British Cycling Revises Rules on Helmet Cameras at Events

Mar 27, 2014 at 5:22
by Fraktiv  
In light of the recent enforcement by British Cycling regarding the regulations relating to equipment such as helmet cameras being used at British Cycling events, the organisation has released a statement revising the rule to permit the use of helmet cameras in certain circumstances.

This is obviously great news for racers in the UK and hopefully sets the bar for other national organisations who are looking into the issue for their own races.

GoPro Course Check

British Cycling released the following statement:

Helmet / Action Cameras

- Helmet cameras are only permitted during practice or designated training sessions. They are not permitted in competition (including qualifying or final runs for DH & 4X).

- The riders are solely responsible for securing the fixation of the camera in order to avoid any danger or distraction.

- Metal or permanent fixtures to attach the cameras are not allowed. Tape, velcro or ties are allowed to secure the device, which must be removed for competition (including qualifying and finals for DH & 4X).

- Chest mounted cameras and bike mounted cameras are not permitted. Any mounts attached to the bike have to be removed prior to event.

- British Cycling, the event organiser and all appointed commissaires have the right to refuse a rider entry to the course if the rules are not adhered to.

- Please note: the use of helmet cameras during competition remains prohibited as in previous years.

Author Info:
fraktiv avatar

Member since May 14, 2008
227 articles
Must Read This Week
Bike Check: Evan Wall's Haro Greer Prototype Enduro Bike
45097 views
Pinkbike's DH Fantasy League: Get Your Team On The Line - Fort William is in 10 DAYS!
42755 views
Pinkbike Poll: Riser Bar or Extra Spacers Under the Stem?
42043 views
First Ride: Canyon Neuron:ONfly - a Lighter 140mm eMTB
40557 views
Vivo Cycling Previews All-Aluminum 12-Speed Derailleur
38947 views
The Ultimate Recap of Sea Otter 2024
38288 views
Review: Zerode G3 - A Belt Driven, Gearbox Equipped DH Bike
36348 views
Sam Hill Says He's Not Done With Racing
30924 views
Sign Up for the Pinkbike Newsletter - All the Biggest, Most Interesting Stories in your Inbox
PB Newsletter Signup

157 Comments
  • 315 4
 Can i stop and shit my underpants halfway down on a race on, or is that only aloud in practice????
  • 40 8
 This guy wins the internet!
  • 11 42
flag JoshMTB (Mar 27, 2014 at 10:26) (Below Threshold)
 Why would they do that? Such non-sense!
  • 27 1
 If you have a safety triangle set up and you hazard lights on then its fine of course
  • 6 1
 I think this answers all the questions I was about ask about this rule.
  • 5 0
 I was not talking about shitting, I was talking about the no mount rule guys...
  • 120 4
 "Metal or permanent fixtures to attach the cameras are not allowed. Tape, velcro or ties are allowed to secure the device, which must be removed for competition "

Does that mean sticky mounts have to be removed? If so, go lick a sack BC.
  • 31 1
 how can you hold a headcam down with tape ? surely that's more unsafe that a gopro mount ? and ties what the hell are they thinking
  • 12 0
 No cause its attached by double sided tape, think it means like the bars used to get that shot of the riders face ect. That's how i take it anyhow....
  • 3 0
 ah right yeah , you wouldn't really use that at a race anyway
  • 26 0
 Nah but there's always some plonker
  • 3 0
 Yes I would think the stick on mounts, which are I think what most use anyway, would be considered not permanent. Just sucks if they make you take the entire mount off, you will end up going through a buttload of those sticky pads.
  • 12 6
 I'm not gonna speculate, maybe i don't know why but, This may have something to do with michael schumacher, Reason why he's in a coma is because his helmet exploded. How? He was wearing a go pro on the side of it and he hit a rock on that side and the gopro broke through the helmet.

