Support road.cc

Like this site? Help us to make it better.

news

Could Volvo and POC end the helmet debate? Swedish firms partner for "world first" car and cycle helmet crash tests (+ video)

They say project will enable "direct comparison" of effect of using a helmet against not wearing one...

Could Volvo Cars and POC be about to settle the helmet debate? The Swedish brands have teamed up for what they claim is a "world-first" series of crash tests that will assess the impact on cycle helmets in collisions with cars – and, by comparing the results with those of existing regulations regarding pedestrian head protection, will enable them “to make a direct comparison between wearing a helmet and not wearing a helmet.”

Volvo says that the initiative is a development of its existing strategy of looking to avoid collisions altogether through features such as cyclist and pedestrian detection systems in its vehicles.

The Volvo-POC research project will see a number of specially designed crash tests at the car manufacturer’s safety research facilities in Gothenburg, Sweden.

It also forms part of wider research aimed at obtaining a greater understanding of the types of long-term injuries sustained by cyclists.

The tests will involve POC cycle helmets, mounted on crash test dummy heads, being launched from a testing rig towards different areas of the bonnet of a static Volvo car.

The helmets will be fired at different speeds and angles, says the car manufacturer, and the tests are in line with current regulatory test procedures for pedestrian head protection, which the two companies say will enable them “to make a direct comparison between wearing a helmet and not wearing a helmet.” They add:

Current bike helmet testing procedures are fairly rudimentary, involving helmets being dropped from different heights on either a flat or an angled surface, and do not take into account vehicle to bike accidents. The Volvo-POC project aims to further refine and advance such testing.

The learnings from the research project will help POC make its helmets safer and more protective in the event of a car-bike accident, while the tests will also provide valuable insights and learnings for Volvo Cars into these types of accidents for future development.

Malin Ekholm, Head of the Volvo Cars Safety Centre, said: “This project with POC is a good example of our pioneering spirit in safety.

“We often develop new testing methods for challenging traffic scenarios. Our aim is not only to meet legal requirements or pass rating tests; instead, we go beyond ratings, using real traffic situations to develop technology that further improves safety.”

“Much like Volvo Cars, safety is at the very centre of our mission, and drives all our ideas and innovations,” commented Oscar Huss, Head of Product Development at POC.

“By working closely with scientific leaders in the POC Lab, we strive to lead the way in introducing new safety ideas. Certification standards are essential, but they should never limit our willingness to look beyond their parameters to find better and more innovative ways to reduce the consequences of accidents.”

Simon joined road.cc as news editor in 2009 and is now the site’s community editor, acting as a link between the team producing the content and our readers. A law and languages graduate, published translator and former retail analyst, he has reported on issues as diverse as cycling-related court cases, anti-doping investigations, the latest developments in the bike industry and the sport’s biggest races. Now back in London full-time after 15 years living in Oxford and Cambridge, he loves cycling along the Thames but misses having his former riding buddy, Elodie the miniature schnauzer, in the basket in front of him.

Add new comment

94 comments

Avatar
Giles Pargiter | 4 years ago
1 like

Of course, as ever, despite personal anecdotes by those displaying "affect bias"  due to personal events ( avoiding getting involved in the whole risk bias effect- which is very real). This so called "helmet debate" comes down those who have done their research and discovered such things as; pedestrians suffer minisculey less head injuries than cyclists and those occupying moving motor vehicles suffer a lot more head injuries than cyclists but that in far access of either, those taking a shower or bath suffer a shockingly multiple amount of head injuries and indeed in comparison, it seems taking a shower or or bath should be assisted by a personal safety assistant. . . .

The biggest risk obviously, is that a motor vehicle will kill you- the one constant thing in all of this.

There is always the risk of death associated with being alive of course....

All of which seems to ignore that cycling is in fact a remarkably safe thing to do - - with or without a helmet. furthermore that helmet wearing has a negligible  effect on this.

 

Talk about blaming the victims!!

Much safer than playing football and way safer than rugby. Indeed slightly safer than ping pong!!

 

Avatar
Rapha Nadal | 4 years ago
3 likes

They definitely sound like communists.

Avatar
hawkinspeter replied to Rapha Nadal | 4 years ago
4 likes

Rapha Nadal wrote:

They definitely sound like communists.

LMAO!

 

Avatar
Rapha Nadal replied to hawkinspeter | 4 years ago
2 likes

hawkinspeter wrote:

Rapha Nadal wrote:

They definitely sound like communists.

LMAO!

