LRRS bans HJC CS, CL from race series.

[Cajun]

Interesting article i picked up from a usa bike site

LRRS (Loudon Road Race Series) are banning certian model HJC model helmets, due to fact they cause they caused more serious head injurys(even in minor crashes)

This only realed to the CS and CL series not the AC.
This is due to the cs and cl being 'plastic' shells and the AC is made fibreglass

full story here
http://www.roadracingworld.com/news/article/?article=25781

[svs]

shaun posted this a while back....

[Cajun]

ahhhh must have missed it

[Squeak the Rat]

There were two HJC helmets temporarily banned from the LRRS (Loudon Road Race Series) in the states due to a high representation in head injuries over a five race period. HJC are the largest selling helmet in the states, so maybe more riders were wearing them.....

What I find interesting in relation to the article referenced by Jim2 is that one of the two HJC helmets that were banned is SNELL approved (the CL model I believe). If polycarbs are shit, then how did it pass the rigurous SNELL tests? Either the helmet is is good, or the SNELL standard itself is shit......

See this thread for some interesting discussion on Snell ratings.....
http://www.kiwibiker.co.nz/forums/showthread.php?t=29306&page=3

[Steam]

I have the HJC CS, should I really think seriously about getting a new helmet, or is it a tiny risk when compared to cellphone-absorbed SUV drivers?

[Wasp]

f*ck me.... i have a cs-12.......

[sugilite]

whew, I have a AC10.
I've never been a fan of poly carbs:nono:

[Skunk]

I have a CS12 too. Got it for a good price from WMCC. I only got it because it's the only affordable green helmet I can find.
I don't see a problem with cheap helmets as long as they meet the standards.
If you can afford an expensive helmet get one. They are quieter (hearing), lighter (neck strain), generally better venting and more comfortable.

[Squeak the Rat]

When I briefly looked at this I came to the conclusion that it "could" be simply because these helmets were commonly used, therefore had higher injury rates. Not sure if I missed anything though or if something else came to light.

In regards to the safety standards, if it's rated it should be good enough in a crash. See Jims post in the link i put on before - it's an article that suggests the flash Snell rated helmets might not be as safe as the often-cheaper DOT rated ones.


PS - of course if your helmets over 5 years old or been dropped then yes you should look at replacing it.

[Smokin]

f*ck me.... i have a cs-12.......

Arrrr crap, so do I

[The_Dover]

I wouldn't shit your drawers about it ladies.

Polycarbonate is an amazing material and it's penetration resistance is incredible. The problem may arise from the energy absorbtion (which is required to stop you rattling your brain) polycarbonate is an extremely elastic material whereas the carbon fiber lids will split and dissipate the energy the polycarb will more than likely deflect transferring the energy to the shell liner. If the foam and shit inside the helmet is properly designed to absorb energy then there shouldn't be a huge issue.

And when it comes to penetration resistance give me polycarb anytime.

[Big Dave]

And when it comes to penetration resistance give me polycarb anytime.


Explains why you walk funny.

[Lou Girardin]

And when it comes to penetration resistance give me polycarb anytime.

Tried marriage?

[The_Dover]

Explains why you walk funny.

Yeah, these polycarb underpants aren't the most comfortable attire I've ever worn.

But they are see through:blip:

[Big Dave]

Yeah, these polycarb underpants aren't the most comfortable attire I've ever worn.

But they are see through:blip:


The way you've been baiting the chics lately - some back armour could be in order too.

[roogazza]

Ten dollar heads , Huh ! ( the old Bell Ad ! ) G.

[Posh Tourer :P]

I have just read the latest UK issue of BiKE mag (I think -it may have been RiDE), where they criticise the ECE 22-05 standard as not being rigorous enough - manufacturers have been sending in helmets specifically strengthened on the points specified for impact testing, whereas the Snell test is random. There are also other concerns - just because something is approved doesnt mean it is safe. I don't know what the DOT testing method is, but it is worth checking out.

On a related note, RiDE tested gloves - no country has safety standards for gloves, and lots of gloves performed very badly in their tests. In fact, almost all of them failed somehow - ripping seams and weaknesses in design.... It is worth thinking about..... Similarly, anything else you wear, apart from a helmet, is not safety-standard assessed......

Odd huh?

This (http://www.motorcyclistonline.com/gearbox/motorcycle_helmet_review/) is an interesting read...... There are gems in there about polycarbonate shells vs fibreglass/resin (that polycarb shells transmit less force to the head), and that perhaps Snell approved helmets are too hard for most race situations - where a softer DOT approved helmet absorbs energy better. On the road, where one can hit hard corners, not flat surfaces, Snell might be better.....