SHARP helmet ratings released

[Bob]

The first ratings by SHARP (Safety Helmet Assessment and Rating Programme) set up by the UK Department for Transport have been released.

Road Safety Minister Jim Fitzpatrick said “"If all riders wore the safest helmets available 50 lives could be saved each year. That is why we started the innovative SHARP scheme and are delighted to publish the first results today.

"Helmets from across a wide price range and from a variety of manufacturers have received four or five stars - so all riders should be able to find a high-scoring helmet in a size and style that fits them and at a price they want to pay."

All helmets must meet minimum legal safety standards but the SHARP scheme uses a wider range of tests to provide riders with more information on how much protection a helmet can provide in a crash.

For more information – and to see if your helmet has been tested, log on to:

http://www.direct.gov.uk/sharp

[scracha]

Good find my man. Shocked to see my cheapo Shark lid outperforms my Shoei.

[flyingbrick]

Good find my man. Shocked to see my cheapo Shark lid outperforms my Shoei.

PWNED. :2thumbsup

[Katman]

As I've always said, Shark pay more attention to safety in their helmets than virtually all other manufacturers. Apparently the owner of Shark helmets had his best friend killed in a motorcycle accident through head injuries so decided to found a company producing the safest possible helmets.

[Mrs Busa Pete]

I want a new helmet mine's only got a 4 star. Got go now where was cyletreads again.

[portokiwi]

Mabe Blosoms right i couldnt find mine on ther OHHHH crap.
Does anyone know anything about the HLD helmets.
i love it I even checked the Web site before I brought it.
http://www.kang-tex.com/product_info.php?language=en&info=p45_HLD-H869-Helmet---black-matt.html&XTCsid=5459ba32aaaaff9aebcfe2142ea97071
But it wasnt in that test that I can find.
:(

[yod]

5 stars - good to know - but i dont think i'll bother testing it

[Cajun]

interesting website. some big price helmets there are out performed by ones half the cost.

[Nordy]

a great website when you are trying to weigh up two great helmets, a good way to tip the balance

would be nice to see how they got their star rating, like what they didnt perform so well in etc (like the car reports tell you how you will die in a crash, well the one on the WRX did)

[McJim]

As has been said before on some other helmet threads. The premium paid for big brand lids is not always directed at safety but rather at fancy visor systems, weight reduction and noise reduction....as well as a hefty sum going towards rider endorsements, sponsorships and general marketing.

[dipshit]

Shocked to see my cheapo Shark lid outperforms my Shoei.

I'm not. I think Shark's crumple zone is a very good idea. They have a corrugated layer of high-density foam to start slowing your head down more gradually, significantly reducing the G's.

[dipshit]

It's interesting to see that most brands have a flagship top performing model followed by cheaper low performing ones in their lineup.

[Bob]

I would like to know why one helmet is a 2, but another is a 5 - what is the criteria for the scores?

So I've sent the following to the SHARP people:

"With reference to the SHARP rating system; I wondered if you can throw some more light on the ratings. I understand that the overall score is awarded based on a range of tests and criteria - but what makes one helmet a 2, but another a 5?

Is it based on a percentage score?
Are the helmets given ratings on each individual test, then the overall score generated by an amalgamation of these?
Are we dealing in absolutes (for example, it takes seven blows to crack the shell, so it scores a 5, but only three blows rates a 2), or are there any 'personal judgements' in the testing?

Also, the results on the initial batch of helmets tested appear to be incomplete. There are helmet weights missing for example. Is the intention to complete the missing items - and to ensure these are complete as and when further helmets are tested?"

Be interesting to see what they come back with... assuming they reply at all. If I get a response, I'll post it here.

[quallman1234]

Interesting to see that the cheap nitro helmet's have quite a high rating??

Also my Cheap CL14 verus my Expensive Arai are both the same a little more detail in this website would be great!

[scracha]

I

So I've sent the following to the SHARP people:
what they come back .
Provably something like 'read the website, ALL t e testing methods and scoring are on there'

Also good to see that high price doesn't mean better. Shoei raid outperforms the dearer shoei lids for example.

[windingroad]

I am trying not to feel gutted about my Shoei - I read the test methodology and I wish I knew how they calculated the star rating results. I wonder if our govt would like to sponsor some tests... they give money away for some obscure reasons... and helmet tests would be a good cause. I'll call Harry.

[AllanB]

Arai is shit.

My HJC is not bad.

Maybe a Shark next time I feel.


Always love the 'which helmet' threads!

[Meekey_Mouse]

Whoah! My Arai is only a 3 :shit::crybaby:

[Whynot]

PWNED. :2thumbsup

roffle

;)

[jrandom]

I would like to know why one helmet is a 2, but another is a 5 - what is the criteria for the scores?

My thoughts precisely. I look forward to seeing their response, if you get one.

:niceone:

On another note, it was a bit of a shock to see that my XR-1000 only got 3 stars!

It's difficult to know how to interpret that without more information about the testing, though, so here's hoping we get some enlightenment.

[slofox]

Where do Shoei show the model designation of their helmets? I have one and can't find which model it is....the book says nothing - must be on the helmet somewhere???

[jrandom]

Where do Shoei show the model designation of their helmets? I have one and can't find which model it is....the book says nothing - must be on the helmet somewhere???

If you bought it within the last few years and it's therefore one of the three current models, just check the shape of the forehead and chin guard air vents and the vent area on the back.

Raid II

<img src="http://resources.digital-word.com/hideout-leather.co.uk/thumbnail_store/300_2005021711235233.jpg"/>

XR-1000

<img src="http://www.toolparts.co.uk/acatalog/XR1000BLACK.jpg"/>

X-Spirit

<img src="http://www.toolparts.co.uk/acatalog/XSPIRIT-317765_sil.jpg"/>

And if you bought it before Shoei released their current three-model range, it's old enough to need replacing!

[slofox]

If you bought it within the last few years and it's therefore one of the three current models, just check the shape of the forehead and chin guard air vents and the vent area on the back.


And if you bought it before Shoei released their current three-model range, it's old enough to need replacing!

Bought it in March this year...will check shapes when I get home....looks like a Raid II from here....thanks for the reply.....:yes:

[Usarka]

I'd be interested to know the SNELL / DOT status of the top rating lids......

[Kornholio]

Couldnt find the AC-10 HJC I have but going by the others it looks pretty average... (Note to self: do not hit head on brick wall or any other solid object with said helmet)

[F5 Dave]

Yes that's very nice to be able to put a number to measure something. Like those bike tests where they score numbers & come up with a numerical winner.

Except here there is no explanation of the methodology as you say, (as in bike tests, it can weight tests equivalently & they may do well on some things but hopelessly on others, which ones really mattered most?).