 

Big fan of Chairman LMAO.

Avatar
ktache | 4 years ago
5 likes

I want graphs.  This is not a proper helmet debate without some graphs!

Avatar
burtthebike replied to ktache | 4 years ago
4 likes

ktache wrote:

I want graphs.  This is not a proper helmet debate without some graphs!

Further explanation needed.  Which group of squirrels was wearing helmets, and did they protect from 85% of injuries inflicted by the predators, as found in completely independent, utterly unbiased research by helmet salemen?

Avatar
hawkinspeter replied to ktache | 4 years ago
3 likes

ktache wrote:

I want graphs.  This is not a proper helmet debate without some graphs!

I'm sorry, but that's racist (speciesist?).

Did you know that the Red squirrels in the British Isles are very definitely red, but the same species in Russia is usually gray and in the United States may be either gray or red?

 

Avatar
Rapha Nadal replied to hawkinspeter | 4 years ago
1 like

hawkinspeter wrote:

ktache wrote:

I want graphs.  This is not a proper helmet debate without some graphs!

I'm sorry, but that's racist (speciesist?).

Did you know that the Red squirrels in the British Isles are very definitely red, but the same species in Russia is usually gray and in the United States may be either gray or red?

 

But are red squirrels communists?

Avatar
hawkinspeter replied to Rapha Nadal | 4 years ago
3 likes

Rapha Nadal wrote:

hawkinspeter wrote:

ktache wrote:

I want graphs.  This is not a proper helmet debate without some graphs!

I'm sorry, but that's racist (speciesist?).

Did you know that the Red squirrels in the British Isles are very definitely red, but the same species in Russia is usually gray and in the United States may be either gray or red?

 

But are red squirrels communists?

Well, squirrels are known to make shared nests (called Drey) to see them through the winter and they often share food as they can't remember exactly which squirrel buried what food.

However, red squirrels don't like sharing with the greys

 

Avatar
FluffyKittenofT... replied to Rapha Nadal | 4 years ago
2 likes

Rapha Nadal wrote:

hawkinspeter wrote:

ktache wrote:

I want graphs.  This is not a proper helmet debate without some graphs!

I'm sorry, but that's racist (speciesist?).

Did you know that the Red squirrels in the British Isles are very definitely red, but the same species in Russia is usually gray and in the United States may be either gray or red?

 

But are red squirrels communists?

 

They used to be, but these days they are Republicans.  Though they are still secretly colluding with Russia, so there's still some continuity, which is nice.

Avatar
hawkinspeter replied to FluffyKittenofTindalos | 4 years ago
3 likes

FluffyKittenofTindalos wrote:

Rapha Nadal wrote:

hawkinspeter wrote:

ktache wrote:

I want graphs.  This is not a proper helmet debate without some graphs!

I'm sorry, but that's racist (speciesist?).

Did you know that the Red squirrels in the British Isles are very definitely red, but the same species in Russia is usually gray and in the United States may be either gray or red?

 

But are red squirrels communists?

 

They used to be, but these days they are Republicans.  Though they are still secretly colluding with Russia, so there's still some continuity, which is nice.

.

Avatar
The Gavalier | 4 years ago
2 likes

“victim blaming tossers who drive the cause of cycling fatalities, cyclists like Gavalier and every other ill informed opinion puts the responsibility for all incidents on the clothing of the cyclist whilst ignoring all other dangers in their life”

You may want to go back, re-read all my posts, then apologise. 

Avatar
hawkinspeter | 4 years ago
1 like

Burt - you're (disc) breaking the quote tags again. With your comment editing you're removing one of the opening quote tags.

Avatar
burtthebike replied to hawkinspeter | 4 years ago
2 likes

hawkinspeter wrote:

Burt - you're (disc) breaking the quote tags again. With your comment editing you're removing one of the opening quote tags.

I'll put my helmet on.

Avatar
alansmurphy | 4 years ago
3 likes

I'm a rare beast that has been converted by these threads, and like our latest troll, Gavalier, have a couple of anecdotes:

 

Hit from behind by car, hit tarmac, wearing helmet. Head didn't hit tarmac, hand injuries.

 

Hit by a car turning accross me (McDonald's was more important than my life), wearing helmet. Head hit nothing, arm injuries.

 

Neither event the helmet helped, neither have convinced me to wear a suit of armour.

 

Came off heading down Mt Ventoux, smashed shoulder and side of helmet on a ski pole, briefly lost conciousness, plates and fake ligaments now in shoulder. "The helmet saved my life" I decided. On further analysis (and whith video evidence) it's more likely the additional head circumference is what caused the helmet to hit the pole.

