Re: published helmet research - not troll

Discussion in 'rec.bicycles.soc' started by Frank Krygowski, Jun 17, 2004.

  1. On Sun, 26 Sep 2004 04:39:25 GMT, [email protected] (Bill Z.)
    wrote in message <[email protected]>:

    >> OK, there we have it. Since any nitwit who has seen a Stratos wold know that
    >> there is essentially one quality that is the same between a modern helmet
    >> and a Stratos - that they both are supposed to be used by cyclists - and yet
    >> Bill tells us that his calibrated eye sees little difference.


    >Any nitwit, who must be smarter than Kunich, would realize that the
    >helmets I was refering to were not Bell Stratos helmets, and I don't
    >own one


    No, you are referring to some mythical helmet looks "vaguely teardrop
    shaped", a bit like your idea of what the Stratos might look like, but
    does not include a fairing over the nape of the neck, no vents, an
    inbuilt visor or covers over the ears which are what actually allow
    aero helmets to produce lower drag despite their greater frontal area.

    And as is obvious to all concerned by now, the only hard evidence
    posted thus far directly contradicts you.

    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
     


  2. 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!

    Mine is
    > typical of what a lot of people use...


    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. These days, with ventilation
    being the marketing emphasis, helmets are worse than ever regarding drag.

    Admittedly, this isn't a big deal. I wouldn't bring it up if you hadn't
    with your false - or mistaken - claim.


    > I described it for you - slightly teardrop shaped. Go down to a store
    > and look for typical helmets like that (nothing extreme designed
    > specifically for racing.) I'm sure you've seen them.


    If yours looks like the ones I see in stores or on cyclists' heads, then
    you're wrong about it reducing drag - unless, once again, you have some
    extreme hair style. Give it up, Bill.

    >>If you pretent that claim is still true, tell us what your helmet is,
    >>so we can verify.

    >
    >
    > Do you have a wind tunnel?


    I've got access to two ordinary ones and one supersonic one. (I don't
    suppose we'll need the latter.)

    Do you expect me to mail the helmet to you?

    :) Actually, I expect you to continue to evade the issue and make a
    fool of yourself!


    --
    --------------------+
    Frank Krygowski [To reply, remove rodent and vegetable dot com,
    replace with cc.ysu dot edu]
     
  3. Tom Kunich

    Tom Kunich Guest

    "Bill Z." <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]
    > "Tom Kunich" <[email protected]> writes:
    >
    > > 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. Neither I nor anyone I know personally will
    > gets their heads shaved just for the sake of a bike ride.


    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?

    > > Secondly, the Bell helmet which you appear to be discussing WAS NOT

    TYPICAL
    > > of any other helmet then or now. No one could wear the helmet for more

    than
    > > a very short TT on a cool day and hence they were rapidly discontinued.

    >
    > The Bell V1 Pro was a typical helmet in the 1980s. We can do better
    > today in terms of aerodynamics. The helmet with the lowest drag is
    > interesting only for showing the range of reductions that are
    > possible.


    The V1 Pro had more drag than a head with long hair. Your own link supplied
    that piece of information and yet you still don't seem to understand that
    point.

    As for your claim that we can "do better today", then perhaps you'd like to
    explain to us why the helmet manufacturers who do run these tests haven't
    released any of the data showing reduced drag?

    Here's a hint - as every single other person in his discussion except you
    has managed to understand from the published works, the modern helmet has
    greatly increased aerodynamic drag from the earlier Bell V1. On top of that,
    the Bell V1 passed the Snell test which was considerably better than the
    present ANSI standard.
     
  4. Tom Kunich

    Tom Kunich Guest

    "Bill Z." <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]
    > "Tom Kunich" <[email protected]> writes:
    >
    > I'll group replies to multiple messages to save space.
    >
    > > "Bill Z." <[email protected]> wrote in message
    > > news:[email protected]
    > > >
    > > > As I said, I wouldn't even tell you guys the color of my car. It's
    > > > none of our business.

    > >
    > > Ahh, so in truth you won't even tell YOURSELF the color of your car.

    Somehow
    > > that doesn't surprise me in the least.

    >
    > Kunich, really are a fool, aren't you.
    >
    > > I must say, now more than ever I'm convinced that the guy out in front

    of
    > > that bike shop in Cupertino whose said his name was Bill and who wasn't
    > > allowed in the shop is our Bill.

    >
    > Kunich now claims that because some probably nonexistent person said
    > he had the same first name as I do, it must be me. Talk about admiting
    > that one is an idiot - Kunich takes the prize.
    >
    > > 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.

    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.
     
  5. Tom Kunich

    Tom Kunich Guest

    "Just zis Guy, you know?" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]
    > On Sun, 26 Sep 2004 04:39:25 GMT, [email protected] (Bill Z.)
    > wrote in message <[email protected]>:
    >
    > >> OK, there we have it. Since any nitwit who has seen a Stratos wold know

    that
    > >> there is essentially one quality that is the same between a modern

    helmet
    > >> and a Stratos - that they both are supposed to be used by cyclists -

    and yet
    > >> Bill tells us that his calibrated eye sees little difference.

    >
    > >Any nitwit, who must be smarter than Kunich, would realize that the
    > >helmets I was refering to were not Bell Stratos helmets, and I don't
    > >own one

    >
    > No, you are referring to some mythical helmet looks "vaguely teardrop
    > shaped", a bit like your idea of what the Stratos might look like, but
    > does not include a fairing over the nape of the neck, no vents, an
    > inbuilt visor or covers over the ears which are what actually allow
    > aero helmets to produce lower drag despite their greater frontal area.
    >
    > And as is obvious to all concerned by now, the only hard evidence
    > posted thus far directly contradicts you.


