Australian Helmet standards

[Bleve]

Graeme Dods wrote:
> >
> > Exactly. I wouldn't want to be them if someone crashes, gets
> > a head injury while wearing a non-approved helmet, and decides to sue
> > them.
>
> Have you ever read any of the blurb that comes out of helmet manufacturers?
> Not even the manufacturers claim it will prevent head injury in the event
> of a crash. All they ever have on their web sites are "cool feature",
> "sporty looks" etc (their "in box" blurb is even more clear, usually "if
> you hurt your head when wearing this, don't come crying to us" type stuff).
> That way they're pretty much in the clear when it comes to claims against
> them, and by extension, anyone mandating their use who also do not make
> such protective claims. Any sporting body could mandate the wearing of a
> frilly pink tutu, but if they make no claims for its effects (implied or
> otherwise) then nobody can say it didn't do what it was meant to do.
>
> However, if said sporting body says, "wear your helmet to protect from head
> injuries", they're on more dubious ground.

The point would be that if the organisers say you can use a
non-approved helmet, and someone crashes, and gets a head
injury (manufacturers claims notwithstanding) then I'd
say they (the crashee) would probably be able to make life
difficult for the organisers. Not that they'd be in the
"right", but they may be able to make a case. Slater & Gordon
would take a punt on it ... if there isn't precedent for it
already.

 

[Terry Collins]

Theo Bekkers wrote:

> You can buy anything you want but it only has to meet Oz standards if you
> wear it on the road. Doesn't have to meet any standard to be on sale.

Oh, does that only apply to bicycles now?

I know the current issue of Bicycling Trade, they are having yet another
whinge about bicycles that don't meet the standard being sold.

 

[Walrus]

"Walrus" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> I was at Richmond Cyclery on the weekend with a mate looking at helmets.
> My mate comments that he wants a Giro Pneumo like I have. The sales guy
> butts in and says "You need to be careful with Giro's and some other
> helmets. For a while now, some manufacturers haven't exported to
> Australia because they have to pay for the Australian standard to be
> applied." He then added that "If you have a crash with a helmet that is
> not to Australian standards, you may not be covered on insurance."
>
> A quick search located this website http://tinyurl.com/bjvgp which
> clearly states that -"The Australian Road Rules clearly demand that a
> bicycle helmet must meet the Australian / New Zealand Standards. The
> AS/NZ 2063 Standard *does not* recognise any other standard helmet from
> any other country. Accordingly, only helmets that meet and carry the AS/
> NZ Standards approval are permitted for use on Australian Roads -
> including road races conducted under the auspices of CA and its
> affiliates."-
>
> I got my Giro off eBay, so there is a US standards sticker on it. It
> has a CPSC standard approval on it, which I assume is the US
> equivalent.
>
> Any thoughts? Is there any truth in his claim about insurance (pardon
> the pun)? If I have a crash, am I at risk of not being covered?
>
> --
> Walrus
>
I am not claiming this to be true but I heard from somewhere (could have
been a bike shop but I can't remember) that the only reason that the Giro
helmets did not meet Australian Standards was that they failed a certain
test that involved hanging weights off of the chin strap or something???
Despite this, they will still provide protection levels as good as the Aust
Std helmets available.

This was a couple of years ago and for pretty well their top of the line
helmets. I was told that they have sinced changed their testing regime to
meet the Aust standards as they are supposedly the toughest around.

Gags

My understanding re Giro helmets is that they are imported by "Pacific Brands" (also do Bell) and in order to get the Australian standard, 35 helmets need to be provided for testing. Apparrently Giro or Pacific won't cough up the 35 helmets...so no approval.

 

[Theo Bekkers]

Terry Collins wrote:
> Theo Bekkers wrote:
>
>> You can buy anything you want but it only has to meet Oz standards
>> if you wear it on the road. Doesn't have to meet any standard to be
>> on sale.
>
> Oh, does that only apply to bicycles now?

