Some have adjustable vents, or use vent plugs.
#INVISOR INVIDEO TRIAL#
Not as slick as a chrono time trial helmet, but made more aerodynamic than a normal road helmet, often just by covering vents with a plastic cover.
#INVISOR INVIDEO FULL#
Abus has shown a model with a cardboard liner section, backed by standard EPS, and there may someday be a full cardboard liner helmet. One is lower density, and should crush more easily at lower impact levels, possibly offering an advantage in avoiding concussions. Conehead helmets have two layers of standard EPS foam. There are more Conehead designs with dual density impact foam in helmet liners. POC has a liner partially composed of a honeycomb material. Smith has models that use collapsible plastic modules looking like hollow straws in place of foam, but with some EPS still included in the liner. Impact liners are finally evolving this year.We still regard MIPS as unprovent technology unless your helmet is so closely coupled to your head that it can't move on impact even a quarter inch. Some skate models have full coverage MIPS layers. Unfortunately, the road models have nothing in the rear, a frequent impact location, because it interferes with ring fit and stabilizer mechanisms. Most are implemented by a thin layer of material in the top that slides. The trend was boosted by Bell's purchase of a big chunk of the MIPS patent-holder company in mid-2014. There are many new helmets using the MIPS (Multi-directional Impact Protection System - tm) slip plane technology.There are unpublished indications that the lightest and thinnest helmets do not perform well when impact levels exceed those required by the CPSC standard. Most of them probably do not, even those that provide additional coverage. Without comparative test data we usually do not know if a particular model exceeds the requirements of the standard and offers superior protection. For the US market the CPSC standard is required by law for any bicycle helmet. We have more on that on our MIPS page.Īlmost all of the helmets listed below meet national or international standards and offer good protection, although some standards are tougher than others. We still regard MIPS as unproven technology unless you have a helmet that couples so closely to your head that you can't move it even a quarter inch. But there is still no verifiable major advance in impact performance, ventilation or wearability this year that would compel you to replace your current helmet.Ī slip-plane addition to some helmets exploded in the market in late 2014 when Bell bought a large chunk of the MIPS patent holder company. The trend continues toward the compact, rounder, smoother profile that we think is best when you crash. There are new models in 2015 that are worth a look if you need a new helmet. We recommend looking for a helmet that fits you well and has a rounded, smooth exterior with no major snag points. We have tested a sample of cheap and expensive helmets and found no real performance differences by price. Almost all of the helmets described below meet standards and offer good if not excellent protection. Some new developments, including MIPS, we consider unproven.
Summary: Our review finds no radical safety improvement this year that would compel you to replace your current helmet, although new technology has finally come to the marketplace.
0 kommentar(er)