This probably isn't true, but just trying to figure out the stupid peoples minds that decided this.
  • 1 0
 yeah propably haha , yeah could be why we will never know
  • 9 0
 Well Bell have solved this problem even before is started with their removeable camera mount. Looks like i wont have a problem with permanent mounts. Big Grin
  • 3 25
flag sam-rodda (Mar 27, 2014 at 7:02) (Below Threshold)
 Pretty sure Schumacher wasn't actually wearing a helmet.
  • 9 0
 Yes, he was. There is currently an investigation regarding whether the camera played a part in the accident.
  • 10 0
 Even the go pro mounts stuck on with double sided tape would need to be removed, according to this rule. Ever try to get one of those mounts off? Yeah, good luck with that rule...
  • 7 1
 ^^^ Exactly what I was thinking @robwhynot. They're a pain in the hoop! BC better be handing out free replacements to everyone they make remove them (if they do).

Yeh, I am mistaken on the Schumacher topic. That's pretty sketchy.
  • 4 2
 Just seen the article on singletrack, I'm still figuring out what speed he had to be going to make a go pro go through the side of a ski helmet.. those things are solid 4-5mm plastic..
  • 19 1
 Its Schumacher. Safe to assume he wasn't going slow...
  • 14 1
 dont understand why you cant use a chest mount? surley its just the same as on your head
  • 1 0
 To give you an idea what GoPro can do to a helmet: www.dropbox.com/s/j4ne1ulqs5dioll/2013-08-15%2013.34.49.jpg
The crash itself wasn't that bad, had just a slight concusion.
  • 8 0
 @Paintball23456 - Keep in mind, the straight line speed you are going when you crash doesn't always translate directly to how severely you can hit your head in a crash. Its about the speed of your head when it hits the ground and that its as much of a factor of how you crash as it is how fast you are going. Just as a simple example, think of how you could fall just while walking. Say you slip on ice and fall back and smack your head, you can slam pretty damn hard even though you weren't moving very fast. Or say you trip on the sidewalk while walking and slam your face on the ground. You can hit pretty hard even though you were just walking.
  • 2 0
 what is so bad about a gopro mount. Makes no sense
  • 1 13
flag thekonaguy98 (Mar 27, 2014 at 8:28) (Below Threshold)
 still making absolutely no sens its just a mount , if anything it will provide more protection
  • 9 0
 @backyardfreerider: My guess is that since helmets work by dissipating and absorbing force and a mount, if the mount is the main contact point during impact it focusses those forces and lessens the helmet's ability to dissipate force which can lead to abnormal failure and possible injury.
  • 7 0
 Im just guessing here but I would imagine that riders could have two helmets, one for practice and one for racing. In that case one helmet could have a mount and the other would be clean. I doubt anybody is really going to adding and removing gopro mounts from their helmets...
  • 9 0
 I get all the safety aspects people are bringing up. But if it was really about safety then how can they allow it in practice and not the race runs?
  • 14 0
 @sino428

I don't think it's healthy and safety or liability driven since they should either be totally allowed or totally banned as you say. Just banned for race runs suggests it is a licensing issue for race footage. The uci make filmers pay a fortune for the privilege so I think it ensuring the rights to race footage remains protected by the uci/ bc. It's all about the ££££
  • 2 1
 How's about rubber coated cases around the gopro case its self, that way it can't go piercing helmets or damage anything else?
  • 4 1
 Although the ruling on mounts and removal of them is stupid, I think BC deserve some credit for listening to the displeasure of the riders and revising their decision. I'm sure going back on their word publicly was a hard thing to do
  • 5 0
 I would bet money, it's about money - not safety. Bummer.
  • 2 0
 The first instinct is always to think its about money, but I just can't see where money would be involved. How do they have anything to gain financially by disallowing Helmet cams during race runs? Most of the popular helmet cam videos from the major races are the course previews that happen in practice (which will still be allowed) not of the race runs themselves.
  • 2 0
 Alot of people seem to be complaining about chest cam. I am sorry to say but BC right there is an actual danger for chest mounts UNLESS you are wearing a chest plate. If you crash of your chest with a chest mount and no chest plate there is a high chance of impaling yourself. Ive heard of two cases were this has happened. I talked to BC commissionaire last year and he said this was going to happen. I told him that absolutely bollocks, he totally agreed and said that is mostly beacuse of the claims getting compensation using helmet camera. So i think the point of this rule is to make it harder to claim.
  • 5 0
 From an article on wideopenmag.co.uk

