Page 2 of 2

Posted: Tue Jun 02, 2009 11:47 pm
by HYPERR
MZ33 wrote:
a whole different type of collusion exists in the helmet industry
That's not uncommon in industry. Technology in the computer industry has been "rolled out" over time, when in fact the technology already existed. rx companies hold onto slight variances in drug formulations so that, when the patent on, say, Ambien, expires, they can roll out "Ambien CR." It's the same drug, but redesigned to have both an immediate and a continual release.

In fact, it would be sensible for the companies to have this "estimated" obsolescence rather than a tested one. It seems a reasonable estimate, but I'm sure that it falls well on the safe side of probability. From a liability standpoint, they are protected. Keep in mind, too, that if they start getting hard data: first, it would take years to have the components studied, and second, every time they modified a component, they would not be able to state a time claim until they tested again. They will always be years behind their own technology. Instead, this handy "rule of thumb", not unreasonable, is out there.

So, in reality, it likely will last longer than 5 years, but we're talking about your head, here. One of those "ladder of risk" moments. What's the chance on any given ride that you will need that helmet at all?

I think of it as: "we're quite sure that the components will hold up for 5 years. Somewhere after that, different components will degrade at different rates and we can't be sure of anything at that point. It's your head. Use it."
I agree with pretty much everything you are saying here MZ.

Yes, some form of "collusion" always exists in every business. Usually in the interest of finance and covering their arse.

Posted: Sun Jun 21, 2009 5:53 am
by Ryethil
HYPERR wrote:
mazer wrote:FROM THE HORSES MOUTH -
The Snell foundation recommends a helmet be replaced every 5 years based on a general concensus of manufacturers and the Snell foundation ~ "Thus, the recommendation for five year helmet replacement is a judgment call stemming from prudent safety philosophy."
Thank you mazer. Just as I thought and just as people from the helmet industry have off the record admitted. The 5 year "rule" is based not on a study of any sort but on a general "consensus". As with anything, especially in the land of the frivolous lawsuits, any form of "general consensus by the manufacturer is going to be on the ultra conservative side in the interest of selling more helmets and in the interest of covering their arse.
As I have said, I have 3 helmets, all premium models, all well kept and maintained. I have examined the glue, foam, etc on all these helmets and they are all in excellent shape. That being said, the oldest(the Dainese) is 7 years old. Despite still being in excellent condition, I will probably replace it in a year or so.
The 5 year "rule" is essentially a judgement call. There is no reason a helmet receiving excellent care, maintenance, & storage would deteriorate in 5 years. There is also no reason why a helmet that is banged around while being carried around, rode hard and put away wet, and stored in a freezing/boiling garage year around is going to last anythig close to 5 years.
Common sense prevails and judgement calls apply.
Whoa, I'm getting in over my head here but I'll try to put it into perspective. This experience comes from my racing days where you can't/don't chances with your safety. If all you want to wear something that keeps the cops away and you don't have a high opinion of yourself than any thing is better than nothing. Guys, bear with me...

However, there are some very specific places where a helmet ages. And With this aging, comes reduced protection.

First of all, there are many seperate components that make up a helmet and all have a place in this discussion. First of all, the outer shell is usually a polycarbonate that degrades with time. Polycarbonates also don't react well to many chemicals that helmets come in contact with. This has a lot to do with various waxes and other chemicals might use to gloss your helmets. Forget paint. It might just be normal household chemicals that seem innocuous enough. The outer shell may look perfect to observation but it could shatter in a crash from age alone. I don't know anyone that can tell how well the shell is holding up from eyeballing alone.

This has to do with the interior as well. Sweat and chemicals can cause the inner polycarbonates to stop being plyable enough to deform properly in a crash. All of this is very hard to determine from any visual inspection.

