POC road helmet

Discuss light weight issues concerning road bikes & parts.
Pharmstrong
Posts: 328
Joined: Sun Jul 22, 2012 7:17 pm

by Pharmstrong

So their top end mountain is £140/£175 depending on MIPS, but the road is £225, sans MIPS. They can sod off. Tired of this gouging for road.

quinner
Posts: 34
Joined: Thu May 03, 2012 12:58 am

by quinner

The MTB helmets fit awkardly, anyone have experience of both their POC MTB helmet and their road offerings yet?

by Weenie


User avatar
djconnel
Posts: 7926
Joined: Wed Sep 26, 2007 1:57 pm
Location: San Francisco, CA
Contact:

by djconnel

Any update on this? When I read "the fit is bad; it fits a round head", I read that... "the fit is excellent; it fits a round head."

User avatar
bearsdidit
Shop Owner
Posts: 322
Joined: Tue Feb 08, 2011 7:56 am
Location: California
Contact:

by bearsdidit

I tried on a medium at Interbike and loved it. It seems to fit pretty similar to a Giro Atmos.

JackWalk
Posts: 78
Joined: Fri Jul 12, 2013 10:29 am

by JackWalk

Pharmstrong wrote:Image
http://instagram.com/p/b5-G7fJI61/

Rear view. POC have said they're sponsoring a team next year, so maybe it's Garmin? Can't imagine they would use the Tempor though, what with Garmin being one of the first teams to realise riders tend to drop their head in TTs...

I agree that the white one looks great, I'd just have to see how much of a balloon/mushroom it would look on my head... that and the fact that due to the location the logo looks to read 'poo'.

I also think they're missing a trick by not making the aero version a magnetic snap on cover. I understand the UCI rules, but producing a cover as well would benefit the rest of us.

I was told by one of the POC dealers at a bike show that they are sponsoring garmin next year


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

JackWalk
Posts: 78
Joined: Fri Jul 12, 2013 10:29 am

by JackWalk

ImageImageImage
Here's some photos I took at the bike show


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

rowdysluggins
Posts: 349
Joined: Tue Apr 27, 2010 2:36 am
Location: Taylosville, Utah

by rowdysluggins

Okay. Where can I get one?

JMT
Posts: 35
Joined: Wed Feb 22, 2012 3:16 pm

by JMT

I like the fact that it has a smooth rounded shape (less stuff that can catch on the ground and less leverage on the head) and more coverage.
I'd have considered it if it had MIPS, the price is just too high as well.
As it stands now I'll try Scott Lin if I can find it in large (Taal is just a tad to small for me). Or I'll try to get hold of a Giro Air Attack and see if it fits (no MIPS but good shape).
The ICE technology seems really nice, even more so for mtb than road.

User avatar
Devon
Posts: 775
Joined: Fri Apr 12, 2013 1:19 pm
Location: Oxford, England

by Devon

Image
Campagnolo; because it's a bicycle, not a fishing rod.

Stefano
Posts: 244
Joined: Sun Dec 19, 2010 4:24 am
Location: Ann Arbor, Michigan

by Stefano

http://velonews.competitor.com/2013/11/ ... met_309751

Won't work with my Oakleys... This could be a deal breaker

User avatar
legs 11
Posts: 3657
Joined: Tue Jan 23, 2007 11:22 am
Location: Leg hurty

by legs 11

That's just nasty. Way overpriced, ugly, questionable qualities.
Image

POC.......COCK more like! :S
Pedalling Law Student.

SpinnerTim
Posts: 170
Joined: Sat Jul 17, 2010 11:36 am

by SpinnerTim

Thanks for that, uh... contribution.

I like this POC effort. I like the general re-emphasis on the helmet as a visibility/impact/post-impact safety feature instead of a fashion statement. Light weight and high-flow vents are a great bonus.

It does look as though POC dropped the ball by choosing to bypass MIPS and failing to offer the fluo/signal green that's available from Lazer, Giro, Rudy, and others. Allegedly, POC has countered that any "green" color is going to get lost outside of urban environments, where more green vegetation exists, but how could anyone equate fluo green with foliage?

