Dave Brough October 25, 2010 11:37 AM $455 for a one-time use product that you have to wear around your neck? No thanks. My $15 helmet with reflectors and sun visor seems like a whole lot better way to ride. t2af October 25, 2010 12:08 PM i love it. what a great idea. I wonder how many times it inflates with a false positive Adrian Akau October 25, 2010 02:49 PM Dave,My sister spent many years working with paralyzed bike riders. I assure you that the protection offered is well worth saving lives and health. I also think that this type of protection should be offered to football players to prevent serious head injuries although I do not know how it could be done. The present helmets are not satisfactory (see the latest NFL ruling). I think that in the long run, the football helmet and collar section will have to be designed into a single piece with the collar part somehow giving support to the helmet. michael_dowling October 25, 2010 07:48 PM Fail! This thing wouldn\'t protect against impacts with hard sharp objects.Present helmets are designed to protect against both blunt and sharp object impacts. Having said that,I detest wearing helmets ( sweat in my eyes,helmet hair),and rarely ride my bike anymore. Matt Rings October 26, 2010 03:22 AM I laid down a bike and went foot over head forward over the fairing hitting headfirst on the pavement (large scrape on the helmet).Would this thing inflate by just flying forward? There would be no time for inflation before the skull hit the tarmac... maybe some decelerometer on the bike that communicates wirelessly to inflate the airbag even as your flying over the handlebars??? windykites October 26, 2010 08:22 AM These women don\'t look like motor bikers (nor the male model) Let\'s face it: Motor bikes are inherently dangerous. Fun to ride, maybe, but bikers should ride more responsibly, instead of roaring around, and weaving in and out of traffic. Safety laws that cover cars, just don\'t apply to bikes; i.e. seat belts, side protection;air bags, etc. Fred Conwell October 26, 2010 12:11 PM \"Lovely hair\" won\'t be so at 70 MPH so why the fuss? And how do you explain the missing helmet on this lawbreaker? Gadgeteer October 26, 2010 09:52 PM If this works as promised and they can get the price down to a reasonable level (below $100), I\'d buy one. I almost never ride without a helmet and they\'ve saved me several times, but I really don\'t like the feel of it on my head. I doubt anybody does. Helmet hair I don\'t care about. That\'s just aesthetic. I\'ve been to car-free areas and events where you\'re allowed to cruise anywhere down the street at a slow pace without worrying about crashing. It\'s great, but it\'s also a little frustrating that it\'s too risky to pick up the pace if you\'re not wearing a helmet. Colter Cederlof October 28, 2010 03:41 AM Eh, the concept is there, but the reasoning behind it isn\'t. What exactly is the problem that this airbag solution solves? I don\'t see real benefit over current helmets. In fact, michael_dowling pointed out a new problem arising from it. Something no one really mentioned is the downside of wearing this bulky unit on your neck. My neck would get nasty, sweaty and there is no ventilation unlike current helmets. In addition, you\'d have limited mobility at the neck when looking around for traffic or down at your speedometer. I\'ll take my physical helmet and that oh so problematic helmet hair any day.@t2af - Your comment is exactly what I\'m thinking too... There have been times where I\'ve just fallen over due to bad footing, but my head doesn\'t quite hit the ground. I\'d bet this airbag would go off and I\'d have to find a replacement. agulesin June 27, 2012 11:58 AM @Fred - a panic button which inflates it on approach of police?