Baseball cap-style folding cycle helmet designed by ex-SpaceX engineers smashes crowdfunding target (+ video)

Simon_MacMichael wrote:

Possibly remiss of me not to point out in the article that baseball cap-style protective headgear isn't new ... if you want niche, such hats have been targeted for several years at press photographers who cover what we may term 'lively' situations but who want to blend in while also trying not to suffer undue harm from a bottle etc to the head.

that's why bowler hats were invented.

Simon E wrote:

Thanks to BTBS and Bike Snob for debunking the bullshit claims aka lies. A fool and his/her money are easily parted.

This campaign does cycling a disservice by reinforcing the ideas that 1. helmetless cycling is dangerous and you're just asking for trouble and 2. that a hat like this will save you from all evil*.

* except the marketing scum who make up lies like these.

Playing devils advocate for a bit, is there a way that they're not evil marketing vampires? They say that the sister of one of them was killed, not wearing a helmet, so maybe they really are trying to make the world a better place (*and* make lots of money at the same time). But they're tilting at the wrong windmill, like a certain Mr Briggs...

brooksby wrote:

Simon E wrote:

Thanks to BTBS and Bike Snob for debunking the bullshit claims aka lies. A fool and his/her money are easily parted.

This campaign does cycling a disservice by reinforcing the ideas that 1. helmetless cycling is dangerous and you're just asking for trouble and 2. that a hat like this will save you from all evil*.

* except the marketing scum who make up lies like these.

Playing devils advocate for a bit, is there a way that they're not evil marketing vampires? They say that the sister of one of them was killed, not wearing a helmet, so maybe they really are trying to make the world a better place (*and* make lots of money at the same time). But they're tilting at the wrong windmill, like a certain Mr Briggs...

playing Devil's Pedant for a bit, there isn't a right windmill to tilt at. Don Quixote was a deluded middle-aged man in not-even-real-armour who imagined he was tilting at giants.

B

ConcordeCX wrote:

brooksby wrote:

Simon E wrote:

Thanks to BTBS and Bike Snob for debunking the bullshit claims aka lies. A fool and his/her money are easily parted.

This campaign does cycling a disservice by reinforcing the ideas that 1. helmetless cycling is dangerous and you're just asking for trouble and 2. that a hat like this will save you from all evil*.

* except the marketing scum who make up lies like these.

Playing devils advocate for a bit, is there a way that they're not evil marketing vampires? They say that the sister of one of them was killed, not wearing a helmet, so maybe they really are trying to make the world a better place (*and* make lots of money at the same time). But they're tilting at the wrong windmill, like a certain Mr Briggs...

playing Devil's Pedant for a bit, there isn't a right windmill to tilt at. Don Quixote was a deluded middle-aged man in not-even-real-armour who imagined he was tilting at giants.

I know that , but saying “But like Mr Briggs they’re tilting at a windmill thinking it’s a giant, or maybe tilting at the wrong giant” just doesn’t scan as well.

(I haven’t read Don Quixote for years: I really must read it again)

brooksby wrote:

B

ConcordeCX wrote:

brooksby wrote:

Simon E wrote:

Thanks to BTBS and Bike Snob for debunking the bullshit claims aka lies. A fool and his/her money are easily parted.

This campaign does cycling a disservice by reinforcing the ideas that 1. helmetless cycling is dangerous and you're just asking for trouble and 2. that a hat like this will save you from all evil*.

* except the marketing scum who make up lies like these.

Playing devils advocate for a bit, is there a way that they're not evil marketing vampires? They say that the sister of one of them was killed, not wearing a helmet, so maybe they really are trying to make the world a better place (*and* make lots of money at the same time). But they're tilting at the wrong windmill, like a certain Mr Briggs...

playing Devil's Pedant for a bit, there isn't a right windmill to tilt at. Don Quixote was a deluded middle-aged man in not-even-real-armour who imagined he was tilting at giants.

I know that , but saying “But like Mr Briggs they’re tilting at a windmill thinking it’s a giant, or maybe tilting at the wrong giant” just doesn’t scan as well.

(I haven’t read Don Quixote for years: I really must read it again)

Slighly off-topic, but is "The Man Who Killed Don Quixote" (the infamous, cursed Terry Gilliam film) going to be released?

hawkinspeter wrote:

Slighly off-topic, but is "The Man Who Killed Don Quixote" (the infamous, cursed Terry Gilliam film) going to be released?

Was premiered in France back in May. I doubt it'll be on wide release in UK though. 

simonmb wrote:

hawkinspeter wrote:

Slighly off-topic, but is "The Man Who Killed Don Quixote" (the infamous, cursed Terry Gilliam film) going to be released?

Was premiered in France back in May. I doubt it'll be on wide release in UK though. 

