You can get decent helmets in Decathlon for €10 that pass all European safety standards. Don't buy fake knockoffs of expensive helmets that are pretending to be something they not, but there's nothing inherently unsafe with cheap helmets if they authentic and pass certification. helmets.org/testbycost.htm
Thanks for posting this. I couldn't find this segment of Fake Britain anywhere else, and it's pretty useful. It blows my mind how many people genuinely think they're getting a real helmet when they buy this shady knockoff junk
it is a very old video now but I do not think that matters. There are fakes and then there are fakes? Some fakes like fake Rollexes or Gucci bags don't matter but some do. Some one selling a fake just wants your money and does not care about consequences.
sdq sdq Oh really? I read somewhere that it is recommended to change your cycling helmet every year. Says there is disintegration of material even if kept in storage.
The point is that the genuine helmet actually did something. The fake was next to non-existent and the headform took the full brunt in an instantaneous transfer of all energy in one moment. G is calculated as a force at any one moment, with the functioning helmet the energy transfer can be dispersed over a longer period of time, giving a lower peak-G. The fake helmet simply offered no protection at all meaning all energy was condensed into a smaller time giving an exponentially higher peak force.
Hi mate, it will be how the energy transfers across the surface of the helmet due to the impact. The design and materials used will affect how the helmet performs, in this case the fake helmet had a poor energy dispersion and or sub standard materials so the energy went straight to the weak spot, the side.
for those who say this is just one example and not proof. Of course it aint proof, you would need to so some kind of sampling? What it is is an illustration of what a fake can mean. It dont matter that the video is old now, a fake is still a fake with no guarantee of quality ( that it claims to have met certain standards will be a lie, who knows whether it really does) or legal come back
mercalia beck well being 5 years old makes it kinda unreliable, because helmet technology has evolved ALOT, and fakes are getting better, and so are genuines, I would like do pay for this test myself to see the results, I don’t buy fake helmets btw
ofcours they are gonna show that. if they had the same results, they would have never showed it. Seems kinda staged to me. helmets are nothing more than foam. In chemistry class we made one. Nothing special and the prices are ridiculous
Marked difference - good to know. However...admittedly it's all anecdotal, but to do a SECOND destructive test with the SAME (true Giro) helmet without at least some spoken caveat is poor testing. If the fake passed the first test how would we know if test #1 didn't crack it and skew test #2? The fact that the faux head/test helmet falls off the stand and hits the ground shows either inexperience in testing or ignorance.
I get your point and the helmet should be replaced after one hit because it won't work as good afterwards. However, it's a pretty good thing if it can take two hits without breaking apart completely, imagine hitting the windshield of a car head first and then falling to the ground, hitting the road with your head, it's a realistic scenario after all and it's good if your helmet still offers any protection at the second hit...
Lol, watch the video... they test helmets twice by impacting one side on test A and the other side on test B. The nature of the material allows this to be effective testing as long as the structure as a whole isn't destroyed. Also "anecdotal"?? No, it's data. It's testing scientifically with protocol. This is what these guys do for a living and there's no way they'd risk their credibility and certification with trying to dupe you.
In my opinion this test do not get a conclusion that the original is best once they do not take in consideration the damage in the head, I can made an aluminium helmet and it wont brake. And the head? Oh!! the head is a secondary detail.
Well it's actually still better having something on your head than having nothing. It's just a marketing video, of course for 40$ + helmets i should expect good quality but yet still not much difference if you don't ride very fast.
it was not a marketing video. It was taken from a UK TV show dealing with consumer matters. well that ( by now old) video shows having a fake helmet is no better than not having a helmet as when it as tested it just caved in. So false sense of security. The point is all about genuine certification that fake helmets also fake. Some time ago I fell backwards getting on my bike ( I lost balance am getting old now) and my head hit a curb, the helmet was dented but intact. it was not a too expensive helmet but did have genuine certification. My head would have got "dented" without the helmet
I am a bit suprised at all the doubting thomases and strange ideas here. eg the helmit breaking means the full force would be on your head and skull rather than absorbed by the material of the helmit? The video was a TV programme from the UK.
Giro helmets are *Made in China* and Chinese counterfeits are almost exclusively produced by the same factory that produces the "genuine" product. They use the same materials and the same tooling for the counterfeits which is why this test seems very suspicious.
@@ww-pw6di and you know that how? I have heard of "fake" Gucci bags etc being the real thing due to matters of manufacture exceeding an order to deal with imperfect examples and the excess vanishing through the back door. That may account for a few items but thats a different matter
@@mercaliabeck6033 If your "genuine" helmet is made in China, then the "fakes" also came from the same production line in the same factory. The difference is those "fakes" didn't pass QC, You'll know this if you've ever doing business in China.
It's tests like this which prevents me from buying a fake cheap helmet.
But geez genuine ones can be pricey.
Fake ones cost more though.
It would cost you your life.
You can get decent helmets in Decathlon for €10 that pass all European safety standards. Don't buy fake knockoffs of expensive helmets that are pretending to be something they not, but there's nothing inherently unsafe with cheap helmets if they authentic and pass certification.
helmets.org/testbycost.htm
@@jamesambrocio and thats why genuine ones can be expensive because they're banking on people not willing to risk it.
Wow! Thank you so much for this demo. Completely opened my eyes to the benefit of getting quality products strait from the source. Mind. Blown.
Thanks for posting this. I couldn't find this segment of Fake Britain anywhere else, and it's pretty useful. It blows my mind how many people genuinely think they're getting a real helmet when they buy this shady knockoff junk
it is a very old video now but I do not think that matters. There are fakes and then there are fakes? Some fakes like fake Rollexes or Gucci bags don't matter but some do. Some one selling a fake just wants your money and does not care about consequences.