So most governiing bodies have settled on a 5 year guideline to take some of the guess work out of trying to deside if a helmet is sound enough when you can't really visually inspect what could possibly be wrong with your helmet. I use Arai and Shoei helmets because I don't trust my head to DOT standards and look for the much stricter Snell standards. I also replace my helmets usually 3-4 years because I'm not a trusting person by nature.

Finally, If you drop your helmet from a great hieght or have an accident, you can't tell if your helmet survived the impact. A helmet deforms when it hits something. This causes the various components to be come less protective because defromation has set in both the outer and inner shells. It's not something out of the ordinary because this is how it protects your head.

Again, the 5 year guideline isn't for the benefit of the helmet companies. It's about common sense when you can't really tell by normal means what kind of shape your helmet is in.

However, I take a lot of trash when I ride my Sportster in the heat of summer from the guys because they are riding around in Tshirt, shorts and bare headed. I guess they are immortal. I just don't want to see anyone mess up there lives because they were stupid. :(

Posted: Sun Jun 21, 2009 8:42 am
by HYPERR
Ryethil wrote:First of all, the outer shell is usually a polycarbonate that degrades with time. Polycarbonates also don't react well to many chemicals that helmets come in contact with. This has a lot to do with various waxes and other chemicals might use to gloss your helmets. Forget paint. It might just be normal household chemicals that seem innocuous enough. The outer shell may look perfect to observation but it could shatter in a crash from age alone. I don't know anyone that can tell how well the shell is holding up from eyeballing alone.
The premium helmet manufacturers like Shoei and Arai do not use polycarbonate in their shells. They use an highly advanced FRP. You can wax the FRP shell anytime you want with no harm to it whatsoever. In fact the Shoei website highly recommends you do that.

That being said, lets now go back to the polycarbonate used in the less expensive helmets. Wax or any of the majority of household chemicals that your helmet may or may not come in contact with, will not harm polycarbonate. Polycarbonate is an incredibly tough plastic that is severely impact resistant and under normal useage will irrefutably maintain that characteristic for the life of the helmet owner and beyond; through drastic temperature variations as well.
You don't think polycarbonate is tough? Then consider that one of polycarbonates most famous incarnation is what is known as "bullet proof glass".

Polycarbonate's structual integrity cannot be compromised by coming in contact with most "household" chemicals including: Acetic Acid, Hydrochloric Acid, Citric Acid, Mercury, Methane, Ozone, Methane, Sulfur, Ammonia, Butane, Ethylene Glycol, and Ethanol.

The modern motorcycle helmet shell is not going to deteriorate to the point it will shatter from "old age" within a reasonable(or even unreasonable) time.

Posted: Sun Jun 21, 2009 11:36 am
by Lion_Lady
HYPERR wrote:I personally think that my 7 year old Dainese and it's internal are in far better condition than a poorly taken care of one year old helmet. I really don't believe in this 5 year rule as a final word. It really depends on how a helmet is stored and cared for.
As with all things in life. There are always exceptions. It seems prudent to "retire" a 5 year old helmet if it has been used regularly and treated with average care. Even if it is probably in good shape.

The question is, how can anyone determine the EXACT crossover point from "safe" to "unsafe" in an individual (used/older) motorcycle helmet?

:humm: "On Monday it was fine to wear, but on Tuesday it wasn't safe any more... "

Its up to the rider to make the final decision, I suppose. And so long as you fully understand the risks I think it is fine to do so.

P

Posted: Mon Jun 22, 2009 8:19 am
by MTNMAN800
With the 5 year rule of thumb many aspects come into play. Yes, manufacturer liability is part of it, yes the companies would like you to buy a new helmet. But there is more to it than that. It is quite reasonable to have some "doubt" about the reliability of a 5 year old helmet and personally I don't think it has too much to do with how well you take care of the helmet. Of course, as someone stated, if you really take poor care of the helmet, exposing it to continual extreme temp differentials, dropping it etc it will need to be replaced sooner but the difference between taking good care of a helmet vs taking excellent care of a helmet to me is a meaningless point. I find it reasonable that there are "concerns" or "doubts" about a helmets abilities to protect you after all the components have aged 5 years. My guess would be that if you gathered a bunch of 5 - 15 year old helmets of different condition, visually inspected them and then tested them there would be a wide variation to the results with some failing and others passing just fine. What it comes down to is this - is it really worth the risk??? Personally I buy a new helmet roughly every 3-4 years simply because the old one is out of style, doesn't match my new bike, I like the new ones better etc. The information is put out there to make you a better informed consumer, use it at your own discretion.