But my main concern is there are many different theories about what safety tests are most applicable. Snell & DOT are quite different apparently. Some test regimes favour things like double impact. But to pass such a test you can compromise other results.

So which is best? I have no clue, I'm not even a pretend expert, but there will inevitably be some trade-off compromises & depending on what research you have done you may tailor your design to meet those requirements.

So who is to say that this rating is based on the 'correct' test regime that would reduce head injury.

So while is is all very nice to put a number to things I still have the suspicion that it smacks of a bureaucratic approach to a stated problem. The statement that 50 or so riders may not have died tends to imply that they were wearing helmets that didn't protect them in those particular accidents they were involved in & that they wouldn't have died from other injuries.

My understanding is that motorcyclists are quite somewhat less represented in head trauma than car drivers in fatal accidents (as they wear no protection), but of course heavily over represented in other life threatening injuries.

oh well.

[iangee]

So, now reading this the day after i paid 6 hundy for an xr1000 shoei helmet, i see it only has 3 stars when a shark helmet at 1/3 of the price has 4 or 5 stars. So the question is, what makes shoei the best helmets in the world? (A phrase ALL the bike shops use). Was I stupid paying 6 hundy? even the cheaper raid 2 has 4 stars... :argh:

[nodrog]

So, now reading this the day after i paid 6 hundy for an xr1000 shoei helmet, i see it only has 3 stars when a shark helmet at 1/3 of the price has 4 or 5 stars. So the question is, what makes shoei the best helmets in the world? (A phrase ALL the bike shops use). Was I stupid paying 6 hundy? even the cheaper raid 2 has 4 stars... :argh:

the price isnt directly related to the "smackyourheadabilty" of a helmet, for instance, a 5 star rated helmet that weighed 8 kilos, was uncomfortable, and had poor visilbility, would be a bad choice over a nice weighted, comfortable 3 star helmet with excellent visibility.

[Meekey_Mouse]

the price isnt directly related to the "smackyourheadabilty" of a helmet, for instance, a 5 star rated helmet that weighed 8 kilos, was uncomfortable, and had poor visilbility, would be a bad choice over a nice weighted, comfortable 3 star helmet with excellent visibility.
Yeah... I think that's mostly what I payed for with my Arai... My helmet is 1,320 grams, has really good visibility and fitted me the best out of all the helmets I tried. I get claustrophobic easily in some helmets but I don't in mine :love:

[Usarka]

Kind of backs up my suspicions that Arai's and Shoei's cost more for the comfort factor than safety.

but man my lid is plush. :love:

and one could easily argue that better comfort = better safety.

[slofox]

the price isnt directly related to the "smackyourheadabilty" of a helmet, for instance, a 5 star rated helmet that weighed 8 kilos, was uncomfortable, and had poor visilbility, would be a bad choice over a nice weighted, comfortable 3 star helmet with excellent visibility.

Agreed. I think fit is vital. A three star helmet that fits correctly will offer you far better protection than a five star helmet that wobbles around on your head. Protection comes from staying on your head when you "use" the helmet, not from withstanding the dropping of a cannon ball onto it from a great height.....

[Okey Dokey]

Thanks for pointing this site out. Glad to see my Ti Tech rated 4 stars. Pity it wasn't 5, but I love it anyway!

[NordieBoy]

Pah!
My ZPF isn't even on there.
Nor the KBC, THH, Oxford, Zeus or other KBC.

[Owl]

Fuck Sharp!

I'll rely on the Ferris "Beat the fuck out of the helmet with the axe" test. Not that I'm likely to come in contact with an axe if I take a spill on my bike.

Here's what I think of ya 3 stars.:moon:

No sour grapes or anything.:whistle:

[Zookey]

The following is an extract from the latest helmet tests by Sharp and show the cheapest 60 Pound Lazer Helmet is 5 Star and the ShoeX spirit can only manage 4 stars at 400 pound.Bugger :shit:
5 Star rated;
Hjc HQ 1
Bell M 1
Arai GPS5x
AGV S 4
Lazer L Z 6
Shark RSR2
:angry:

[Nordy]

http://www.kiwibiker.co.nz/forums/showthread.php?t=75796&highlight=sharp+tests

search is a good thing

[98tls]

:(My old VR1 only gets 3.

[Zookey]

:weep:So does mine ,the actual site is a United kingdom Govt.one.
http://www.direct.govt.uk/sharp.
One wonders how much blurb the makers put out is not just advertising.my lid supposed to be the best in the world.3 stars only geeez :headbang:

[firefighter]

My suomy isn't even on there!

[James Deuce]

Cool. After having seeds of doubt sown in my mind about the suitability of Carbon Fibre as a helmet material, I find my HJC HQ-1 is a 5 star helmet in the SHARP ratings.

Suck on that doubters!

[Swoop]

After having seeds of doubt sown in my mind about the suitability of Carbon Fibre as a helmet material...
Why is that Jim? Carbon is immensely stronger than steel and eminently suitable.

[James Deuce]

Too hard & brittle, therefore decelerating the helmet contents at higher G-Forces than fibreglass or polycarbonate helmets. Apparently not. The deceleration forces are what caused Shoei and Arai to get all bent out of shape with Motorcyclist magazine and their in depth helmet analysis. It is very good that a largely independent Government sponsored research body are getting similar results.

Plenty of KBers have expressed doubt at the suitability of CF for helmets. I reckon they are just jealous.

My main reason for buying it was fit, comfort, and weight. I have a dodgy neck from breaking it. The top end Shoei and Arai helmets are comparatively heavy. If Nolan did a CF N102 I'd be in like a shot.

[cs363]

Just remember that the Sharp test is just one institution and their opinions and test results should be taken in context and added to any research you do on the particular brand of helmet that you own or intend to buy. There is huge debate within the industry concerning the whole helmet testing/standards area at present, read this for more interesting info:
http://www.motorcyclistonline.com/gearbox/motorcycle_helmet_review/index.html
Besides static tests there are factors like helmet/head size, rider weight, velocity, surface impacted and a host of other factors that determine the ultimate safety of a helmet. At the end of the day I think the golden rule of getting the best safety gear you can afford will always apply, remember the old Bell ad - $10 head, $10 helmet?
Not saying that there aren't moderately priced helmets out there that are safe, but personally I would prefer to get the best equipment I can afford to protect my extremities.

[jrandom]

CF...

If Shoei or Arai did a CF helmet, I'd be in like a shot, but to be perfectly honest, I'm far too snooty to wear anything with 'HJC' on it.

