how's your helmet game ?

[riser4]

Bought a new helmet last year. I left my old one in the cafeteria stateside at Jay Peak and it didnt show up in lost and found. It took me a while to find another one that fit right as the old one had long since been discontinued.

[willywhit]

it's not the horse I'd be concerned about

I hear DSM is cooking up some exciting new threads from Italy, that guy kills

[Djongo Unchained]

Come ski with me this winter. I'm easy to find.

[Groomer Gambler]

Had a few knocks and bangs since, nothing major. Glad I have it. Started in Boeri, then Leedom, Gyro. I wear Smith helmets now, re[place every 2-3 years.
Goggles over helmet

Well, I guess this turned into a helmet debate!

Still looking to get a new helmet. My past life as a park skier used to take the padding out to fit a hat or hood with goggles under the helmet. Is it still okay to wear goggles under? I feel like that can't make a yuge difference. With something like MIPS I'm assuming a baselayer or beanie underneath though would change the effectiveness of said technology?

[Supermoon]

I have no idea if it hurts the MIPS to wear a hat underneath, but I've switched from park-rat steeze to goggles over helmet in the last few years, too. I think I get a better and more comfortable fit overall with the padding in. Anything that lets the helmet move around on your head in a crash is less than ideal, so creating space for your goggles or a hat seems like it would make them less effective.

[Slopetime]

I don't have so much of a dog in this fight, but if you haven't distractedly fallen off a cattrack on the way back to the lift 10 minutes after skiing the line of the season you haven't fuckin' skied. Let he who is without the occasional jerry-ass tendencies cast the first stone.

My 2 cents: a helmet doesn't make you immortal, no protection is perfect. But it's an insurance policy that also happens to be warm and comfy (and waterproof.) Will I ever see it pay out? Shit, hopefully not anymore. But it sure has in the past.

I grew up racing, so with mandatory helmets, and I've always skied with one. It feels weird at this point to ski without one. I'm beyond the really dumb macho risks I used to take - and the resulting falls - fingers crossed. But there's a lot of utility in not getting thwacked in the head by spruce branches in the kind of uncut hell-woods I find myself masochistically drawn to, and it's certainly peace of mind on crowded bulletproof. On your own head be it, I guess.

Pretty much this right here. It's not the steep that gets ya, it's often the flat, mindless traverse.

[summit]

I have no idea if it hurts the MIPS to wear a hat underneath, but I've switched from park-rat steeze to goggles over helmet in the last few years, too. I think I get a better and more comfortable fit overall with the padding in. Anything that lets the helmet move around on your head in a crash is less than ideal, so creating space for your goggles or a hat seems like it would make them less effective.

It shouldn't affect MIPS (or whatever rotational force mitigating thingy your helmet has).

Wearing stuff under the helmet becomes a problem if it makes the helmet ride up (less coverage) or not sit right (moves around) or the straps can no longer preventing from moving very out of place in a crash.

[Moss-Back]

I've ridden street bikes for 35 yrs, I would NEVER ride without a helmet.
But for whatever reason, I was reluctant to get one for skiing. When my kiddo was born, Mrs. Moss laid the "Dad-Responsibility/Need You to Come Home" rap on me, so I got a ski bucket.
FIRST DAY with it, low snow cover, billy-goat traversing through steep, tight trees...hung a ski and tumbled downhill head-first, smacked into a tree with the top of my head. Hard. Got up, laughed & shook it off.
I'm absolutely certain the outcome would have been FAR worse sans helmet. And this would have been a very tough place to get a toboggan into.
I was sold, right then & there. Goggles outside helmet.


Sent from my XT1650 using TGR Forums mobile app

[ACH]

Man, I swear my head has gravitational pull, I hit shit with it all the time. If ever there was a candidate for full time helmet wearing it would be me. So, it goes without saying, I wear a lid when I ski. I don't touring, and sometimes in the Spring, but I feel naked as hell without it. OTOH, I roll with some people in this place on occasion that ski mach-loony on the regular and never wear a helmet, have never hit their head AFAIK. YMMV.

