Cycling in cities is a great idea: it’s quick, cheap, and you even get some exercise. But the number of people that don’t wear a helmet is frankly terrifying. Maybe this folding helmet will help change that.
Designed by French studio Agency 360 in 2010, but going into production this year, this folding helmet is called Overade. According to Patrick Jouffret, the designer, who worked alongside engineer Philippe Arrouart, it offers as much protection as a standard helmet but folds up when not in use. We’ve seen folding helmets before, but they’ve looked pretty crappy — this one actually looks nice.
OK, it doesn’t fold up to be tiny, but it’s small enough to not get in the way. It’ll definitely fit in a bag easily. I normally clip the chin strap of my helmet around the strap of my bag when I’m off my bike, but that’s a real pain in the arse, and this could be a solution.
But where this helmet really comes into its own is in cities with bike-sharing schemes. When you’re not certain you’ll be able to get a bike, and when there’s zero possibility of being able to lock your helmet to a bike when you leave it, there’s currently little motivation for people to take a helmet with them. That’s dangerous, and hopefully something like this will help solve the problem. [Agency 360 via Design Boom]
crud
Wednesday, February 1, 2012 at 8:12 AMjust so long as it doesn’t fold on your head in a collision
Corey
Wednesday, February 1, 2012 at 8:18 AMThis comment has been reported for inappropriate content and is awaiting review.
Dave
Wednesday, February 1, 2012 at 8:36 AMbecause we all know car drivers can’t be selfish pricks… right…
AshR
Wednesday, February 1, 2012 at 8:54 AMyeah someone got out of the wrong side of the bed…. Corey are you really Shane Warne posting under a pseudonym?
I think they’re a good idea for the “casual” trip in the city on a share/ hire bike, I can’t see it taking off for people who own bikes and commute etc, but does make taking a helmet with you if you might hire a bike more of a reality.
Dan
Wednesday, February 1, 2012 at 10:26 AMYeah, bikes hold up traffic. Even on the roads where they’re not allowed! Should have seen the Westgate Bridge this morning. Bad bikes. Bad bad bikes.
Chuan
Wednesday, February 1, 2012 at 8:54 AMNext time you’re in a traffic jam, put aside your petty prejudice and take a look at what’s holding up the cars. Oh right. Not bikes. More cars.
Outside peak hour, there is the advanced motoring technique known as “passing when safe”. Try it.
Drew
Wednesday, February 1, 2012 at 10:06 AMIt takes me an hour to drive to work and only 20 minutes on the bike.
I think I’ll take that extra 40 minutes of sleep, thanks.
Corey
Wednesday, February 1, 2012 at 10:31 AM“Outside peak hour, there is the advanced motoring technique known as passing when safe. Try it.”
Why should I have to put my life at risk going on the wrong side of the road just because some wanker is too cheap to pay for petrol. That’s not even taking to account situations where there’s a double line and there is no legal way for me to over take some fat pathetic middle aged man doing 40ks down the road.
Not one of you had a response to why motored vehicles with max speed of like 40ks aren’t aloud on the road yet these douche bags are.
“Next time you’re in a traffic jam, put aside your petty prejudice and take a look at what’s holding up the cars. Oh right. Not bikes. More cars.”
If you honestly think some moron on a bike blocking 3/4 of a lane doing 20-50ks under the speed limit doesn’t CAUSE traffic then there is no point discussing it with the likes of you.
Riding bikes on Australian roads is dangerous, selfish and simply idiotic. Simple.
Tony Stott
Wednesday, February 1, 2012 at 11:04 AMOK Corey, you have now repeated your claim that “motored vehicles with max speed of like 40ks aren’t aloud on the road”. Setting aside your ignorant use of “aloud” instead of “allowed”. I want to call you on this – WHERE’S the PROOF?
But more importantly, your redneck anti-bike attitude is PRECISELY what makes riding bikes on the road dangerous – the thought that homicidal maniacs (does the cap fit?) are sitting in their cars looking to take out their frustrations on others.. Do you target women and children too?
Corey
Wednesday, February 1, 2012 at 11:41 AMIf you can find me a motor bike that complies with http://www.infrastructure.gov.au/roads/motor/design/index.aspx and has a max speed of 40ks I will be impressed.
I’m not looking to take my frustration out on anyone, I just want a safe and quick commute, without the roads scattered with idiots more concerned about petrol prices rather than their own and others safety. If you reallllyy honestly think getting on a thin framed, slow peddle bike riding amongst cars doing up to twice the speed, you sir are disillusion.
Corey
Wednesday, February 1, 2012 at 11:55 AMBtw, I love your attitude that it’s everyone else’s fault. Bike riders CHOOSE to do the much more dangerous activity. Drivers aren’t homicidal, I always give my fall attention to driving, last thing I ever want to do is hurt ANYONE. But no matter how much drivers try to be safe, it doesn’t change the fact that riding a bike on the road is almost suicidal, or at the very least, a larger gamble than driving a modern car with many safety features.
