published helmet research - not troll

"Bill Z." wrote in message
...
"Just zis Guy, you know?" writes:

Bill "Laa laa I'm not listenign" Zaumen trolled:

ROTLMAO! You take the prize, you really do.
The perfect reason-proof, fact-proof Usenet troll.

And not how every reason I gave was simply ignored.

No, Bill, not ignored - followed up and found to contradict you.

You sound like Bush - stay on message and the facts be damned.

FACTS? You ignorant clown! You wouldn't know a fact if it bit you on the
ass. That other blithering ass would post a citation and then not even know
what the hell was written there? If your stupidity was one tenth as much as
it is, you'd still qualify as retarded.

"Just zis Guy, you know?" wrote in message
...
Bill "Laa laa I'm not listening" Zaumen trolled:

You sound like Bush - stay on message and the facts be damned.

LOL! This from the man who insists helmets reduce drag based on
posted evidence that they don't!

Even worse, the ******* posted the information himself.

"Just zis Guy, you know?" writes:

Bill "Laa laa I'm not listening" Zaumen trolled:

You sound like Bush - stay on message and the facts be damned.

LOL! This from the man who insists helmets reduce drag based on
posted evidence that they don't!

I posted evidence showing an air drag reduction, except for an
old-style helmet (a Bell V1 Pro). One URL showed two limiting cases,
with the worst just slightly worse than a cyclist riding with a full
head of hair and the best a bit better than a bald-headed cyclist.

But you are staying on message, I guess. Just like King George.

Then our resident redneck Tom Kunich chimed in twice (I'm combining
both of his posts to save space) with

Even worse, the ******* posted the information himself.

FACTS? You ignorant clown! You wouldn't know a fact if it bit you on the
ass. That other blithering ass would post a citation and then not even know
what the hell was written there? If your stupidity was one tenth as much as
it is, you'd still qualify as retarded.

Ooooh. Our little Tommy is trying to graduate from the 8th grade
boy's locker room to the 9th grade boy's locker room. Or is is the
other way around? I forget. Given that outburst, I can only wonder
if Kunich's blood pressure went through the roof as he posted it or if
he merely had an, err, "rise" in his pants. And all over a percent
or so change in air drag from using a helmet.

What a pathetic excuse for humanity Kunich is. Guy, by contrast, is
merely a mindless troll.

--
My real name backwards: nemuaZ lliB

Bill "Laa laa I'm not listening" Zaumen trolled:

You sound like Bush - stay on message and the facts be damned.
LOL! This from the man who insists helmets reduce drag based on
posted evidence that they don't!

I posted evidence showing an air drag reduction, except for an
old-style helmet (a Bell V1 Pro). One URL showed two limiting cases,
with the worst just slightly worse than a cyclist riding with a full
head of hair and the best a bit better than a bald-headed cyclist.

It doesn't matter how often you repeat this bull****, Bill, it will
never be true. The data you posted showed that:

- head fairings reduce drag but provide no protection
- the best performing ANSI certified aero helmet tested, the Stratos,
was worse than a bald head or skullcap
- the only standard helmet tested, the V-1, was worse then the
worst-case unhelmeted scenario of unrestrained long hair.

Additional data (also posted by you) says that helmets increase drag,
vented helmets increase drag, drag is a problem with helmets, and aero
helmets only reduce drag if the rider's position is kept within
tightly constrained limits.

From this you deduce that helmets /reduce/ drag, presumably because in
BillWorld[tm] it is heresy to suggest that there could ever be any
respect in which not wearing a helmet is better than wearing one. And
then you accuse /me/ of being "on-message!" You are a loon.

And the really laughable thing is, the entire argument /would not
exist in the first place/ if you had not insisted that helmets reduce
drag, and then posted data proving the exact opposite.

Bill |----------- unfathomable gulf -----------| clue

Guy
--
May contain traces of irony. Contents liable to settle after posting.
http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk

88% of helmet statistics are made up, 65% of them at Washington University

Bill "Laa laa I'm not listening" Zaumen trolled:

The data from that particular URL showed that the most aerodynamic helmet
is better than a bald head and that an older design (a Bell V1 Pro) with
a symmetric shape (nothing in the back to improve air flow around the
head), is ever so slightly worse than a long hair. The Stratos was
significantly better than long hair or short hair.

It doesn't matter how often you repeat this bull****, Bill, it will
never be true. The data you posted showed that:
- head fairings reduce drag but provide no protection
- the best performing ANSI certified aero helmet tested, the Stratos,
was worse than a bald head or skullcap
- the only standard helmet tested, the V-1, was worse then the
worst-case unhelmeted scenario of unrestrained long hair.

And the Stratos, a time trial helmet, was virtually unwearable,
according to someone who (unlike you) has actually worn one.

Your continued attempts to pretend that the Stratos was in some way
representative are noted, and duly discounted for the bull**** they
are.

Do you think a
standard helmet (the Bell V1 Pro is not a standard design today) might
fall somewhere in between?

