When do you gear up Casual vs Full Gear?

[Scatcat]

15 minutes ago, Marty Backe said:

I remember this original post, and I think it's a great reminder. I should post this every time I see a video where a group of riders are cruising with their hands in their pockets (I won't name names here). That still blows me away, and they defend the practice!

Those two pictures though. And he was on a ventilator even? I'm guessing the first picture is immediately after and the second is after a couple of days, with swelling, etc. Scary.

Thanks for the post, really.

Yes. Mostly we're able to handle falls pretty alright. But there is always that "Murphy" time, that is just waiting around the corner. The one where all our experience and training fails us, and we end up flat on the ground like a freshly squashed fly. Cheating fate and walking away from such a "murphy-moment" is all about passive security and some luck.

[Scatcat]

1 hour ago, Darrell Wesh said:

My evidence is not anecdotal. It’s common sense. A heavier weight at the head will be harder to keep up in a fall. More bulk around the head will make contact sooner and hit the ground easier. It’s funny how angry people can get when facts stare them in the eye and put a stain on values they hold dear. This is irrefutable fact. 

You misread my post however! and are attacking it for something it never said. I never advocated going around wearing no helmet. I even acknowledged I’ve seen the faceplant photos of those without full face helmets. 

 I merely said that videos documenting all the gnarly scratches on their helmet (which they attribute would have happened to their face had they not had the helmet on) can not be justified due to those simple common sense facts I listed above. Something that COULD be justified would be more in the realm of: “hit my head and had a concussion, thank god I had my helmet or it would have been much worse” 

I understand the risk I take. If I didn’t think my body was ready to save me then I would be wearing a full face helmet every ride. You don’t understand that in my sport, I fall everyday. And catch myself. That is the nature of a sprinters block start: To generate an instantaneous burst of acceleration utilizing Newton’s Third Law, and having to have the strength and core rigidity to keep yourself upright. 

Ive fallen twice while riding for a year. Both times I was wearing a helmet and did not get a scratch on them. The first fall was coming off of grass and trying to go back into the sidewalk. The curb was deeper than I ever imagined and my entire tire contacted and immediately flattened, sending me flying forward as if a car had just hit a brick wall and sent the passenger out the windshield. Maybe 15mph. Full face helmet made no contact despite this being the most abrupt crash possible, even more abrupt then a cutout. 

The second crash I documented here in the forums, a 33mph fall off the MSX. No scratch on my helmet. A clean roll. No hurt wrists despite no wrist guards. 

Also: I am absolutely all for the idea of normal helmets. I would like to wear a simple “regular” helmet if I can find one attractive enough. For everyone else, if you’ve fallen before and had scratches on your full face, or don’t feel you’re fit enough to avoid a faceplant, I advise a full face. 

 

Your example with the Spanish GT16 rider was pretty anecdotal. And you DID use him as a reason you don't worry too much. He got a serious fracture in one of his arms, but was incredibly lucky to walk away without more serious damage.

So you've had two falls, one ditch stop at relatively low speed and one really speedy fall you managed to roll out of. From that you extrapolate that you will always be so lucky... Well, I certainly hope you're right.

But this common sense/physics thingie of yours sounds like no more, no less than justification for a decision you already made.That's your business if you keep it to yourself. But when you make your claims here, don't expect others to just let it stand without comments.

Adding 20% of weight to the head, and an inch or so in radius. Is that what you argue will make the difference between hitting your head or not? Is that what you call "common sense"? Put that in perspective, with a doubling in speed quadrupling the force... So go from 15 to 30 mph and the force difference is well, well beyond that of your "physics" for the added weight of a helmet.

 

Edited April 9, 2019 by Scatcat

[Smoother]

Both @Scatcat and @Darrell Wesh make good points. But @Marty Backe  made the most salient point relative to this particular accident. Specifically, the rider voluntarily had both his hand unavailable while riding fast, namely, adjusting his back pack. If you are going to have any chance of walking away from a fast face plant, with a face(assuming you aren't wearing a full face helmet),  you MUST have your hands/arms readily available to put out in front of you, as nature intended.  Marty referred to people riding with hands in pockets (same negative result). This poor guy basically broke the fall with his face, and his face with the fall.