As for me being a redneck, imo someone who puts saving a few bucks on petrol above their own personal safety is the real cheap redneck.
Drew
Wednesday, February 1, 2012 at 12:36 PMTrolls will troll…
Swtchbckr
Thursday, February 2, 2012 at 10:34 AMCycling ISNT dangerous. Check out your stats sometime. Per kilometre travelled or per number of trips, whatever way you look at it, there are way more people killed and injured in cars than on bikes. Even being a pedestrian is more ‘dangerous’ than cycling.
All you want is a safe and quick commute? get on a bike, you lazy troll
Steve
Thursday, February 2, 2012 at 10:46 AMCorey: “we aren’t the ones choosing to be stupid”
You’re right, you were born that way.
Gordo13
Wednesday, February 1, 2012 at 11:36 AMit’s ‘allowed’ Corey…. ‘allowed’
greg
Wednesday, February 1, 2012 at 2:28 PM“they see me (t)rollin.. they hatin..
Dear Corey- you are a dickhead. Please go back to your rock and crawl under it.
Long time bike rider
Wednesday, February 1, 2012 at 3:39 PM+1 to Greg. Problem with riding a bike is morons like you Corey. Get some patience and respect for others
Dave
Wednesday, February 1, 2012 at 8:37 AMWonder if it will meet AUS standards
Molokov
Wednesday, February 1, 2012 at 12:54 PM+1
kakyoin01
Wednesday, February 1, 2012 at 9:14 AMi am waiting for my Iron Man suit
Graeme
Wednesday, February 1, 2012 at 1:01 PM“But the number of people that don’t wear a helmet is frankly terrifying.” Read this before contributing to the myth that cycling is inherently dangerous and benefits from the protection of a helmet.
http://www.cycle-helmets.com/robinson-bmj.pdf
Corey
Wednesday, February 1, 2012 at 1:23 PMYeah lets get rid of seatbelts too, and screw parachute, their for wimps.
You’d be demand tax payer assistance if you became disabled by not wearing a helmet.
Rossco
Wednesday, February 1, 2012 at 1:39 PMCycling on its own is not inherently dangerous Graeme. Riding on poorly maintained roads (where does my rates money go?) with careless idiots is very dangerous. I haven’t cycled on a busy road in Australia since I got hit by a car back in 2001, thankfully it was my helmet that cracked and not my skull. Anecdotal evidence yes but I know from experience that there is a good chance I would not be here today if I was not wearing a helmet.
Edward
Wednesday, February 1, 2012 at 2:40 PMCorey mate, you need to take a chill pill. Roads are not the sole domain of cars. The fact that you pay rego does not entitle you to treat the road as if it is yours and get angry at cyclists. Be patient and pass when it’s safe. Rego is not payment for using the road. The bulk of it is an insurance premium to compensate for the damage caused by cars.
You seem to have a problem with sharing the road with cyclists. You’ll find the feeling is mutual. That is why so few people use bikes in Australia. Knowing there are motorists on the road with your attitude is frankly terrifying so people prefer to stay in their cars. Not because they wouldn’t use a bike. It’s just too undafe in Australia.
Would you agree to separated bike paths in Australian cities like there are across the Netherlands? It would mean bicycles would be out of “your” way and safer. It would also mean that many people would choose to ride instead of drive and free up even more road space just for you. What do you reckon?
monkeymind
Wednesday, February 1, 2012 at 2:55 PMWrong worng wrong. No use using logic in this case.
Corey
Wednesday, February 1, 2012 at 3:20 PMLook mate it’s not about “sharing” it’s just the simple fact that there is no way to ride bikes on Australian roads safely and not inconvenience drivers.. The roads are simply not designed for it. If there was a bike lane on every main road like in EU I would be ok with it, but there isn’t. Bike riders can try and justify it all they want to save $50 a week in petrol but the fact is riding a POS $300 bike will NEVER be as safe as driving a car with seatbelts, airbags abs etc. So don’t blame us drivers, we aren’t the ones choosing to be stupid.
And FYI, Brisbane does have an impressive non-road bike network, and I am totally for them. I am not anti-bike, I am anti-bike-in-the-wrong-place.
Drew
Wednesday, February 1, 2012 at 3:46 PMYou might want to have a look at the road rules and related laws.
You opinion means nothing, laws allow bikes to be on the road whether you like it or not. If you’re not happy about this, then you should do something about getting the laws changed instead of getting all hot and bothered about it.
My bike is close to $4,000 which is more than many of the cars on the road in Victoria.
Edward
Friday, February 3, 2012 at 10:50 AM“I am not anti-bike, I am anti-bike-in-the-wrong-place.”
