USA Cycling recognizes new helmet standard

[[email protected]]

Does this mean all those Giro, Bell, Specialized etc. time trial
helmets are USCF legal now?

>From http://www.usacycling.org/news/user/story.php?id=2122

""""""""""""""""""""""""""
USA Cycling recognizes new helmet standard

USA Cycling has recently added the European helmet standard to its list
of approved standards for legal bicycle racing helmets. In 1986, USA
Cycling became the first cycling federation to make hard shell helmets
required for all bicycle races. At that time we acknowledged numerous
government agencies, such as SNELL, ANSI, and the US CPSC. In the last
few years, the UCI has made hard shell helmets mandatory for all races,
and a new standard has recently appeared on the market, the European
Committee for Standardization. Helmets approved by the European
Committee will carry stickers (ECS or CEN) similarly to the stickers
found in all American-made helmets.

At all times when participating in or preparing for an event held under
a USA Cycling permit, including club rides, all licensees who are
mounted on a bicycle must wear a securely fastened helmet that meets
either the US DOT helmet standards or one of the following standards:

(1) American National Standards Institute (ANSI) Standard Z90.4;
(2) Snell Memorial Foundation Standard "B" or "N" series;
(3) American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) standard F-1447;
(4) Canadian Standards Association (CSA) standard CAN/CSA-D113.2-M;
(5) U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) standard for bicycle
helmets;
(6) European Committee for Standardization (CEN) standard for bicycle
helmets

Riders shall show documentary proof of this, such as a manufacturer's
label, upon request by event officials. Beginning January 1, 2010, only
the DOT, CPSC, and CEN helmet standards will be recognized.

""""""""""""""""""""""""""

 

[Werehatrack]

On 12 Mar 2006 06:47:53 -0800, [email protected] wrote:

>Does this mean all those Giro, Bell, Specialized etc. time trial
>helmets are USCF legal now?

USAC is not USCF. USCF is not, AFAIK, obligated to honor the helmet
acceptances or rejections of USAC.

I find it interesting that they have decided to drop the ANSI and
Snell certs from their approval list.
--
Typoes are a feature, not a bug.
Some gardening required to reply via email.
Words processed in a facility that contains nuts.

 

[[email protected]]

Werehatrack wrote:
> On 12 Mar 2006 06:47:53 -0800, [email protected] wrote:
>
> >Does this mean all those Giro, Bell, Specialized etc. time trial
> >helmets are USCF legal now?
>
> USAC is not USCF. USCF is not, AFAIK, obligated to honor the helmet
> acceptances or rejections of USAC.
>
> I find it interesting that they have decided to drop the ANSI and
> Snell certs from their approval list.

USCF is part of USAC. (The other parts are NORBA, USPRO and NCCA.)
This used to be more obvious from the usacycling.org page, but now
it is hidden under the About USA Cycling section.

USAC has been moving to bring their technical rules in sync
with the UCI rules. This might be part of that. They also might
be trying to avoid an absurd situation if some Euro team comes
to the US to race and their lids don't have the proper sticker.

It's possible that they are dropping the other certs by 2010
because most of the lids sold in the US now have the
CPSC sticker (AFAIK).

I don't think this would legalize old TT helmets. First, they
wouldn't have the newer certification. Second, even the Euro
UCI races now require a TT lid that has foam in it. It's possible
that newer TT helmets of this sort will go through the new
European cert process and not the CPSC - in that case, they
could become legal for racing in the US, I guess.

 

[Werehatrack]

On 12 Mar 2006 15:54:17 -0800, "[email protected]"
<[email protected]> wrote:

>Werehatrack wrote:
>> On 12 Mar 2006 06:47:53 -0800, [email protected] wrote:
>>
>> >Does this mean all those Giro, Bell, Specialized etc. time trial
>> >helmets are USCF legal now?
>>
>> USAC is not USCF. USCF is not, AFAIK, obligated to honor the helmet
>> acceptances or rejections of USAC.
>>
>> I find it interesting that they have decided to drop the ANSI and
>> Snell certs from their approval list.
>
>USCF is part of USAC. (The other parts are NORBA, USPRO and NCCA.)
>This used to be more obvious from the usacycling.org page, but now
>it is hidden under the About USA Cycling section.

