or Connect
EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Ski Gear Discussion › What helmet schumacher wore when he hit the rock?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

What helmet schumacher wore when he hit the rock?

post #1 of 6
Thread Starter 

Anyone knows?

post #2 of 6
Half will say it's a great helmet that saved his life. The other half will say that the helmet failed.
post #3 of 6

Perhaps OP is thinking that with his knowledge of high-speed sports whatever helmet Schumacher chose would be a good one, and will go out and buy the same model. 

 

If you are skiing fast, you might be better off with a SNELL/DOT approved motorcycle helmet. 

Even if that were the case, I really think that even Schumacher would wear a ski helmet.  Richy-rich might wear a motorcycle helmet.

 

It's intersting in that even in motorcycling circles there is much debate over whether to get SNELL as in order to reach impact protection from the high forces required by SNELL, the impact of lower forces is compromised, and the lower impacts are much more likely to occur to the general public, based on accident data.

 

Question for those who really know a lot about ski helmets, are some ski helmets designed more for high impact than others?

post #4 of 6

Schumacher favored Schurbeth for his motorcycling.

They are great helmets and very expensive.

His F1 helmets are not publicly available and are full of electronics.

They cost thousands.

 

Eventually, his ski helmet will be identified.

 

I like Bieffe ski helmets as being the most motorsports like but they are hard to get in the US.

post #5 of 6
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ghost View Post
 

If you are skiing fast, you might be better off with a SNELL/DOT approved motorcycle helmet. 

 

 

If you are going with an open face full helmet, maybe. A full face will have problems with the visor freezing. You breath a lot heavier on skis than on a bike, and since it's typically colder on skis than riding, that moisture will find the visor and freeze. Leaving vents open will just defeat the purpose of trying to keep your head warm. The basic helmets of your sterotypical Harley rider (skull caps, or whatever slang  you want to use for them), will be worthless. 

 

If you are looking at helmets from other applications for ski use I would consider an SA rated helmet over an M rated one. SA helmets are for car racing, and are designed to take several large hits with concentrated impact points (your roll cage), where motorcycle helmets are good for typically one really good hit with the ground. Ultimately I would stick with ski helmets however. They are build to handle entirely different things. 

 

Having said that, the testing and design of ski helmets hasn't really changed much lately, and issue that is very similar in cycling. There is a good article discussing it that a friend pointed me towards when we were discussing ski helmets. Cliffnotes and link:

- MIPS equipped helmets need only comply to the same safety standard, but testing suggests they provide substantially more impact protection.
- Bike helmet tech (and standards) has been stagnant since 1999
- There's really no safety difference between a cheap (traditional EPS) helment and an expensive one
- Concussions increased dramtically (67%) from 1997 to 2011. The author paints this as a mystery. It seems obvious that it's the rise in popularity of mountain biking and subsequent increase in unintentional inverted dismounts.
- You should know what to do when someone whacks their head. See the flow chart.
http://www.bicycling.com/senseless/index.html
 

post #6 of 6
Quote:
Originally Posted by markojp View Post

Half will say it's a great helmet that saved his life. The other half will say that the helmet failed.

His neurosurgeons say it saved his life, but hey what do they know?

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ghost View Post

 

If you are skiing fast, you might be better off with a SNELL/DOT approved motorcycle helmet. 

 

It's intersting in that even in motorcycling circles there is much debate over whether to get SNELL as in order to reach impact protection from the high forces required by SNELL, the impact of lower forces is compromised, and the lower impacts are much more likely to occur to the general public, based on accident data.

 

Question for those who really know a lot about ski helmets, are some ski helmets designed more for high impact than others?

Disagree about being better off with a motorcycle helmet. My Arai weighed a ton, had full frontal protection and a visor, and so would do a nice job levering your neck into a clean break when you bounced on hardpack. Which is why they're banned by FIS for speed events.

 

As far as design, cannot speak to Snell, mainly think it's a fairly stupid approach to any helmet, or to debates within motorcycling these days - haven't owned or ridden in a decade. Industry people back then told me helmet designs were aimed at serious penetrative forces like you get if you hit a guard rail (although that can just cause decapitation, or amputation of a limb and quick bleedout, both of which certainly save your brain from concussion) or a telephone pole or the headlight of a car. None of those objects are common on the slopes, although trees come closest, being the parents of telephone poles. 

 

What I know about differences is only personal stuff, not experimental. Measured couple of times, my ski helmet was significantly lighter, less distance between shell and noggin, I know from literature by makers that the shell itself is thinner, and AFAIK, the design increasingly is about easy sequential crushing, and about absorbing non-perpendicular forces. Sort of a BMW on our heads. Think on it: Axon shear from ragdolling is the big risk, not lamp post fractures. Which is why racers are taught to try to slide when down instead of tumble. Good luck on that...

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Ski Gear Discussion
EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Ski Gear Discussion › What helmet schumacher wore when he hit the rock?