EDIT: I recently rode with a backpack and I seem to remember fiddling with the straps while underway (not at diminished battery or high speed I might add).  I didn't think of the dangers at the time (familiar smooth clear path), but this report has highlighted, the dangers, so hopefully, we all learn from the misfortune of @Unventor s former riding partner.

Edited April 10, 2019 by Smoother

[Darrell Wesh]

3 minutes ago, Scatcat said:

Your example with the Spanish GT16 rider was pretty anecdotal. And you DID use him as a reason you don't worry too much. He got a serious fracture in one of his arms, but was incredibly lucky to walk away without more serious damage.

So you've had two falls, one ditch stop at relatively low speed and one really speedy fall you managed to roll out of. From that you extrapolate that you will always be so lucky... Well, I certainly hope you're right.

But this common sense/physics thingie of yours sounds like no more, no less than justification for a decision you already made.That's your business if you keep it to yourself. But when you make your claims here, don't expect others to just let it stand without comments.

Adding 20% of weight to the head, and an inch or so in radius. Is that what you argue will make the difference between hitting your head or not? Is that what you call "common sense"? Put that in perspective, with a doubling in speed quadrupling the force... So go from 15 to 30 mph and the force difference is well, well beyond that of your "physics" for the added weight of a helmet.

 

What you’re failing to realize or add in your extrapolation is that people fall and hit their head at 5mph. And people fall and DONT hit their head at 25mph. So that force difference is irrelevant, we need facts and ive stated facts concerning added weight and volume make it more likely to contact ground. Those are my only claims. And they’re fact. 

The reason I used that specific fall was it was the first video documented incident I’ve seen at such high speeds without a helmet. I used to always wear full face helmets on my 18” wheels when I knew I would be going full speed. I slowly phased the full face out when I saw that video because my prior thought process was that it was impossible to NOT faceplant or hit your head at such high speeds. A fall off an EUC in a natural standing forward stance is dramatically different from a fall off a skateboard/eboard or anything with handlebars. It’s very specific to athletic acceleration-falling and catching yourself for rapid acceleration. 

I will once again say I am an advocate for safety gear. If I do group rides I’ll wear a full face. But i like socializing spontaneously while on my EUC, and the freedom to pop in and out of shops or places without a bulky full face I need to take off every 5 minutes. To me and others I’ve questioned, a full face just looks like you should be mountain biking somewhere or doing something off road. Not to mention the plethora of times I’m going really slow on the sidewalk and don’t want people to be intimidated by the full face (which is why all my other protective gear is concealed). If I look normal instead of like I’m on a mission, people make comments and approach me more. You make more friends. Meet more people. Likely convert people to EUC’s as well if it doesn’t look so dangerous. 

You cannot be blind to the detriments of wearing a full face helmet despite the overwhelming positives of wearing one. 

[svenomous]

Regarding the ongoing debate about physics, I will state simply that I agree it is up to personal preference and risk tolerance vs. convenience, not to mention the perceived looks/style/dorkiness factor.  A lot of luck is involved in any case, to the point that an unprotected person can roll and walk away with minor scratches at 30mph (50km/h) while a full RoboCop-bedecked person can hit pavement at just the right angle to still crack a rib or get a spinal injury or crush something.  Look at what happened to @Rehab1 for example, where the hand/elbow hit, but the force transmitted just right and caused havoc upstream at the shoulder.  And indeed, the same is true in reverse: that elbow pad or knee pad or spinal D3 or helmet may be the exact thing that saves a body part from damage in a particular fall.  This reminds me of what happens with smartphones: a phone drops onto concrete from 6ft (180cm) and mirale of miracles, there's just a little scratch that's barely visible!  Next time, it drops on a wooden floor from a coffee table, but hits on the corner, and the entire screen cracks and crumbles despite the fancy screen protector or bumper case.  Each of us chooses how much protection is appropriate for our riding style, personal style, comfort, etc.  I say all this from a somewhat theoretical viewpoint, as I'm a prospective EUC rider, not an actual one (yet...first EUC arrives sometime next week I believe).  I ride bicycles on my daily commutes, and have to contend with the dangers of street traffic (plenty of very near misses), not to mention the ever-present if small potential for catastrophic mechanical failure while barreling down a hill at 40mph (over 60km/h), as I do every morning.