"It comes, we’re told, from British Cycling’s increasing nervousness about legal action following accidents at their events. Riders (allegedly) are using the footage as evidence to pursue legal claims against BC which is meaning they are being successfully sued."

Reads like they wanna get rid of the witness for the sueing claims rather than the reason they get sued in the first place.

I wish they weren't being so vague about it, it's pretty gay!
  • 3 0
 I think they are trying to make out it is about safety/ litigation but allowing the cameras in practice goes against this. In reality there is money tied up in the television rights during practice and race runs (even if it is small compared to football etc) and the most likely reason is protecting those stakeholders. In fairness, the UCI have done a great job of getting the races out there live on the net in the past season or so but I guess they want to keep it as exclusive as possible. BC is just an extension of UCI rules and possibly even a testing bed for further reaching (worldwide?) UCI rule enforcements wrt cameras...
  • 89 2
 Surely its not applicable if you have 26" wheels as you will be going too slow for any real damage to occur...
  • 3 0
 lol!!!
  • 38 2
 The logic is not understood here.
  • 37 1
 simple to understand. there is no logic
  • 19 1
 British health & safety legislation has nothing to do with logic unfortunately! Or common sense for that matter..
  • 5 0
 I think what they are trying to achieve is a system where a crash would result in the camera being ripped off rather than a solid structure potentially penetrating a helmet/skull
  • 9 1
 Yeah can somebody explain the "this is obviously great news" part of the article cause cause i dont seem to grasp the greatness.
  • 4 0
 fercho25, it's "great" (although a better description would have been 'better') news as a few days ago they announced that cameras were banned full stop due to persistant legal action by riders at events. This statement is a small but 'better-than-nothing' turn around from the complete ban.
  • 22 0
 So basically you cant attatch your £300 camera to your head properly, you must bodge it on with zip ties? Cant say ive ever felt anyone had an unfair advantage by runnig a go pro during a race run....
  • 6 0
 I understnad your frustration... however this is a small turn around from earlier in the week when initially there was to be no head cams. So good news on that point! As for the advantage, it was never about having an advanatage, it is about BC being put into a corner by riders using camera footage to support legal action when an accident occured. Unfortunatley it is the classic case of the actions of a few riders have impacted on the majority. It's good to see that BC have listened to the initial outcry over the last week and further clarified their stance and offered an alternative.
  • 3 0
 Nope because technically the sticky back gopro mounts (standard ones) use double sided tape.

mycamera.co.za/images/detailed/8/gopro_flat_adhesive_mounts_1.jpg

^ these will be fine
  • 17 1
 Long live grassroots DH and no bullshit rules! Sign your waiver and move on!!
  • 3 0
 It's just in Britain as far as I know?
  • 3 7
flag ctmtb98 (Mar 27, 2014 at 10:05) (Below Threshold)
 Damn commies
  • 3 0
 This does affect grassroot racing as 90% of races are do through BC
  • 2 0
 And waivers mean sweet feck all in a UK court unfortunately . . .
  • 12 1
 I bet it was to generate income from a 'sponsored course video' $$$$$$$$
  • 7 0
 New rules for this season high viz vests,steel toe cap shoes,maximum speed on the track 12.9mph,no jumps that are higher than 1feet and drops are reduced to 15 inch in hight for safety reasons of course unless on practice runs then you can do what you like.
  • 8 1
 So I race ski cross at a pretty high level, and we have a similar rule. I won't give FIS the benefit of assuming it was put in for any kind of good reason, but as athletes we agree with it. We have noticed that helmet cameras have a nasty habit of grabbing on things like safety netting, the ground etc as you fall into them, making them a slight menace in the course. In biking this does seem less of an issue since helmets tend to have more sticky outy things anyway, but something to consider.