Or do you think it might be worse, because of its large vents? Or do
you think that in its day the V-1 was a standard helmet, so the only
standard helmet tested at the time was worse than unrestrained long
hair?

The thing is, Bill, you have so far provided no evidence to support
your idea that a modern standard helmet is better than a V-1. You
have provided evidence that standard helmets are still considered to
worsen drag, and evidence that even aero helmets only work within a
tightly constrained envelope, but none at all to support your idea
that adding large numbers of vents to spoil the airflow somehow
improves the aerodynamics on a modern helmet.

You've repeatedly mispepresented what I said and this is no
exception.

No, Bill, you have repeatedly represented the Stratos as being in some
way representative of modern helmets in a way the V-1 is not. You are
wrong, simple as that. And we know you have no insight because you
didn't even know that the head fairings in the study you linked have
no padding.

And even funnier, you are ignoring the fact that
it *did* show a drag reduction. If the reduction is important to you,
you'll hold your head at the appropriate angle.

The "it" in question being an aero helmet designed for time trials,
and found to be unwearable in practice. The only hard data for a
standard helmet shows the precise opposite. As you know.

So you are just trolling. Fine, feel free to carry on trolling. Or
produce some evidence which supports you, rather than contradicting
you. Or **** off. Preferably the last.

And the really laughable thing is, the entire argument /would not
exist in the first place/ if you had not insisted that helmets reduce
drag, and then posted data proving the exact opposite.

Yet another lie as Guy stays "on message"

Bill, you are a True Believer; like any other True Believer you are
unable to distinguish between an agnostic and an atheist. This
results in you making yourself look more and more stupid, which is
funny some of the time.

The entire argument is due to your obvious obsession with me, as can
be seen by your continual replies to nearly everything I post,

ROFLMAO! Your arrogance is matched only by your ignorance. Both are
of truly epic proportions.

I reply, Bill, because you persist in making wrong assertions. And
then, being the arch-troll that you are, arguing the toss for ever
after you've been proven wrong, as in this case. All you have to do
is stop making wrong assertions (you could begin by checking the
contents of links you post, for example) and the "obsession" would
vanish.

So, my challenge to you:

1. admit you are wrong, as proven by the data you posted
2. produce new data which supports your position rather than
contradicting it, or
3. shut up.

Any of the above will be perfectly acceptable.

Note that even at this late stage I am perfectly prepared to accept
that there may be evidence to support you. There hasn't been any yet,
of course, and I've challenged you several times to produce some (last
time you gave me a load of citations to the original study and a new
paper which showed ANSI certified aero helmets to be worse than a bare
head in all but a few situations, especially if the rider's attitude
was anything other than a low crouch).

Guy
--
May contain traces of irony. Contents liable to settle after posting.
http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk

88% of helmet statistics are made up, 65% of them at Washington University

MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii

"Just zis Guy, you know?" writes:

Bill "Laa laa I'm not listening" Zaumen trolled:

The data from that particular URL showed that the most aerodynamic helmet
is better than a bald head and that an older design (a Bell V1 Pro) with
a symmetric shape (nothing in the back to improve air flow around the
head), is ever so slightly worse than a long hair. The Stratos was
significantly better than long hair or short hair.

It doesn't matter how often you repeat this bull****, Bill, snip

And *you* just repeated verbatim the same text from your previous
post. Calling something "bull****" isn't going to change the fact
that you really have no argument to make.

Oh, and in the message
http://www.google.com/groups?selm=2n94a8Ftv67qU1%40uni-berlin.de&output=gplain,
you called the acronym BS a "playground insult" and whined about it:

: Yeah sure. More BS on your part hinting at vague conspiracies.
: ^^
: *whoop!* *whoop!* Playground Insult Alert! *whoop!* *whoop!*

Well Guy, that makes you quite the hypocrite, doesn't it. One standard
for you and a different one for everyone else, so it seems!

Rest of post snipped - who needs to read a cut and paste job of this
jerk's previous posts and I certainly have better things to do than to
try to find something in this mass of mindless verbage.


--
My real name backwards: nemuaZ lliB

"Just zis Guy, you know?" wrote:

And the Stratos, a time trial helmet, was virtually unwearable,
according to someone who (unlike you) has actually worn one.

It is very hot with the visor up (raised visor closes the vents)
and the visor is hard to see through, especially as the helmet
shell scratches it when you raise and lower it. With the vents
open, it isn't really much hotter than a Tourlight, with either
one I'd take them off and pour water in my hair every 10-20 miles.
Do people still do that, or have modern helmets made it pointless?

Some would consider helmets like Biker, Tourlight, and Stratos
unwearable in comparison to whatever they wear now. The last
helmet I bought was a 1991 Specialized Sub-6, so I'm not
qualified to compare the comfort of my helmets to the current
fodder.
I've never worn the Sub-6 in summer, so don't know how hot it
is compared to the Bells. It seems to be better ventilated, but
I've ridden less than 500 miles in it and just don't have any
specific memories of it.

