than the people using the helmet.


mfdemicco said:


> Try Update: Helmets Proven to Perform for Decades
> .


----------



## Lombard (May 8, 2014)

Let me just start by saying that I dismiss most conspiracy theories. This includes the one about helmet manufacturers putting expiration stickers on helmets for the sole purpose of getting us to buy new helmets. If there is a non-scientific motive behind the expiration dates, I would have to say it is protection from liability.

The problem with aging helmets and ones that are subjected to extended extremes of temperature, is the hardening of the foam surface that rests against your head. The harder it becomes, the less it will absorb impact in a crash. I have read that one way to test a helmet to see if it is still good is to stick your fingernail in the foam surface. If you can penetrate it, it is still good. If not, it needs to be replaced. I don't know how true that is, but it's worth mentioning.

Conspiracy or not, I would rather be safe than sorry.

This all being said, you are vastly better off with an old helmet than no helmet.


----------



## roadbat (Oct 29, 2012)

The Helmets: Bicycle Helmets site has very interesting information not biased either by company hype or other such influences. They found even dramatic mistreatment like gasoline that showed major apparent damage did not cause the helmet to fail a spec test. Sweat and body oils had zero effects, and other things like bug screen, DEET, sunscreen also did not cause consequential damage. 8 year old helmets that do not show damage or cracks probably are fine. Note, the new MIPS feature has not been shown to give more protection, so sales prices on nonMIPS helmets that are solid brands now may be a great way to save, and if you don't need one, just stick it in a closet, where zero aging effects should be incurred until you start using it. Helmet tech has not improved significantly and many designs are odd, weird, square style embellishments rather than functional protection, and pricey ones are not better than mid-priced units.


----------



## jetdog9 (Jul 12, 2007)

MMsRepBike said:


> Well let me put it to you like this:
> 
> The owner of our shop does his diligence and tells every customer pretty much that helmets are only good for 2 or 3 years. He points them to the statements provided by the manufacturers and then does his best to sell them a new helmet. He will tell anyone who will listen and even those that won't that helmets need regular replacement.
> 
> ...


Would rep this but not allowed.


----------



## Srode (Aug 19, 2012)

For what it's worth, when I used to road race motorcycles, riders were required to use helmets manufactured not more than 5 years prior to the race they were participating in and that was checked when you took your bike through tech inspection.


----------



## Oxtox (Aug 16, 2006)

Srode said:


> For what it's worth, when I used to road race motorcycles, riders were required to use helmets manufactured not more than 5 years prior to the race they were participating in and that was checked when you took your bike through tech inspection.


what's the similarity of construction between moto and cycling helmets...?

guessing they're significantly different.


----------



## Srode (Aug 19, 2012)

Oxtox said:


> what's the similarity of construction between moto and cycling helmets...?
> 
> guessing they're significantly different.


pretty much the same materials, eps foam and polycarbonate shell


----------



## stevoo (Oct 26, 2011)

Since this thread is over 2 years old I wonder how many helmets forum readers have replaced since the original post.


----------



## Oxtox (Aug 16, 2006)

stevoo said:


> Since this thread is over 2 years old I wonder how many helmets forum readers have replaced since the original post.


I replaced this one...


----------



## Lombard (May 8, 2014)

Oxtox said:


> I replaced this one...
> 
> View attachment 320079


Was this the one from your accident? Hope you're fully recovered. Yep, I would definitely replace that one.


----------



## Oxtox (Aug 16, 2006)

Lombard said:


> Was this the one from your accident? Hope you're fully recovered. Yep, I would definitely replace that one.


yup, from the hit/run incident last summer...

helmet did its job, but still suffered a significant concussion. have 3+ hrs of missing time...

I'm as recovered as I'm going to get...shoulder is about 85% of its previous status, broken thumb is healed but is now partially numb from the surgery to remove bone splinters...


----------



## Lombard (May 8, 2014)

Oxtox said:


> yup, from the hit/run incident last summer...
> 
> helmet did its job, but still suffered a significant concussion. have 3+ hrs of missing time...
> 
> I'm as recovered as I'm going to get...shoulder is about 85% of its previous status, broken thumb is healed but is now partially numb from the surgery to remove bone splinters...


OUCH! Be safe out there!


----------



## HenryCBike (Aug 16, 2017)

I replace my helmet after any mid to major crash. Last crash I was on a trail. During a section of wood planks (pier type trail) another rider was coming the opposite direction and went into my lane. I had to break hard and both tires lost traction. I crashed and my head went right into one of the pier poles. 

I don't mind replacing helmets as needed. My issue is every company and even every model fits differently. A Specialized medium does not fit me and their large is too big. A Giro medium fits well only for certain models. It's odd.


----------



## biscut (Dec 15, 2016)

I spent my early 20's ice climbing solo (nothing extreme; more weather extreme than ice difficulty) in northern New England. I'm a lot older and I feel life is a balance of risk. I no longer do the things I use to due to my kids and my earning power. I'm too valuable to my family unit to do crazy stuff. 

I don't see keeping a helmet past whatever xxx point you choose as an issue. As long as it hasn't suffered an impact or is a known material that degrades over time. Common sense says your level of safety is increased as the years go by and tech makes things better. But that 1997 Camry that has 200k miles and still going strong isn't retired because it's not AS safe as a 2017 BMW. 

Each individual needs to access and make that decision.


----------



## MercRidnMike (Dec 19, 2006)

HenryCBike said:


> I replace my helmet after any mid to major crash. Last crash I was on a trail. During a section of wood planks (pier type trail) another rider was coming the opposite direction and went into my lane. I had to break hard and both tires lost traction. I crashed and my head went right into one of the pier poles.
> 
> I don't mind replacing helmets as needed. My issue is every company and even every model fits differently. A Specialized medium does not fit me and their large is too big. A Giro medium fits well only for certain models. It's odd.


I'm the same way....I'll replace a helmet as needed (i.e. after a crash), but I also have a set interval I use. I look at my helmet as the same as the hard hat I use for work...it's safety gear. I have to replace my hard hat every 5 years and it's shock absorbing layer is, for all intents and purposes, the same as what makes up my cycling helmet. 

Under ideal conditions, sure, a helmet will last longer...but heat, sweat, UV light, knocks and bumps, being dropped etc. ad nauseaum all add up. An old helmet might meet testing requirements (which are in need up updating anyway), but 300 "g's" (where a helmet fails under CPSC guidelines) is a lot of force! For an average 10 lb head, that's 3000 lbs force!! Your 10 year old helmet might pass....but 2990 lbs force is a lot more than I want my brain experiencing. If a new helmet keeps that to sub-2000 lbs or even sub-1500 lbs, it's that much less energy my brain is subjected to, and less likelihood of long lasting effects. 

I've had to test a helmet in a real-life crash. I hit with enough force to break off and embed the arm of my riding glasses, but I didn't have a concussion (the ER doc was, frankly, flabbergasted at that). I credit it to the fact that my helmet was newer and had multiple certifications (each certifying agency has different testing and "pass" protocols....multiple certifications means it passed whatever is the most stringent of those tests). Sure, some might see it as wasteful replacing a helmet every 5 years while others will say I'm not replacing it often enough, but I personally think it strikes a good balance between helmet life and the safety of my head.

As in all things, YMMV.


----------



## GammaDriver (Jul 6, 2007)




----------



## dirt farmer (Jun 7, 2016)

A study


----------

