Reference For Helmets Being Unsafe In The Elio?

[karl]

Hans was developed to prevent basilar skull fracture, or your head disconnecting from your neck. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HANS_device Some facts about helmets

 

[karl]

Some facts about helmets http://www.smf.org/helmetfaq

They are designed to protect your head from a blow. The motorcycle type from six feet high...

 

[goldwing06]

I've heard Paul talk about how wearing a helmet in the Elio would be unsafe but after a number of searches I haven't found any studies to substantiate this claim. Is this just gut feel and marketing or is there actually some studies that can support this?

I'm a proponent of helmets on bikes (powered and non-powered) but I also support people's right to choose if they want to wear one or not.

In cars, and the elio, I'm like most people and really don't want to wear a helmet. However, given that your head is the most vulnerable part of your body head injuries in automobile crashes are often serious if not deadly. While searching for studies to support Paul's assertions I found many studies that discuss head injuries in crashes although only a few went so far as suggesting helmet use in cars.

As many motorcyclists are aware, we are inundated by "helpful" people that want to legislate our safety through helmet laws. When you look at the arguments for and against helmet use on motorcycles many of the same arguments can be made when applied to automobiles. So is the reason we don't have helmet laws for cars simply because there are more people that refuse to use them? Is it because people think cars are safer because they are surrounded by metal and other safety devices that will protect them?

Since I can't find definitive studies one way or the other I am left wondering if today's motorists are simply looking at the use of helmets in cars in much the same way motorists fought back against the use of safety belts. Ignorance, inconvenience, rebellion?

Ok, sorry for rambling but please, if anyone can provide a reference to support Paul's claim that wearing a helmet in the elio (aka a car) would actually be more dangerous than not wearing one I'd love to see it.

 

[goldwing06]

and it would seem more a question of comfort, rather than safety. the head rest would need to be adjustable or removable, to allow the helmet to not hold the head out of position. otherwise, if a helmet is to be required in an enclosed motorcycle, then it should also be required in a convertible automobile. however, my state law does not require a helmet but when i ride i wear one, for multiple reasons. it provides a mount for the face sheild, and headphones, and keeps the wind noise to a tolerable level. and should the fickle finger of fate find it funny to finger me out, maybe having it on will allow me to ride another day. also, my passenger must wear on also. would that also apply the the pax in a Elio? hmm?

 

[checho]

In regards to motorcycles helmets there are basically 2 types:
soft helmets made of cheap plastic usually rated DOT, this are useful for low speed impacts the way it works is the plastic deforms to absorb the impact, the problem is that with an strong impact the deformation of the helmet is so big that it reaches the head, I personally do not recommend this type of helmet in a case of strong impact it could cost your life.
hard helmets, usually made from fiberglass or kevlar, made for a single impact, making them disposable helmets, this type of helmets are usually approved by the SNELL foundation, are very high quality and very expensive, they do not deform as fast as the plastic helmets so they can protect in cases in which the plastic helmet fails. my life was saved from a Shoei helmet, the helmet did crack with the impact, but the crack did not penetrate the interior of the helmet, I highly recommend Snell approved helmets they are the best as far as I know.

as far as the Elio, I do not think a helmet should be required since it has air bags, and a roll cage, however I also believe the use of a helmet should not be illegal either, it should be left for the driver to decide, having the freedom to choose is very important.

in the case of a very cheap helmet which restricts the vision it could be less safe in the Elio, however if we talk about quality helmets such as Shoei, Ariel, or any Snell approved helmet it will be added safety, such helmets do not restrict vision, in such a cases it will be added safety.

I think when Paul said it would be unsafe to use a helmet in the Elio he was referring to the average person that will get a $50 dollar helmet and have his vision restricted, he was not referring to the few that will spend $500 for a quality helmet that does not restrict the vision, since the percentage of people buying a $500 helmet will be very few.

a good helmet stays put, does not move out of position, the cheap ones do move out of position which has an affect on vision and comfort.
Also cheap helmets due to their poor air design have a tendency of fogging, the better helmet do not fog as easily.

