What is Trek launching?

[fromtrektocolnago]

i wasn't aware that independent tests were already released

Does the VT test count? https://www.helmet.beam.vt.edu/bicycle- ... tings.html

not really. just giving me 5 stars provides no transparency to the methodology. how is this an improvement over mips. we really don't know yet.

[fromtrektocolnago]

i wasn't aware that independent tests were already released

Does the VT test count? https://www.helmet.beam.vt.edu/bicycle- ... tings.html

Depends where its funding comes from... did any of the funding come from Trek?

Like!
And was it a blind study?

[Leviathan]

The marginal improvement helps prevent/slow CTE and other cumulative, irreversible brain injuries. It’s not sexy, but it’s a bigger step forward than a lighter, stiffer frame.

Absolutely agree. Its impossible to take issue with this technologies' potentially life-saving benefit.

However, in order to realise that benefit youre talking about a pretty small segment on a venn diagram with sets of "Cycling fast", "Fall on head", "current helmet not adequate"... So its pretty poor to present this as being the BEST thing in 30 years of cycling, given the probability of it happening is the same as the chance of finding an honest man in British parliament. Were a car manufacturer to describe a new type of seatbelt as being "the biggest change in car technology in 30 years" theyd be laughed out of dodge.

I take issue with Trek's marketing, not its product. FWIW had it been a "100g lighter and stiffer frame" I would have been just as non-plussed.

[Karvalo]

not really. just giving me 5 stars provides no transparency to the methodology. how is this an improvement over mips. we really don't know yet.

Have you read the Trek study (conducted, written and published by people who don't work for Trek)? It goes into a lot of detail into how the concept and the test results differ from and improve upon MIPS.

If you have read it, cool! You can talk about which bits you take issue with or don't necessarily believe. If you haven't read it, then asking the question when there's a whole bunch of info sitting there available to you is kinda lazy.

[HammerTime2]

Have you read the Trek study (conducted, written and published by people who don't work for Trek)? It goes into a lot of detail into how the concept and the test results differ from and improve upon MIPS.

Presuming James Huang is correct, you mean this study conducted by the people who worked with Trek to develop the helmet and have a financial stake in the commercial success of the helmet?

In https://cyclingtips.com/2019/03/bontrag ... el-helmets

a paper published in the scientific journal Accident Analysis and Prevention, and co-authored by orthopedic surgeon Dr. Steve Madey and biomechanical engineer Dr. Michael Bottlang, both of whom worked with Trek and Bontrager to bring WaveCel to cycling helmets
...
If WaveCel is as good as Trek and Bontrager say it is, I almost wish Legacy Research Institute – the company founded by Drs. Madey and Bottlang that developed and own the WaveCel technology – would just give it away.

That’s not how the world works, of course, and Trek and Bontrager currently have a multi-year exclusive agreement with WaveCel.

Edit: The published paper https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/a ... via%3Dihub

Disclosure

Some of the authors (MB, SMM) are co-inventors of CELL technology described in this manuscript, have filed patents, and have a financial interest in the company that owns this technology. These authors (MB, SMM) are founders and co-directors of the Legacy Biomechanics Laboratory. Several of the authors (EB, AR, ST, SMM, MB) are affiliated with the Legacy Health System, which was a partial funder of this research. None of the authors received any money or in-kind contribution for this work.

[spartan]

the tech is not marketing bs. similiar tech was developed for nfl (american pro football) it is a game changer IF safety is relevant. mips was a baby step vs wavecel. big negative it is heavier vs eps foam. airflow we need some real world testing. i ordered one so will test in the spring.

history lesson when giro made the first softshell road helmet in the late 80's it took 10+years before the european helmet manufactures caught up to the american upstart.

will history repeat ?

Have you read the Trek study (conducted, written and published by people who don't work for Trek)? It goes into a lot of detail into how the concept and the test results differ from and improve upon MIPS.

Presuming James Huang is correct, you mean this study conducted by the people who worked with Trek to develop the helmet and have a financial stake in the commercial success of the helmet?

In https://cyclingtips.com/2019/03/bontrag ... el-helmets

a paper published in the scientific journal Accident Analysis and Prevention, and co-authored by orthopedic surgeon Dr. Steve Madey and biomechanical engineer Dr. Michael Bottlang, both of whom worked with Trek and Bontrager to bring WaveCel to cycling helmets
...
If WaveCel is as good as Trek and Bontrager say it is, I almost wish Legacy Research Institute – the company founded by Drs. Madey and Bottlang that developed and own the WaveCel technology – would just give it away.

That’s not how the world works, of course, and Trek and Bontrager currently have a multi-year exclusive agreement with WaveCel.

[Karvalo]

Have you read the Trek study (conducted, written and published by people who don't work for Trek)? It goes into a lot of detail into how the concept and the test results differ from and improve upon MIPS.

Presuming James Huang is correct, you mean this study conducted by the people who worked with Trek to develop the helmet and have a financial stake in the commercial success of the helmet?

That's a very good point worth making. But to be honest if someone reads the study and takes issue with it for any reason, including that one, I don't have an problem with that. But dismissing it or questioning why it doesn't incorporate MIPS before even bothering to take 10 minutes to read the technical info provided is daft.

[TobinHatesYou]

However, in order to realise that benefit youre talking about a pretty small segment on a venn diagram with sets of "Cycling fast", "Fall on head", "current helmet not adequate"... So its pretty poor to present this as being the BEST thing in 30 years of cycling, given the probability of it happening is the same as the chance of finding an honest man in British parliament. Were a car manufacturer to describe a new type of seatbelt as being "the biggest change in car technology in 30 years" theyd be laughed out of dodge.

Cycling fast is not part of the equation. Your head can meet pavement with 800G just by falling 1 meter. Some helmets are completely inadequate. Some will reduce the Gs significantly more than others.

[Calnago]

not really. just giving me 5 stars provides no transparency to the methodology. how is this an improvement over mips. we really don't know yet.

Have you read the Trek study (conducted, written and published by people who don't work for Trek)? It goes into a lot of detail into how the concept and the test results differ from and improve upon MIPS.

And this study...funded by oh... shall I take a wild guess.

[AJS914]

I looked at the aero version (based on the Ballista). It is $300 and is 70 grams more than the Ballista.

[fromtrektocolnago]

if this new helmet makes old helmets obsolete by comparison shouldn't Trek be marking down all their old helmets?

[853guy]

Would I spend money on a helmet that’s been engineered to reduce the potential for concussion or traumatic brain injury relative to a foam helmet in a crash? Yes.

Do I expect that every bicycle-related accident will fall within a set of predictable speeds and angles relative to real-world conditions, especially when mountain biking and/or commuting in urban and highly populated areas, or for that matter, in a group ride? No.

Best,

853guy

[Nefarious86]

Go ahead.... delete it.
[edit]: Nice work on the deletion @Nefarious86 . Might as well just tidy up the the thread by deleting related posts from #151 (per Tapatalk) thru to and including this one.

I didn't delete anything.

Sent from my SM-G975F using Tapatalk

[Geoff]

Looks like it may be more comfortable in hot weather, too.

[AJS914]

if this new helmet makes old helmets obsolete by comparison shouldn't Trek be marking down all their old helmets?

Many of their helmets have been on sale for the last month. Maybe they are keeping the Ballista MIPs in their lineup at the $200 price point. I imagine the market for the $300 aero helmet is small.

Interestingly, in the Virginia Tech study, my Ballista MIPS rates a 10.9. The XXX WaveCell rates a 10.8 - only a .1 improvement. It's not quite a 30 year advance over yesterdays top of the line helmet tech.