Pretty much anything. You can buy and have fitted some very loud exhaust
systems to motorcycles and cars that don't comply with Oz standards. Not
illegal to buy or sell, just to use on the road.

Theo

 

[SteveA]

My understanding re Giro helmets is that they are imported by "Pacific Brands" (also do Bell) and in order to get the Australian standard, 35 helmets need to be provided for testing. Apparrently Giro or Pacific won't cough up the 35 helmets...so no approval.

If I recall correctly, the cost of certification is around $20,000 per model of helmet. That is quite a bit to recover per model of helmet in a small market like Australia.


SteveA

 

[suzyj]

Gags wrote:

> I am not claiming this to be true but I heard from somewhere (could have
> been a bike shop but I can't remember) that the only reason that the Giro
> helmets did not meet Australian Standards was that they failed a certain
> test that involved hanging weights off of the chin strap or something???
> Despite this, they will still provide protection levels as good as the Aust
> Std helmets available.

The rumour I've heard (and am thus duly spreading) is that the cost of Australian Standards compliance testing was too high when amortised over the teeny number of high-end helmets that Giro expected to sell in Aust, so they didn't bother having them tested.

Gotta remember we're not a real big market, as evidenced by the high cost of bike parts locally.

Regards,

Suzy

 

[Walrus]

Couldn't you just find an LBS that stocks your brand of helmet??

Then check if its got the sticker inside... If it has, then you're
apples. (ie. if you have an accident, and it becomes an issue, you can
just say that the sticker came off...). And if it doesn't, then legally
you're toast...

Cheers,
Abby (I fought the law and the, law won...)

That's the problem, they don't sell them here because they are not to Oz standard.

 

[Walrus]

If I recall correctly, the cost of certification is around $20,000 per model of helmet. That is quite a bit to recover per model of helmet in a small market like Australia.


SteveA

If it's $20,000 to get the standard, and the average cost of a Giro helmet is $200...then you dno't have to be Einstein to figure out that they only have to sell 100 before they're infront. Doesn't seem like much to me.

Given Limar/Met/Selev etc can do it, and Giro is more well known thanks to Lance, there has to be another reason for it.

 

[Walrus]

I just looked at my other helmet that I use to commute with. It's a Netti, about 2 years old, and it has CPSC standard, not Aus/NZ! I thought Netti was an Australian company...they must get the helmets made elsewhere?

So I've been riding that way for a couple of years...

 

[Peka]

I just looked at my other helmet that I use to commute with. It's a Netti, about 2 years old, and it has CPSC standard, not Aus/NZ! I thought Netti was an Australian company...they must get the helmets made elsewhere?

I bought a Netti this year and it has Aust Standard sticker inside....

 

[SteveA]

If it's $20,000 to get the standard, and the average cost of a Giro helmet is $200...then you dno't have to be Einstein to figure out that they only have to sell 100 before they're infront. Doesn't seem like much to me.

Given Limar/Met/Selev etc can do it, and Giro is more well known thanks to Lance, there has to be another reason for it.

True. But that $200 average price for a Giro helmet you pay does not all go to the importer/distributor who is the one who pays for the certification (factory might pay in some cases but that does not change the logic, just some of the numbers). Say the importer gets 20% of the $200 that you pay. After overheads, the importer clears say 10% or $20 per helmet. Importer would have to sell 1,000 helmets before breaking even.


Now, say you are Mr Pacific Brands. You have a choice of 10 Giro helmets, 10 Bell helmets and 10 Dunlop helmets (I think they do Dunlop) to import, get certified and distribute. You can cover all the price points in the market by selecting 15 out of the 30 helmets across all 3 brands. Certification costs $300,000 instead of $600,000. And instead of having to sell 30,000 helmets before you break even, you only have to sell 15,000.

You do your numbers and decide that it is not worth bringing in all the range.