Seriously, there's a reason fire trucks and emergency vehicles are painted that color; it pops. And really, if dayglo green blends in with vegetation, then how did this happen... http://thereaganwing.files.wordpress.co ... edator.jpg" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;"

-Tim

User avatar
prendrefeu
Posts: 8608
Joined: Wed Oct 31, 2007 10:32 pm
Location: Los Feliz, Los Angeles, California
Contact:

by prendrefeu

@SpinnerTim

Actually, "hi-viz" makes little to no difference for objects in motion. Retro-reflectivity does under certain circumstances.
We shouldn't go off topic here, but it has been covered in this thread:
viewtopic.php?f=14&t=111040

Oh, and Firetrucks and ambulances? Not all are Hi-Viz, actually.
Out here they are often a red or dark red, sometimes white or pale green. Yes they have reflective attributes but hi-viz colours they are not.
Why? Because it doesn't make a guaranteed difference for visibility of a moving object under all conditions. Actually hi-viz works under very particular conditions (ever play football (soccer) in the snow? or golf at night?), but is basically useless and just a fashion statement in all other conditions for moving objects. Pattern, and hence contrast, make a much more significant impact on visibility.

But back to topic, the POC helmet.
Exp001 || Other projects in the works.

SpinnerTim
Posts: 170
Joined: Sat Jul 17, 2010 11:36 am

by SpinnerTim

"Oh, and Firetrucks and ambulances? Not all are Hi-Viz, actually.
Out here they are often a red or dark red, sometimes white or pale green. Yes they have reflective attributes but hi-viz colours they are not.Why? Because it doesn't make a guaranteed difference for visibility of a moving object under all conditions. Actually hi-viz works under very particular conditions (ever play football (soccer) in the snow? or golf at night?), but is basically useless and just a fashion statement in all other conditions for moving objects. Pattern, and hence contrast, make a much more significant impact on visibility."

Ok. Well, in case you missed the photo link to Predator blood, some of what I wrote was in jest, and I think you missed that.

I'm going to go with my experience and maintain that hi-viz yellow/green is as good as its name. Disagree if you want. And if you insist that all of the visibility value comes from contrast, then tell me how much neon green you see on your local roads. If it's a ton, move away from Chernobyl. Everywhere else, this color works.

Those Vini-sponsored Italian pro conti kits are visible from helicopter cameras solo or in a mass of moving riders, so I'm going to maintain that it works in motion, too.

Finally, I like the POC helmet, and my input on the subject is that they should have expanded the range of hi-visibility colors. Even POC claim that the colors they picked were selected for visibility, so they seem to disagree that color has no value. Fluo green/yellow is a natural for this application, and I hope it finds its way into their next model year.

-Tim

by Weenie


User avatar
prendrefeu
Posts: 8608
Joined: Wed Oct 31, 2007 10:32 pm
Location: Los Feliz, Los Angeles, California
Contact:

by prendrefeu

SpinnerTim wrote:Those Vini-sponsored Italian pro conti kits are visible from helicopter cameras solo or in a mass of moving riders, so I'm going to maintain that it works in motion, too.


That's because the colour is simply a contrast to the others in what is perceptibly an 'object' with little relative motion. The helicopter is viewing one body, more or less together and more or less moving the same speed therefore relative motion to each other is negligible, and again contrast of color is visible. The viewer (you or camera shot) is also stationary relative to the objects in motion. If it was a quick pan shot and the camera was going one way and the peloton in the opposite direction, you'll notice that high-viz isn't any more perceptible than other colours or patterns which offer contrast. If you were specifically looking for high-viz knowing that that is what you'll be trying to prove, you're just falling into the confirmation bias scenario. If properly tested however your response to "what did you see?" would be fairly equal among anything that provided contrast. High-viz for cyclists is just fashion, sorry to burst your bubble, and appealing to false beliefs of how the human eye actually works. In selling you give people what they want, not necessarily what is actually correct. People want high-viz because they think it's safer? Sure, I'll sell that to you. You want a mirror on your helmet? I'll sell you one. You want a clock? I've got a famous clock to sell you too, it's in London and is often called "Ben."

Your example exemplifies confirmation bias, not actual science unfortunately. :)

When it comes to stationary objects, contrast if in form of a bright colour is visible. Sure. Which is why most 'stationary' or low-movement workers wear high-viz colours. The actual objects moving around? No need for high vis. The cones? Hi-viz. They aren't moving. Objects in motion which are not moving at an equal speed or significant relative speed to the viewer? Colour is not a signficant factor, and never will be, sorry. If it was you're going to need to contradict thousands of years of evolution across multiple species (not just humans) because it pertains to the way light is detected by the eye. Cones or rods, it doesn't matter: contrast makes the difference, not colour.
Exp001 || Other projects in the works.

Post Reply
  • Similar Topics
    Replies
    Views
    Last post