Sounds like a liability thing for BC anyway. If people were using helmet cam footage to sue me at my own event, you know what? I'd ban them too.
  • 2 0
 if someone used camera footage to prove you were in the wrong you would just ban cameras? How about accept that you were wrong, apologise and try and fix the problem. Seems the logical conclusion to me
  • 2 0
 As far as I know these are downhill races, on mostly established tracks. Maybe you know more than me about this particular instance, but I'm lost on what the organizer could do wrong to invite a lawsuit that could then be proven with GoPro footage. Aside maybe from bitchy whining about how a certain section made them crash because it hadn't been dumbed down enough, but I have no respect for someone who would enter a race, inspect the course and then sue on those grounds in a country with available public healthcare.
  • 1 0
 no i dont know either to be honest. however if the go pro footage has proven helpful in the the case one way or the other then it seems more logical that all runs get filmed rather than a ban on filming. I personally agree that people whinging that they hurt themseves doing a sport that they know to be dangerous is a symptom of people refusing to take responsibility for their own actions. However if you hit a cow stood in the middle of the track or something, then you kinda deserve some sort of compensation and denying people the means to prove that is unfair surely?
  • 3 0
 I think the the camera for the most part (certainly the pros) isn't for them to watch their race runs - it's to watch their practice runs to see/review the lines/mistakes etc - to use it as a tool not for a Youtube post. Once the race is done -it's done.
  • 4 0
 That's exactly what I use it for. Most times I have to arrive a day early to "map the course" cause I cant even wear it during practice (as per UCI rules) but some tracks I've never been to, so it helps getting trail familiarity, which increases safety in my opinion.
  • 3 0
 It's not healthy and safety or liability driven I don't think since they should either be totally allowed or totally banned. Just banned for race runs suggests it is a licensing issue for race footage. The uci make filmers pay a fortune for the privilege so I think it ensuring the rights to race footage remains protected by the uci/ bc
  • 2 0
 Sounds like you hit the nail on the head with this explanation. This comment should be moved to the top so everyone reads it.
  • 7 1
 hahah I can't stop laughing...
  • 5 0
 Gee Atherton shared she's thoughts on this through twitter. Simply put, he isn't pleased
  • 9 0
 Dammit autocorrect. *his
  • 3 1
 Wish this came in last week. I got in a fair telling off for wearing my gopro on my first practice run at the sda. Fair to say I hadnt heard about the rule, but I also assumed if im paying £65 to race I should be allowed to record myself doing so.
Big step forward, but I really disagree with this rule in its entirity
  • 3 1
 could it be related to schumachers ski accident where they think the helmet mounted cam contributed to his injury www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/motorsport/formulaone/michael-schumacher/10640839/Michael-Schumacher-skiing-crash-did-helmet-camera-cause-head-injuries.html
  • 3 0
 That's an interesting possibility.