 

None of what i read or experience encourages me to wear a helmet whilst walking, wear full armour whilst riding, wear fire retardent clothing whilst cooking. However, it boils my piss that victim blaming tossers who drive the cause of cycling fatalities, cyclists like Gavalier and every other ill informed opinion puts the responsibility for all incidents on the clothing of the cyclist whilst ignoring all other dangers in their life.  

Avatar
The Gavalier replied to alansmurphy | 4 years ago
1 like
alansmurphy wrote:

I'm a rare beast that has been converted by these threads, and like our latest troll, Gavalier, have a couple of anecdotes:

 

Hit from behind by car, hit tarmac, wearing helmet. Head didn't hit tarmac, hand injuries.

 

Hit by a car turning accross me (McDonald's was more important than my life), wearing helmet. Head hit nothing, arm injuries.

 

Neither event the helmet helped, neither have convinced me to wear a suit of armour.

 

Came off heading down Mt Ventoux, smashed shoulder and side of helmet on a ski pole, briefly lost conciousness, plates and fake ligaments now in shoulder. "The helmet saved my life" I decided. On further analysis (and whith video evidence) it's more likely the additional head circumference is what caused the helmet to hit the pole.

 

None of what i read or experience encourages me to wear a helmet whilst walking, wear full armour whilst riding, wear fire retardent clothing whilst cooking. However, it boils my piss that victim blaming tossers who drive the cause of cycling fatalities, cyclists like Gavalier and every other ill informed opinion puts the responsibility for all incidents on the clothing of the cyclist whilst ignoring all other dangers in their life.  

Why troll?

Avatar
The Gavalier replied to alansmurphy | 4 years ago
0 likes
alansmurphy wrote:

I'm a rare beast that has been converted by these threads, and like our latest troll, Gavalier, have a couple of anecdotes:

 

Hit from behind by car, hit tarmac, wearing helmet. Head didn't hit tarmac, hand injuries.

 

Hit by a car turning accross me (McDonald's was more important than my life), wearing helmet. Head hit nothing, arm injuries.

 

Neither event the helmet helped, neither have convinced me to wear a suit of armour.

 

Came off heading down Mt Ventoux, smashed shoulder and side of helmet on a ski pole, briefly lost conciousness, plates and fake ligaments now in shoulder. "The helmet saved my life" I decided. On further analysis (and whith video evidence) it's more likely the additional head circumference is what caused the helmet to hit the pole.

 

None of what i read or experience encourages me to wear a helmet whilst walking, wear full armour whilst riding, wear fire retardent clothing whilst cooking. However, it boils my piss that victim blaming tossers who drive the cause of cycling fatalities, cyclists like Gavalier and every other ill informed opinion puts the responsibility for all incidents on the clothing of the cyclist whilst ignoring all other dangers in their life.  

Why troll?

Avatar
alansmurphy replied to The Gavalier | 4 years ago
2 likes

The Gavalier wrote:
alansmurphy wrote:

I'm a rare beast that has been converted by these threads, and like our latest troll, Gavalier, have a couple of anecdotes:

 

 

Why troll?

 

I'm not sure. Maybe because you enjoy it?

Avatar
hawkinspeter | 4 years ago
2 likes

@Fluffy - there's now a trend of bringing back dangerous playgrounds: https://www.nytimes.com/2018/03/10/world/europe/britain-playgrounds-risk.html

Quote:

Now, Ms. Morris says proudly, “we have fires, we use knives, saws, different tools,” all used under adult supervision. Indoors, scissors abound, and so do sharp-edged tape dispensers (“they normally only cut themselves once,” she says).

Avatar
BehindTheBikesheds replied to hawkinspeter | 4 years ago
2 likes

hawkinspeter wrote:

@Fluffy - there's now a trend of bringing back dangerous playgrounds: https://www.nytimes.com/2018/03/10/world/europe/britain-playgrounds-risk.html

Quote:

Now, Ms. Morris says proudly, “we have fires, we use knives, saws, different tools,” all used under adult supervision. Indoors, scissors abound, and so do sharp-edged tape dispensers (“they normally only cut themselves once,” she says).

I started teaching my own son how to use knives/hot pans when he was still in primary school (and an iron), my youngest grandson started using a kitchen knife when he was 5, my other grandson when he was 7(he's a bit hyperactive so gets a bit keen to wade right in).

