#1
|
|||
|
|||
Helmet Complience
Just looking at the thread about the Atmos Helmet, and it was going off
topic, but I want to know whats the difference with a Helmet that is allowed in Europe and the USA, but not on Australian roads. The Giro Atmos is the top of the line in helmets, so I am sure if Lance wears it, it must be safe. Am I right ? Kurt |
Ads |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Helmet Complience
"Kurt Davis" wrote in message ... Just looking at the thread about the Atmos Helmet, and it was going off topic, but I want to know whats the difference with a Helmet that is allowed in Europe and the USA, but not on Australian roads. The Giro Atmos is the top of the line in helmets, so I am sure if Lance wears it, it must be safe. Am I right ? It's just got to do with the differences in testing, and who does the testing. Some countries' standards are more difficult to pass than others, some allow the manufacturer to certify their own helmets whilst others (like here) must go through specific labs. It's prety hard to define 'safe', if you want to see more about helmet standards around the worls, have a look he http://www.bhsi.org/standard.htm The Australian standard appears pretty tough. Cheers Gemma |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Helmet Complience
On Fri, 29 Oct 2004 21:19:15 +1000, Kurt Davis wrote:
Just looking at the thread about the Atmos Helmet, and it was going off topic, but I want to know whats the difference with a Helmet that is allowed in Europe and the USA, but not on Australian roads. The Giro Atmos is the top of the line in helmets, so I am sure if Lance wears it, it must be safe. Am I right ? Kurt Ummm -- no. The wearing of a helmet does not absolve a bicyclist from the responsibility of riding safely so as to avoid accidents in the first place. I think about here I will stop and try to think a little reasonably and non-emotively before posting more on this subject. Peter -- If you are careful enough in life, nothing bad -- or good -- will ever happen to you. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Helmet Complience
"Peter" == Peter Keller writes:
Peter On Fri, 29 Oct 2004 21:19:15 +1000, Kurt Davis wrote: Just looking at the thread about the Atmos Helmet, and it was going off topic, but I want to know whats the difference with a Helmet that is allowed in Europe and the USA, but not on Australian roads. The Giro Atmos is the top of the line in helmets, so I am sure if Lance wears it, it must be safe. Am I right ? Kurt Peter Ummm -- no. The wearing of a helmet does not absolve a Peter bicyclist from the responsibility of riding safely so as to Peter avoid accidents in the first place. Peter I think about here I will stop and try to think a little Peter reasonably and non-emotively before posting more on this Peter subject. Probably a good idea. Kurt asked if the helmet was safe, not whether wearing one made the rider safe. -- Cheers Euan |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Helmet Complience
On Sat, 30 Oct 2004 08:07:14 +1000, euan_b_uk wrote:
"Peter" == Peter Keller writes: Peter On Fri, 29 Oct 2004 21:19:15 +1000, Kurt Davis wrote: Just looking at the thread about the Atmos Helmet, and it was going off topic, but I want to know whats the difference with a Helmet that is allowed in Europe and the USA, but not on Australian roads. The Giro Atmos is the top of the line in helmets, so I am sure if Lance wears it, it must be safe. Am I right ? Kurt Peter Ummm -- no. The wearing of a helmet does not absolve a Peter bicyclist from the responsibility of riding safely so as to Peter avoid accidents in the first place. Peter I think about here I will stop and try to think a little Peter reasonably and non-emotively before posting more on this Peter subject. Probably a good idea. Kurt asked if the helmet was safe, not whether wearing one made the rider safe. I take your point. In the way that the helmet does not on its own volition deliberately attack the rider, it can be construed as being safe. Peter -- If you are careful enough in life, nothing bad -- or good -- will ever happen to you. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Helmet Complience
Kurt Davis Wrote: Just looking at the thread about the Atmos Helmet, and it was going off topic, but I want to know whats the difference with a Helmet that i allowed in Europe and the USA, but not on Australian roads. The Giro Atmos is the top of the line in helmets, so I am sure i Lance wears it, it must be safe. Am I right ? Kurt Without examining the standards, the helmet probably complies with th Australian Standard, but certification takes time and money from th manufacturer. They either haven't got around to getting it certified or they don't think it's worth the cost. Ritc -- ritcho |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Helmet Complience