Though it is hard to imagine that a taped on gopro mount would be any where close to as damaging as smashing a helmet into a sharp rock. The speculation is worthwhile but not (yet) based on solid evidence.
  • 3 1
 I can't find a link, but I read people were using footage as proof to sue British Cycling.
  • 2 0
 I read about them using footage to sue as well, it was in an article earlier in the week about the initial total ban of cameras at events
  • 7 3
 So why are they banned in Race runs? Surely it's your race run that you would want to film!!!?? Am I missing something?
  • 5 0
 People film their practise runs so they can watch the footage before the race to help them remember the course, so it's more beneficial to be able to film the practice day.
  • 1 1
 But I was thinking you'd want to look back on your race run to see where you went wrong and where you went right- you could also compare it with your mates race runs to see where you lost/gained time. Sometimes the race run is a blur at the time. I know the race is over by then by it's still nice to know. I just want to know why they're banned? Is it safety? I know there has been mention of Michael Schumacher's injury being made worse by wearing a camera on his head. I'm curious as to B.C.'s reasoning that's all.
  • 9 0
 Because they don't want you to challenge their official timing with your camera timing.
  • 3 0
 Helmet cams have been banned in race runs for a while haven't they? At least at bigger events they have
  • 2 0
 its so if a decision is made at the time of the race people cant go back and argue it. Once a decision is made its final and cameras on riders will make it harder for judges/marshals to call this without people getting in uproar about a decision.
  • 2 1
 Why dont they focus on building a standard for wheel sizes in racing? Every forum of racing has a standard. You cant go out and race a bmx race with a 22 inch wheel. Are sport is more concerned with a camera on peoples head instead of fair even racing.
  • 1 0
 Please not this. It could backfire fast. I'm hoping to get another year or two of life out of my v10, and it would be a shame if it was declared ineligible for racing before it's time came.
  • 1 0
 guess there will be loads of gopro's and similar devices going cheap on ebay if they are not allowed to have permanent fixture's, the scavenger's will be picking them up along the track and flogging them, oh that might be a good business idea........forget all that you just read.
  • 3 2
 So you aren't allowed to race with a GoPro mount on your helmet?!
"Metal or permanent fixtures to attach the cameras are not allowed. Tape, velcro or ties are allowed to secure the device"
  • 4 0
 GoPro mounts are fixed with adhesive and can be removed relatively quickly and probably not classed as "permanent" in the eyes of BC, but good observation. More clarity needed perhaps.
  • 1 0
 GoPro mounts are stuck on so not permanent id say??
  • 1 0
 The missing part of the quote makes it pretty clear that the mount used for the camera must be removed. Good luck. Those go pro mounts stick like mad
  • 1 0
 It might be allowed during the practise, but all mounts have to be removed for the contest. Have fun applying and removing the GoPro mounts at every practise/race.
  • 6 0
 buy 2 helmets Big Grin
  • 3 0
 f*ck, you're smart! Big Grin
  • 2 2
 2 helmets cost mucho $$$. I'd rather spend that money on some component upgrades!
  • 4 0
 if you have a (helmet) sponsor it should be no problem Smile (seeing as this is for racing)
  • 4 1
 most people have more then one helmet..and the pros get theres given to them just like there bike so it;s not really a problem for them to have 2
  • 2 1
 Unfortunately not everyone who races in these events has a helmet/clothing sponsorship. Think of the privateers who will be racing these events and are affected by these new sanctions by having to buy another lid. I agree it's a solution, but for some, it's going to cost them.
  • 2 0
 You dont need a $500 troy lee for your practice run, get a cheep one
  • 3 1
 Yeah you don't need a good helmet for practice, it's not like you've not fully learned the new track yet, and you're gonna be trying new lines and pushing the limits of speed so you know how fast you can go in your race run. Just get a cheap one, no-ones ever crashed in practice. pinkbike logic
  • 2 0
 Just because a helmet is cheaper then a pretty troy lee doesnt mean its not good there sre plenty out there just as good for less then half the price and if u can afford that expensive go pro u can afford one of those... Not pink bike logic just normal logic
  • 4 1
 Good job they don't have same stupid rules in supercross!! youtu.be/gCfGmLvWu4A
  • 1 1
 youtu.be/gCfGmLvWu4A
  • 1 0
 And at the Red Bull Crashed Ice (live.redbull.tv/events/326/red-bull-crashed-ice-2014-qubec-city-canada) they even show the helmet cam live. Can we please have that at the WC Red Bull..?
  • 2 0
 Why are cameras banned in the first place? So far I've read 1) safety 2) remember lines 3) challenge their time. Which one is it really?
  • 5 3
 Filming a run should not be allowed at all!! It's very dangerous riding with a little camera attached to your helmet anyone seen the amount of deaths it's caused!!! Mental!
  • 4 4
 How many deaths has it caused? Out of genuine curiosity as I quite want a go pro but won't get one if it might cause my demise? Reliable sources please not just internet hearsay
  • 5 0
 s a r c a s m
  • 7 0
 can genuinely never tell on this website
  • 2 0
 Yeah it's hard to tell when half the people are just morons , pretty sure he's joking though Razz
  • 2 0
 So we can't move to next step...live view of the race from rider's view like motogp Smile
  • 3 0
 What is the reason for the ban?
  • 5 1
 fear of change
  • 4 0
 Fear of being sued by riders who take a fall and blame the course/ organisation. Riders have already been succesful and have used footage as evidence. Shame really.
  • 2 1
 Well there were reports that it was the camera on Michael Schumachers helmet that caused his helmet to fail so badly and has resulted in him being where he is now. So maybe there is a legitimate safety concern.
  • 3 0
 I heard it was because people were using footage when suing them, as patchesuk said.
  • 2 5
 Did you read the story on that they said quote " his helmet exploded" than in the next sentence they said it split in two? Which is it and if you read he also went off the designated run where he wasn't supposed to be so in my opinion he just asked for it
  • 2 0
 if its the fear of being sued why would there be different rules for practice and for race?
  • 5 0
 I dont have a clue which story you are talking about. And "he asked for it"? What kind of moron are you? Did you see the place where the crash happened? It was a tiny patch between two pistes and according to witnesses he was after helping one of his friends children up and then ended up in the off piste section. Most likely unintentionally as there really is no reason someone would ski there otherwise.