You’d probably find we agree on a lot of stuff. The problem is that at the moment, cyclists do not really have a choice. The off-road network in Brisbance is ok if you want to do a bit of recreational cycling. Often though, those routes do not take people to the places they actually want to go. For a proper Dutch-style cycling network to work, it has to be within 500m of anyone who wants to use it. Otherwise, people do not really have a choice but to use the road.
Perhaps you could have advocate for Dutch-style infrastructure in Brisbane. Even if you never use it, it will still benefit you no end.
Tee
Wednesday, February 1, 2012 at 2:00 PMWell said Corey. I had a mate who, whilst driving, was t boned by a cyclist who just sped off, leaving the driver responsible for the cost of the damage. Us drivers pay to use the roads through registration and also must have compulsory insurance in case of these kinds of accidents. Why cyclists can run away and get off scot-free puzzles me!
Iordan
Wednesday, February 1, 2012 at 2:15 PMt-boned by a cyclist! could there be a worse fate!?
Dave
Wednesday, February 1, 2012 at 3:02 PM+1
seriously? The worst you get is a scratch on your pretty paint job. If the cyclist T-boned him it’s most probably because they pulled in front without allowing the cyclist enough room to stop. I highly doubt someone would willingly go up against a car for fun.
Corey
Wednesday, February 1, 2012 at 3:22 PMOh yeah of course, blame the driver. It couldn’t have been some fat unfit idiot concentrating more on not having a heart-attack while ridding his bike than look what’s in front of him
Dave
Wednesday, February 1, 2012 at 3:41 PMIf someone can maintain a 40km/h speed on the bike they won’t be a fat man about to have a heart attack. That fat man would be the douchebag in the car focusing on eating his Mc Donalds instead of what’s on the road ahead of him. Sure there are some bad cyclists out there who think they own the road but there are way worse car drivers who think the same. *cough corey* Why is it always an unfit idiot in your stories doing the exercise? I believe there’s probably more unfit idiots in cars.
Corey
Wednesday, February 1, 2012 at 5:11 PM“Why is it always an unfit idiot in your stories doing the exercise?”
http://magazine.bikeradar.com/2010/05/11/is-cycling-the-new-golf/
Because all the middle-aged corporate douche bags slide into their skin tight spandex once a week and suddenly think they are fit.
I drive, and keep my exercise schedule safe and not an inconvenience to others.
InformedGamer
Friday, February 3, 2012 at 10:40 AMThis is what I think of your stupidity
http://gifs.gifbin.com/022011/1298914487_car-plows-through-cyclists.gif
Drew
Wednesday, February 1, 2012 at 3:47 PMI dare say I’ve seen more morbidly obese drivers than I have seem fat cyclists.
Drew
Wednesday, February 1, 2012 at 3:22 PMYou do not pay to use the roads through the cost of your registration. Your registration cost covers the administration of the vehicle registration system, if that.
Are you trying to say that car drivers never leave the scene of an accident without stopping to render assistance and exchange particulars?
Carlos
Wednesday, February 1, 2012 at 7:32 PMAh, danger, danger, danger the myth of the demon bicycle.
Anyway putting all the trolling aside. A bicycle helmet works in the opposite fashion to normal helmets. A normal helmet is hard and is designed to stop a projectile. With a bicycle helmet, the head is the projectile and the helmet is meant to cushion the head and dissipate force via padding that crushes on impact thereby reducing the accelerations which lead to serious brain injuries. If you can fold up the helmet into a small package it will have insufficient padding to work. This helmet looks like a hard shell which won’t meet the safety standards.
Pete
Wednesday, February 1, 2012 at 11:05 PMCorey be one big fat well fed (t)roll…
Cyclo
Saturday, February 4, 2012 at 6:33 PMCycling without a helmet is not “dangerous”.
The only dangerous thing about cycling is being hit by a car. And make no mistake, this will be dangerous whether you’re wearing a helmet or not, anyone who thinks otherwise is delusional.
Helmets do provide some marginal protection, but it is reasonably small. Sure if you want to wear one, that’s fine, but it should not be a criminal offence to ride without one.
The majority of cyclists killed in Australia are killed while wearing a helmet and most of those who die of fatal head injuries also have other fatal injuries. A helmet is not the magical device that will save your life in all situations as many believe.
The mandatory helmet law and the unquestioning and exaggerated belief in the danger of cycling this has fostered has been a disaster for cycling in Australia.
Lycraless
Sunday, February 5, 2012 at 7:00 PMAs usual and expected helmets raises alot of anger and ire in concerned people. What we need more than the kind of care that paternalistic states, like we have in Australia, offer is some self-empowerment, some rights, the recognition that we are adults who know how to choose what it good for us without the intervention of the paternal state.
The lack of self-empowerment is not to be appeased by these people saying to us that we are made to wear helmets because they care for us.