Back to practicalities, though:  I have a question about gloves vs. wrist guards.  I've bought the Flexmeters (based on recommendations in threads on this forum), but not actually used them yet (as I said, I don't have an EUC yet), and in this discussion there was a lengthy sub-thread about combining wrist guards with gloves, or buying gloves with integrated wrist guards.  Specifically regarding the Flexmeters, all the talk was about getting slim enough gloves, or modifying gloves, so that these could be worn under the wrist guards, but per the Flexmeter instructions and marketing text, they seem to expect people to wear the gloves over the wrist guards while removing the velcroed skids.  This would of course require a somewhat "loose" glove that allows for some extra thickness around the hand and wrist.  I wonder why nobody has mentioned this method of wearing both gloves and Flexmeters.  Is it just not practical (I haven't tried yet)?  Regarding gloves I'd use, btw, I have several pairs of bicycling gloves, both summer ones with open fingers and waterproof/warm winter ones, that should theoretically do the trick, given that they're meant only for additional abrasion protection and not impact protection.  I guess I should just go and try some of my gloves with the Flexmeters, over or under, to see what happens.  So lazy, sitting here on my couch.

[Darrell Wesh]

15 minutes ago, svenomous said:

Regarding the ongoing debate about physics, I will state simply that I agree it is up to personal preference and risk tolerance vs. convenience, not to mention the perceived looks/style/dorkiness factor.  A lot of luck is involved in any case, to the point that an unprotected person can roll and walk away with minor scratches at 30mph (50km/h) while a full RoboCop-bedecked person can hit pavement at just the right angle to still crack a rib or get a spinal injury or crush something.  Look at what happened to @Rehab1 for example, where the hand/elbow hit, but the force transmitted just right and caused havoc upstream at the shoulder.  And indeed, the same is true in reverse: that elbow pad or knee pad or spinal D3 or helmet may be the exact thing that saves a body part from damage in a particular fall.  This reminds me of what happens with smartphones: a phone drops onto concrete from 6ft (180cm) and mirale of miracles, there's just a little scratch that's barely visible!  Next time, it drops on a wooden floor from a coffee table, but hits on the corner, and the entire screen cracks and crumbles despite the fancy screen protector or bumper case.  Each of us chooses how much protection is appropriate for our riding style, personal style, comfort, etc.  I say all this from a somewhat theoretical viewpoint, as I'm a prospective EUC rider, not an actual one (yet...first EUC arrives sometime next week I believe).  I ride bicycles on my daily commutes, and have to contend with the dangers of street traffic (plenty of very near misses), not to mention the ever-present if small potential for catastrophic mechanical failure while barreling down a hill at 40mph (over 60km/h), as I do every morning.

Back to practicalities, though:  I have a question about gloves vs. wrist guards.  I've bought the Flexmeters (based on recommendations in threads on this forum), but not actually used them yet (as I said, I don't have an EUC yet), and in this discussion there was a lengthy sub-thread about combining wrist guards with gloves, or buying gloves with integrated wrist guards.  Specifically regarding the Flexmeters, all the talk was about getting slim enough gloves, or modifying gloves, so that these could be worn under the wrist guards, but per the Flexmeter instructions and marketing text, they seem to expect people to wear the gloves over the wrist guards while removing the velcroed skids.  This would of course require a somewhat "loose" glove that allows for some extra thickness around the hand and wrist.  I wonder why nobody has mentioned this method of wearing both gloves and Flexmeters.  Is it just not practical (I haven't tried yet)?  Regarding gloves I'd use, btw, I have several pairs of bicycling gloves, both summer ones with open fingers and waterproof/warm winter ones, that should theoretically do the trick, given that they're meant only for additional abrasion protection and not impact protection.  I guess I should just go and try some of my gloves with the Flexmeters, over or under, to see what happens.  So lazy, sitting here on my couch.

Don’t wear a helmet and don’t wear wrist guards. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Just kidding. Anyways, I have no idea why demon would recommend that as everyone knows you wear gloves UNDER wrist guards. You need the wrist guard overtop to slide. 

