*


All times are UTC + 1 hour



Post new topic Reply to topic
 [ 44 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next
Author Message
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jul 28, 2005 3:07 pm 
Offline
Very Frequent Poster
User avatar

Joined: Mon Feb 11, 2002 1:00 am
Posts: 8207
Location: Florida
ookpik wrote:
RickI wrote:
What helmet do you use at present? What do other riders use?


It's a ProTec or something like that, I think, but I'd like to get one that will protect my ears from hard impacts with the water - Gath(?) maybe?


The ProTec Ace Wake has removable pads to cover your ears to try to avoid perforation problems. Some of the other ProTec helmets like the Water Helmet have fairly soft foam and may not deliver he same impact protection of the Ace Wake.

Gath helmets do cover your ears and I understand the soon to be released Gedi will have a number of new features including removable ear pads, shell and padding over the forehead area.

Anyway folks, please pass on your comments about your helmets now. This study, if it comes together, will be the first of its kind for kiteboarding helmets and should be fairly indepth.

FKA, Inc.

transcribed by:
Rick Iossi


Top
Profile
 Post subject: Re: LOOKING GOOD
PostPosted: Thu Jul 28, 2005 8:45 pm 
Offline
Very Frequent Poster
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jan 03, 2004 9:15 pm
Posts: 828
Location: England
Image

Capix WakeCap - These should be worn with the peak at the back as they do when used for Wakeboarding ?


Top
Profile
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jul 28, 2005 8:50 pm 
Offline
Very Frequent Poster
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jan 03, 2004 9:15 pm
Posts: 828
Location: England
Safety Standard Rating...

BS EN 1385: Specification for helmets used for water sports. (Wakeboarding)


Top
Profile
 Post subject: Re: LOOKING GOOD
PostPosted: Thu Jul 28, 2005 9:10 pm 
Offline
Very Frequent Poster
User avatar

Joined: Mon Feb 11, 2002 1:00 am
Posts: 8207
Location: Florida
mx5alan wrote:
Image

Capix WakeCap - These should be worn with the peak at the back as they do when used for Wakeboarding ?


That is a Sweet Strutter, it is substantially more built up/engineered with a composite shell than the plastic shelled Capix at about three times the price.

I spoke to the guys at the Sweet factor in Norway a while back. As I recall they said their helmets at the time were designed to be worn forwards or backwards. I don't think the Strutter was around at that time however.

Say you wear it backwards and come spinning in from a high jump and load up the bill of the cap? I may be more reckless but I have had more radical wipeouts than I can reasonably count over the years. I still vote for minimal projections on kiteboarding helmets.

FKA, Inc.

transcribed by:
Rick Iossi


Last edited by RickI on Thu Jul 28, 2005 9:25 pm, edited 2 times in total.

Top
Profile
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jul 28, 2005 9:12 pm 
Offline
Very Frequent Poster
User avatar

Joined: Mon Feb 11, 2002 1:00 am
Posts: 8207
Location: Florida
mx5alan wrote:
Safety Standard Rating...

BS EN 1385: Specification for helmets used for water sports. (Wakeboarding)


It is good to have a recognized safety standard rating. Considering some of the helmets that have achieved this rating though it doesn't appear to be that rigorous. At least not for the special demands of kiteboarding and potential higher speed impacts against hard objects. Case in point, checkout the discontinuous soft padding inside the certified helmet shown below:

Image
From: http://www.jervisbaykayaks.com/


Top
Profile
 Post subject: Re: LOOKING GOOD
PostPosted: Thu Jul 28, 2005 9:22 pm 
Offline
Very Frequent Poster
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jan 03, 2004 9:15 pm
Posts: 828
Location: England
RickI wrote:
I still vote for minimal projections on kiteboarding helmets.

Agree, which is why I use a Pro-Tec Ace Wake.


Top
Profile
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jul 28, 2005 10:22 pm 
Offline
Very Frequent Poster
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jan 03, 2004 9:15 pm
Posts: 828
Location: England
RickI wrote:
It is good to have a recognized safety standard rating. Considering some of the helmets that have achieved this rating though it doesn't appear to be that rigorous. At least not for the special demands of kiteboarding and potential higher speed impacts against hard objects.


About testing...
http://www.smf.org/testing.html

The test isn't that rigorous - as with motorcycle helmets, these aren't tested for a 60mph impact with the road.


