Re: published helmet research - not troll



"Just zis Guy, you know?" <[email protected]> writes:

> Bill "laa laa I'm not listening" Zaumen wrote:


Guy is still putting out his baby talk. What a moron. I'll reply to
the stuff below and put him back in his timeout for his other
posts. He still needs to grow up.

>
> >> Firstly, you did nothing of the sort. ALL of the SAFETY helmets showed a
> >> higher aerodynamic drag than a bald head or one wearing a rubber cap as used
> >> to be popular.

>
> >Most cyclists do not have a bald head. It was very clear that I was
> >comparing the drag relative to a full head of hair, and this was
> >stated multiple times.

>
> And, as was stated multiple times, the only ANSI certified helmet that
> increased drag by less than a full hea dof hair was unwearable.


You may have stated that, but you didn't prove it. Instead, you talked
about one specific helmet that reduced drag more than a bald head and
one specific ANSI certified helmet.


> >The Bell V1 Pro was a typical helmet in the 1980s. We can do better
> >today in terms of aerodynamics.

>
> So you assert, but despite repeated promptings you have not produced a
> single shred of evidence.


Look at the shape of newer helmets. Filling in the gap behind a cyclist
reduces air drag. In fact, if someone drafts you closely, you're air
drag will drop although you'll still put out more effort than the guy
behind you.


There are numerous reasons why a modern
> hlemet might be *worse* than the V1, not least because of the large
> vents ruining the surface airflow.


My helmet has less vents than the more extreme designs. It's kind of
middle of the road.


--
My real name backwards: nemuaZ lliB
 
"Tom Kunich" <[email protected]> writes:

> As far as I've been able to determine from Bill's postings it appears that
> what he's really saying is, "HawwwwwwHeeeeeeeHawwwwwwww".


From what I can determine, Tommy is acting as much like a child as Guy.

--
My real name backwards: nemuaZ lliB
 
Frank Krygowski <[email protected]> writes:

> Bill Z. wrote:
>
> > Frank Krygowski <[email protected]> writes:
> >
> >>Bill Z. wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>>Frank Krygowski <[email protected]> writes:
> >>>
> >>As I recall, the claim was "My helmet reduces drag over that of a bare
> >>head." (Feel free to double check and correct me.) Sounds to me like
> >>it was about your particular helmet!

> >
> >>If you made that claim in error, just say so; all will be forgiven.

> > No, it wasn't in error - I was just using informal language.

>
> In other words, what? You don't know if it actually reduces drag
> compared to a bare head? Then say so!


I said I had a full head of hair and wasn't going to shave it. Why
should I care about the performance relative to a bare head. If it
reduces drag slightly given my head of hair, that's good enough for
me.

> And as we've tried to point out, unless your "lot of people" consists
> of racers with special equipment, your helmet will not reduce
> drag. Ordinary helmets as sold in bike shops in 2004 do not reduce
> drag. Almost no helmets ever sold for mass-market ever reduced drag
> compared to any fairly ordinary head & hairstyle.


You've yet to produce one shred of evidence for this claim. I've
provided URLs to papers doing measurements showing a net drag
reduction (a slight one).

--
My real name backwards: nemuaZ lliB
 
"Tom Kunich" <[email protected]> writes:

> "Bill Z." <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> > "Tom Kunich" <[email protected]> writes:

>
> It is very clear that you are clueless. Why would anyone wear a helmet that
> increased his aerodymanic drag if that was a consideration, instead of
> simply putting on the tight rubber cap?


Because some of us use a helmet for its intended purposes - head
protection - and if it reduces drag even slightly, that eliminates
one potential downside for wearing one. This should be so obvious
that it wouldn't even have to be stated. It is pretty clear who
is clueless it is you.


--
My real name backwards: nemuaZ lliB
 
"Just zis Guy, you know?" <[email protected]> writes:

> On Sun, 26 Sep 2004 19:04:01 GMT, "Tom Kunich" <[email protected]>
> wrote in message
> <[email protected]>:
>
> >It is very clear that you are clueless. Why would anyone wear a helmet that
> >increased his aerodymanic drag if that was a consideration, instead of
> >simply putting on the tight rubber cap?

>
> Amazingly, Bill's trawl of the web for helmet aerodynamics references
> missed this from arch helmet zealots BHSI (Motto: "Don't confuse them
> with the facts"):


Oh please. You or your anti-helmet friends have gone on record
numerous stimes calling the BHSI web page a bile or garbage. If
I had quoted anything from it, you'd have complained.

You didn't even understand what it said. E.g.,

> But even if they do have foam, aero helmets don't save any appreciable
> drag until you get to competitive cycling speeds--over 20 MPH at
> least. Most cyclists don't ride that fast and do not need the aero
> effect. And that aero tail sticking out the back might snag in a crash
> and jerk your head."