I'd like to see the difference between a new helmet and one that's been ridden for a few years.
by motorbike standard , 5 years duration , provided its not taken any impact
sdq sdq Oh really? I read somewhere that it is recommended to change your cycling helmet every year. Says there is disintegration of material even if kept in storage.
There's something weird with this datas... 12x more G. I dont belive that orginal polymer and foam are 12 times best and resitence.
The point is that the genuine helmet actually did something. The fake was next to non-existent and the headform took the full brunt in an instantaneous transfer of all energy in one moment. G is calculated as a force at any one moment, with the functioning helmet the energy transfer can be dispersed over a longer period of time, giving a lower peak-G. The fake helmet simply offered no protection at all meaning all energy was condensed into a smaller time giving an exponentially higher peak force.
my only question is: why would the side of the helmet break off if the impact is directly in center?
Hi mate, it will be how the energy transfers across the surface of the helmet due to the impact. The design and materials used will affect how the helmet performs, in this case the fake helmet had a poor energy dispersion and or sub standard materials so the energy went straight to the weak spot, the side.
Because if you watch the video they set it up to impact one side.. thats how they get two tests out of each helmet.
Many original models Giro helmets do not have rib cage
Why would anyone consider a fake helmet? A gyro at that, it’s not like some status symbol lol
Aren't helmets supposed to absorb the impact which means they should break?
the numbers the tests gave indicates no - the forces recorded would end up on your exposed head? A good helmet represents a barrier?
that giro helmet is the same i have ! lol
for those who say this is just one example and not proof. Of course it aint proof, you would need to so some kind of sampling? What it is is an illustration of what a fake can mean. It dont matter that the video is old now, a fake is still a fake with no guarantee of quality ( that it claims to have met certain standards will be a lie, who knows whether it really does) or legal come back
mercalia beck well being 5 years old makes it kinda unreliable, because helmet technology has evolved ALOT, and fakes are getting better, and so are genuines, I would like do pay for this test myself to see the results, I don’t buy fake helmets btw
@@HeathyRoidz that's like saying crooks and thieves are more conscientious these days, they really care about you
phew, well that was only one test run with one fake helmet. not enough data to draw a general conclusion
Kek5kopF and it’s 5 years old
Suspected fake?? The OEM would know exactly what is and isn't theres
Who paid for this study
Giro, obviously...
Oryginal have roll cage and this is key difference
I wonder who order the test, certainly a giro :/ !
it was a tv prgramme If my memory is correct
ofcours they are gonna show that. if they had the same results, they would have never showed it. Seems kinda staged to me. helmets are nothing more than foam. In chemistry class we made one. Nothing special and the prices are ridiculous
If true that would be a pretty serious spread of misinformation by helmet manufacturers.
Lol, have fun being a vegetable.
Fake or not they are both same styrofoam helmet
Plus oryginal have ROLL CAGE
Marked difference - good to know. However...admittedly it's all anecdotal, but to do a SECOND destructive test with the SAME (true Giro) helmet without at least some spoken caveat is poor testing. If the fake passed the first test how would we know if test #1 didn't crack it and skew test #2? The fact that the faux head/test helmet falls off the stand and hits the ground shows either inexperience in testing or ignorance.
I get your point and the helmet should be replaced after one hit because it won't work as good afterwards. However, it's a pretty good thing if it can take two hits without breaking apart completely, imagine hitting the windshield of a car head first and then falling to the ground, hitting the road with your head, it's a realistic scenario after all and it's good if your helmet still offers any protection at the second hit...
Lol, watch the video... they test helmets twice by impacting one side on test A and the other side on test B. The nature of the material allows this to be effective testing as long as the structure as a whole isn't destroyed. Also "anecdotal"?? No, it's data. It's testing scientifically with protocol. This is what these guys do for a living and there's no way they'd risk their credibility and certification with trying to dupe you.
Brought to you by GIRO
In my opinion this test do not get a conclusion that the original is best once they do not take in consideration the damage in the head, I can made an aluminium helmet and it wont brake. And the head? Oh!! the head is a secondary detail.
The data they get in the computer is exactly what happens to the head.
i just dont know why they changed the hitting surface..justto say the fake is worse? i would like to see the original in the same test..
+pedro gomes You should actually watch the video before you comment on it.
Well it's actually still better having something on your head than having nothing. It's just a marketing video, of course for 40$ + helmets i should expect good quality but yet still not much difference if you don't ride very fast.
it was not a marketing video. It was taken from a UK TV show dealing with consumer matters. well that ( by now old) video shows having a fake helmet is no better than not having a helmet as when it as tested it just caved in. So false sense of security. The point is all about genuine certification that fake helmets also fake. Some time ago I fell backwards getting on my bike ( I lost balance am getting old now) and my head hit a curb, the helmet was dented but intact. it was not a too expensive helmet but did have genuine certification. My head would have got "dented" without the helmet
Of course this is a bias video
I am a bit suprised at all the doubting thomases and strange ideas here. eg the helmit breaking means the full force would be on your head and skull rather than absorbed by the material of the helmit? The video was a TV programme from the UK.
Giro helmets are *Made in China* and Chinese counterfeits are almost exclusively produced by the same factory that produces the "genuine" product. They use the same materials and the same tooling for the counterfeits which is why this test seems very suspicious.
@@ww-pw6di and you know that how? I have heard of "fake" Gucci bags etc being the real thing due to matters of manufacture exceeding an order to deal with imperfect examples and the excess vanishing through the back door. That may account for a few items but thats a different matter
@@mercaliabeck6033 If your "genuine" helmet is made in China, then the "fakes" also came from the same production line in the same factory. The difference is those "fakes" didn't pass QC, You'll know this if you've ever doing business in China.