[James Deuce]

Just remember that the Sharp test is just one institution and their opinions and test results should be taken in context and added to any research you do on the particular brand of helmet that you own or intend to buy. There is huge debate within the industry concerning the whole helmet testing/standards area at present, read this for more interesting info:
http://www.motorcyclistonline.com/gearbox/motorcycle_helmet_review/index.html
Besides static tests there are factors like helmet/head size, rider weight, velocity, surface impacted and a host of other factors that determine the ultimate safety of a helmet. At the end of the day I think the golden rule of getting the best safety gear you can afford will always apply, remember the old Bell ad - $10 head, $10 helmet?
Not saying that there aren't moderately priced helmets out there that are safe, but personally I would prefer to get the best equipment I can afford to protect my extremities.

You didn't read that link you posted, did you?

If you did, your comprehension skills need some work.

[cs363]

You didn't read that link you posted, did you?

If you did, your comprehension skills need some work.

That's a pretty wide open statement - did YOU read the link? Did you just want an argument or are you adding something to the debate?There are many differences depending on what standard the helmet has been tested to - what are you actually referring to?

The point I was trying to make is that whatever article people are referring to it needs to be taken in context - is the helmet tested approved to Snell, ECE, BS, AS, JIS standard etc as they are all different, what is the intended use of your helmet etc etc.

I'm just saying there are a hell of a lot of variables involved and no one test or article is the be all and end all.

[NordieBoy]

The point I was trying to make is that whatever article people are referring to it needs to be taken in context - is the helmet tested approved to Snell, ECE, BS, AS, JIS standard etc as they are all different, what is the intended use of your helmet etc etc.

I'm just saying there are a hell of a lot of variables involved and no one test or article is the be all and end all.

I think the point was that the old Bell ad is crap.

[Tank]

fuck - my KBC VR2R only got 2 stars.

That dosnt make me happy at all!

[CHOPPA]

That's a pretty wide open statement - did YOU read the link? Did you just want an argument or are you adding something to the debate?There are many differences depending on what standard the helmet has been tested to - what are you actually referring to?

The point I was trying to make is that whatever article people are referring to it needs to be taken in context - is the helmet tested approved to Snell, ECE, BS, AS, JIS standard etc as they are all different, what is the intended use of your helmet etc etc.

I'm just saying there are a hell of a lot of variables involved and no one test or article is the be all and end all.


I fully agree! Specially cause my rx7 only got 3 stars..... Its cool ive been doing my own testing and there f*&ken great! ;) I worked in a bike shop in oz and apparently the shark rsr won the safest helmet or something in 2000 (a while ago now) but it was so uncomfortable for my head i think it would be 3 times as likely to make me crash and only twice as safe so my helmet must be better! hahaha

[cs363]

I fully agree! Specially cause my rx7 only got 3 stars..... Its cool ive been doing my own testing and there f*&ken great! ;) I worked in a bike shop in oz and apparently the shark rsr won the safest helmet or something in 2000 (a while ago now) but it was so uncomfortable for my head i think it would be 3 times as likely to make me crash and only twice as safe so my helmet must be better! hahaha


You make a good point - and one that has been raised in several articles concerning helmet safety. 'Safety' encompasses far more than impact tests - is the world's safest helmet (whatever it F'ing well is...) still safe with a badly scratched visor? Or if it's too loud, or too quiet and any other number of variables you could throw in. What if it's got a really safe shell but a crap retention system?
Even the experts can't agree on what makes the safest helmet as evidenced by that article.

[scracha]

I'll take government sponsored scientific tests over "my mate bubba crashed his and was OK" type stories any day.
http://sharp.direct.gov.uk/about-sharp/test-protocols/

Incidentally, I crashed my Shoei Syncrotech and my Shark S500 and was OK so they must be great

[jrandom]

http://sharp.direct.gov.uk/about-sharp/test-protocols/

That's more like it. They didn't have that info up to start with.

[CHOPPA]

there test seem a bit hairy to me, we dropped helmet on an anvil to test it...... We got rodger to hit the helmet as hard as he could with a hammer.....

Im never gonna like this test cause they dont like my helmet hahaha, also the fact that this unknown company can say that a company like agvs top of the line helmet is not as good as there mid range one im sure if thats the case they wouldnt piss around developing something and they would just put some vents on there cheap helmets?

As i previously said i worked in a shop bla bla but i went to a helmet seminar bullshit thing and they explained how diff materials worked better at diff speeds like a plastic helmet was better then fibreglass etc at impacts of less then 80ks there abouts and diff materials at diff impact speeds etc etc I wonder how fast the helmets were travelling when they hit the anvill.....?

[scracha]

also the fact that this unknown company can say that a company like agvs top of the line helmet is not as good as there

"unknown company"...oh... you mean the UK Department of Transport. Can't see why they'd be biased, especially as none of the 5 star rated helmet manufacturers are British.
Arai - Japanese
AGV - Italian
Bell - American
HJC - Dunno but it aint British.
Laser - Belgian (I think)
Shark - French

It's a bit like the arguments Addidas and Nike used to give for expensive trainers (gah...sneakers....runners...whatever you colonials call them). Anyways...was found to be total $hite.

[CHOPPA]

sill i read all there test procedures and they dont test the total package of the helmet like other tests do they only test the most common head injury aspect of the helmet not every aspect, so that pretty much sums up that this isnt a comprehensive test....

[CHOPPA]

and i would rather wear adidas or nike sneakers then these f*&ken uncomfortable things im wearing i got from the warehouse......

[Bob]

"unknown company"...oh... you mean the UK Department of Transport. Can't see why they'd be biased, especially as none of the 5 star rated helmet manufacturers are British.
Arai - Japanese
AGV - Italian
Bell - American
HJC - Dunno but it aint British.
Laser - Belgian (I think)
Shark - French


Scratcha - Thanks for adding the above. It really does help clarify.

Choppa - if it is not clear, it is an attempt by the UK government to make sure riders are given a good rating system, above and beyond the EU standard (from what I can understand, the Dept of Transport claim they have looked at the main sets of tests and taken the toughest elements of them into their own test criteria).

The Department of Transport do not make crash helmets, they have no bias. I'm sorry if you did not pick up on that from the original news item.

Of course, if a helmet is not comfortable, then it is not going to be a good helmet for you. The SHARP ratings are based on protection. That said, no matter how good an HJC helmet rates, I find them uncomfortable and they press against my forehead. On the other hand, my Arai rates a 3 - but it is comfortable and fits correctly.

Overall, a helmet has to be (a) comfortable (b) fit correctly and (c) provide protection. Then of course there are things like the quality of venting to consider. To buy a helmet just because of one thing is not going to get you the best helmet for you.

There are people out there riding in ill-fitting helmets (for them) just because it is the right colour/race rep graphic.

What the SHARP rating system shows is that you cannot simply think "It costs lots of money, so it must be the best protection." From that aspect, it makes for interesting reading. But can only be an element of your decision making when buying a helmet.

Hope this little lot helps.... I shall now put away my soapbox....