[skizix]

Two things:


1) The effectiveness/value of MIPS is dubious: https://helmets.org/mips.htm

So there is research that MIPS does nothing (Snell), and research that says it does make a difference (from the MIPS folks themselves, lol). Helmets.org (which really does seem unbiased) seems to believe it does nothing, but in the end concludes, "...the jury is still out on MIPS."

POC was one of the first adopters of MIPS, but fairly quickly moved away from it - supposedly because it was largely debunked, and because the MIPS parts take up space that could otherwise be filled with more impact-absorbing material. But now, some years later, they're developing their own MIPS-like system (and catching legal flak from MIPS as a result).

So who knows? Personally, I don't feel like it's worth the extra money, feel like hair does the same job, and feel like it's just more parts to fall apart. But if you really feel like it'll help save your noggin, by all means use it.


2) I am definitely skeptical that helmets have a shelf life (i.e. need replacing after 3 yrs or whatever, even with no impact). Marketing bullshit. Here's another helmets.org article: https://helmets.org/replace.htm In a reversal: Snell does believe in shelf life. But helmets.org does not. Read the study where 675 helmets were impact-tested, up to 26 years old, and found "no significant impact performance change with age."

I replace a helmet when it suffers a decent impact (only had to do that once so far), or when it starts to show significant signs of age (i.e. stuff other than the actual protective foam). Every-3-year replacement seems like serious overkill to me. But again, if it makes you feel better, go for it.

[gretch6364]

I like that Smith is starting to offer their high end helmets with or without MIPS. I need a new helmet and will like elect no MIPS

[ACH]

Two things:
2) I am definitely skeptical that helmets have a shelf life (i.e. need replacing after 3 yrs or whatever, even with no impact). Marketing bullshit. Here's another helmets.org article: https://helmets.org/replace.htm In a reversal: Snell does believe in shelf life. But helmets.org does not. Read the study where 675 helmets were impact-tested, up to 26 years old, and found "no significant impact performance change with age."

Generally speaking, everything manufactured as a state of decay from the moment it is produced. Some materials age well, others do not. "Shelf life" and "use life" are two different things to me.

As an example, if I have an unused helmet that is stored in a box at room temp over a long term, I don't expect that it will change much, if at all. OTOH, if I use my helmet on a daily basis over and extended period of time, say 3 ~ 4 seasons (average 80 ~ 90 days per), I think it's a good idea retire it after three seasons. My rational is the following. Over that period of time the helmet is being subjected to sweat on the regular (then subsequent cleaning), UV damage any time the sun is out, normal wear and tear of being packed and transported and repeated minor tree branch impacts.

Basically speaking, I think life expectation of a helmet is going to depend on who you are and how often you get out.

[mall walker]

inbounds: bern baker eps
out of bounds, if using a helmet: bd vapor with a hat underneath

been a while since I really rung my bell skiing though

[summit]

Two things:


1) The effectiveness/value of MIPS is dubious: https://helmets.org/mips.htm

So there is research that MIPS does nothing (Snell), and research that says it does make a difference (from the MIPS folks themselves, lol). Helmets.org (which really does seem unbiased) seems to believe it does nothing, but in the end concludes, "...the jury is still out on MIPS."

POC was one of the first adopters of MIPS, but fairly quickly moved away from it - supposedly because it was largely debunked, and because the MIPS parts take up space that could otherwise be filled with more impact-absorbing material. But now, some years later, they're developing their own MIPS-like system (and catching legal flak from MIPS as a result).

So who knows? Personally, I don't feel like it's worth the extra money, feel like hair does the same job, and feel like it's just more parts to fall apart. But if you really feel like it'll help save your noggin, by all means use it.