I stand corrected. Not being a member of any of the above, I missed
the fact that USAC is the umbrella organization.

>USAC has been moving to bring their technical rules in sync
>with the UCI rules. This might be part of that. They also might
>be trying to avoid an absurd situation if some Euro team comes
>to the US to race and their lids don't have the proper sticker.

Problems of this nature have indeed been reported. Given the overall
lack on unanimity within the sport over the subject of which helmet
(if any) should be mandated, and in the absence of definitive data
identifying any single standard as being either superior or even
demonstrably more effective at providing assurance of protection from,
or reduction of severity of, injury, it makes sense to include as many
standards as possible and allow the competitors to choose among them
as they see fit.

>It's possible that they are dropping the other certs by 2010
>because most of the lids sold in the US now have the
>CPSC sticker (AFAIK).

Thus potentially negating some of the benefits of choice.

>I don't think this would legalize old TT helmets. First, they
>wouldn't have the newer certification. Second, even the Euro
>UCI races now require a TT lid that has foam in it. It's possible
>that newer TT helmets of this sort will go through the new
>European cert process and not the CPSC - in that case, they
>could become legal for racing in the US, I guess.

My own expectation is that the most immediate effect will be confusion
over what is, and what is not, legal. The issue may seem quite
straightforward, but I have learned not to underestimate the ability
of officials at a competitive sporting event to misunderstand and
misapply seemingly simple changes in rules.
--
Typoes are a feature, not a bug.
Some gardening required to reply via email.
Words processed in a facility that contains nuts.

 

[Werehatrack]

On Mon, 13 Mar 2006 02:17:10 GMT, Werehatrack
<[email protected]> wrote:

>...Given the overall
>lack on unanimity within the sport over the subject of which helmet
>(if any) should be mandated,

Should have been "which helmet *standard*, if any".
--
Typoes are a feature, not a bug.
Some gardening required to reply via email.
Words processed in a facility that contains nuts.

 

[Alex Rodriguez]

In article <[email protected]>,
[email protected] says...

>Beginning January 1, 2010, only
>the DOT, CPSC, and CEN helmet standards will be recognized.

What's the story behind this move? Why will they no longer recognize ANSI
and SNELL?
------------
Alex

 

[Art Harris]

Alex Rodriguez wrote:

> What's the story behind this move? Why will they no longer recognize ANSI and SNELL?

ANSI is obsolete, and Snell is seldom used. Check your helmet, it's
most likely got CPSC certification.

See:
http://www.bhsi.org/standard.htm

I'm always amused to see bike event applications that state in big
letters, "ALL PARTICIPANTS MUST WEAR AN ANSI OR SNELL APPROVED HELMET."
I'll bet 95 percent of the riders in those events are using helmets
that have neither.

Art Harris

 

[Andrew Price]

Art Harris wrote -

> I'm always amused to see bike event applications that state in big
> letters, "ALL PARTICIPANTS MUST WEAR AN ANSI OR SNELL APPROVED HELMET."
> I'll bet 95 percent of the riders in those events are using helmets
> that have neither.

I find the notion of national, as opposed to international, standards
curious particularly for items used by the entire species.

When irrationality of product safety standards applies, I suspect local
marketing forces have had their influence.

Here (in Oz) if the commissionaires get picky they won't let you start a
race controlled by the Cycling Federation unless it has the relevant
Australian and New Zealand Standards sticker attached - an ANSI or Snell
sticker will get you a d/q and no start.

When I asked if those standards were inferior, I was told not necessarily,
just different.

EU countries seem to have their own certification, and the US obviously
likewise.

Maybe one function a new arm of the UN could usefully perform is to be the
international body responsible to certify products to be as they should be
or not and replace the inconsistent and locally biased systems we have at
present - its one planet and the item either does its job or it doesn't.
Presumably complaince costs could be reduced overall.

I suspect this has the same prospects as porcine aviation occurring anytime
soon.

best. Andrew

 

[Werehatrack]

On 13 Mar 2006 12:25:12 -0800, "Art Harris" <[email protected]> wrote:

>Alex Rodriguez wrote:
>
>> What's the story behind this move? Why will they no longer recognize ANSI and SNELL?
>
>ANSI is obsolete, and Snell is seldom used. Check your helmet, it's
>most likely got CPSC certification.
>
>See:
>http://www.bhsi.org/standard.htm
>
>I'm always amused to see bike event applications that state in big
>letters, "ALL PARTICIPANTS MUST WEAR AN ANSI OR SNELL APPROVED HELMET."
>I'll bet 95 percent of the riders in those events are using helmets
>that have neither.