Bob

[cs363]

Scratcha - Thanks for adding the above. It really does help clarify.

Choppa - if it is not clear, it is an attempt by the UK government to make sure riders are given a good rating system, above and beyond the EU standard (from what I can understand, the Dept of Transport claim they have looked at the main sets of tests and taken the toughest elements of them into their own test criteria).

The Department of Transport do not make crash helmets, they have no bias. I'm sorry if you did not pick up on that from the original news item.

Of course, if a helmet is not comfortable, then it is not going to be a good helmet for you. The SHARP ratings are based on protection. That said, no matter how good an HJC helmet rates, I find them uncomfortable and they press against my forehead. On the other hand, my Arai rates a 3 - but it is comfortable and fits correctly.

Overall, a helmet has to be (a) comfortable (b) fit correctly and (c) provide protection. Then of course there are things like the quality of venting to consider. To buy a helmet just because of one thing is not going to get you the best helmet for you.

There are people out there riding in ill-fitting helmets (for them) just because it is the right colour/race rep graphic.

What the SHARP rating system shows is that you cannot simply think "It costs lots of money, so it must be the best protection." From that aspect, it makes for interesting reading. But can only be an element of your decision making when buying a helmet.

Hope this little lot helps.... I shall now put away my soapbox....

Bob

Very eloquently put! I couldn't agree more :)

Just to add to Scracha's post - yes Lazer are made in Belgium and HJC are Korean, though most of their helmets are made in China now.

[Ocean1]

Why is that Jim? Carbon is immensely stronger than steel and eminently suitable.

Depends on what you mean by "strong".

Also depends on what you mean by steel. And carbon fibre.


Too hard & brittle, therefore decelerating the helmet contents at higher G-Forces than fibreglass or polycarbonate helmets. Apparently not.

Hard and brittle are common attributes of high strength materials in general. For some structures the need for a high strength/mass ratio justifies that choice, for some malleability might be more important.

In the case of helmet shells my purely subjectively based opinion is that, if the primary structural design criteria is to optimise rigidity up to a point of impact force exceeding that required to kill by deceleration alone then CF would be a good choice. This, because even minor deformation in the shell can reduce the impact area on the skull, increasing stress in direct proportion. Correctly spec’d CF would meet that criteria with less mass than almost any other commercially viable alternative. So, while pic’s of a CF helmet reduced to bloody, lethally sharp shards would put most people off, it’s likely that any impact heavy enough to do that would’ve jellified the contents anyway.

I see SHARP use an oblique impact test. It occurs to me that coefficient of friction is a very important variable there, yet I’m not aware of any helmet with low-friction coatings…

Regardless, helmets tested by SHARP have all passed different but arguably sufficiently rigid test criteria. Compared to early helmet test results they would likely all be represented in the top few percent of any material/design performance curve. So even if SHARP test criteria could be considered simply as more stringent or broader in scope we’re talking about differences in risk between any modern helmet of miniscule proportions. And compared to what constituted legal requirements when I first started on the road…

[alanzs]

And compared to what constituted legal requirements when I first started on the road…

Were wool caps really considered helmets back then? Damn, things HAVE changed. :innocent:

[Ocean1]

Were wool caps really considered helmets back then?

Even less...

[blossomsowner]

cool, my helmet has 5 stars.............i bought it for the fit.........the sales guy didn't have a clue about safety stuff though

[fizbin]

fuck - my KBC VR2R only got 2 stars.

That dosnt make me happy at all!
I agree WTF i am riding with a 2 star helmet ahhhhhh!
The question is why is it a 2 start helmet?
hmm time to buy a shark methinks

[Tank]

I agree WTF i am riding with a 2 star helmet ahhhhhh!
The question is why is it a 2 start helmet?
hmm time to buy a shark methinks

yeah - it had me thinking as well. When I got my helmet I had no idea about anything. Motomail sold it to me and didn't teach me anything about fitting etc. When I lift my helmet from the rear it flips over the front of my face!!!!! yet they sold it to me telling me that the fit was fine.

Cycletreads went thru everything with me and taught me how to fit a helmet and even told me to have the helmet for a couple of weeks and if it 'beds down' wrong to take it back . When ordering in a helmet they brought in 2 sizes just to make sure.

Seriously - you cannot get better service.

I ended up with a Shark RSR2 .

RRP was $989 and seemed good value for money - the reviews on the web have them as a top of the line helmet. fit and finish was outstanding. Comes with racing breath guard, 3mm fog and scratch resistant visor, tearoffs and a 5 year warranty.

Even tho its the current model Cycletreads did it for $499 - so I was one very happy camper. I would really recommend them for all your clothing helmet needs.

[Zookey]

Seriously - you cannot get better service.

I ended up with a Shark RSR2 .

:yes:Coudnt have made a better choice.When you buy a helmet that has a sponsorship attached you are paying a premium for that for nothing,and its a strange marketing thing thats happened in our burb where the two bike shops only sell Shoe, one dropping the Shark brand.that means they will share the market,dumb and gives no choice, it would seem obvious that there must be one hell of a mark up for them to do that,as it has proved in your case by Cycletreads :argh:

[Radar]

Released about two weeks ago - Ratings for 56 of the most popular full face helmets on the market were published after testing by SHARP - the Safety Helmet Assessment and Rating Programme set up in a world-first by the Department for Transport last year.

The SHARP tests - which award ratings of between one and five stars - showed that the safety performance of helmets can vary by as much as 70%.

SHARP website:
http://www.direct.gov.uk/sharp

[davereid]

I have to admit that regularly on a summers day, I will take a quiet ride down a country road without my helmet.

I enjoy it.

Like riding a motorcycle, it increases my risk of death if I happen to have a crash. I do it anyway.

I'm not saying helmets are useless. But I am saying they are over-rated.

We rode for many years without them. Then to save dozens of lives a year they were introduced.

Did they save lives ? Certainly, there will be those who credit their survival to a helmet.

But, WITHOUT cheating by googling it, use the following data to determine which year the life-saving helmet became compulsory.

Data from - http://www.transport.govt.nz/assets/NewPDFs/motorycycle-casualty-2003.pdf (the spelling mistake is theirs, not mine, grab your copy before the name change ends access to the document)

[Radar]

I have to admit that regularly on a summers day, I will take a quiet ride down a country road without my helmet.

...

Data from - http://www.transport.govt.nz/assets/NewPDFs/motorycycle-casualty-2003.pdf (the spelling mistake is theirs, not mine, grab your copy before the name change ends access to the document)

I know what you mean by riding without a helmet on a summer's day and having it feel great, because I did this in Thailand and Laos with rented motorbikes that came with a helmet that was too small. No protective gear at all although at least I wasn't wearing jandals! It was way too hot and humid to put on cordura or leather even if it was available. After walking everywhere as a backpacker tourist, riding a motorcycle as I did was incredibly good.