A friend of mine put thousands of miles on his Stratos after
removing the visor entirely, which I assume defeated much of
the aero benefit. We also used to do double centuries and
24 hour races in our Tourlights, so maybe we were just nuts.
I should ask him for a comparison, he wears Bell foam hats,
and probably remembers his Tourlight and Stratos.

Mitch.

Mitch Haley writes:

"Just zis Guy, you know?" wrote:

And the Stratos, a time trial helmet, was virtually unwearable,
according to someone who (unlike you) has actually worn one.

It is very hot with the visor up (raised visor closes the vents)
and the visor is hard to see through, especially as the helmet
shell scratches it when you raise and lower it. With the vents
open, it isn't really much hotter than a Tourlight, with either
one I'd take them off and pour water in my hair every 10-20 miles.

Guy aside, it was mentioned in part as a limiting case - it shows how
much better than the Bell V1 Pro you might do in terms of reducing
drag if that were the only criteria important to you. So you can get
better cooling compared to a Stratos and still reduce air drag
slightly compared to a Bell V1 Pro, and a slight reduction is all you
need before you see a benefit over a bare head with hair on it.

--
My real name backwards: nemuaZ lliB

"Bill Z." wrote in message
...
"Just zis Guy, you know?" writes:

Bill "Laa laa I'm not listening" Zaumen trolled:

You sound like Bush - stay on message and the facts be damned.

LOL! This from the man who insists helmets reduce drag based on
posted evidence that they don't!

I posted evidence showing an air drag reduction, except for an
old-style helmet (a Bell V1 Pro). One URL showed two limiting cases,
with the worst just slightly worse than a cyclist riding with a full
head of hair and the best a bit better than a bald-headed cyclist.

No matter how many times you post your ignorant lies they are still ignorant
lies. The article said that the LOWEST drag came from a bald head or a rider
wearing a rubber skull cap. NOT A SAFETY HELMET OF ANY TYPE.

But you are staying on message, I guess. Just like King George.

Then our resident redneck Tom Kunich chimed in twice (I'm combining
both of his posts to save space) with

Even worse, the ******* posted the information himself.

FACTS? You ignorant clown! You wouldn't know a fact if it bit you on the
ass. That other blithering ass would post a citation and then not even
know
what the hell was written there? If your stupidity was one tenth as much
as
it is, you'd still qualify as retarded.

Ooooh. Our little Tommy is trying to graduate from the 8th grade
boy's locker room to the 9th grade boy's locker room.

There you go, deny the facts again. Which is probably why you spell your
name backwards - it doesn't have much importance to you since you never knew
who your father was.

"Tom Kunich" writes:

"Bill Z." wrote in message
...
"Just zis Guy, you know?" writes:

Bill "Laa laa I'm not listening" Zaumen trolled:

You sound like Bush - stay on message and the facts be damned.

LOL! This from the man who insists helmets reduce drag based on
posted evidence that they don't!

I posted evidence showing an air drag reduction, except for an
old-style helmet (a Bell V1 Pro). One URL showed two limiting cases,
with the worst just slightly worse than a cyclist riding with a full
head of hair and the best a bit better than a bald-headed cyclist.

No matter how many times you post your ignorant lies they are still ignorant
lies. The article said that the LOWEST drag came from a bald head or a rider
wearing a rubber skull cap. NOT A SAFETY HELMET OF ANY TYPE.

Kunich, you have a well-deserved reputation of being one of the worst
liars on usenet. If you look at

http://www.sheldonbrown.com/rinard/aero/aerodynamics.htm

you will read, "Aero helmets, as they are used for racing, which do
not however meet the ANSI safety requirements, reduce the aero drag by
approximately 2% compared to a bald head or a rubber cap over the
hair. The Bell Stratos, an ANSI approved helmet, increases the aero
drag by approximately 1.3 % over a bald head. Short hair worsens it
around 4.6%, long hair around 8.6%." The article then mentions that
the Bell V1 Pro "gains around 9.8% compared to a bald head."

It is quite evident that the best you can do with a helmet is 2 percent
better than a bald head (being ANSI certified is not relevant.) If you
design it so it is ANSI certified, the best anyone has done is 1.3
worse than a bald head, but you'd be 4.6 percent worse with short hair.
So, if you look at the range, it is pretty obvious that a Bell V1 Pro
is only slightly worse than a full head of hair, and the best ANSI
certified helmet at the time (1990 - 14 years ago) was only slightly
worse than a bare head.

It is pretty clear that you should have no problem finding ANSI certified
helmets that fall in between. You simply trade off other factors
like cooling with air drag and can still get a net reduction in drag.

And that is with 14 year old designs.

There you go, deny the facts again. Which is probably why you spell your
name backwards - it doesn't have much importance to you since you never knew
who your father was.

Back to a junior high school locker room, Tommy? You know, your
childish behavior really does make you look like a complete and utter
jerk. You should be ashamed of yourself, but I really doubt if you
have the decency.

--
My real name backwards: nemuaZ lliB