All he's saying is that the more extreme designs don't save you too
much energy at low speeds because air drag increases nonlinearly
with speed. He didn't say a helmet only reduces drag at high
speeds. He said that the effect is too small for most cyclists
to notice, which is what I said in my original message.

--
My real name backwards: nemuaZ lliB
 
"Tom Kunich" <[email protected]> writes:

> "Just zis Guy, you know?" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> >


> Which summerizes everything we've said before.


You mean, which repeats everything you've said before in the hopes
that people will believe anything if it is repeated enough.

> I have trouble believing that Bill ever exceeded 20 mph on a bicycle in his
> entire life.


How would you know? We've never met, but then you are one of the
worst liars on usenet.

--
My real name backwards: nemuaZ lliB
 
"Tom Kunich" <[email protected]> writes:

> "Bill Z." <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> > "Tom Kunich" <[email protected]> writes:


> > > Berechnen Sie isn't gerade ein Idiot aber ein Idiot der Genieanteile.

> >
> > He can't even speak proper German either.

>
> And strangely enough, that non-existant person also spoke fluent German.


In case you didn't notice "Isn't" is not German, which does not use
apostrophes. Or didn't you know?

> So somehow the clues keep building up time and time again. The big question
> is why you're so ashamed of yourself that you would try to hide the fact
> that it was you to whom I was talking that day.


More lies from this moron. The truth is we've never met.

--
My real name backwards: nemuaZ lliB
 
"Tom Kunich" <[email protected]> writes:

> "Mitch Haley" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> >
> > Here's a wind tunnel comparison I'd like to see, a 1975 Prime vs Bell's
> > most expensive current model foam hat. Afterwards, we can send them to
> > Snell labs for impact testing. I'd bet the 30 year old helmet would come
> > out on top if it hasn't spent too much time in direct sunlight.

>
> That hard shell on the V1 and my Kiwi considrebly increased the safety of
> the helmet.


Since you've previously claimed helmets do no good, are you now claiming
that you have ones that work?

--
My real name backwards: nemuaZ lliB
 
Bill "laa laa I'm not listening" Zaumen wrote:

> Guy is still putting out his baby talk. What a moron. I'll reply to
> the stuff below and put him back in his timeout for his other
> posts.


Translation: Bill still can't make it to the end of a sentence, and is still
in "laa laa I'm not listening" mode.

>> , as was stated multiple times, the only ANSI certified helmet
>> that increased drag by less than a full hea dof hair was unwearable.


> You may have stated that, but you didn't prove it.


No, I didn't have to, because the links you posted did that for me.
Evidently you didn't read them first - more fool you.

>>> The Bell V1 Pro was a typical helmet in the 1980s. We can do better
>>> today in terms of aerodynamics.


>> So you assert, but despite repeated promptings you have not produced
>> a single shred of evidence.


> Look at the shape of newer helmets.


As you are so fond of saying, repeating yuor ******** doesn't make it true.
We have seen reasons advanced why modern helmets would be worse than the V-1
(and that includes from someone who actually owns one), and you have
asserted that modern helmets are better, but actually you have posted no
evidence to supercede the figures from the Kyle study.

We do know that another study you linked says that helmets increase drag,
and the strongly pro-helmet BHSI say that helmets make drag worse and you
wouldn't want to wear the kind which doesn't.

> Filling in the gap behind a cyclist
> reduces air drag. In fact, if someone drafts you closely, you're air
> drag will drop although you'll still put out more effort than the guy
> behind you.


I suppose that one day you will stop trying to conflate the aerodynamics of
time trial helmets with those of standard helmets, but I'm not holding my
breath. Note: the Japanese study you linked showed that even the aero
helmets made things worse unless the head was held rigidly, the long tail of
the helmet pressed back against the neck, and the rider in an aero crouch.
When the rider sat up even slightly, the aero helmets performed markedly
worse than a bare head.

You wouldn't know that, of course, because you didn't read the study before
you posted the link.

> My helmet has less vents than the more extreme designs. It's kind of
> middle of the road.


So you say, but since you flatly refuse to tell us which helmet you wear we
can't know whether you are lying or just deluded.

Guy
--
May contain traces of irony. Contents liable to settle after posting.
http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk

88% of helmet statistics are made up, 65% of them at Washington
University
 
Frank Krygowski wrote:

> Wearing a homebrewed helmet is pretty strange, though! Did you get
> enough of a look to tell how it differed from available models?


It seemed to have a hard shell and thin (probably high density foam rather
than styrofoam) padding. It might well have been adapted from a standard
model. The straps were a bit odd, with tubes over them (to reduce rubbing?)

