Quote:

There was a helmet thread on here somewhere that had a link to a good study of the DOT and SNELL certifications versus the newer European certifications, and it raised some concern about how safe the DOT and SNELL certs really are.

Hey! I found the link to that article!

MOTORCYCLIST MOTORCYLCE HELMET PERFORMANCE Blowing The Lid Off



a very thorough investigation and I thought I'd got enough info to make a decision then.......

A story from this Weeks MCN.................

EURO HELMET TESTS ARE TOO SLACK

UK's top, lid tester claims 'flawed' safety standards are putting lives at risk

The UK's most experienced motorcycle helmet tester has slammed flawed Brussels helmet safety regulations. Since 2000, all helmets sold in the UK have had to meet Europe's 22-05 standard. However, Brussels' testing philosophy is at odds with the rest of the world. According to Brian Walker, from 'independent testing house Helmet Protection Evaluation (HPE), the current ECE Regulation 22-05 (now stamped on the back or chin strap of all UK lids) has narrowed the spectrum of performance levels to the point that the tests aren't strict enough."

Walker has been testing helmets for 55 years and has approved them for Formula one driver Michael Schumacher, the British Army, cricket teams and all major motorcycle helmet makers, including Arai, Shoei, Suomy and AGV. He says it's time to speak out against meddling from Brussels that has capped the safety performance levels of the helmets we wear. Walker outlined the four main flaws with the current European testing standards:

EURO HELMETS IMPACT TESTED IN SPECIFIC AREAS REGULATION 22-05 only requires the helmet to be impact tested on areas the size of a penny coin at the front, back and rear. According to Walker, the highly specific areas of testing could lead to the "potential of localised strengthening". Walker showed MCN photographs he had taken of helmets sent to him for testing that had been covertly reinforced with impact patches to strengthen specific areas - the manufacturers had reinforced the precise points struck during the testing procedure. Other testing methods, such as Snell (a tough American standard for crash helmet performance) conduct impact tests at random over a much larger surface area, makes the practice of reinforcing specific points worthless.

NO PENETRATION TEST REGULATION 22-05 has no penetration test - a test that pierces helmets with sharp spikes. All other helmet evaluation tests worldwide include a penetration test, making its absence in the European test alarming. Walker is often asked to view crash scene photographs to assess the performance of helmets; he said: "We've seen a penetration accident that split a man's helmet in two and killed him - penetration tests are important."

EXTREME ANVIL TEST CANNED REGULATION 22-05 scraps the use of the hemispherical anvil test, in which a helmet is dropped on to a block of solid metal. The hemi-anvil test is featured in the Japanese, American and Australian standards. Regulation 22-05 replaces it with a "kerb stone anvil" test. However, according to Walker, "the impact for this test is not representative of the extremes a biker faces".

CAR BASED TEST INCLUDED REGULATION 22-05 has faced stinging criticism over the inclusion of the Head Injury Criteria (HIC) scale. Devised by John Versace, a safety researcher for the Ford Motor Company, this scale uses a complex formula to judge the head injuries of non-helmeted car drivers following accidents. It was never intended to be used for evaluating the effectiveness of helmets. Industry experts decided by consensus at a recent conference in Milwaukee , that "HIC should not be incorporated into crash helmet standards". They concluded the main weaknesses of including HIC in helmet testing are: 1) It only deals with linear acceleration. not rotational acceleration - despite more injuries being caused by the latter; 2) It only deals with frontal impacts, not lateral impacts; 3) It takes no consideration of mass.
Manufacturers Respond

ARAI

“It’s important people see how flawed ECE 22-05 is. We will be inundated with cheap helmets from the far east because Regulation 22-05 is so easy to pass. The impact test is so specific that some manufacturers add carbon fibre reinforcements at the precise points they know are being tested. It would frighten you if you saw how badly legal European helmets performed.”

SHOEI

“European Shoei helmets are different from the Shoei helmets sold in the rest of the world. We use different materials and European helmet shells are less rigid. Many manufacturers would like to see EEC testing standards in the USA because it’s much easier to pass 22-05 than the American Snell standard. It means developing a whole new shell.

AGV

“From the manufacturing and testing point of view, it’s easier to pass ECE 22-05. as a result, we’ve seen a massive influx of Chinese helmets that are made to pass a standard test and they’re made to a budget. It’s more difficult to pass a Snell test. We’d like to see a graded system, like the old BSI A and B standards, but we can’t see that ever happening now in Europe.”

GP RIDERS WON’T WEAR EURO-SPEC LIDS

When Shinaya Nakano had a 200mph horror crash at Mugello in 2004, much was made of the helmet that saved his life. However, his Arai lid was not certified to ECE Regulation 2-05, Instead it was a Snell-approved helmet. In fact, non of the Arai sponsored MotoGP riders chose to wear ECE marked helmets opting for the Snell marked helmets supplied by Arai. Shoei Europe also confirmed that it’s rider Chris Vermeulen wears a Snell helmet and not a European standard helmet.


Why can't everything be as simple as buying a Motorbike - BA or Speedy ?

If you do it today you MIGHT regret it. If you CAN'T do it tomorrow you WILL regret it.