[Scatcat]

12 hours ago, Darrell Wesh said:

What you’re failing to realize or add in your extrapolation is that people fall and hit their head at 5mph. And people fall and DONT hit their head at 25mph. So that force difference is irrelevant, we need facts and ive stated facts concerning added weight and volume make it more likely to contact ground. Those are my only claims. And they’re fact. 

The reason I used that specific fall was it was the first video documented incident I’ve seen at such high speeds without a helmet. I used to always wear full face helmets on my 18” wheels when I knew I would be going full speed. I slowly phased the full face out when I saw that video because my prior thought process was that it was impossible to NOT faceplant or hit your head at such high speeds. A fall off an EUC in a natural standing forward stance is dramatically different from a fall off a skateboard/eboard or anything with handlebars. It’s very specific to athletic acceleration-falling and catching yourself for rapid acceleration. 

I will once again say I am an advocate for safety gear. If I do group rides I’ll wear a full face. But i like socializing spontaneously while on my EUC, and the freedom to pop in and out of shops or places without a bulky full face I need to take off every 5 minutes. To me and others I’ve questioned, a full face just looks like you should be mountain biking somewhere or doing something off road. Not to mention the plethora of times I’m going really slow on the sidewalk and don’t want people to be intimidated by the full face (which is why all my other protective gear is concealed). If I look normal instead of like I’m on a mission, people make comments and approach me more. You make more friends. Meet more people. Likely convert people to EUC’s as well if it doesn’t look so dangerous. 

You cannot be blind to the detriments of wearing a full face helmet despite the overwhelming positives of wearing one. 

So I start positive. I get what you're talking about socially. And for slow cruising in a park or on a sidewalk, a full face may well make you look like a living hazard/alien soldier to bystanders.

Then a small sting. If the force difference is irrelevant, then the extra weight of helmet is just as irrelevant. That extra weight is extra force when you fall, that was the whole point, wasn't it? To some extent that reasoning about 5mph and 25mph is just like my reasoning that either you fall in a way that lets you save your head, rolling or sliding, or you don't. If you don't, passive security is all that stands between you and a fractured skull and a potential inter-cranial hemorrhage.

And yeah, I'm not blind to the downsides of a bulky helmet. I'm just planning to buy a summer helmet, and so let my somewhat bulky (3 lbs) cross helmet rest until next fall. And when I look at prospective helmets, safety is of course one of the paramount parameters, but not the only one. The others are how convenient it is taking off or putting on, and how "open" it is when communicating with the rest of the world, and of course weight. I can even accept a small protective hit, for some added convenience.

[Rehab1]

@svenomous Yes those that hit the pavement unprotected traveling at 59km/h and walk away without a scratch still amazes me. They are definitely blessed and should add to their fortune by playing the lottery daily. 

[Lutalo]

6 hours ago, svenomous said:

  I wonder why nobody has mentioned this method of wearing both gloves and Flexmeters. 

Because it's not practical. I don't own one pair of gloves that makes any sense to attempt to wear over my wristguards; most won't even fit over my wristguards. If it made any sense we would already be doing it. 

In fact, where it's practical to wear clothing items over protective gear many are already doing that; including, me. For example,  I usually wear my knee protection under my jeans, and my elbow protection under my hoodie or jacket. I have a preference for the natural look. The warmer seasons obviously impact my style, but when it's practical, that's how I wear them. 

[Smoother]

9 hours ago, svenomous said:

but per the Flexmeter instructions and marketing text, they seem to expect people to wear the gloves over the wrist guards while removing the velcroed skids.  This would of course require a somewhat "loose" glove that allows for some extra thickness around the hand and wrist.  I wonder why nobody has mentioned this method of wearing both gloves and Flexmeters.  Is it just not practical (I haven't tried yet)?

Firstly congrats on your new wheel and your new sport. Which wheel are you getting?

I haven't perused the Flexmeter spin web site in a while but I seem to recall something about snowboarding.  Which is a good reason to wear gloves over the guards. And if you ride an EUC over ice or snow and it's still cold, that would be a good idea too.  But over grippy surfaces such as paved roads and paths, or even unpaved for that matter you want your gliders (or what ever your brand has as a hard plastic slider) to slide and dissipate the energy of the fall into horizontal motion followed by a friction induced deceleration (hopefully on your pads and your chest/stomach).  Putting gloves on the outside one increases the chances of sticking the landing and transferring that kinetic energy along the arm, with predictable consequences.  One also risks rolling over the hand in such a way that the wrist guards now become a fulcrum on which to break your fingers (although Flexmeters claims their design helps prevent/reduce this)  I, for one, don't plan on testing that.