I've always figured that the organizers in such cases just copied the
forms from a motorcycle event. I don't follow that subject anymore,
but at one time, ANSI and Snell were the two labels that were accepted
there.
--
Typoes are a feature, not a bug.
Some gardening required to reply via email.
Words processed in a facility that contains nuts.

 

[Colin Campbell]

Andrew Price wrote:

>Art Harris wrote -
>
>
>
>>I'm always amused to see bike event applications that state in big
>>letters, "ALL PARTICIPANTS MUST WEAR AN ANSI OR SNELL APPROVED HELMET."
>>I'll bet 95 percent of the riders in those events are using helmets
>>that have neither.
>>
>>
>
>I find the notion of national, as opposed to international, standards
>curious particularly for items used by the entire species.
>
>When irrationality of product safety standards applies, I suspect local
>marketing forces have had their influence.
>
>Here (in Oz) if the commissionaires get picky they won't let you start a
>race controlled by the Cycling Federation unless it has the relevant
>Australian and New Zealand Standards sticker attached - an ANSI or Snell
>sticker will get you a d/q and no start.
>
>When I asked if those standards were inferior, I was told not necessarily,
>just different.
>
>EU countries seem to have their own certification, and the US obviously
>likewise.
>
>Maybe one function a new arm of the UN could usefully perform is to be the
>international body responsible to certify products to be as they should be
>or not and replace the inconsistent and locally biased systems we have at
>present - its one planet and the item either does its job or it doesn't.
>Presumably complaince costs could be reduced overall.
>
>I suspect this has the same prospects as porcine aviation occurring anytime
>soon.
>
>best. Andrew
>
>
>
>
Andrew,
There is already an organization called the International Organization
for Standardization (the Anglicized acronym is ISO). ANSI (the American
National Standards Institute) is a national member of ISO. I've no
doubt that Oz has a national member organization as well.

ISO sets standards for things like computer programming languages,
expression of dates and times, and the like. I'm not sure why the US
Government's Consumer Product Safety Commission and a similar
organization in the European Union are setting helmet rules, when ISO
would be a perfectly reasonable, world-wide choice for producing and
maintaining a standard.

 

[[email protected]]

Andrew Price wrote:
> I find the notion of national, as opposed to international, standards
> curious particularly for items used by the entire species.
> ....
> Maybe one function a new arm of the UN could usefully perform is to be the
> international body responsible to certify products to be as they should be
> or not and replace the inconsistent and locally biased systems we have at
> present - its one planet and the item either does its job or it doesn't.
> Presumably complaince costs could be reduced overall.
>
> I suspect this has the same prospects as porcine aviation occurring anytime
> soon.

The ISO already exists, which may or may not be an improvement,
depending on how you feel about porcine aviation.

An ancient hermitage of Tibetan monks believes that if the words
"ISO" and "compliance costs could be reduced" are ever uttered in
the same sentence, the stars will wink out and the end of the world
will ... <****!>

 

[Sandy]