Thanks for the PDF file. A lot fewer deaths since the early 70's!

I now see that this topic has already been posted and my thread has been merged with the original.

:wacko: For some reason it did not show up in two searches of posts that I did for "helmet". :confused:

[quickbuck]

But, WITHOUT cheating by googling it, use the following data to determine which year the life-saving helmet became compulsory.



True... hard to see, however it does prove that a helmet will not protect you from every crash....

Looking at the data though, there is a bit of a spike in the numbers around the time of the 1973 fuel crisis...
I guess we will see that again soon...

[discotex]

I wonder how fast the helmets were travelling when they hit the anvill.....?

Sorry for the dredge. I hadn't noticed the thread before.

http://sharp.direct.gov.uk/about-sharp/test-protocols/test-speeds/

About 30km/h by my maths. Probably reasonable for a direct blow.

I thought this line was interesting:
"Research indicated a strong recommendation to use 9.5m/s as the upper impact velocity. This may be too severe for many current production helmets."

Wonder if the Arai and Shoei helmets would fare better if the speed was increased.

[mnkyboy]

I doubt that they would fare any better, however a more rigid foam would help at higher speed.

Anyone feel like sponsoring a $10k "independant" helmet test - (I'm sure norman the mormons from the tron would be happy crash test dumm.....errrr:whistle:)

As a side thought, I feel midly put out that my Suomy Spec 1R only rates a 3, although it was only $350 and the ONLY helmet in cycletreads that fit me (3XL)

Cest la vie

[CHOPPA]

Just got back from the gp and from all the info over there it backs up my comments in the start of this thread that this test is all shit and go and buy an arai!

[cs363]

Just got back from the gp and from all the info over there it backs up my comments in the start of this thread that this test is all shit and go and buy an arai!

X 2 on that! :)

[Owl]

Well I'm happy with my Arai, as I tested my previous one face first onto the road!:Oops:

[derfel]

Of course you can have all the stars in the World, but if your lid doesn't fit properly...

[Tank]

Just got back from the gp and from all the info over there it backs up my comments in the start of this thread that this test is all shit and go and buy an arai!

Just curious - is this info something qualifiable (reports etc) or simply the views of people paying / receiving sponsorship and personal preferences?

[CHOPPA]

originally i was just sticking up for arai but yes i read 2 full page articles in oz, i know 1 article wasn in the mcn from london or wherever and the other was another oz magazine. With out going into to much detail the sharp test were testing areas where other manafacturers have decided through years and years of extensive real world testing have decided that the helmet doesnt need to be all that strong like near the bottom at the sides cause no impact is recieved to these areas cause of your shoulders etc and areas at the front of the helmet where arai and the likes through 'real world testing' have found that it takes alot of the impact and sharp didnt test this area. Basically both articles in diff magazines totally discredited the tests, they said its a good idea but they should consult manufacturers to get there insights into how the testing should be carried out

[Katman]

And anyone who places any credence in an article in MCN would need their head read.

[CHOPPA]

And anyone who places any credence in an article in MCN would need their head read.

And who are you...

[Katman]

And who are you...

What?????

Who the fuck do you want me to be?

[NordieBoy]

What?????

Who the fuck do you want me to be?

Melanie Griffith would be cool.

[Owl]

Melanie Griffith would be cool.

:rofl::rofl::rofl:Not bad, but then Kelly LeBrock wasn't bad once!:(

[CHOPPA]

What?????

Who the fuck do you want me to be?

Well if your gonna shoot down one of the best motorcycling information sources you must have some sort of credibility...?

[NordieBoy]

Well if your gonna shoot down one of the best motorcycling information sources you must have some sort of credibility...?

No-one needs any credibility to shoot down MCN.

The amount of times they've been caught out photoshopping their "exclusive" photos of upcoming bikes alone is a case for derision.

AMCN on the other hand is a good read.

[flyingbrick]

Oi you two :girlfight:... who the fuck cares :calm:

KBC's VR2 is embarassing in the sharp tests..... damn it.

[NordieBoy]

None of my helmets are even rated.

[stormy1]

On another note, it was a bit of a shock to see that my XR-1000 only got 3 stars!

It's difficult to know how to interpret that without more information about the testing, though, so here's hoping we get some enlightenment.

Yeah a bit gutted as I have only just recentley brought the XR-1000 however .... After going through all of this thread I would have to say that i am still happy with my helmet. Good fit, nice and quiet, good ventilation etc. I would have to think that it is in the best interests of all of the recognised major helmet manufacturers to make the safest helmet they can. Hell Princess Diana was killed in a Mercedes!

Well my 2 cents worth :whistle:

[pritch]

I think people are taking the Sharp testing far too seriously. So far it appears to be a helmet test designed by people who know nothing about helmets.

It bothers me not at all that my helmets don't do well in their irrelevant testing.
If they are open to suggestions from the manufacturers the tests may become meaningful. Otherwise it's another instance of one of the worlds great lies, "I'm from the Government and I'm here to help".

[5150]

I am suprised that my RX7 Corsair only got 3 stars.....:gob:

[zzzbang]

Same here, would like to see why they are rated only 3star, looks a bit strange to me..

[cs363]

I think people are taking the Sharp testing far too seriously. So far it appears to be a helmet test designed by people who know nothing about helmets.

It bothers me not at all that my helmets don't do well in their irrelevant testing.
If they are open to suggestions from the manufacturers the tests may become meaningful. Otherwise it's another instance of one of the worlds great lies, "I'm from the Government and I'm here to help".

X2 Couldn't agree more - so it seems do most of the UK motorcycling press as readers of any of those mags may have noted. General consensus seems to concur with your second sentence above :)

[Clubbie]

I see that they have a spot explaining how the testing is done, but not how it all stacks up to give you a score.

Still.... my brand new (and yes...cheap) helmet got a whopping ONE star woohoo yeah baby!!!!

Crap.

[grotto]

Having read the article "Motorcycle Helmet Performance: Blowing the Lid Off", it sounds like a non-Snell approved hemet (cheapo DOT) is actually safer than a Sharp 5 star?
I'm totally confused now, guess I'll just buy the most comfortable cheapy!

[Karl@Alpha]

Looks like the "hit it with a big hammer" test may not be the best after all.
Shubith(sp) have to be one of the top lids you can get, maybe why BMW badge them as their own?
Yet they didn’t really do too well?
Rigorous Government Testing... wot? like our fuel?

[Gezza]

My poxy HJC gets 2 stars
Gezza

[Clubbie]

Interestingly, here's what the rideforever site has to say about helmet selection...