 

[goldwing06]

hummmm! got a problem with wearing a heavy helmet when i'm strapped in a steel cage. the neck becomes the weak link. only accidents that would not set off the airbags would seem to benifit from them. on long trips wearing a helmet, the first thing that starts me to thinking about a rest stop, is the itching head under the helmet. thats why i carry a hair brush on the bike. really feels good to just do a good brushing after a few hours, especially when the sun has been beating down on ya. just for the sake of staying legal when traveling interstate, i'd keep a lightweight, minimum helmet on board, just to appease the local fuzz. a helmet takes up a lot of space in something as compact a an elio so storage could become an issue if traveling with a pax.

 

[NN4S]

One thing I haven't seen mentioned directly (may have been in a link) is that Snell rates helmets differently for cars and bikes. The Snell "M" rating is for motorcycle use, whereas the Snell "SA" (Special Applications) helmet is rated for Auto Racing use. The main issue between the ratings is that the SA helmets are rated for MULTIPLE impacts (bounced around inside a roll cage) as opposed to a single major impact (the initial whack on the ground or other contact surface) that is expected with a bike helmet. Having owned both types years ago when I raced in SCCA's F440 class and rode bikes as my DD, there is a major difference in weight (the SA helmets being quite a bit heavier) and neck strain while wearing them.

With the airbag system planned for the Elio, I see no need to worry about a helmet inside it. The safety harness and planned airbags should do a great job of handling the unfortunate decellaration forces in an accident without injury to the driver.

 

[Jeff Miller]

One thing I haven't seen mentioned directly (may have been in a link) is that Snell rates helmets differently for cars and bikes. The Snell "M" rating is for motorcycle use, whereas the Snell "SA" (Special Applications) helmet is rated for Auto Racing use. The main issue between the ratings is that the SA helmets are rated for MULTIPLE impacts (bounced around inside a roll cage) as opposed to a single major impact (the initial whack on the ground or other contact surface) that is expected with a bike helmet. Having owned both types years ago when I raced in SCCA's F440 class and rode bikes as my DD, there is a major difference in weight (the SA helmets being quite a bit heavier) and neck strain while wearing them.

With the airbag system planned for the Elio, I see no need to worry about a helmet inside it. The safety harness and planned airbags should do a great job of handling the unfortunate decellaration forces in an accident without injury to the driver.

I thought Snell also included requirements that the helmet be resistant to fuel as well. I wasn't aware that there was a M and a SA rating. I know the DOT requirements are not as strict as Snell requirements.

Throughout this thread I find it interesting the number of comments about why people don't want to or why they shouldn't have to wear a helmet in their elio. That is fine, I never suggested that people should but also find it incredibly odd that many of the same arguments against wearing a helmet in an elio are literally the same as those used for requiring a motorcyclist wear one. I believe I'm like many here in that I too do not want to wear a helmet in my elio but I also wouldn't think of riding my motorcycle without a helmet; I just don't want somebody telling me and legislating me to do that.

The original question that was asked was to see if anybody could site a reference to support Paul's assertion that wearing a helmet in the elio would be more dangerous than not. There was one post that indicated some tangential information but thus far I have seen nothing to confirm Paul's assertion. Can anyone site some real research?

 

[NN4S]

I thought Snell also included requirements that the helmet be resistant to fuel as well. I wasn't aware that there was a M and a SA rating. I know the DOT requirements are not as strict as Snell requirements.

---- Snip! ----

The original question that was asked was to see if anybody could site a reference to support Paul's assertion that wearing a helmet in the elio would be more dangerous than not. There was one post that indicated some tangential information but thus far I have seen nothing to confirm Paul's assertion. Can anyone site some real research?

There is a flammability aspect to the SA rating, if that is what you mean by fuel. There are actually three different Snell ratings (see below), but I have personal experience only with the two I mentioned.

The only reason that I can see a helmet being more dangerous than not inside of a vehicle is if that helmet were not designed for use inside of one. At one point in time, Bell or Simpson had a very good case on helmet design for in-car use vs. bike use posted. If you want current info, perhaps a visit to Snell's site and the perusal of the standards and testing procedures would answer your question satisfactorily.