> Oh, and I was under the impression he was mostly a recumbentist - or
> whatever the word is - even riding a trike much of the time. Seems to
> me that removes even more of the justification for a foam hat!


He was riding a Burrows 2D - a bike which goes flat for transport on trains.
He had come by train to the meeting. I think he still has a Speedy :)

Guy
--
May contain traces of irony. Contents liable to settle after posting.
http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk

88% of helmet statistics are made up, 65% of them at Washington
University
 
Bill "Laa laa I'm not listenign" Zaumen trolled:

>> Which summerizes everything we've said before.


> You mean, which repeats everything you've said before in the hopes
> that people will believe anything if it is repeated enough.


Er, actually, Bill, it was you who posted the links to the research which
said this - the Kyle study and the one from Japan.

Guy
--
May contain traces of irony. Contents liable to settle after posting.
http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk

88% of helmet statistics are made up, 65% of them at Washington
University
 
Bill "Laa laa I'm not listening" Zaumen trolled:

>> Amazingly, Bill's trawl of the web for helmet aerodynamics references
>> missed this from arch helmet zealots BHSI (Motto: "Don't confuse them
>> with the facts"):


> Oh please. You or your anti-helmet friends have gone on record
> numerous stimes calling the BHSI web page a bile or garbage. If
> I had quoted anything from it, you'd have complained.


I only have one anti-helmet friend, Bill, and he doesn't post on Usenet (he
is a published author on transportation safety issues).

The fact that BHSI is a helmet zealot site is what makes it remarkable that
you didn't check it during your trawl for evidence. Had you looked there
you could have saved yourself looking like an ass. Not that I care.

> All he's saying is that the more extreme designs don't save you too
> much energy at low speeds because air drag increases nonlinearly
> with speed. He didn't say a helmet only reduces drag at high
> speeds. He said that the effect is too small for most cyclists
> to notice, which is what I said in my original message.


Except that, once again, he is talking about aero helmets, which bear no
relation to standard helmets. They have smooth surfaces, no vents, they
cover the ears, they have a long tail at the back... but hey, you seem to
be the only person around here who doesn't know the difference and it's
useless trying to explain anything to you not because you cannot understand
but, worse, because you are a zealot and refuse to accept any evidence which
does not match your preconceptions.

Guy
--
May contain traces of irony. Contents liable to settle after posting.
http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk

88% of helmet statistics are made up, 65% of them at Washington
University
 
Bill "Laa laa I'm not listening" Zaumen trolled:

> I've
> provided URLs to papers doing measurements showing a net drag
> reduction (a slight one).


For time trial helmets. For standard helmets, every study you've linked has
shown an increase in drag over the worst-case unhelmeted scenario of
unrestrained long hair.

Your continuing attempts to conflate the performance of two clearly
dissimilar items are almost amusing. Almost.

Guy
--
May contain traces of irony. Contents liable to settle after posting.
http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk

88% of helmet statistics are made up, 65% of them at Washington
University
 
On Mon, 27 Sep 2004 07:12:38 GMT, [email protected] (Bill Z.)
wrote in message <[email protected]>:

>some of us use a helmet for its intended purposes - head
>protection


Hmmm. If head protection were the intended purpose of helmets, the
manufacturers would not have pushed through the massively lower
standards to which the current crop are certified. The real purpose
is making money for the makers.

>and if it reduces drag even slightly, that eliminates
>one potential downside for wearing one.


And presumably the documented fact that it does not is similarly
irrelevant.

Guy
--
May contain traces of irony. Contents liable to settle after posting.
http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk

88% of helmet statistics are made up, 65% of them at Washington University
 
"Just zis Guy, you know?" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> I only have one anti-helmet friend, Bill, and he doesn't post on Usenet

(he
> is a published author on transportation safety issues).


The latest Rivendell Reader is interesting. Grant Peterson for reasons I'm
not quite clear on, has always been pro-helmet. He just ran an article from
an English gentlemen whom I'm sure we all are familiar with. The tenor of
the article is - helmets increase injuries. He seems to have a lot of
statistics upon which he is basing his evidence.

Peterson, who at least shows that he is open minded (in other words -
without the HawwwwwwHeeeeeeHawwwwww of a certain individual whose name
starts with Bill and ends with Zaumen) does run an article after that
suggesting that he thinks that perhaps a helmet does some good if you aren't
so stupid that you risk compensate.

Any bets that Zaumen is one of those early Thompson and Rivara riders, whom
it turned out, seldom rode over 5 mph?
 