"The standards set a minimum level of performance. A helmet that complies with one of these standards and is in good condition, fits and is fastened correctly, should provide as much protection as you can expect in a crash.

Technological advances in helmet construction have also improved impact protection, shell materials and design features. Some helmet manufacturers claim their products exceed the performance levels set by the standards, but as yet there are no independent tests to substantiate these claims."

[rocketman1]

My KBC rates the friggin lowest 1 star, stuff that, Im buying a new one.

[NordieBoy]

My KBC is a 1 star as well.
It's also certified for road use in NZ so passes all the applicable standards.

[Big Dave]

I haven't trawled all of the thread so sorry if this is mentioned earlier.

The way I read it is Arai did a lot of research into the impact points on the hat. They found that the best result was to optimise the distribution of materials to make it 'thickest' at the most likely contact points and to keep weight acceptable, not as thick at the points where there is much smaller likelihood of penetration. There are numerous Acronyms for the variable density materials.

This skews the sharp ratings because it hits them the same all over the helmet.

[rocketman1]

been Meaning to buy a new helmet for a while, my KBC rated shit, so went and bought a AGV on saturday, its a four star, so at least I feel a bit safer in myself if nothing else.

[simonnn]

You are so right.
I understand they spend a lot with testing institutes in France.

[jam mad]

i haven't spent the time to read all seven pages here, but just the recent page and a half. it seems that quite a few people here think the SHARP tests are crap.

i find this rather interesting; i recently bought a helmet, selected as a high-rated SHARP lid. in doing so i visited several shops around auckland and all of them were universally negative (some in fact totally ignorant) of the SHARP tests. when i pushed them for their reasons, i heard a whole load of answers, none of which even vaguely stood up to the reality;

"it's all a commercial load of crap" (it's publicly funded, competely non-commercial)
"it's only one stupid impact test with a hammer" (22 different tests actually)
"you can't tell me you'd rather have a HJC than an Arai" (err, perhaps not, but that's not what the test is there for)
"if you have a big off, no helmet will save you" (that's simply a non-argument, as it is self-evident and misleading)
"it's just a load of crap" (hmmm...)

the various responses i got from my questions seem to be similar, more or less, to several opinions here;

"helmet testing designed by people who know nothing about helmets." (perhaps, but i'd rather trust an independent body of engineers and medical professionals than, say, a helmet company)

this all reminds me of the introduction a few years ago of the euro NCAP, the crash testing for cars run by the EC. for years it was belittled by the manufacturers, not surprisingly because many of them did poorly. the chrysler voyager was a perfect example; it was (from memory) the first car to completely fail the NCAP tests, whereby a frontal impact at 40mph would result in probable death of one or both front seat occupants. it was brushed under the carpet by chrysler and other mfrs in the same boat at the time, easy to do as NCAP wasn't well known. but it is now, and what a surprise, cars are a LOT safer now. chrysler very quickly redesigned the voyager and then strangely leant heavily on safety to market the new model when they hadn't done so before for their range. although some of this "post NCAP" focus on safety has been publicised, a lot of it has clearly been done reasonably quietly by the mfrs in response to the data from the NCAP testing.

i'm confident that SHARP is the same. i guarantee we'll find that arai start making better (yes it is possible) helmets in response. we'll never know they're doing it, or how, but i'm certain that it will happen. i use arai as the example as they're the most high profile, but i'm sure that many other mfrs are listening to SHARP. and in the meantime, arai reps are clearly doing a great job of dragging the SHARP system into disrepute.

hey, if i was running arai, i'd do the same. which is why i feel strongly that it's not a load of cobblers. oh, and the fact that the SHARP test just seems to make good solid sense.

[NordieBoy]

I find the Sharp testing/scoring methods to be less than transparant.

They give you details of the tests/methods but then when it comes to the final score...


Final Assessment and Helmet Ranking

An objective assessment protocol has been developed to enable the objective rating or ranking of the performance of each helmet to allow easy comparison for the consumer. There is no specific pass or fail criterion applied. This allows the prioritisation of relevant impact areas and provides the flexibility to refocus the target areas for improvement in the future.

Also...

The test protocols do not include an impact on the chin guard of full faced helmets

I prefer Snell to Sharp and DOT to Snell.

[Headbanger]

None of them are going to do a damn thing to stop your brain smashing around inside your skull in the event of a big head impact, all of them are going to protect your skull in the event of a crash(notwithstanding a huge head impact in which case your fucked).

If I were to be wearing my helmet to protect myself from 22 hammers hitting my helmet then sure I'd look at sharp, But back in the real world it means fuck all.

[Kiwi Graham]

I'm happy to continue wearing my Arai and will replace it with an Arai. I am confident in the reasearch and testing that Arai have done in their design, concentrating on 'real world' test for impact, impact areas and stresses. I also have an 'Arai shaped head'.

In my opinion the SHARP test is not related to real life impacts or impact areas and stresses, has little meaning for me as a motorcyclist of some 30+yrs seeing what helmets SHARP rate as high :gob: verses what 'the industry' shows to be good quality.

Go check out the Moto-GP or WSBK paddock and see how many '5 star' SHARP rated helemets are worn.

For me I want motorcyclist assessing what I wear on my bonce in 'real life' tests not a bunch of professors with some dreamt up, unrealistic aseptic test.

[sil3nt]

A magazine in the UK has already found the SHARP tests have very little to do with what happens in a motorcycle accident. I find it rather amusing that people have changed helmets based on these results.

[pritch]

"helmet testing designed by people who know nothing about helmets." (perhaps, but i'd rather trust an independent body of engineers and medical professionals than, say, a helmet company).

Well that's nice for you, if a touch sanguine perhaps. :)

My comments as quoted were made subsequent to reading an article on the SHARP tests in BIKE Magazine. It's a while ago now but from memory, one objection arose from the placement of the impact test points. It was felt that these may have been selected rather arbitrarily. One such is apparently over the ear, most helmets have less padding at that point for good reasons. Some helmets, however, are marked down due to this. It was also reported that the same selected point rarely suffers impact in real world situations as it's normally protected by the shoulder.

The Snell tests may also have been designed by independent engineers but you won't have to look far to find that there are equally qualified engineers and medical professionals who are very unhappy with that testing regime.

The basic idea of the SHARP tests is sound but it perhaps needs fine tuning to make it more applicable to real world situations. I certainly wouldn't be factoring the SHARP test results into any helmet purchase in the immediate future.

As always, you pays your money and you makes your choice.