[LanghamP]

21 hours ago, Darrell Wesh said:

You cannot be blind to the detriments of wearing a full face helmet despite the overwhelming positives of wearing one. 

A lot of the people who have crashed seem to hit their chin. And referring to bicyclists who ride in groups and catch their front tire in the rear tire of the person ahead of them, a front flip with the terrible but not deadly result seems to indicate that full-face helmets are the way to go.

However, drivers will pass you much closer if you're wearing a helmet, and realistically your biggest danger to death and injury comes from being hit by a driver, so I wonder if the best option for most riders is simply not to wear a helmet.

[Dzlchef]

1 minute ago, LanghamP said:

However, drivers will pass you much closer if you're wearing a helmet, and realistically your biggest danger to death and injury comes from being hit by a driver, so I wonder if the best option for most riders is simply not to wear a helmet.

Hmm...not really sure about that argument.  In LA, they really aren’t going to care what you’re wearing, they’re too busy checking phones and putting on makeup to notice.  

[Smoother]

17 minutes ago, LanghamP said:

A lot of the people who have crashed seem to hit their chin. And referring to bicyclists who ride in groups and catch their front tire in the rear tire of the person ahead of them, a front flip with the terrible but not deadly result seems to indicate that full-face helmets are the way to go.

However, drivers will pass you much closer if you're wearing a helmet, and realistically your biggest danger to death and injury comes from being hit by a driver, so I wonder if the best option for most riders is simply not to wear a helmet.

I've driven past hundreds of cyclists but I never use the status of their head gear to determine how close I pass them.  I give them a reasonable safe gap as required by law, and if there is no room to pass (blind bends/narrow roads) I'll wait until it's safe to pass, also as prescribed by law. I don't know what the common mentality is in St.Louis or wherever you're reporting from, but It sounds f.ing crazy. I prescribe more drive-by-shootings to reduce the number of free-range-rude.

[Darrell Wesh]

59 minutes ago, Dzlchef said:

Hmm...not really sure about that argument.  In LA, they really aren’t going to care what you’re wearing, they’re too busy checking phones and putting on makeup to notice.  

The data supports @LanghamP 

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.forbes.com/sites/carltonreid/2018/11/14/motorists-punish-helmet-wearing-cyclists-with-close-passes-confirms-data-recrunch/amp/

My own personal experience with full face helmets and motorcycle helmets on EUC’s and scooters also demonstrated to me cars give me much less room. 

Ive previously stated my biggest concern is getting hit and that is also a big reason why I don’t wear a helmet. Helmets offer little to no protection from being hit by a car, as stated in the article.

I ride 90% of the time in the road. The suggestion to not wear a helmet is radical however, and would only be suitable for people who ride in traffic. The way I see it, if you face plant in traffic you’ll be protected by a full face helmet from damage to your face, but you’re likely going to get hit from behind by a car. If you wear no helmet that extra distance the car kept from you could help them avoid you or brake in time after your faceplant.  This is why  I believe it’s a better idea to not wear a helmet if you’re on the road with cars. 

If you’re on the sidewalks and “dedicated” bike paths then your biggest danger is yourself losing control and thus a helmet is warranted. 

Edited April 10, 2019 by Darrell Wesh

[Dzlchef]

19 minutes ago, Darrell Wesh said:

The data supports @LanghamP 

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.forbes.com/sites/carltonreid/2018/11/14/motorists-punish-helmet-wearing-cyclists-with-close-passes-confirms-data-recrunch/amp/

My own personal experience with full face helmets and motorcycle helmets on EUC’s and scooters also demonstrated to me cars give me much less room. 

Ive preciously started my biggest concern is getting hit and that is also a big reason why I don’t wear a helmet. Helmets offer little to no protection from being hit by a car, as stated in the article.

