Total Motorcycle Community Forums

Anyone else happy about the findings in the July issue of Motorcyclist?
"Blowing the lid off" was the name of the article and its available on line at thier site.
I wrote in asking if it could made available to anyone on the web whos up on two wheels currently and whos thinking of getting out of the cage...

GReat article, seems the bottom line is that you can buy a "great" inexpensive helmet that blows the high end brands out of the water!
Good for us bad for the name branders...

One rep for the mag wrote me back stating that 2 MAJOR helmet mfgs just pulled all thier advertisments out of the mag!
Arai and Shoei!!!

Ya know, can't all of 'em play in the sandbox nice? I mean they where looking out for all of our best interests!!!


-kutch

There was a lot of discussion about it in a thread a couple of weeks ago. you'd have to search it though, not sure of the title.

Snell also released their own reply to this article. Their reply seemed just as authorative as the magazines and they tried to back it up. I don't have the links but it is out there. I think that I will stick with my Arai and Shoei helmets for now. There are some decent less expensive helmets out there but I have found that the fit and attention to details are not the same.
I think that there is a reason that most of the racers use the name brand helmets even if they are not sponsored by them.

Because they don't pay for them?

Yeah, you've got Motorcyclist vs. Snell. I believe Motorcyclist - they have no safety stickers to sell and actually lost a couple of sponsors against their own interest as a result of their findings. The logic they used was very sound. The tiebreaker if I needed one is that The European union tests also say that the hardness rating required to pass the Snell tests is in fact much too hard and that it's actually substantially safer to have a shell that is a bit softer.

Aye. I prefer the Eurpopean standards anyway - they're required to have more padding than a dot or snell - they just 'seem' more solid. And there's no way I'd spend over $200 on a helmet. Ever. As the article showed, much of the protection you get is determined by the way you fall and how your head hits. To go out and buy expensive helmet for the best protection is sorta naive ... however to buy it based on its fit (May be the only one that fits your head) is valid.

I think Shoiei and Arai both made a mistake by pulling their adverts. The expectation that if they advertise, the mag should only say good things about them reflects a crappy (Though probably far too common) corporate philosophy. Hopefully enough riders will bypass their prodects for them to realize how petty they've been.

JCS wrote:Snell also released their own reply to this article. Their reply seemed just as authorative as the magazines and they tried to back it up.

Actually, Snell's statement kind of proved that the magazine was right. Whoever replied for Snell apparantly didn't read the article all the way through. They accused them of running only a certain test, but the article clearly shows you the results from multiple tests. Seems they just got mad at the first part they read, and started fuming and writing.

The part they really rode Snell on was the double impact to the same spot on the helmet. You must pass this in order to receive Snell certification. Problem is, on the street or on the track, it almost never happens. So the shell is made harder to pass this test, but since it is harder, it doesn't absorb as much of the impact. Just like in a car, they make the crumple zone to absorb the impact. You could make it rigid and not do so much damage to your car, but it would damage you more. So I guess, you must choose between a helmet that looks unscathed with your head hurting, or the one completely damage, with you feeling alright.

Either way my helmet was right there in the worst impact absorbtion along with the Arai's and Shoei's, but I'll still keep it. They all will do a good job on protecting your head. Another point to always remember aside from all the certification crap is the best fit is the best and safest helmet usually. So base your buy off of that, and not off of the price and certifications.

The links to the Motorcyclist article and the discussion are in this thread here:

http://totalmotorcycle.com/BBS/viewtopic.php?t=3815

For the record, after reading this article, as well as the response from the Snell Foundation, and Motorcyclist's subsequent response, I have come to the following conclusion:

I will never buy a Snell approved helmet - ever

What is the point of keeping your skull intact if the resultant g-load transferred to your brain turns it into a pachinko ball inside said skull?

I have found two helmets that I am going to buy (yes, two - different helmets for different riding situations), and neither one of them is Snell approved, just DOT. They passed the most critical test though - they both fit very comfortably.

I'm thinking Snell can't admit that they're wrong, if they did wouldn't they open themselves up to lawsuits from anyone who got a head injury with a Snell approved helmet?

After all we've been buying Snell approved because we're told they're a higher standard! and our heads will be safer!!!

Buelligan wrote:I'm thinking Snell can't admit that they're wrong, if they did wouldn't they open themselves up to lawsuits from anyone who got a head injury with a Snell approved helmet?

After all we've been buying Snell approved because we're told they're a higher standard! and our heads will be safer!!!

""and nobody wants that now do they""...


-kutch