Of course we dont know any of this for a fact but saying he asked for it is beyond crass. What you are saying is that he deserves to have suffered a life ending injury (unfortunately thats what it looks like now) because he skied between two pistes for reasons that you dont know. By that logic there should be at least 10,000 fatalities in Whistler every year considering how much out of bounds skiing is done there.
  • 1 0
 I'm not trying to be a dick about it I'm just saying we all know the risks when we venture to those types of places and I don't understand how they are saying the go pro made his helmet explode but yet it was only cracked in two it doesn't make sense to me
  • 2 1
 Was this also caused by the schumacher crash that put him in a coma (rumors say the helmet cam compromised the helmet's integrity)
  • 3 4
 Can't really see why anyone would want a camera attached to them during the race anyway, but it'd be interesting to know the reasoning behind it being an issue at all. Score another well deserved idiot point for Britain, the country with insane gun prohibition laws & insanely high violent crime rates to match. Way to make no f*cking sense again guys!
  • 2 1
 Well better throw all our helmet mounted lights in the bin as well and race in the dark!
  • 1 0
 I think it will end up with a helmet integrated camera.... Will they ban helmet then?
  • 1 0
 what if Bell has a secret agreement with British Cycling to use their helmets with removeable camera mount?
  • 1 0
 Guess GoPro have to get there finger out and make an integrated camera in goggles now
  • 1 0
 "Metal or permanent fixtures to attach the cameras are not allowed", how will this effect Metal camera's?
  • 1 0
 Nothing to do with the topic but, what are those wire attached to the Gopro on the picture ?
  • 1 0
 It's for the microphone.
  • 2 1
 maybe they should directly prohibit to remember the lines on a track? what? if you remember the line-it is a huge advantage
  • 2 1
 You would think the chesty would be allowed with its aerodynamic and secure properties.
  • 3 0
 the problem with a chesty is if you fall on it it can do you a lot of damage
  • 2 0
 ... In that line of thinking, so can a stem. Or a handlebar. Or a pedal or a rock or a tree or... This is DH racing, not FIS controlled sport. It sounds as though BC is having some enforcement and legal issues when it comes to timing, etc, which I'm guessing is the real reason for banning them, not rider 'safety'.
  • 1 0
 I can see the safety aspects, especially with a chest mount. But if its really about safety how can they allow it in practice runs? Is safety only a concern in race runs? That doesn't make any sense.
  • 1 0
 Agreed the chesty mount is just as dangerous as a stem and when you enter a race here you sign a piece of paper for insurance surley we can sign one saying we are liable to any injurys by a chest moumt, helmet mount or what ever. Dh is becoming pampered tracks are becoming smoother for saftey its not right soon it wont be classed as an extreme sport.
  • 1 0
 On the tracks becoming safer note. Have a look at the report from last weekends BDS
  • 7 5
 Hey CyclingBC (Canada), maybe you should consider this...
  • 5 1
 Why neg prop this guy? Cycling BC (Not British Cycling) has rules saying no mountable cameras during racing OR practice.
British Cycling is now allowing camera's during practice. Tmackstab just wants to be allowed to record his practice runs in BC. I couldn't agree more. Having that footage could help you get a faster time, and when you're making your own edits at home how cool would it be to have clips with a bunch of fans on the side of the course cheering?!
  • 1 0
 I would like to see athletes to wear their cameras when racing in every other sport as well!!
  • 2 1
 Clearly another dumbass "racing organization" run by by non-racers. f*ck them!
  • 2 0
 Every thing is about DOLLA DOLLA BILL YAAA!
  • 1 0
 soon it won't matter as cameras are already in watches... they'll be so small soon we'll all have them all over the place.
  • 2 1
 Im just trying to work out what "unior tools team" is Wink
  • 2 1
 Is this another Waki-Leaks post or are these idiots for serious?
  • 1 0
 this is or real
  • 2 0
 these idiots were serious. Pinkbike didnt report on it last week where they banned them completely from events. They have now gone back to the way it was where you can film in practice but just not in your race runs
  • 3 1
 Dry sarcasm goes undetected on the webz
  • 2 5
 WTF??
Are you serious? Is that so important? how you carry your camera in a race??
The only person who will be harmed if the camera falls off is the rider who carries it...