I just hope it gets released somewhere, though it looks like Terry Gilliam has lost the rights to it! https://io9.gizmodo.com/terry-gilliam-has-lost-the-rights-to-the-man-who...

brooksby wrote:

Simon E wrote:

Thanks to BTBS and Bike Snob for debunking the bullshit claims aka lies. A fool and his/her money are easily parted.

This campaign does cycling a disservice by reinforcing the ideas that 1. helmetless cycling is dangerous and you're just asking for trouble and 2. that a hat like this will save you from all evil*.

* except the marketing scum who make up lies like these.

Playing devils advocate for a bit, is there a way that they're not evil marketing vampires? They say that the sister of one of them was killed, not wearing a helmet, so maybe they really are trying to make the world a better place (*and* make lots of money at the same time). But they're tilting at the wrong windmill, like a certain Mr Briggs...

She wasn't killed. She did spend four months in a coma and has since recovered. Who's to say that a helmet would have prevented that from happening? Shouldn't they be asking how hit and runs like this can be prevented?

BehindTheBikesheds wrote:

And

We bow before your Google-fu, o mighty one    Thanks for digging all this data up.

And

A bit tangential, but it'd be interesting to break down the location of UK cycling deaths...I suspect that it is skewed by London.  Looking into this i found a website called cycling-intelligence.com run by Olaf Storbeck from the FT who has been collecting data on serious accidents and death in London for some time. 

BehindTheBikesheds wrote:

And

Interesting about France: from holidaying there, I would have said they were less likely to wear helmets than in the UK.  

I also saw TV footage of Emmanuel Macron riding a bike at a holiday resort - normal clothes, no helmet.  And I remember thinking at the time that if Teresa May had lowered herself to riding a bike, it would have been a circus of helmets and hi-viz for all involved - because if she hadn't, the tabloids (and Twitter) would have crucified her).

hirsute wrote:

I quite like that the dimensions are in inches but the weight is in grams. "What the hell is a gram?"

According to Cervelo, a gram is a unit of speed.

https://road.cc/content/tech-news/249578-cervelo-updates-s3-improved-aer...

Still not convinced by Dave's explanation as to why that is not just hogwash.

arckuk wrote:

BTBS can rest easy, BSNYC has already taken apart this helment (relevant content starts half way down).

Nice - that's made me chuckle.

arckuk wrote:

BTBS can rest easy, BSNYC has already taken apart this helment (relevant content starts half way down).

Ha! Excellent.

I especially like the term 'MuskDouches'.

jasecd wrote:

Personally I think it looks alright - certainly no worse than the helmets that most of us wear on a regular basis. 

My issue is that their target market is exactly the people who should not need to wear helmets - low speed inner city riding that is roughly as safe as walking. Look at Copenhagen or Amsterdam - barely anyone wears a helmet for this type of riding - this should be the aim, not more and more protective clothing that reinforces the perception that cycling is dangerous.

Conversely, it's exactly the sort of riding where the helmet is most able to make a difference.  A helmet is going to do sweet FA if you go under a HGV at speed on a main road or take a tumble at 60kph downhill, conversely a low speed coming together with an innatentive pedestrian, low speed clip by a car or piece of street furniture and it may well save you a knock.

Don't know where you ride, but low speed inner London or New York is not "roughly as safe as walking" unless you happen to be on a CS route or equivalent....  Aspirationally, that should be the direction, but there's a long way to go.

If your personal risk tolerance means you are more happy with a helment on with the roads as they are, it's more stuffable into a bag, it looks less obviously MAMIL approved and it appears to be properly tested.  Looks like a winner.

FlyingPenguin wrote:

 

Conversely, it's exactly the sort of riding where the helmet is most able to make a difference.  A helmet is going to do sweet FA if you go under a HGV at speed on a main road or take a tumble at 60kph downhill, conversely a low speed coming together with an innatentive pedestrian, low speed clip by a car or piece of street furniture and it may well save you a knock.

 

Don't know where you ride, but low speed inner London or New York is not "roughly as safe as walking" unless you happen to be on a CS route or equivalent....  Aspirationally, that should be the direction, but there's a long way to go.

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachmentdata/file/648081/rrcgb2016-01.pdf

2016 UK Pedestrian fatalities: 35.4 per billion miles 

2016 UK Cyclist fatalities: 29.5 per billion miles

Casualty rates are however considerably higher for cyclists than pedestrians though a lot of that is thought to be attributed to solo incidents, which are less likely when walking.

While I haven't found any stats specificallly for cities I stand by my original comment that the risk is roughly the same, particularly when you consider that cyclist fatalities disproportionately occur in rural areas. This is not to negate the very hostile environments that we often find ourselves riding in, in cities and towns due to crap infrastructure and crapper driving - it can be deeply unpleasant but often isn't as dangerous as it feels.

I agree that the helmet will be more use in a low speed incident, however I bet that the vast majority of readers of this site are likely to wear one when going out for a 'proper ride'. I know I do then I won't bother when taking the 'clunker' to the shops.