Some qoutes from a Ski helmet FAQ...
Quote:
Q: what are the differences beetween the standards?
A: both standards require the helmet to absorb a large energy impact onto a flat surface (2m drop for astm; 1.5m drop for CE1077) and several lower energy drops onto different shaped surfaces (board edge surface, hemispherical surface, etc). The astm standard requires a much higher energy impact than the CE1077 standard but also allows for a higher ‘impact reading’ before the helmet receives a failing rating. Both the ce and astm standards require the helmet to be impacted at ambient (room) temperature, in a cold condition (-25c), in a hot condition (+40c) and in a wet condition (after being submerged under water for several hours).

The ce standard also has a penetration test that is meant to simulate a ski pole tip impacting a vent opening in the helmet.

Q: how fast can i go before the helmet will not protect me?
A: the impact velocity for the application of the astm and ce standard does not exceed 15mph (22.5 kph).

However, the impact is a straight vertical drop into a solid 500 lb (225 kg) steel impact surface with no rotation, tumbling or give in the system.

In actual field impacts, helmets routinely protect people at speeds much higher than 15mph (22.5kph).




A helmet that meets the standards will only provide adequate protection to reduce the risk of head injury.


and
http://www.capixco.com
The Capix WakeCap is rated CE 1077


Top
Profile
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jul 28, 2005 10:28 pm 
Offline
Very Frequent Poster
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jan 03, 2004 9:15 pm
Posts: 828
Location: England
Ideal Standard for kitesurfing would be a combined

EN 1385: Specification for helmets used for water sports. (Wakeboarding)
EN 966: 1996 Specification for helmets for airborne sports (Paragliding)


Top
Profile
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Jul 29, 2005 4:46 am 
Offline
Very Frequent Poster
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jan 06, 2002 1:00 am
Posts: 2583
Location: Mauritius, waterman since 1960
My first helmet was custom made, as they all gave me a headache.
I put on two neoprene diving hoodies and had a friend laminate resin and glass over my nut. It got pretty hot underneath for a while, and I sat next to my compressor for some fresh air to breath.
Now my son is using it, as I have tried the protech ace wake which fits like a glove.
Here almost no one wears a helmet, they all feel it will not hapen to them.
Nico


Top
Profile
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Jul 29, 2005 12:43 pm 
Offline
Very Frequent Poster
User avatar

Joined: Mon Feb 11, 2002 1:00 am
Posts: 8207
Location: Florida
mx5alan wrote:
Ideal Standard for kitesurfing would be a combined

EN 1385: Specification for helmets used for water sports. (Wakeboarding)
EN 966: 1996 Specification for helmets for airborne sports (Paragliding)


The more I look at this, the more it seems we need a kiteboarding standard. I was speaking to a couple of guys a few months back about trying to form an ASTM standards committee for kiteboarding helmets. IF it happens that could be a while in coming.

If I were hang gliding there is no question that I would want the best performing helmet certified by EN 966 or ASTM equivalent. The problem is that most evolved helmets for hang gliding and paragliding are not all that suitable for kiteboarding by virtue of weight, drag and perhaps even bucketing potential (accumulating added water weight resulting in cervical problems).

For example:

Image
This helmet weighs 24 ounces or 681 grams. There is nothing scientific about it, yet, but it seems a better target weight range for kiteboarding might be around less than 400 to 500 grams for the frequent impact environment of kiteboarding. The drag issues are obvious.

Image

This helmet has less drag, but it is hard to say how it would perform with regard to bucketing from just the photo. It is hard to get a feel for the projected area on impact with water but it could be higher than might be comfortable as well. This helmet weights 19 ounces or 540 grams, that is getting up there.

Regarding EN 1385: Specification for helmets used for water sports. (Wakeboarding), the helmets I found this time around look more realistic for kiteboarding. That is with the exception of a number of helmets with excellent composite shell, in some cases superior single impact EPS foam but with EXCESSIVE drag and surfaces for loading up, in some cases only.

I think if we could find a helmet or helmets that satisfied both standards, had light weight, low drag, low bucketing potential, etc. it could be a good thing. Any ideas out there?

FKA, Inc.

transcribed by:
Rick Iossi


Top
Profile
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic
 [ 44 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next

All times are UTC + 1 hour


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: dyyylan, dzincha, Exabot [Bot], FLandOBX, Google [Bot] and 25 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group