Police crackdown on unsafe helmets

[rastuscat]

all certified helmets have to meet minimum requirements, some might go beyond this but this isn't necessarily what you're paying for when you go more expensive; usually what you pay for is weight reduction, comfort, features & better tech (which usually leads to 1 & 2)

alert alert alert.......

Someone's using skoobers account to talk sense!!!!!!

[tigertim20]

Do you have a consumer magazine report you can post then on the safety of different priced helmets? Sorry I dont see any connection by just googling the word "Sharp"

So your belief is a $125 helmet is just as safe as a $1000 one and those that buy the $1000 one just do it for pose value? I feel you are the one off the planet and if you hit your head wearing your cheap helmet your thinking may be different. I have actually looked at some cheap helmets and the build quality is just not there but maybe the cheap cost is more important to you.

for fuck sakes are you lazy or stupid?

plenty of info out there showing that in fact many $100 helmets meet, and often exceed the safety ratings of $900 helmets.

if you arent intelligent enough to string together a combination of a few words like sharp, safety, helmet, ratings then you are beyond the help Im qualified to give

[pritch]

If you honestly believe a $900 helmet is 3 times better/safer than a $300 helmet, then I can't save you from yourself.

True. Once helmets meet the safety standard they must be safe, the gubbermint said so. More expensive lids should be more comfortable and may be quieter. They may be more stable at speed or they may be lighter. Then the fancy paint jobs cost more, some of them lots more.

It is extremely unlikely though that a $1500 hat is five times safer than a $300 hat.

[bogan]

You may not be able to see any quality difference but I can.

Perhaps your propensity for testing helmet durability is not a good thing, is it not?

[tigertim20]

You may not be able to see any quality difference but I can. How would you know the accuracy of a safety rating on a real cheap helmet anyway and manufacturers do falsify labels which is far less likely to happen with a more expensive widely known brand. Just respect that I prefer to buy on a balance of price and quality and I will respect you prefer to buy on the cheapest price with a label equivalent to that of more expensive helmets irrespective of build quality.

glad you could clarify for me that you are in fact stupid, and not just lazy.

the sharp ratings are independent.

and my most recent helmet purchase, within the last month in fact was around $700. not because of some falsely conceived idea of its superiority, but because it is a nicer fit for my skull.

Now go crawl back in your hole.

[Topes]

Fucking Mike Noon, you are the fucking AA. If you reckon your members and drivers aren't educated about the road rules pull your thumb out of your arse and do something about it. You have magazines and a bunch of other means at your disposal to educate people, don't bitch and moan that not enough is being done.

I think this is the dumbest road rule ever. Why do you have indicate that you're going straight. I'd rather be keeping an eye up and out for hazards then worry about my indicator because I'm not crossing the path of another vehicle.

If a roundabout has two lanes the outside is for straight through only and the inside is straight or right turn..

That other dumbest idea and that round about in Lower Hutt is a prefect example is putting pedestrian crossing where you can put a car at risk by making it stop in the round about.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[James Deuce]

SHARP isn't a standard, it's a rating system and arguably a flawed one at that. The following article neglects to mention that unlike DOT, Snell, and ECE the SHARP system doesn't use a head form that simulates hair and scalp, both of which have a significant effect on helmet rotation during an oblique impact. SHARP also uses much lower energy direct and oblique angle anvil impacts.

http://www.revzilla.com/common-tread...ty-ratings-101

Underlying every production standard is the need to compromise affordability and capability so we can actually afford a helmet.

[swbarnett]

Why do you have indicate that you're going straight.

But you're not going straight. I assume you're not in the habit of going over the center of the roundabout?

[haydes55]

I think this is the dumbest road rule ever. Why do you have indicate that you're going straight. I'd rather be keeping an eye up and out for hazards then worry about my indicator because I'm not crossing the path of another vehicle.

If a roundabout has two lanes the outside is for straight through only and the inside is straight or right turn..

That other dumbest idea and that round about in Lower Hutt is a prefect example is putting pedestrian crossing where you can put a car at risk by making it stop in the round about.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Regardless of your exit, in a round about you must always indicate to exit. It's simple. Takes less thought than scratching your balls. Only indicate right if you're turning right. Shit that's easy.