I ride 90% of the time in the road. The suggestion to not wear a helmet is radical however, and would only be suitable for people who ride in traffic. The way I see it, if you face plant in traffic you’ll be protected by a full face helmet from damage to your face, but you’re likely going to get hit from behind by a car. If you wear no helmet that extra distance the car kept from you could help them avoid you or brake in time after your faceplant.  This is why  I believe it’s a better idea to not wear a helmet if you’re on the road with cars. 

If you’re on the sidewalks and “dedicated” bike paths then your biggest danger is yourself losing control and thus a helmet is warranted. 

I ride in traffic 20 miles a day and feel that a helmet is crucial.  I’ve never felt crowded out by a car although I’ve had car doors opened on me and daily somebody tries to run me down.  I work on being very visibile and aware when riding in traffic which makes more sense then wearing less protection.  To each their own.

[seage]

22 minutes ago, Darrell Wesh said:

The data supports @LanghamP 

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.forbes.com/sites/carltonreid/2018/11/14/motorists-punish-helmet-wearing-cyclists-with-close-passes-confirms-data-recrunch/amp/

My own personal experience with full face helmets and motorcycle helmets on EUC’s and scooters also demonstrated to me cars give me much less room. 

Ive preciously started my biggest concern is getting hit and that is also a big reason why I don’t wear a helmet. Helmets offer little to no protection from being hit by a car, as stated in the article.

I ride 90% of the time in the road. The suggestion to not wear a helmet is radical however, and would only be suitable for people who ride in traffic. The way I see it, if you face plant in traffic you’ll be protected by a full face helmet from damage to your face, but you’re likely going to get hit from behind by a car. If you wear no helmet that extra distance the car kept from you could help them avoid you or brake in time after your faceplant.  This is why  I believe it’s a better idea to not wear a helmet if you’re on the road with cars. 

If you’re on the sidewalks and “dedicated” bike paths then your biggest danger is yourself losing control and thus a helmet is warranted. 

Now thats rather interesting. I must say though, from my limited riding in the city, which i've just started, a lot of cars stay a LOT further back from me than when im on my bike. Helmet or no helmet. Usually they're paying full attention to me and go PRETTY wide around. But this may be the temperament of Toronto drivers. I do wonder if we're all coming at this from lived perspectives. Basically, we're all reactive to how we see traffic and road conditions and so on based on where we've grown up/live/ride. 

Because as shitty as Toronto is, im guessing its nowhere near as crazy as LA roads. Or New York, even watching in videos, its a different ball game, and the way people ride out there reflects that. Thats why on youtube you always see people going "YOU'RE GONNA GET THIS BANNED, YOU'RE BEING RECKLESS!" but they're coming from the perspective of how they ride/drive in their own cities, and not really taking into consideration the styles of others. I feel like id PROBABLY get hit in New York if i rode like i do in Toronto. Maybe not even by a car, but another cyclist of some sort. The way Tishawn rides for example seems crazy, but hes always out of the way, and his reaction time is stupid fast. Everyone sees him and he has space. It looks crazy, but i wonder if he was to chill out and ride straight as can be, if cars would get cozy and run him down by mistake? Are cars in NY used to crazy bike messengers? Is this actually less crazy and more the norm of how cyclists/boarders and cars share the road? And as outsiders are we seeing it as nuts because thats just so far from our reality we cant understand it?

I think we really have to apply different styles and knowledge and precautions depending on where we ride, and not just by terrain or "City - Subs - mountains". But actually WHICH city. WHICH mountain, you know? 

Or maybe im talking out of my ass XD. Im just really interested about the debate going on!

Also, i hope theres no hard feelings between you and and @Scatcat. Those pictures were upsetting, mate. Im glad hes okay now, but thats a terrible way to go down. I do understand how this thread felt kinda personal but I do hope we also are opening some doors to the different perspectives and why. Also good clear shots of reality once in a while. 

[Darrell Wesh]

8 minutes ago, Dzlchef said:

I ride in traffic 20 miles a day and feel that a helmet is crucial.  I’ve never felt crowded out by a car although I’ve had car doors opened on me and daily somebody tries to run me down.  I work on being very visibile and aware when riding in traffic which makes more sense then wearing less protection.  To each their own.