[cs363]

The reality is that all of the helmet tests and standards are subjective (just like NCAP tests, but that's a whole other argument), and unfortunately until they allow human test subjects (unlikely)all of these tests are based on best guess scenarios.
One of the main tests that NCAP do for instance involves driving the car into a concrete block that is offset, as the inimitable Jeremy Clarkson stated - "In the real world people don't go around driving into offset concrete blocks, they drive into each other, head on!"
Yet NCAP don't do any tests simulating head on, car to car accidents, surely one of the most dangerous (considering combined speeds) and relatively common forms of injury accident in a car.
One of the main reasons that the car manufacturers have essentially given up opposing NCAP is a very simple one, the great unwashed (general public) who buy into these things like sheep have now become fixated on NCAP ratings and buy cars accordingly, yet in independent tests many of the cars that had lesser ratings have proven safer (under those test conditions).

I sincerely hope motorcyclists won't be so sheep like....

Just a quick Google search of 'SHARP helmet tests' will net you a huge variety of supporting & opposing viewpoints as to their credibility, likewise with NCAP.

However, back to the helmets - I'll stick with Arai because they have built a reputation with actual helmet users, in the real world for being the best. (check out the RX7 on the Arai US website that was crashed in at very high speed, the guy survived albeit with a few bodily injuries, but no head trauma http://www.araiamericas.com/default.aspx?pageid=49 ) while you're there, check out the other testimonials.

This is also interesting: http://motorcycleinsider.wordpress.com/2008/06/26/the-new-sharp-helmet-tests/


I've always found the bush telegraph is the best source of information, Arai are almost universally acclaimed as the best with Shoei a close second - that's good enough for me. All of these tests and ratings etc., should be used in conjunction with your own common sense and needs/requirements when buying a helmet - everyone is different.

But, that is of course just my 2 cents worth, each to his own - buy whatever makes you happy - for instance no good having an Arai if it doesn't fit the shape of your head!

[sexy beast]

excellent...my CYBER isnt listed in the test as well....time to buy a new one....woohooo im off shopping!

[FastBikeGear]

I dropped my super light weight carbon fibre 'name' brand helmet about six months ago on the concrete and as there was an evident crack in the paint work that looked like it might go deeper I bought a new replacement (Mid range model from same company) - this brand fits me exceptionally well and are very comfortable for me.

The old helmet was the top of the line carbon fibre helmet made by the manufacturer and I bought it regardless of cost because I was racing nearly every weekend at the time.

Anyway it's been sitting on the shelf waiting for me to get around to throwing it out. So I decided to smack it with the hammer to see what happened.

I gave it a light hit... and the hammer bounced back at me and some paint came off but no other damage - no suprise.

I gave it a harder hit in the same place again same result...some suprise.

I stuck it on the ground and smashed it as hard as I could with a two handed strike - again some paint came off but the shell still seemed perfectly intact...very suprised.

Bit suprised really I expected the hammer to go clean through the shell. If your head had been in it when I smacked it with the hammer you would now be taking disprin and having a lie down.

I wouldn't be surprised tro discover that progess means that the shell on my new mid range (less expensive) helment is a bit softer and a bit safer.

[Stickman]

Mabe Blosoms right i couldnt find mine on ther OHHHH crap.
Does anyone know anything about the HLD helmets.
i love it I even checked the Web site before I brought it.
http://www.kang-tex.com/product_info.php?language=en&info=p45_HLD-H869-Helmet---black-matt.html&XTCsid=5459ba32aaaaff9aebcfe2142ea97071
But it wasnt in that test that I can find.
:(

Don't worry. I've got an HLD too. If you hit that hard your head is the least of your worries :Oops:

[R-Soul]

Anybody seen these new Lazer helmets with supersjkin technology?

http://www.gizmag.com/lazer-superskin-helmet/14345/
Looks lik eit might be worth a bit of money. 70% is quite a high number...
The webiste has lots of other interesting bike articles too..

[FastBikeGear]

Anybody seen these new Lazer helmets with supersjkin technology?

http://www.gizmag.com/lazer-superskin-helmet/14345/
Looks lik eit might be worth a bit of money. 70% is quite a high number...
The webiste has lots of other interesting bike articles too..

Lazer have been talking about these helmets for a while now. The January issue of Superbike Magazine also ran a bit of a feature on them. On the face of it they look like a great idea but a hard sell.

They won't get any support for the idea from other helmet manufacturers as they have patented the technology and at this stage they are saying they are not going to license it to other helmet manufacturers.

[R-Soul]

Lazer have been talking about these helmets for a while now. The January issue of Superbike Magazine also ran a bit of a feature on them. On the face of it they look like a great idea but a hard sell.

They won't get any support for the idea from other helmet manufacturers as they have patented the technology and at this stage they are saying they are not going to license it to other helmet manufacturers.

The testing does show that it has some great benefits. But perhaps their business model should have included licensing to other manufacturers. Or sale sof the skins to the manufacturers.

[avgas]

Good to know. KBC VR1 got the same as my old Shoei.
Only difference was this time I got a helmet for half the price of the old one.

[FastBikeGear]

Th testing does show that it has asome great benefits. But perhaps their business model should have included licensig to other manufacturers. Or sale sof the skins to the manufacturers.

I did some more research on this. Turns out Lazer actually license the technology from someone else! However they have an exclusive license agreement on this technology for motorcycle helmets.

[R-Soul]

I did some more research on this. Turns out Lazer actually license the technology from someone else! However they have an exclusive license agreement on this technology for motorcycle helmets.

hmmm I think that the licensors sold themselves short. Very short.

[trevsnz]

I was about to go buy a shoei helmet and got a bit worried after reading the star rating of the xr1000 only is 3, but I can rest easy now as the new xr1100 has a 5 star rating. :)

[carver]

go the KBC helmets..one got 1 star!

[Jonno.]

The reality is that all of the helmet tests and standards are subjective (just like NCAP tests, but that's a whole other argument), and unfortunately until they allow human test subjects (unlikely)all of these tests are based on best guess scenarios.
One of the main tests that NCAP do for instance involves driving the car into a concrete block that is offset, as the inimitable Jeremy Clarkson stated - "In the real world people don't go around driving into offset concrete blocks, they drive into each other, head on!"
Yet NCAP don't do any tests simulating head on, car to car accidents, surely one of the most dangerous (considering combined speeds) and relatively common forms of injury accident in a car.
One of the main reasons that the car manufacturers have essentially given up opposing NCAP is a very simple one, the great unwashed (general public) who buy into these things like sheep have now become fixated on NCAP ratings and buy cars accordingly, yet in independent tests many of the cars that had lesser ratings have proven safer (under those test conditions).

I sincerely hope motorcyclists won't be so sheep like....

Just a quick Google search of 'SHARP helmet tests' will net you a huge variety of supporting & opposing viewpoints as to their credibility, likewise with NCAP.

However, back to the helmets - I'll stick with Arai because they have built a reputation with actual helmet users, in the real world for being the best. (check out the RX7 on the Arai US website that was crashed in at very high speed, the guy survived albeit with a few bodily injuries, but no head trauma http://www.araiamericas.com/default.aspx?pageid=49 ) while you're there, check out the other testimonials.