Having read all the data that is publicly available as well as plenty of the epidemiology on head injuries and helmets, traditional helmets are better at mitigating linear deceleration and preventing skull fracture (and some coup/contracoup) but there is a rotational force mitigation problem (causing concussion/TBI). And that is why MIPS was created. Now, the original POC MIPS implementation had a free moving inner shell from the outer shell that only went into action if enough shear force occured during a crash to break a shear pin joining the inner and outer. I have one of those POC bike helmets and it rocks. It works I think much better than the yellow elastomer MIPS that is all around now. I have more faith in linked layers with more solid elastomer links as rotational mitigation technology like 6D and several bike/moto companies are putting in like Kali, Leatt, and Bell.

I don't see those in ski helmets, or most bike helmets.

I bet POC's slide system works about as well as MIPS without the engineering tradeoffs. But why is there questionable MIPS data? Well for starters there isn't much in the way of universally agreed upon testing standards for rotational force mitigation. It took a LOT of data to show that traditional EPS helmets weren't reducing concussions much, but were reducing skull fractures and linear head injury severity. We don't have those data sets for MIPS helmets much less a breakdown of the various other engineering strategies. So yea, the jury is still out there!

Should it work? One would think perhaps your head just slides a in the helmet anyway, so why do we need MIPS. It does dependent on fit (tight? loose?) and friction (bald? hair?) and impact force/direction. Well, MIPS should let the external shell rotate against the liner, and then the liner can rotate against your head so there should be less rotation on the head, less rotational force in some circumstances. It is a sound theory. A perhaps related corollary: there is ample evidence to indicate that the improvements of ski boot design not letting slopping twisting happen in the boot is the cause for increased ACL injuries which necessitates binding manufacturers to build in better knee protection (bindings are designed to save the tibia, not the knee, but it is not the binding designs that are the cause of increased knee injury).

But do we need MIPS when falling onto a slippering surface like snow? Maybe less so than a biker/moto rider. But at higher speeds the forces are higher even on something with "give" and "low friction" like snow (we still wax our skis, remember?). And sometimes your head hits trees or rocks in a fall. So I think rotational mitigation is a good thing... is MIPS the best, I don't know, I think there is better, but I think it is better than nothing. MIPS might be safer and it certainly isn't less safe.

One could also solidly argue that smooth helmets with no brims (or breakaway visors) and a lower profile are lower friction, less likely to catch, and reduce rotational forces. Some manufacturers incorporate some of these items, particularly breakway visors in the biking world. POC seems to utilize all three strategies but it means less venting and no stylie lines... that POC look. I ski a Smith over a POC helmet because of the venting.

The last design key that I see missing in ski helmets is dual density foam, something becoming common in bike/moto. A few ski helmet companies are going the dual density route. POC has had it for a while.

[Doremite]

^great post Summit. Appreciated

[BCMtnHound]

I used to seldom get hit in the noggin from the damn bar being brought down by an aggressive gaper. With the helmet adding an extra couple cm or so, I get knocked almost every damn time. So fucking annoying.

Skid lid is due for replacement. Time to start trying on the new offerings I suppose. At least the venting options appear to have improved over my 7+yr old giro model.

[willywhit]

Every-3-year replacement seems like serious overkill to me. But again, if it makes you feel better, go for it

gotta double check but I think SCCA requires a fresh helmet every 3 years, regardless of how much it was used.
The SA2015-certified helmet you buy today is likely to be accepted by your track-day or racing organization for the next decade, but Snell recommends that you replace your helmet every five years or after any significant impact while wearing it
https://procarreviews.com/best-car-racing-helmet/

[Woodsy]

2) I am definitely skeptical that helmets have a shelf life (i.e. need replacing after 3 yrs or whatever, even with no impact). Marketing bullshit. Here's another helmets.org article: https://helmets.org/replace.htm In a reversal: Snell does believe in shelf life. But helmets.org does not. Read the study where 675 helmets were impact-tested, up to 26 years old, and found "no significant impact performance change with age."