My son cycled to school on a 60mph road from age of 10 sans helmet for 7 years, neither of my grandkids nearly 6 and 10 wear a helmet and they ride plenty. The small un is cycling mad and will happily launch himself down the grassy slopes at the park and prefers to ride on the roads with me given a choice though I strictly select when/where. He like my son is being taught how to cycle, what to watch for, what not to do and when he's had a crash reminded why he had a crash and he doesn't repeat the mistake.

Giving kids a chance to explore their boundaries and find out the hard way in some instances is not a bad thing, what is bad is creating an environment where due to external influences they completely lose any sight of the boundary and go beyond in a very big way and end up getting really badly hurt or worse. The studies that they have done on kids shows us that they are influenced significantly when they are wearing a safety aid/something that will protect them, this pretty much replicates the influence that occurs in competition with adults when they are pushing the boundaries very often.

Avatar
Sniffer replied to BehindTheBikesheds | 4 years ago
2 likes

BehindTheBikesheds wrote:

hawkinspeter wrote:

@Fluffy - there's now a trend of bringing back dangerous playgrounds: https://www.nytimes.com/2018/03/10/world/europe/britain-playgrounds-risk.html

Quote:

Now, Ms. Morris says proudly, “we have fires, we use knives, saws, different tools,” all used under adult supervision. Indoors, scissors abound, and so do sharp-edged tape dispensers (“they normally only cut themselves once,” she says).

I started teaching my own son how to use knives/hot pans when he was still in primary school (and an iron), my youngest grandson started using a kitchen knife when he was 5, my other grandson when he was 7(he's a bit hyperactive so gets a bit keen to wade right in).

My son cycled to school on a 60mph road from age of 10 sans helmet for 7 years, neither of my grandkids nearly 6 and 10 wear a helmet and they ride plenty. The small un is cycling mad and will happily launch himself down the grassy slopes at the park and prefers to ride on the roads with me given a choice though I strictly select when/where. He like my son is being taught how to cycle, what to watch for, what not to do and when he's had a crash reminded why he had a crash and he doesn't repeat the mistake.

Giving kids a chance to explore their boundaries and find out the hard way in some instances is not a bad thing, what is bad is creating an environment where due to external influences they completely lose any sight of the boundary and go beyond in a very big way and end up getting really badly hurt or worse. The studies that they have done on kids shows us that they are influenced significantly when they are wearing a safety aid/something that will protect them, this pretty much replicates the influence that occurs in competition with adults when they are pushing the boundaries very often.

I do enjoy a BTBS anecdote to prove a point - and it happens regularly.

It is especially entertaining on the threads where he rubbishes other arguments because they reference anecdotes.

It is OK for him to use this to validate his argument, but not for others if it doesn't fit his assumptions / prejudices / views (delete as applicable).

Avatar
BehindTheBikesheds replied to Sniffer | 4 years ago
3 likes

Sniffer wrote:

BehindTheBikesheds wrote:

hawkinspeter wrote:

@Fluffy - there's now a trend of bringing back dangerous playgrounds: https://www.nytimes.com/2018/03/10/world/europe/britain-playgrounds-risk.html

Quote:

Now, Ms. Morris says proudly, “we have fires, we use knives, saws, different tools,” all used under adult supervision. Indoors, scissors abound, and so do sharp-edged tape dispensers (“they normally only cut themselves once,” she says).

I started teaching my own son how to use knives/hot pans when he was still in primary school (and an iron), my youngest grandson started using a kitchen knife when he was 5, my other grandson when he was 7(he's a bit hyperactive so gets a bit keen to wade right in).

My son cycled to school on a 60mph road from age of 10 sans helmet for 7 years, neither of my grandkids nearly 6 and 10 wear a helmet and they ride plenty. The small un is cycling mad and will happily launch himself down the grassy slopes at the park and prefers to ride on the roads with me given a choice though I strictly select when/where. He like my son is being taught how to cycle, what to watch for, what not to do and when he's had a crash reminded why he had a crash and he doesn't repeat the mistake.

Giving kids a chance to explore their boundaries and find out the hard way in some instances is not a bad thing, what is bad is creating an environment where due to external influences they completely lose any sight of the boundary and go beyond in a very big way and end up getting really badly hurt or worse. The studies that they have done on kids shows us that they are influenced significantly when they are wearing a safety aid/something that will protect them, this pretty much replicates the influence that occurs in competition with adults when they are pushing the boundaries very often.

I do enjoy a BTBS anecdote to prove a point - and it happens regularly.