ritcho wrote:
Kurt Davis Wrote: Just looking at the thread about the Atmos Helmet, and it was going off topic, but I want to know whats the difference with a Helmet that is allowed in Europe and the USA, but not on Australian roads. The Giro Atmos is the top of the line in helmets, so I am sure if Lance wears it, it must be safe. Am I right ? Kurt Without examining the standards, the helmet probably complies with the Australian Standard, but certification takes time and money from the manufacturer. They either haven't got around to getting it certified, or they don't think it's worth the cost. Ritch -- ritcho Perhaps they are not allowed on Australian roads because of our "unique bitumen road surface" (http://www.forsterhalfironman.com/event-crse.html) ;-) (Yep, sure to be some people happy/amazed I actually referenced something, even if it is a dodgy, dodgy quote.) |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Helmet Complience
ritcho Wrote: Without examining the standards, the helmet probably complies with th Australian Standard, but certification takes time and money from th manufacturer. They either haven't got around to getting it certified or they don't think it's worth the cost RitchLeaving aside the legality issue. There are a number of variables. Importers make an economic decision whether it is worthwhile/profitabl to pay for certification. There are differences in certificatio standards between countries. There are differences between testin methodologies for those standards. The standards/testing methodologie attempt to replicate real world helmet stresses/risks/levels o protection in a consistently reproducable lab setting. The real worl impact when a rider crashes may or may not be similar to the impac tests in the lab. Given these variables, it might not be unreasonabl to trust your cranium to the protection of a helmet that is CPSC (i US) certified but not Australian Standards certified Steve *Bell Phi Pro - CPSC Certified *Bell Rubicon Pro - Austrlain Standards Certified *Bell Ghisallo - CPSC Certified on its way from the USA -- SteveA |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Helmet Complience
as of the first Nov (in QLD, not sure about other states) being caught
not wearing a helmet will cost you $75. Peter Keller wrote: On Sat, 30 Oct 2004 08:07:14 +1000, euan_b_uk wrote: "Peter" == Peter Keller writes: Peter On Fri, 29 Oct 2004 21:19:15 +1000, Kurt Davis wrote: Just looking at the thread about the Atmos Helmet, and it was going off topic, but I want to know whats the difference with a Helmet that is allowed in Europe and the USA, but not on Australian roads. The Giro Atmos is the top of the line in helmets, so I am sure if Lance wears it, it must be safe. Am I right ? Kurt Peter Ummm -- no. The wearing of a helmet does not absolve a Peter bicyclist from the responsibility of riding safely so as to Peter avoid accidents in the first place. Peter I think about here I will stop and try to think a little Peter reasonably and non-emotively before posting more on this Peter subject. Probably a good idea. Kurt asked if the helmet was safe, not whether wearing one made the rider safe. I take your point. In the way that the helmet does not on its own volition deliberately attack the rider, it can be construed as being safe. Peter |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Helmet Complience
"Max" wrote in message
u Peter Keller wrote: [...] I take your point. In the way that the helmet does not on its own volition deliberately attack the rider, it can be construed as being safe. as of the first Nov (in QLD, not sure about other states) being caught not wearing a helmet will cost you $75. It's $100 in Victoria (Rule 256(1) & (3)). As an aside, it's theoretically possible to get an exemption from the requirement to wear an "approved hemet" (Rule 256(5)) but I have no idea on what grounds or whether it's ever actually happened. -- A: Top-posters. Q: What is the most annoying thing on Usenet? |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Trikki Beltran's bad concussion and his helmet | gwhite | Techniques | 1015 | August 27th 05 08:36 AM |
Ontario Helmet Law being pushed through | Chris B. | General | 1379 | February 9th 05 04:10 PM |
Fule face helmet - review | Mikefule | Unicycling | 8 | January 14th 04 05:56 PM |
Reports from Sweden | Garry Jones | General | 17 | October 14th 03 05:23 PM |
Helmet Advice | DDEckerslyke | Social Issues | 17 | September 2nd 03 11:10 PM |