    As far as I've been able to determine from Bill's postings it appears that
    what he's really saying is, "HawwwwwwHeeeeeeeHawwwwwwww".
     
  6. On Sun, 26 Sep 2004 19:11:54 GMT, "Tom Kunich" <[email protected]>
    wrote in message
    <[email protected]>:


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


    Cloff!

    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
     
  7. Mitch Haley

    Mitch Haley Guest

    Tom Kunich wrote:
    > On top of that, the Bell V1 passed the Snell test which
    > was considerably better than the present ANSI standard.


    On top of that, my V-1 has something resembling a helmet shell,
    as do my Tourlight and my Stratos. It was only when sales of
    foam hats surpassed sales of helmets that Bell started making
    foam hats. At least we can credit Bell with trying to make
    something that might have protective value in the early years.
    Prime, Biker, V-1, Tourlight come to mind here. The shell on
    the Stratos seems to be a different material, and it's much thinner
    than the shells on the earlier Bell models.

    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.

    Mitch.
     
  8. On Sun, 26 Sep 2004 17:04:42 -0400, Mitch Haley <[email protected]>
    wrote in message <[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.


    You are probably right. According to a contact who tests helmets to
    standards, many samples of current lids even fail the lower ANSI
    standard tests (i.e. do not meet their specified performance). The
    only major brand he will recommend is Specialized.

    I met Richard Ballantine today, author of Richard's Bicycle Book. He
    was wearing what appeared to be a homebrewed helmet. I meant to ask
    him about it, but forgot :)

    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
     
  9. 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"):

    "The teardrop-shaped time trial helmets used by professionals in
    Olympic competition over short distances are not vented. Venting
    spoils some of the aerodynamics, and for those events cooling is less
    important than a slippery wind profile. But most of those helmets are
    also not lined with foam. They do not provide impact protection. Air
    can circulate under the plastic shell because it is empty. Those
    helmets are not legal for use in races in the US because they do not
    provide impact protection. You would not want to use one on the road
    for the same reason."

    "Beginning with a Louis Garneau model in 2002 certified to the US CPSC
    standard, manufacturers began producing time trial helmets with foam
    in them. The trend accelerated in 2003 when the UCI, professional
    European cycling's governing body, announced that beginning in January
    of 2004 impact performance would be required in time trial helmets.
    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."

    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
     
  10. Tom Kunich

    Tom Kunich Guest

    "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. Modern helmets have almost nil protection since in order to pass
    the tests with all of those vents the foam has to be so ridgid that it can
    locally overload the skull. That's something that the ANSI standard does not
    address since the tests are run on an aluminum head-form and only measures
    the deceleration peak.
     
  11. Tom Kunich

    Tom Kunich Guest

    "Just zis Guy, you know?" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]
    >
    > "The teardrop-shaped time trial helmets used by professionals in
    > Olympic competition over short distances are not vented. Venting
    > spoils some of the aerodynamics, and for those events cooling is less
    > important than a slippery wind profile. But most of those helmets are
    > also not lined with foam. They do not provide impact protection. Air
    > can circulate under the plastic shell because it is empty. Those
    > helmets are not legal for use in races in the US because they do not
    > provide impact protection. You would not want to use one on the road
    > for the same reason."


    Which summerizes everything we've said before.

    > "Beginning with a Louis Garneau model in 2002 certified to the US CPSC
    > standard, manufacturers began producing time trial helmets with foam
    > in them. The trend accelerated in 2003 when the UCI, professional
    > European cycling's governing body, announced that beginning in January
    > of 2004 impact performance would be required in time trial helmets.
    > 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."


    I have trouble believing that Bill ever exceeded 20 mph on a bicycle in his
    entire life.
     
  12. Just zis Guy, you know? wrote:

    >
    > I met Richard Ballantine today, author of Richard's Bicycle Book. He
    > was wearing what appeared to be a homebrewed helmet. I meant to ask
    > him about it, but forgot :)


    That's interesting!

    Ballantine's early books were among the first, IIRC, to strongly
    recommend helmets - using images of paralysis, heavy brain damage, etc.
    He was one of the pioneers of using Worst Case Scenarios on this
    issue, without telling how unlikely those scenarios are. I think his
    books probably did a lot to fuel helmet promotion.

    The latest issues of his books show some serious backpedaling. He
    acknowleges that he lobbied hard for helmets - and now says that
    mandating is absolutely a bad idea. He points out their protection is
    very limited - which is true. He seems very skeptical of helmet prices.
    And he now says, of the question "But surely it is a good idea for all
    cyclists to wear helmets?" that the answer is "No."

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


    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!


    --
    --------------------+
    Frank Krygowski [To reply, remove rodent and vegetable dot com,
    replace with cc.ysu dot edu]
     
  13. Bill Z.

    Bill Z. Guest

    "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
     
  14. Bill Z.

    Bill Z. Guest

    "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
     
  15. Bill Z.

    Bill Z. Guest

    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
     
  16. Bill Z.

    Bill Z. Guest

    "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
     
  17. Bill Z.

    Bill Z. Guest

    "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
     
  18. Bill Z.

    Bill Z. Guest

    "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
     
  19. Bill Z.

    Bill Z. Guest

    "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
     
  20. Bill Z.

    Bill Z. Guest

    "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
     
Loading...
Loading...