It is especially entertaining on the threads where he rubbishes other arguments because they reference anecdotes.

It is OK for him to use this to validate his argument, but not for others if it doesn't fit his assumptions / prejudices / views (delete as applicable).

Ah, so you readily admit to not understanding the difference between ...

I fell/was knocked off my bike and survived ergo my helmet saved my life - something which is utterly unproven by every measure and replicated in many activities/sports globally.

 And, I taught my child/grandkids life skills in the normally accepted fashion were they learnt from mistakes whilst given freedoms to explore under adult supervision for the most part without 'safety' aids and not only survived but were not ever in any life endangering scenarios.

Okay champ, I bow to your superior understanding of these matters.

Avatar
Rapha Nadal | 4 years ago
3 likes

Wonderful; yet another thread of folk shouting into the void.

Avatar
hawkinspeter replied to Rapha Nadal | 4 years ago
5 likes

Rapha Nadal wrote:

Wonderful; yet another thread of folk shouting into the void.

You're missing the delicious irony of the headline positing an end to the helmet debate and the comments continuing it.

Avatar
Rapha Nadal replied to hawkinspeter | 4 years ago
3 likes

hawkinspeter wrote:

Rapha Nadal wrote:

Wonderful; yet another thread of folk shouting into the void.

You're missing the delicious irony of the headline positing an end to the helmet debate and the comments continuing it.

Believe me, the irony has not been missed here!  Has anybody mentioned disc brakes yet?

Avatar
burtthebike replied to Rapha Nadal | 4 years ago
1 like

Rapha Nadal wrote:

You're missing the delicious irony of the headline positing an end to the helmet debate and the comments continuing it.

Believe me, the irony has not been missed here!  Has anybody mentioned disc brakes yet?

[/quote]

I for one, am a firm believer in a law forcing disc brakes to wear helmets.  I myself have had my own life saved because of them, and I personally know hundreds of other people who are similarly only alive today because their disc brake was wearing a helmet.  If it saves just one life......*

 

 

 

 

*Think I got most of the cliches in there, but please feel free to add.

Avatar
alansmurphy replied to burtthebike | 4 years ago
3 likes

burtthebike wrote:

 

 

*Think I got most of the cliches in there, but please feel free to add.

 

For the sake of a few quid why wouldn't your dic brakes wear helmets, I took my bike to an emergency bike mechaninc who said if my brake wasn't wearing a helmet the helmet break would definitely be a brake break... And something about hi viz...

Avatar
Rapha Nadal replied to burtthebike | 4 years ago
2 likes

burtthebike wrote:

Rapha Nadal wrote:

You're missing the delicious irony of the headline positing an end to the helmet debate and the comments continuing it.

Believe me, the irony has not been missed here!  Has anybody mentioned disc brakes yet?

I for one, am a firm believer in a law forcing disc brakes to wear helmets.  I myself have had my own life saved because of them, and I personally know hundreds of other people who are similarly only alive today because their disc brake was wearing a helmet.  If it saves just one life......*

 

 

 

 

*Think I got most of the cliches in there, but please feel free to add.

[/quote]

Hmmmm, i really think we should add a Campag vs. Shimano debate into the mix.  And follow up with some hi-viz?

Avatar
mdavidford replied to burtthebike | 4 years ago
0 likes
burtthebike wrote:
Rapha Nadal wrote:
hawkinspeter wrote:

You're missing the delicious irony of the headline positing an end to the helmet debate and the comments continuing it.

Believe me, the irony has not been missed here! Has anybody mentioned disc brakes yet?

I for one, am a firm believer in a law forcing disc brakes to wear helmets. I myself have had my own life saved because of them, and I personally know hundreds of other people who are similarly only alive today because their disc brake was wearing a helmet. If it saves just one life......*

*Think I got most of the cliches in there, but please feel free to add.

I, for one, would be firmly in favour of mandating the fitting of disc brakes to most commenters here, if it would provide greater stopping power on their comments when it comes to helmet-related threads.

Avatar
ConcordeCX replied to Rapha Nadal | 4 years ago
4 likes

Rapha Nadal wrote:

hawkinspeter wrote:

Rapha Nadal wrote:

Wonderful; yet another thread of folk shouting into the void.

You're missing the delicious irony of the headline positing an end to the helmet debate and the comments continuing it.

Believe me, the irony has not been missed here!  Has anybody mentioned disc brakes yet?

that would bring the helmet bandwagon to a juddering halt causing everyone to catapult over the bars and land on their heads.

Pages

Latest Comments