Posted: Mon Jun 22, 2009 10:08 am
by Gunslinger
MTNMAN800 wrote:The information is put out there to make you a better informed consumer, use it at your own discretion.
That's the problem, there is no information out there other than a general consensus from the manufacturers. If it is out there I sure haven't seen it. They test new helmets to determine how many G's are transferred from a blow to the head, I see no reason why they couldn't do the same thing with a used helmet. I don't buy into any of the collusion theories but I do think the 5 year rule is more of a CYA maneuver than anything based on actual testing.

I guess I don't read it that way.

Posted: Mon Jun 22, 2009 1:43 pm
by Ryethil
HYPERR wrote:
Ryethil wrote:First of all, the outer shell is usually a polycarbonate that degrades with time. Polycarbonates also don't react well to many chemicals that helmets come in contact with. This has a lot to do with various waxes and other chemicals might use to gloss your helmets. Forget paint. It might just be normal household chemicals that seem innocuous enough. The outer shell may look perfect to observation but it could shatter in a crash from age alone. I don't know anyone that can tell how well the shell is holding up from eyeballing alone.
The premium helmet manufacturers like Shoei and Arai do not use polycarbonate in their shells. They use an highly advanced FRP. You can wax the FRP shell anytime you want with no harm to it whatsoever. In fact the Shoei website highly recommends you do that.

That being said, lets now go back to the polycarbonate used in the less expensive helmets. Wax or any of the majority of household chemicals that your helmet may or may not come in contact with, will not harm polycarbonate. Polycarbonate is an incredibly tough plastic that is severely impact resistant and under normal useage will irrefutably maintain that characteristic for the life of the helmet owner and beyond; through drastic temperature variations as well.
You don't think polycarbonate is tough? Then consider that one of polycarbonates most famous incarnation is what is known as "bullet proof glass".

Polycarbonate's structual integrity cannot be compromised by coming in contact with most "household" chemicals including: Acetic Acid, Hydrochloric Acid, Citric Acid, Mercury, Methane, Ozone, Methane, Sulfur, Ammonia, Butane, Ethylene Glycol, and Ethanol.

The modern motorcycle helmet shell is not going to deteriorate to the point it will shatter from "old age" within a reasonable(or even unreasonable) time.
I already misunderstood a post today, so I'll try to be more to the point.

Shoei's website entry on helmet maintance:

http://www.shoei-helmets.com/Maintenance.aspx

I read their maintinace tips and didn't draw the same conclusions. They say to use a "specific" for helmets cleaner and wax. And they have always said to apply this helmet wax because ozone can attack the outer shell material.

As for FRP it is a type polycarbonate and this is a good thing. Previously used material was fiberglass and fiberglass doesn't deform and sends more shock through the outer shell. It also ages and shattered more easily.

What they said about care of the interior I know to be true and cleaning of the inner lining must be very carefully done with very "neutral" cleanser and sun dried. This hasn't changed for the inner lining is very subject to all sorts of chemical and excess sweat attacks.

Finally they said the possible accidental and not so accidental conditions that would effect the helmet's continued usefulness. They spelled it out pretty well. I think they left out two important conditions as well. I wear mine usually quite a bit for 7 days so it's usually soaking or drying all 7 days. The second one is how many times have I dropped it onto a surface of various hardness or bumped it carrying it around. I don't use it as a prop to keep my bike upright in soft ground but I'm not all that gentle when I'm carrying it or transporting it.

