Reviews of new bike helmets show no connection between cost and protection

If cyclists pay more money for their helmets, that doesn’t necessarily mean their heads will be safer in a crash, as there is no connection between the price of a helmet and the level of protection it offers.

These are the key findings of new cycle helmet safety tests and assessments released earlier this month as part of a study by Imperial College London. The goal was to find out how much protection different helmets provide and help consumers make an informed decision about the helmet that offers the best protection.

The study, “How well do popular bicycle helmets protect against different types of head injuries?”, was published in an article in Annals of Biomedical Engineering earlier this month.

“Until now, there has been limited information about how well cyclists can expect their helmet to protect them in a head impact,” Claire Baker of the Imperial Dyson School of Design Engineering and lead author of the study said in a statement.

“This is because current safety standards are simply pass/fail and only test the direct impact that occurs when a head is hit directly. However, evidence from previous studies shows that permanent brain damage occurs with more severe impacts or with rapid rotations of the head during an impact.”

Researchers at Imperial College London have developed a simple new safety rating system for cycle helmets, with easy-to-understand ratings ranging from zero for less protection to five for the best on the market. The system is intended to help buyers choose helmets and support manufacturers in future helmet design. It is based on extensive new security testing experiments.

The Imperial team examined 30 of the most popular mid-sized adult helmets on the market in the UK, based on a combination of laboratory tests, data from major retailers and a survey of more than a thousand cyclists. All bicycle helmets tested in the study must meet legal standards to ensure they provide protection.

The cost and designs of helmets varied widely, but the results of the study showed significant differences in performance, with no relationship between the price of a helmet and the level of safety it provided to the wearer. For example, a helmet that cost £130 (about $174) performed no better in tests than one that cost £40 (about $53).

All helmets sold in Europe must meet the minimum safety standard set, said Dr. Baker, “but we wanted to determine in realistic collision testing whether some provide better safety protection than others.” We developed a simple rating system to rate helmets based on the risk of head injury in a collision. The risk of injury took into account the likelihood of deep brain injuries from head rotation, as well as more superficial injuries and possible skull fractures from direct impact. “

“Interestingly,” she added, “we found no correlation between price and protection, with the best-performing helmet being one of the cheaper ones, retailing at around £50” (around $67).

In the future, the testing program and reviews will include children’s helmets as well as a wider range of adult helmet models and sizes on the market.

“The science of brain biomechanics has made enormous progress and we now know much more about how best to protect the human head from serious and long-term injuries in a collision,” says Mazdak Ghajari, also from the Dyson School of Design Engineering Imperial College and lead author of the study said in a statement. “We share our insights with helmet manufacturers and those responsible for setting testing standards so that the industry can keep up and develop products that offer the best possible protection.”

“We believe these evaluations will lead to further improvements in helmet designs,” added Dr. Ghajari added, “and provides greater protection against a range of head and brain injuries when a cyclist is involved in a fall or collision.”

To access the paper and helmet reviews, click here and here.