I’m all for challenging conventional beliefs so my question to you is Why? What do you think will happen if you fall while you’re in front of a car? 

Its funny because the article also talks about how motorists think a helmet is some magic piece of armor that will protect a cyclist if they get run over. I think that same irrationality extends to people who wear the helmet. It’s not going to protect you from that. 

Riding in traffic is strictly warned against on all EUC manuals (at least INMOTION and Ninebot manuals). It’s the most dangerous way to commute. The most lethal. If science says cars will give me a bit more room so I have less of a chance to die then I’ll take that over protecting my face any day. 

Edited April 10, 2019 by Darrell Wesh

[LanghamP]

4 minutes ago, Dzlchef said:

I ride in traffic 20 miles a day and feel that a helmet is crucial.  I’ve never felt crowded out by a car although I’ve had car doors opened on me and daily somebody tries to run me down.  I work on being very visibile and aware when riding in traffic which makes more sense then wearing less protection.  To each their own.

The obvious answer is to wear a helmet, always.

The obvious answer is incorrect, if the purpose of wearing a helmet is to protect the bicyclist.

The correct answer is for a gun to be installed in the steering wheel of the car in lieu of the airbag, and, upon entry to shared roadways, to be deployed ready to fire into the heart of the driver upon a collision with a pedestrian or a bicyclist. Doing so immediately spreads the risk from bicyclists/pedestrian to driver. Do you think that drivers will now take the utmost care when driving?

[Marty Backe]

22 minutes ago, Dzlchef said:

I ride in traffic 20 miles a day and feel that a helmet is crucial.  I’ve never felt crowded out by a car although I’ve had car doors opened on me and daily somebody tries to run me down.  I work on being very visibile and aware when riding in traffic which makes more sense then wearing less protection.  To each their own.

For your commutes, I wonder if it might be a good idea to wear what Chooch does - the high visibility yellow safety vest. I'm not much for the look, but I think if I commuted a lot like you do, I would probably wear it during the commute.

[LanghamP]

11 minutes ago, Darrell Wesh said:

I’m all for challenging conventional beliefs so my question to you is Why? What do you think will happen if you fall while you’re in front of a car? 

Except for three states in the USA that finds bicyclists partially at fault if they get rammed from behind, all other states say the bicyclist is a vehicle with the right to the entire lane, with of course the responsibility of not running lights, yielding to pedestrians, etc...

The problem is that unless drivers are specifically trained to allow the bicyclist the full lane, then drivers think the bicyclist is being in a place properly reserved for automobile traffic. In practice, ramming a bicyclists and killing them results in being charged only half the time. Most killers (of bicyclists) face no jail time at all ("sorry didn't see you, mate").

You wear a full-face helmet when you horseplay in a group ride or you're looking for trouble on your 18 incher, but make no mistake...a driver will be more likely to hit you if you're wearing one.

[Unventor]

23 hours ago, Smoother said:

Both @Scatcat and @Darrell Wesh make good points. But @Marty Backe  made the most salient point relative to this particular accident. Specifically, the rider voluntarily had both his hand unavailable while riding fast, namely, adjusting his back pack. If you are going to have any chance of walking away from a fast face plant, with a face(assuming you aren't wearing a full face helmet),  you MUST have your hands/arms readily available to put out in front of you, as nature intended.  Marty referred to people riding with hands in pockets (same negative result). This poor guy basically broke the fall with his face, and his face with the fall.

EDIT: I recently rode with a backpack and I seem to remember fiddling with the straps while underway (not at diminished battery or high speed I might add).  I didn't think of the dangers at the time (familiar smooth clear path), but this report has highlighted, the dangers, so hopefully, we all learn from the misfortune of @Unventor s former riding partner.

My former riding partner? I am not sure who that might be.

[Marty Backe]

2 minutes ago, LanghamP said:

Except for three states in the USA that finds bicyclists partially at fault if they get rammed from behind, all other states say the bicyclist is a vehicle with the right to the entire lane, with of course the responsibility of not running lights, yielding to pedestrians, etc...

The problem is that unless drivers are specifically trained to allow the bicyclist the full lane, then drivers think the bicyclist is being in a place properly reserved for automobile traffic. In practice, ramming a bicyclists and killing them results in being charged only half the time. Most killers (of bicyclists) face no jail time at all ("sorry didn't see you, mate").