People struggle with the simplest things, makes me wonder how difficult it would actually be to be a brain surgeon.

[nzspokes]

SHARP isn't a standard, it's a rating system and arguably a flawed one at that. The following article neglects to mention that unlike DOT, Snell, and ECE the SHARP system doesn't use a head form that simulates hair and scalp, both of which have a significant effect on helmet rotation during an oblique impact. SHARP also uses much lower energy direct and oblique angle anvil impacts.

http://www.revzilla.com/common-tread...ty-ratings-101

Underlying every production standard is the need to compromise affordability and capability so we can actually afford a helmet.

Agreed. Cheaper helmets are designed to pass whatever standard is relevant for that country.

Quality helmets will pass standards but also last a lot longer, be lighter, be more stable at speed, have decent warranties and have spare parts available.

I have read the Sharp testing system a while back, at the time I thought it was a budget testing system.

[F5 Dave]

SHARP isn't a standard, it's a rating system and arguably a flawed one at that. The following article neglects to mention that unlike DOT, Snell, and ECE the SHARP system doesn't use a head form that simulates hair and scalp, both of which have a significant effect on helmet rotation during an oblique impact. SHARP also uses much lower energy direct and oblique angle anvil impacts.

http://www.revzilla.com/common-tread...ty-ratings-101

Underlying every production standard is the need to compromise affordability and capability so we can actually afford a helmet.

Interesting, I'd scoffed at Sharp when I learnt it didn't rate my Arai of the time as best pick. I then read it and came away fairly impressed that it was making a good stab of it. But that article shows that it only rates helmets that pass ECE and has 5 steps thereafter. Everything is compromise. Even that article has quite a bias. No sticker is a novelty helmet that offers no protection it slurs. Or hasn't been tested.

[pritch]

Regardless of your exit, in a round about you must always indicate to exit. It's simple. Takes less thought than scratching your balls. Only indicate right if you're turning right. Shit that's easy.

People struggle with the simplest things, makes me wonder how difficult it would actually be to be a brain surgeon.

In Taranaki the roundabouts tend to be miniatures. Some in Hawera are just painted in the middle of ordinary intersections. The indicators need to be operated as fast as you can possibly work them and people do just drive straight over them.

As for how difficult it is to be a brain surgeon, that's topical and a good question considering the dumb shit Ben Carson comes out with.

[nerrrd]

Wonder what they'd say about my "super-visor" which is attached via clips stuck to the ordinary visor, it's pretty lightweight plastic but probably counts as an illegal modification?



Can identify with the smaller roundabout issue, the gears on my current bike are so tall I have to feather the clutch and work the indicators at the same time, bit of a challenge for my limited co-ordination skills.

[nodrog:Me]

So while my debate was not about standards you do confirm that not only with higher priced helmets do you get better build quality but they will likely be safer too
if they have a different rating to the Sharp testing system. From the attachment posted all the other standards are not rated perfect either so if in doubt the thinking would be to buy the most expensive
helmet you can afford for the sort of riding you do if its a good fit. Looking at the model/brand helmet that racers wear would be a good indication of a top helmet if you dont want
to buy on whatever the testing standard of a helmet is. I douubt racers would wear $125 dollar new helmets despite the claim they are just as safe as $1000 ones.

its called ergonomics dumbarse.

a bucket full of sand on your head would probably pass a helmet test, but its not going to be very comfortable is it?

[rastuscat]

I think this is the dumbest road rule ever. Why do you have indicate that you're going straight. I'd rather be keeping an eye up and out for hazards then worry about my indicator because I'm not crossing the path of another vehicle.

If a roundabout has two lanes the outside is for straight through only and the inside is straight or right turn..

That other dumbest idea and that round about in Lower Hutt is a prefect example is putting pedestrian crossing where you can put a car at risk by making it stop in the round about.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

There are a lot dumber rules, don't worry.

And clearly you have no idea what you are supposed to be doing.

The person sitting opposite you on a roundabout is wondering if they have to give way to you. Once you are on the roundabout, you have left the straight road you are on, and have entered a separate control area. If you indicate your exit, everyone knows what you are doing, and it just make traffic flow better. Less waiting.

Of course, the subtleties of such traffic flow issues escape many, who cant see past the needs of the person in their mirror.