Dans le message de news:[email protected],
Colin Campbell <[email protected]> a réfléchi, et puis a déclaré :
> Andrew Price wrote:
>
>> Art Harris wrote -
>>
>>
>>
>>> I'm always amused to see bike event applications that state in big
>>> letters, "ALL PARTICIPANTS MUST WEAR AN ANSI OR SNELL APPROVED
>>> HELMET." I'll bet 95 percent of the riders in those events are
>>> using helmets that have neither.
>>>
>>>
>>
>> I find the notion of national, as opposed to international, standards
>> curious particularly for items used by the entire species.
>>
>> When irrationality of product safety standards applies, I suspect
>> local marketing forces have had their influence.
>>
>> Here (in Oz) if the commissionaires get picky they won't let you
>> start a race controlled by the Cycling Federation unless it has the
>> relevant Australian and New Zealand Standards sticker attached - an
>> ANSI or Snell sticker will get you a d/q and no start.
>>
>> When I asked if those standards were inferior, I was told not
>> necessarily, just different.
>>
>> EU countries seem to have their own certification, and the US
>> obviously likewise.
>>
>> Maybe one function a new arm of the UN could usefully perform is to
>> be the international body responsible to certify products to be as
>> they should be or not and replace the inconsistent and locally
>> biased systems we have at present - its one planet and the item
>> either does its job or it doesn't. Presumably complaince costs could
>> be reduced overall. I suspect this has the same prospects as porcine
>> aviation occurring
>> anytime soon.
>>
>> best. Andrew
>>
>>
>>
>>
> Andrew,
> There is already an organization called the International Organization
> for Standardization (the Anglicized acronym is ISO). ANSI (the
> American National Standards Institute) is a national member of ISO. I've
> no doubt that Oz has a national member organization as well.
>
> ISO sets standards for things like computer programming languages,
> expression of dates and times, and the like. I'm not sure why the US
> Government's Consumer Product Safety Commission and a similar
> organization in the European Union are setting helmet rules, when ISO
> would be a perfectly reasonable, world-wide choice for producing and
> maintaining a standard.

I think you would have no problem in sorting out a structural certifying
process, but the background effects, and how to measure them, seem to remain
in perpetual controversy. As does everything about helmets, of course. For
example, filling a helmet with a specific weight, shape and material load,
dropping it straight, angled and connected or not to a neck-like feature -
all these are variables that are fiercely fought over by interested parties.

But a test for the shell, independent of real-world application, is probably
do-able.
--
Sandy
Verneuil-sur-Seine
*******

La vie, c'est comme une bicyclette,
il faut avancer pour ne pas perdre l'équilibre.
-- Einstein, A.

 

[Donga]

Andrew:
>Here (in Oz) if the commissionaires get picky they won't let you start a race controlled by the Cycling Federation unless it has the >relevant Australian and New Zealand Standards sticker attached - an ANSI or Snell sticker will get you a d/q and no start.
>When I asked if those standards were inferior, I was told not necessarily, just different.

Surely this is because Australian helmet retailers realised the number
of riders buying their helmets for a fraction of the price over the
internet - same helmet, but without the trade-restrictive Australian
certification. Seems reasonable to suspect the retailers got in the
ears of the Cycling Federation and hey, guess what? No ANZ sticker, no
race.

Donga

 

[Werehatrack]

On 14 Mar 2006 02:04:10 -0800, "Donga"
<[email protected]> wrote:

>Andrew:
>>Here (in Oz) if the commissionaires get picky they won't let you start a race controlled by the Cycling Federation unless it has the >relevant Australian and New Zealand Standards sticker attached - an ANSI or Snell sticker will get you a d/q and no start.
>>When I asked if those standards were inferior, I was told not necessarily, just different.
>
>Surely this is because Australian helmet retailers realised the number
>of riders buying their helmets for a fraction of the price over the
>internet - same helmet, but without the trade-restrictive Australian
>certification. Seems reasonable to suspect the retailers got in the
>ears of the Cycling Federation and hey, guess what? No ANZ sticker, no
>race.

What, no one is creating realistic copies of the stickers?
--
Typoes are a feature, not a bug.
Some gardening required to reply via email.
Words processed in a facility that contains nuts.

 

[Werehatrack]

On 13 Mar 2006 18:54:35 -0800, "[email protected]"
<[email protected]> wrote:

>Andrew Price wrote:
>> I find the notion of national, as opposed to international, standards
>> curious particularly for items used by the entire species.
>> ....
>> Maybe one function a new arm of the UN could usefully perform is to be the
>> international body responsible to certify products to be as they should be
>> or not and replace the inconsistent and locally biased systems we have at
>> present - its one planet and the item either does its job or it doesn't.
>> Presumably complaince costs could be reduced overall.
>>
>> I suspect this has the same prospects as porcine aviation occurring anytime
>> soon.
>
>The ISO already exists, which may or may not be an improvement,
>depending on how you feel about porcine aviation.
>
>An ancient hermitage of Tibetan monks believes that if the words
>"ISO" and "compliance costs could be reduced" are ever uttered in
>the same sentence, the stars will wink out and the end of the world
>will ... <****!>

I think he meant to say "if the member organizations of ISO were ever
to be in unanimous agreement about the standards administered, and
actually persuaded their various nations' industries and governments
to adopt them, the universe would vanish in a quantum particle decay
event within moments due to the locally induce rupture in the
probability fields."
--
Typoes are a feature, not a bug.
Some gardening required to reply via email.
Words processed in a facility that contains nuts.

