Aero helmet modification

Triathlon Forum
1

A friend of mine has a Giro advantage with a visor fitted into it. It looks awesome and has vents too. This has been done by a company professionally now is this illegal? If i was to do the same would I be refused to race at an IM (austria and Cananda 09)?

Also the helmet will not have any stuctural alterations just the application of a visor

Any guidance guys!!

2

This is what Contador and other pro cyclists use, for UCI technically it is illegal but they all do it, not sure about IM
.

3

I am sure some zebra-shirted person with 'little-Big-man’s complex will jump up and down on the ‘Illegal’ nature…I really doubt you will ever get anything other than

Faster
Compliments
Sweat running down it (hint…RAIN-X is your friend!)
.

4

I had an official sniffing around the transition area at Tupper Lake Tinman last year. He looked at my Advantage II to see if it was not just a plain advantage. This is the only time that I recall anyone ever looking. Strangely enough at the very race, albeit the sprint distance, the first place rider was DQ’d for not using an approved helmet. So if you come in first in a race you may have a problem with a modified Advantage II…maybe.

5

What would be illegal with the visor on the Giro? I have a visor on my LG, is this against UCI rules then? I’ve never had anything said to me about my helmet.

6

It’s not the visor, per se, that’s the problem, but the modification.

Theoretically, even a helmet paint job or taped vents could be called into question by an over-zealous official.

EDIT: Relevant USAT Rule:
5.9 Helmets.
(a) Type of Helmet. All participants shall wear a protective head cover, undamaged and unaltered…

7

It’s not the visor, per se, that’s the problem, but the modification.

Theoretically, even a helmet paint job or taped vents could be called into question by an over-zealous official.

i understand the paint job part… if you have someone good you could easily add a fairing repaint it and it would look ‘stock’

8

I agree strictly by the letter of the law, but wouldn’t you think there’s a case to be made that the detachable visor is not part of the helmet in so much as sunglasses are not part of it either.

Now, we know how little common sense some of these USAT are UCI rules are… but this seems particularly nitpicky.

9

Putting aside the “wisdom” of UCI rulings, I see two legitimate potential concerns with a visor.

  1. As the helmet wasn’t tested with the visor attached, there is no way to know whether or not it adversely affects safety. As it is an aftermarket product, its materials, construction, manufacturing tolerances, workmanship, etc. could affect safety.

  2. The visor may present a cutting hazard upon impact. (Yes, the same could be said about sunglasses.)

10
  1. The visor may present a cutting hazard upon impact. (Yes, the same could be said about sunglasses.)
    but what about helmets that come with visors, i.e. LAS Crono and UVEX (uvex has a visor, right?)
11

I’m just speculating, but I assume they are tested with the visor as part of their certification process.

Then again, maybe the CPSC doesn’t test for cutting hazards. Take a look at the trailing edge of the **. I bet that would cut up your back severely in a crash. There’s also the issue of aero helmets torquing off during impact that will probably be addressed soon by the CPSC.