Snell Standards 2015 and prior
Snell Article & Document Archive

Below is a taste of the information to be found there. I can't go through it all right now to find information that will answer your specific question since I need to prepare material for my class tomorrow, but I think you might be able to find what you are looking for on their site.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Snell Standards specific question
What are the differences between the SA, M and K standards?
The SA standard was designed for competitive auto racing while the M standard was for motorcycling and other motorsports. The K standard was released to accommodate helmets used in karting. There are three major differences between them:

1. The SA standard requires flammability test while the M and K standards do not.
2. The SA and K standards allow for a narrower visual field than the M standard (Some SA and K certified helmets may not be street legal).
3. The SA and K standards include a rollbar multi-impact test while the M standard does not.

How do helmets work?
Helmets are normally comprised of four elements; a rigid outer shell, a crushable liner, chin straps or a retaining system, and fit or comfort padding. The rigid outer shell, when present, adds a load-spreading capability, and prevents objects from penetrating the helmet. The liner, usually made of EPS (expanded polystyrene) or similar types of materials, absorbs the energy of an impact by crushing. The chin strap when properly buckled and adjusted along with the fit padding helps the helmet remain in position during a crash.

Helmets work like a brake or shock absorber. During a fall or crash, a head is traveling at a certain speed. Since the head has weight and is moving, there is a certain amount of energy associated with the moving head. When the helmet along with the accompanying head impacts an unyielding object, a rock, a wall, a curb or the ground, the hard shell starts by taking the energy generated by the falling helmet (head) and spreads it over a larger portion of the helmet, specifically, the internal foam liner. The foam liner then starts to crush and break which uses up a lot of the energy, keeping it from reaching the head inside. Depending on how fast the head is traveling, and how big, heavy and immovable the object is, the faster the head slows down, and the more energy is present. In short, everything slows down really quickly. A helmet will effectively reduce the speed of the head by breaking and crushing which reduces the amount of energy transferred to the brain. The whole process take only milliseconds to turn a potentially lethal blow into a survivable one.

 

[Jeff Miller]

There is a flammability aspect to the SA rating, if that is what you mean by fuel. There are actually three different Snell ratings (see below), but I have personal experience only with the two I mentioned.

The only reason that I can see a helmet being more dangerous than not inside of a vehicle is if that helmet were not designed for use inside of one. At one point in time, Bell or Simpson had a very good case on helmet design for in-car use vs. bike use posted. If you want current info, perhaps a visit to Snell's site and the perusal of the standards and testing procedures would answer your question satisfactorily.

Snell Standards 2015 and prior
Snell Article & Document Archive

Below is a taste of the information to be found there. I can't go through it all right now to find information that will answer your specific question since I need to prepare material for my class tomorrow, but I think you might be able to find what you are looking for on their site.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Snell Standards specific question
What are the differences between the SA, M and K standards?
The SA standard was designed for competitive auto racing while the M standard was for motorcycling and other motorsports. The K standard was released to accommodate helmets used in karting. There are three major differences between them:

1. The SA standard requires flammability test while the M and K standards do not.
2. The SA and K standards allow for a narrower visual field than the M standard (Some SA and K certified helmets may not be street legal).
3. The SA and K standards include a rollbar multi-impact test while the M standard does not.

How do helmets work?
Helmets are normally comprised of four elements; a rigid outer shell, a crushable liner, chin straps or a retaining system, and fit or comfort padding. The rigid outer shell, when present, adds a load-spreading capability, and prevents objects from penetrating the helmet. The liner, usually made of EPS (expanded polystyrene) or similar types of materials, absorbs the energy of an impact by crushing. The chin strap when properly buckled and adjusted along with the fit padding helps the helmet remain in position during a crash.

Helmets work like a brake or shock absorber. During a fall or crash, a head is traveling at a certain speed. Since the head has weight and is moving, there is a certain amount of energy associated with the moving head. When the helmet along with the accompanying head impacts an unyielding object, a rock, a wall, a curb or the ground, the hard shell starts by taking the energy generated by the falling helmet (head) and spreads it over a larger portion of the helmet, specifically, the internal foam liner. The foam liner then starts to crush and break which uses up a lot of the energy, keeping it from reaching the head inside. Depending on how fast the head is traveling, and how big, heavy and immovable the object is, the faster the head slows down, and the more energy is present. In short, everything slows down really quickly. A helmet will effectively reduce the speed of the head by breaking and crushing which reduces the amount of energy transferred to the brain. The whole process take only milliseconds to turn a potentially lethal blow into a survivable one.

Thanks for the detailed response regarding snell ratings.