You wear a full-face helmet when you horseplay in a group ride or you're looking for trouble on your 18 incher, but make no mistake...a driver will be more likely to hit you if you're wearing one.

Besides protecting my head, the most useful feature of my helmet is the helmet mirror. I have continuous situational awareness of what's approaching me from behind. I don't have to look down at a wrist mounted mirror (which is still better than nothing) or raise my wrist mounted mirror so that it looks like I'm waving at someone.

I can always see if people driving behind me are giving me a wide berth, and modify my trajectory as necessary. And sometimes I'll ride in the lane and carve so that I indeed am consuming the entire lane. But again, I'm looking in my mirror and if I get the sense that a car may not be honoring my position, I'll scoot over to the side.

So skip the primary helmet-for-safety argument, and get a helmet so that you know what's happening around you.

This is my favorite mirror right now. It has a slightly convex mirror that offers exceptional visibility.

Amazon Link

[NylahTay]

 

 

 

1 hour ago, Darrell Wesh said:

The data supports @LanghamP 

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.forbes.com/sites/carltonreid/2018/11/14/motorists-punish-helmet-wearing-cyclists-with-close-passes-confirms-data-recrunch/amp/

 

Wow, what an interesting study. I will say that when I see someone on a bicycle with a helmet and full cycling gear, I tend to think of them as professionals that know what they are doing. Whereas if I see someone with jeans, tshirt, and helmet, my mind jumps to think it's just a casual rider. So I can see people being more careless around the 'pro' rather than the 'casual' person. 

I wonder if that would translate with us putting full gear on. I've never worn a helmet while riding my EUC, but that is partially due to only riding on sidewalks since I can only go about 12mph. I've owned a Ninebot One S1 for the past 2 years. Now that I've ordered a KS18XL, I've been following this thread a bit more closely. I was looking at motocycle mesh jackets since summer in Missouri USA is hot and humid and airflow is important. But If I were to put on full protective gear, would that make people more careless? Interesting thought! 

 

 

 

1 hour ago, Darrell Wesh said:

If you’re on the sidewalks and “dedicated” bike paths then your biggest danger is yourself losing control and thus a helmet is warranted. 

I use my EUC for my daily commute, which has sidewalks all the way, with few (maybe 1-2) pedestrians. The city has been doing better with adding more bicycle lanes, and there are normally sidewalks everywhere. So maybe I'll just stick to getting a helmet when my KS18XL comes in.

[Dzlchef]

1 hour ago, Darrell Wesh said:

I’m all for challenging conventional beliefs so my question to you is Why? What do you think will happen if you fall while you’re in front of a car? 

Its funny because the article also talks about how motorists think a helmet is some magic piece of armor that will protect a cyclist if they get run over. I think that same irrationality extends to people who wear the helmet. It’s not going to protect you from that. 

Riding in traffic is strictly warned against on all EUC manuals (at least INMOTION and Ninebot manuals). It’s the most dangerous way to commute. The most lethal. If science says cars will give me a bit more room so I have less of a chance to die then I’ll take that over protecting my face any day. 

I wear the helmet in case I hit my head on the ground, car door, whatever.  It has no bearing on riding with traffic, or a side street by myself. 

[LanghamP]

9 minutes ago, Dzlchef said:

I wear the helmet in case I hit my head on the ground, car door, whatever.  It has no bearing on riding with traffic, or a side street by myself. 

A helmet is the final "last gasp" defense, when the collision has already occured. Its purpose is to reduce the injury by distributing the energy over a larger area and over longer times.

It's akin to wearing metal mesh while swimming in a shark tank; one would be far better off not being in the water with a shark in the first place.

Concerning @Nylah Tay Rogers riding on a sidewalk:

The sidewalk is not a safe place isolated from car drivers because drivers can freely and legally enter the sidewalk in many places. That is, because the sidewalk is intersected by many driveways, riding on the sidewalk means you still have to deal with drivers. Pedestrians have a death rate three times higher than bicyclists per trip. It's dangerous to think of a sidewalk as a place reserved only for pedestrians when the sidewalk isn't actually reserved for just pedestrians.