Why create an amazing, zing, zing and zing, rule like this one? I guess Britishs have no problems, so they create awful things such this rule
  • 3 1
 Exactly, and then who does the rider, or the rider's family, sue? BC.
  • 3 1
 Haha, when the rider join in a RACE he's already assuming his risk of DEATH... lol
  • 1 0
 I read it was because they were using the footage for insurance claims
  • 1 0
 Are chest mounts or bike mounts ok?
  • 1 0
 Dare u to put go pro on!!
  • 1 1
 Makes the new helmets with Go Pro mounts built in pretty useless now??
  • 3 0
 Actually, it makes them very desirable. Since the mount is permanent and part of the helmet it wouldn't need to be removed, just the camera.
  • 1 0
 Fair point
  • 2 1
 live and let live
  • 1 1
 Your there to race, not take videos! Get over it fer fooks sake!!!
  • 1 1
 Oh good grief
  • 1 2
 What's a good full-face helmet I can get for cheap?
  • 3 0
 how has this got anything to do with helmet camera bans? 661 are pretty good btw
  • 2 1
 These will protect you from everything:

[P=http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_-7gz1x_HNjE/TGvCwOWgLiI/AAAAAAAACL0/GeYDVOpwVDY/s1600/tinfoil_helmets.jpg size=m align=c][/P]

Including aliens.
  • 1 1
 Why isn't the picture working anymore? :S
When I just posted it it showed the picture embedded in my comment, but now it's gone and all I see is the code?







Copyright © 2000 - 2024. Pinkbike.com. All rights reserved.
dv56 0.042748
Mobile Version of Website