"Bill Z." <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> "Tom Kunich" <[email protected]> writes:
>
> > "Bill Z." <[email protected]> wrote in message
> > news:[email protected]...
> > > "Tom Kunich" <[email protected]> writes:

> >
> > It is very clear that you are clueless. Why would anyone wear a helmet

that
> > increased his aerodymanic drag if that was a consideration, instead of
> > simply putting on the tight rubber cap?

>
> Because some of us use a helmet for its intended purposes - head
> protection - and if it reduces drag even slightly, that eliminates
> one potential downside for wearing one.


A standard helmet has more aero drag than a guy with long hair. A lot more
drag than a guy with short hair. Strange that you are the one that provided
this data and somehow you cannot understand it. Could you really be this
stupid?

> It is pretty clear who is clueless


We agree on that.
 
"Just zis Guy, you know?" <[email protected]> writes:

> Bill "laa laa I'm not listening" Zaumen wrote:
>
> > Guy is still putting out his baby talk. What a moron. I'll reply to
> > the stuff below and put him back in his timeout for his other
> > posts.

>
> Translation: Bill still can't make it to the end of a sentence, and is still
> in "laa laa I'm not listening" mode.


Our pathetic troll, Guy, wants to divert attention from his infantile
behavior.

Back to your time-out, Guy. I'm ignoring everything else you posted
today. It's been covered before and basically you don't know what you
are talking about.


--
My real name backwards: nemuaZ lliB
 
"Tom Kunich" <[email protected]> writes:


> <snip> HawwwwwwHeeeeeeHawwwwww <snip>


Looks like Tom is competing with Guy to see who can act like more of
an ill-bred idiot.

--
My real name backwards: nemuaZ lliB
 
Bill Z. said:
Back to your time-out, Guy. I'm ignoring everything else you posted
today. It's been covered before and basically you don't know what you
are talking about.


--
My real name backwards: nemuaZ lliB
So Bill's "ignoring everything else you posted
today."

Gee Bill - that's pretty severe punishment - I'm sure that'll teach that Guy chap a lesson or three.

Bill - you're out of this world - where are you from? My guess is another planet - planet Zau perhaps - which galaxy is it in?

Roger
 
Bill "laa laa I'm not listening" Zaumen trolled:

>Our pathetic troll, Guy, wants to divert attention from his infantile
>behavior.


I love the way that you, who have posted nothign but contentious wrong
assertions which you then try to defend against all evidence, call
others trolls!

>Back to your time-out, Guy. I'm ignoring everything else you posted
>today. It's been covered before and basically you don't know what you
>are talking about.


Translation: "Laa laa, I'm not listening".

I am sure that allthe groups you are trolling here would be very much
obliged if you would extend that timeout to everybody who disagrees
with you, and make it indefinite. The mechnism is simple: you just
have to unsubscribe the newsgroups.

It will be evident to anybody still watching that what you have done
is to troll for insults at the top of a post in order to give yo a
ready excuse for your usual evasions, saving you the tiresome
necessity of answering the simple and obvious truth that not only are
you wrong, but the evidence you posted shows you are wrong.

== reinstated evaded content ==


As you are so fond of saying, repeating yuor ******** doesn't make it
true. We have seen reasons advanced why modern helmets would be worse
than the V-1 (and that includes from someone who actually owns one),
and you have asserted that modern helmets are better, but actually you
have posted no evidence to supercede the figures from the Kyle study.

We do know that another study you linked says that helmets increase
drag, and the strongly pro-helmet BHSI say that helmets make drag
worse and you wouldn't want to wear the kind which doesn't.

> Filling in the gap behind a cyclist
> reduces air drag. In fact, if someone drafts you closely, you're air
> drag will drop although you'll still put out more effort than the guy
> behind you.


I suppose that one day you will stop trying to conflate the
aerodynamics of time trial helmets with those of standard helmets, but
I'm not holding my breath. Note: the Japanese study you linked showed
that even the aero helmets made things worse unless the head was held
rigidly, the long tail of the helmet pressed back against the neck,
and the rider in an aero crouch. When the rider sat up even slightly,
the aero helmets performed markedly worse than a bare head.

You wouldn't know that, of course, because you didn't read the study
before you posted the link.

> My helmet has less vents than the more extreme designs. It's kind of
> middle of the road.


So you say, but since you flatly refuse to tell us which helmet you
wear we can't know whether you are lying or just deluded.
 

Similar threads

J
Replies
0
Views
507
Road Cycling
Just zis Guy, you know?
J
J
Replies
0
Views
436
Road Cycling
Just zis Guy, you know?
J
J
Replies
0
Views
346
Road Cycling
Just zis Guy, you know?
J
J
Replies
0
Views
304
Road Cycling
Just zis Guy, you know?
J