 

[Mark Janeba]

Andrew Price wrote:
> Art Harris wrote -
>
>
>>I'm always amused to see bike event applications that state in big
>>letters, "ALL PARTICIPANTS MUST WEAR AN ANSI OR SNELL APPROVED HELMET."
>>I'll bet 95 percent of the riders in those events are using helmets
>>that have neither.
>
>
> I find the notion of national, as opposed to international, standards
> curious particularly for items used by the entire species.

Do you mean like drug purity standards, or drug safety standards, or
automobile emission standards (which even vary by state in the US)?

This sort of thing (local standards) happens all the time. Indeed, it
rarely fails to happen that standards vary by locality. Good or bad,
it's the reality we live in.

Mark

 

[A Muzi]

> On 14 Mar 2006 02:04:10 -0800, "Donga"
> <[email protected]> wrote:
-snip-
>> No ANZ sticker, norace.

Werehatrack wrote:
> What, no one is creating realistic copies of the stickers?

When that rule was first applied in USCF our helmet reps
passed out rolls of stickers. But a sticker won't help an
obviously non-compliant helmet.

--
Andrew Muzi
www.yellowjersey.org
Open every day since 1 April, 1971

 

[RonSonic]

On Tue, 14 Mar 2006 19:52:38 -0800, Mark Janeba
<[email protected]> wrote:

>Andrew Price wrote:
>> Art Harris wrote -
>>
>>
>>>I'm always amused to see bike event applications that state in big
>>>letters, "ALL PARTICIPANTS MUST WEAR AN ANSI OR SNELL APPROVED HELMET."
>>>I'll bet 95 percent of the riders in those events are using helmets
>>>that have neither.
>>
>>
>> I find the notion of national, as opposed to international, standards
>> curious particularly for items used by the entire species.
>
>Do you mean like drug purity standards, or drug safety standards, or
>automobile emission standards (which even vary by state in the US)?
>
>This sort of thing (local standards) happens all the time. Indeed, it
>rarely fails to happen that standards vary by locality. Good or bad,
>it's the reality we live in.

Why shouldn't different people adopt rules and standards that reflect their own
perception of risk or local costs.

Why would standards be universal?

Ron

 

[John Forrest Tomlinson]

On Wed, 15 Mar 2006 15:30:04 GMT, RonSonic <[email protected]>
wrote:

>
>Why shouldn't different people adopt rules and standards that reflect their own
>perception of risk or local costs.

In some cases just to save energy. There is probably more diversity
of opinion on helmets and cycling within either the US or, say,
Australia, than the differences between "typical" opinions in either
place.

JT

****************************
Remove "remove" to reply
Visit http://www.jt10000.com
****************************

 

[Werehatrack]

On Wed, 15 Mar 2006 00:36:45 -0600, A Muzi <[email protected]>
wrote:

>> On 14 Mar 2006 02:04:10 -0800, "Donga"
>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>-snip-
>>> No ANZ sticker, norace.
>
>Werehatrack wrote:
>> What, no one is creating realistic copies of the stickers?
>
>When that rule was first applied in USCF our helmet reps
>passed out rolls of stickers. But a sticker won't help an
>obviously non-compliant helmet.

Heh. Yeah, we used to see fools show up with a military surplus
combat helmet that they'd retrofitted with a sticker that I suspect
they peeled from a new unit in a shop somewhere. They didn't pass
tech. One of them even tried to come back through with a different,
older actual bike helmet that he'd restuck the same sticker into that
he'd had on the steel one. He forgot to peel the *older, original*
sticker that was just under the edge of the padding first, though, and
it showed the unit as non-compliant. That got him a warning that any
further tech infractions would net him an escort to the gate. Today,
I think the second dumbass move would probably be enough. For one
thing, in motorized racing around here, the tech inspectors tend to be
the guys who were the most adept at beating the system years ago.
They do not look kindly on hamfisted stupidity; their standards are
higher.
--
Typoes are a feature, not a bug.
Some gardening required to reply via email.
Words processed in a facility that contains nuts.