I replace a helmet when it suffers a decent impact (only had to do that once so far), or when it starts to show significant signs of age (i.e. stuff other than the actual protective foam). Every-3-year replacement seems like serious overkill to me. But again, if it makes you feel better, go for it.

I replace from bangs and stank.
If it is sitting on a shelf it could last more years for certain.

[EWG]

Use life is what I'm trying to figure out. Last year I replaced our fleet of mtb helmets due to age (8-10 years), didn't get MIPS. Doing it again I would get it.

Our ski helmets are starting to age, so same question. Wife's Leedom is 2008. Too old? Not sure. I kind of think the breakdown concern is just marking crap designed to sell more helmets. If we do replace I'm getting MIPS. Why not? I'd love to hear more opinions on how old is too old. Thoughts?

My suspicion of the industry selling us crap we don't need aside, however, I am a helmet believer. Too many friends face planting on too many things. Many of these friends HIGHLY skilled. Many of them dumbasses too...

Some years ago I'm skiing with my son, who was maybe 10. At maybe 30 mph he's on my right, and decides to take a sharp left right in front of me. Rather than plow right through him I instinctively sort of de-weight and go up, clipping him with my knees to his shoulders. He's fine, skis right through it, but I look like the WR in the NFL who gets flipped over by a tackle in the air. Full spin, land directly on the back of my head. Giro Omen cracks completely in half, shell and foam.

We all get up, ski a few more runs to prove dad's fine, head home. Headaches and sensitivity to light starts. I play some indoor soccer a week later and my teammates get pissed cause I'm passing to the wrong team. Looks like the right team to me...

Do what you want, wear what you want, it's America man.

Here's the takeaway:
Having kids is dangerous to your health.

[bodywhomper]

What about DOT lids?

[summit]

What about DOT lids?

When people talk about potential issues for DOT FF lids for skiing, usually weight and optimization for higher energy impact compromising low energy performance are brought up. I think it's possible to find light DOT helmets. As far impact dissipation optimized for various impact forces, that is where dual density foam design is necessary to have a DOT helmet (or non-DOT helmet) that works well for high and low speed impacts.

Kali Shiva 2.0 and Kali Shiva 2.0 Carbon ($ but 15% lighter) would be my first pick if I wanted a DOT helmet that I could ski and mtb in and be just as happy as I am with another amazing helmet like POC, Leatt, 100%, TLD etc. Kali Shiva 2 is a DOT helmet that is also ASTM 2040 (ski/snowboard) ASTM 1592 (DH MTB) and several other safety certs with advanced rotational mitigation, advanced dual density foam, and a breakaway visor. I don't think anyone else has all those certs on one helmet. Kali is has motorcycle DNA in their helmets and they are designed to be great for MANY purposes (well vented). They clearly care a lot about safety. One helmet to do it all? That is the closest solution I can think of.

[bodywhomper]

Nice post. I figured somebody had thought about this. A DOT half lid was initial thought.

With any helmets, I’m curious how many helmets could meet multiple standards and the companies don’t bother to go through the certification/testing processes.

[k2skier112]

Epic, dejavu

[bodywhomper]

Nice post. I figured somebody had thought about this. A DOT half lid was initial thought.

With any helmets, I’m curious how many helmets could meet multiple standards and the companies don’t bother to go through the certification/testing processes.

So getting back to myself, it looks like there are plenty of light and minimal DOT half helmets for under $100 that provide protection from smacking tree branches and high energy crashes. goggle straps under the helmet?

My personal problem, i struggle to find a helmet that fits or stays on my head, and I do not like the feel of helmets that have coverage of most of my head. I also don’t like the look. Thus my reasoning for looking outside the typical norm. I’m 43. In my 41 years of skiing, I’ve only hit my head on tree limbs or snow and ice. The tree thing happens pretty frequently. In some ways, having a lid has increased my risk acceptance of skiing in very dense trees areas. I often wear a lid now as an example for my kids.

[XXX-er]

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calga...YaH3Yrh6o1tUw4

Skier death already due to head trauma