You will miss out on some customers who want to buy a Giro model at a price point that you have covered with a Bell and who go and buy a Limar or a Met but you are prepared to miss out on a few customers campared to the costs of certification and the number of helmets you would have to sell to break even.


(the above is a simple scenario that ignores the value of bringing in the top of the range helmet at a loss because it is good PR, elesticity of demand for individual brands of helmets at certain price points, colour and size availability of helmets and the price of yak butter in Tibet)

SteveA

 

[Marty]

Walrus wrote:
> SteveA Wrote:
>
>>If I recall correctly, the cost of certification is around $20,000 per
>>model of helmet. That is quite a bit to recover per model of helmet in
>>a small market like Australia.
>>
>>
>>SteveAIf it's $20,000 to get the standard, and the average cost of a Giro
>
> helmet is $200...then you dno't have to be Einstein to figure out that
> they only have to sell 100 before they're infront. Doesn't seem like
> much to me.
>
> Given Limar/Met/Selev etc can do it, and Giro is more well known thanks
> to Lance, there has to be another reason for it.
>
>

The money only comes out of the profit from each helmet, you still have
other costs associated with the production and transport costs and so
on. Try the maths again with only the profit portion.

Marty

 

[Stuart Lamble]

On 2005-09-20, Walrus <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> SteveA Wrote:
>> If I recall correctly, the cost of certification is around $20,000 per
>> model of helmet. That is quite a bit to recover per model of helmet in
>> a small market like Australia.
>>
>>
>> SteveAIf it's $20,000 to get the standard, and the average cost of a Giro
> helmet is $200...then you dno't have to be Einstein to figure out that
> they only have to sell 100 before they're infront. Doesn't seem like
> much to me.

Your mathematics is faulty. If the average cost to manufacture a helmet
is (say) $50, and they can count on amortising the standards testing
over 100 helmets, the final cost is $50 + ($20,000 / 100) = $250. Then
you have to add on the cost of shipping the helmet to the sales place;
the retail markup; and the manufacturer also making some money in the
deal (otherwise why bother?)

If they can amortise the cost over 1,000 helmets, the final cost, before
profit margins and transport, becomes $50 + ($20,000 / 1000) = $70.
That's still a hefty leap in cost of about 40%.

Basic desire for a profit means a helmet manufacturer will only fork out
for the testing if they can see them getting more than that back, in
reasonably short order. Giro is obviously saying that they don't see
that they can, for whatever reason.

--
My Usenet From: address now expires after two weeks. If you email me, and
the mail bounces, try changing the bit before the "@" to "usenet".

 

[Peter Keller]

On Mon, 19 Sep 2005 16:31:34 +0800, Graeme Dods wrote:

>>
>> Exactly. I wouldn't want to be them if someone crashes, gets
>> a head injury while wearing a non-approved helmet, and decides to sue
>> them.
>
> Have you ever read any of the blurb that comes out of helmet manufacturers?
> Not even the manufacturers claim it will prevent head injury in the event
> of a crash. All they ever have on their web sites are "cool feature",
> "sporty looks" etc (their "in box" blurb is even more clear, usually "if
> you hurt your head when wearing this, don't come crying to us" type stuff).
> That way they're pretty much in the clear when it comes to claims against
> them, and by extension, anyone mandating their use who also do not make
> such protective claims. Any sporting body could mandate the wearing of a
> frilly pink tutu, but if they make no claims for its effects (implied or
> otherwise) then nobody can say it didn't do what it was meant to do.
>
> However, if said sporting body says, "wear your helmet to protect from head
> injuries", they're on more dubious ground.
>
> Graeme

Unfortunately what is reasonable, what is the law and what are insurance
requirements often have no connection or correlation.
btw if you crash and smash your knee while not wearing an approved
helmet, is one covered by insurance? I did this once, and the first thing
my concerned observer said was, "just as well you were wearing your helmet!"

*Sigh*

Peter

--
If you are careful enough in life, nothing bad -- or
good -- will ever happen to you.