I religious maintain my helmets and yet I don't feel gualified to determine just by eyeballing a helmet what it's condition is.

I called the Arai rep and got him to admit that while they have made strides in creating new ways to have the helmet deform in a crash (YEA!) they really haven't changed the maintinace conditions that much in the last 10 -15 years.

I'm not going to talk about cheaper helmets except to say anything is better than nothing.
I guess the rest is up to you. In my job I've been at more than one accident site where the rider's hemet was seriously gouged to deep into the inner lining and others where the outer lining shattered. Not all of these were cheap and I have a better sense of which helmets I want.

Actually, none of this matters if you don't fall down. As for how long you keep you're helmet is how long you feel safe wearing it.

I'm not trying to burst your bubble but while 6 years of being a paramedic hasn't slowed down my own riding. I don't want to pickup some dead biker who just pushed it a bit to far. And like I said before, the helmet can protect the head which will look good in an open casket funeral. If the biker isn't wearing other things to keep his bod in one piece than he might as go around helmetless. :frusty:

Posted: Mon Jun 22, 2009 1:56 pm
by Ryethil
Gunslinger wrote:
MTNMAN800 wrote:The information is put out there to make you a better informed consumer, use it at your own discretion.
That's the problem, there is no information out there other than a general consensus from the manufacturers. If it is out there I sure haven't seen it. They test new helmets to determine how many G's are transferred from a blow to the head, I see no reason why they couldn't do the same thing with a used helmet. I don't buy into any of the collusion theories but I do think the 5 year rule is more of a CYA maneuver than anything based on actual testing.
I'm going to get myself in trouble sometime...

They have tested used helmets and in so doing it destroys them. Not all helmets are the same in longevity. And you can't usually eyeball a helmet for safety until it has degraded to a point you should of gotten another some time ago.

Yes, a lot of this is CYA for a major lawsuit can put a helmet manufacturer out of business quickly. But most premium helmet makers actually care for the people who use their product and made a compromise that gives the rider as long as they feel safe vs possible helmet troubles. I have no idea why they chose 5 years but I've never destroyed a helmet. So I guess do what you feel safe with.

Posted: Tue Jun 23, 2009 8:44 am
by Gunslinger
Ryethil wrote: They have tested used helmets and in so doing it destroys them.
Agreed. When they test new helmets they are also destroyed.
Ryethil wrote:Not all helmets are the same in longevity.
I have no idea but I think that's a fair assumption.
Ryethil wrote:And you can't usually eyeball a helmet for safety until it has degraded to a point you should of gotten another some time ago.
Agreed.
Ryethil wrote: But most premium helmet makers actually care for the people who use their product...
Really?? That's very nice of them.
Ryethil wrote:I have no idea why they chose 5 years...
That's the entire crux of the argument. Where does this 5 year limit come from? Why not 7 years, or 10? Show me the data.

Posted: Tue Jun 23, 2009 9:06 am
by Ryethil
Gunslinger wrote:
Ryethil wrote:
Snip
Ryethil wrote: But most premium helmet makers actually care for the people who use their product...
Really?? That's very nice of them.
Ryethil wrote:I have no idea why they chose 5 years...
That's the entire crux of the argument. Where does this 5 year limit come from? Why not 7 years, or 10? Show me the data.
Alex shakes her head in wonderment...

You win for I have made a few phone calls that I can't upload to the Forum. But you don't have any data either!?! My experiences show me one thing but I'm not you and have your experiences. That is what a forum is about, opinions and experiences, not cold hard logic. And that is what motorcycles are about which in the end we call freedom. And with regards to helmets and their lifespan, I don't want to make a decision
that proves that it should have been okay but I can't think because my brains are mush inside or outside my head.

I've said this all along but I don't see this highlighted. So I shrug my shoulders and enjoy the joy of riding my bike.

:rockon: