
Originally Posted by
bean fidhleir
I can understand the idea of replacing a helmet that spends most of its time getting UV-baked in some place like Arizona, because even a UV-stable plastic will eventually degrade.
As you say, it's only the Snell Foundation that actually has data to support the 5-year claim, but as you say, they're a very reputable, well established, independent organization, and I'm not going to dismiss their recommendations unless I see someone else's data that's truly better.
Also, while UV eventually will degrade the outer shell, it's the EPS liner that actually protects your head, and what degrades that is body acids and oils. While I don't know of any helmet-specific data, all you have to do is search on EPS chemical resistance. You'll find that EPS is not at all stable, and the range of chemicals that degrade it include many that are contained in sweat and sebum. If the helmet's touched hair or skin (including being tried on in an LBS!), it's started to degrade, and while repeated exposure, heavy sweat and/or oily hair will make the degradation worse, lack of exposure won't stop what's already started. (Think about fingerprints on brushed stainless steel.)
As someone who's alive and rational today because of a helmet I was wearing at 21 mph, better safe than sorry.
As far as price resistance, honestly bicycle helmets are more like fine Champagne than they are like motorcycle helmets. I have a $40 helmet up north and a $180 helmet down south. There's about a 25% difference in comfort between them
. I don't know that I'll spend that kind of money again, and you definitely don't need to spend that kind of money to get a good, safe, comfortable helmet. Like zen (?) said in another thread, $8 a year for a new helmet every 5 isn't much - especially when you compare it against the annual cost of the support you'd need if you get a significant TBI.
Speed comes from what you put behind you. - Judi Ketteler