This is also interesting: http://motorcycleinsider.wordpress.com/2008/06/26/the-new-sharp-helmet-tests/


I've always found the bush telegraph is the best source of information, Arai are almost universally acclaimed as the best with Shoei a close second - that's good enough for me. All of these tests and ratings etc., should be used in conjunction with your own common sense and needs/requirements when buying a helmet - everyone is different.

But, that is of course just my 2 cents worth, each to his own - buy whatever makes you happy - for instance no good having an Arai if it doesn't fit the shape of your head!

I read this type of reply a lot and I'll make a statement.

Saying "X brand is really good cause this guy crashed fast and is alright" doesn't mean squat because there's no comparitive evidence (ie same crash different helmet). For all you know you could have crashed in a 90 dollar oxford open face and be in a comparitive state in the same situation; yet because you've spend a lot more money on yours you can claim it's quality where as the oxford would be "lucky".
Most bikers don't spend a lot of time crashing, and when they do you're a little busy and it happens in a split second. So to have them say hey my helmet is awesome doesn't really prove anything, especially when they had to sell a kidney to pay for their Arai, I think a lot of people would definitely talk themselve into the fact they've made an investment.

And I'm not saying Arais or Shoeis aren't safe, but it's naive to assert they're the be all and end all of helmets.

[Jonno.]

T
However, back to the helmets - I'll stick with Arai because they have built a reputation with actual helmet users, in the real world for being the best. (check out the RX7 on the Arai US website that was crashed in at very high speed, the guy survived albeit with a few bodily injuries, but no head trauma http://www.araiamericas.com/default.aspx?pageid=49 ) while you're there, check out the other testimonials.

This is also interesting: http://motorcycleinsider.wordpress.com/2008/06/26/the-new-sharp-helmet-tests/


I've always found the bush telegraph is the best source of information, Arai are almost universally acclaimed as the best with Shoei a close second - that's good enough for me. All of these tests and ratings etc., should be used in conjunction with your own common sense and needs/requirements when buying a helmet - everyone is different.

But, that is of course just my 2 cents worth, each to his own - buy whatever makes you happy - for instance no good having an Arai if it doesn't fit the shape of your head!

I read this type of reply a lot and I'll make a statement.

Saying "X brand is really good cause this guy crashed fast and is alright" doesn't mean squat because there's no comparitive evidence (ie same crash different helmet). For all you know you could have crashed in a 90 dollar oxford open face and be in a comparitive state in the same situation; yet because you've spend a lot more money on yours you can claim it's quality where as the oxford would be "lucky".
Most bikers don't spend a lot of time crashing. So to have them say hey my helmet is awesome doesn't really prove anything, especially when they had to sell a kidney to pay for their Arai, I think a lot of people would definitely talk themselve into the fact they've made an investment.

And I'm not saying Arais or Shoeis aren't safe, but it's naive to assert they're the be all and end all of helmets.

[NordieBoy]

For all you know you could have crashed in a 90 dollar oxford open face and be in a comparitive state in the same situation; yet because you've spend a lot more money on yours you can claim it's quality where as the oxford would be "lucky".

$90 Oxford open face helmets FTW!

[FastBikeGear]

Here's an interesting idea. A helmet with a rearview mirror builit in. And the reviewers seem to think it is more than a gimmick.

Reevu helmet
(http://www.webbikeworld.com/r2/motorcycle-helmet/reevu/msx1/)

And no we aren't selling them, but we like to keep an eye on any new technology, especially safety stuff.

[NordieBoy]

Here's an interesting idea. A helmet with a rearview mirror builit in. And the reviewers seem to think it is more than a gimmick.

Reevu helmet
(http://www.webbikeworld.com/r2/motorcycle-helmet/reevu/msx1/)

And no we aren't selling them, but we like to keep an eye on any new technology, especially safety stuff.

Tried one on last year but whilst the helmet was comfortable enough but my head shape meant I couldn't see the rear view bit at all.

[FastBikeGear]

How and where did you get to try one?
I note from the review I linked to that the earlier prototypes didn't allow adjustment of the screen, whereas the just released version allows you to move/adjust hte position of the screen.

[NordieBoy]

How and where did you get to try one?
I note from the review I linked to that the earlier prototypes didn't allow adjustment of the screen, whereas the just released version allows you to move/adjust hte position of the screen.

Local bike shop in Nelson (McLeans).

[R-Soul]

I read this type of reply a lot and I'll make a statement.

Saying "X brand is really good cause this guy crashed fast and is alright" doesn't mean squat because there's no comparitive evidence (ie same crash different helmet). For all you know you could have crashed in a 90 dollar oxford open face and be in a comparitive state in the same situation; yet because you've spend a lot more money on yours you can claim it's quality where as the oxford would be "lucky".
Most bikers don't spend a lot of time crashing. So to have them say hey my helmet is awesome doesn't really prove anything, especially when they had to sell a kidney to pay for their Arai, I think a lot of people would definitely talk themselve into the fact they've made an investment.

And I'm not saying Arais or Shoeis aren't safe, but it's naive to assert they're the be all and end all of helmets.

I have also read a bit about helmets and their safety ratings, and there has been a thought paradigm change in recent years similar to that of the car safety- the idea of energy absorbtion by being smashed as opposed to how rigid and "smash proof" the helmet is.

Also small subtle changes in testing can make a large amount of diference to the results. Obviously a helmet must have a certain amount of impact resitance (to prevent impacts with sharper objects coming through the helmet) but must also have a certain amount of energy absorbtion- normally by having the helmet "give".

There seems to be a broad range of opinions on what percentage give and what percentage rigidity- one article I read made a good case for the cheap moulded plastic ones being very efficient as they absorb a lot of energy in the buckling of the outer shell during impact. Obviously you dont want so much buckling that the thing being impacted actually penetrates your skull though...

The speeds and energy levels that the helmets are being testted at make a huge difference too. A helmet that may be optimised for energy absorbtion of crashes at lower speeds may be less than useful at higher speeds (and a helmet designed for high energy level impacts can be compromised at lower speeds and energy levels).

[Sensei]

Hey Jonno , out of interest what brand do you use ?

[R-Soul]

I guess it is just a matter of choosing what kind of helmet you want regarding impact protection and energy absorbtion (it seems like teh known racing helmets - Arai, Shoei, etc- are better at higher speeds), and then looking at additional safety aspects for other aspects of safety - like
- weight - the less weight the helmet has, the less force it will exert on your neck in an accident
- sliding contact - the Laser Superskins look awesome to protect your head from being jerked suddenly on contact from the ground.
- visibility - I like anything that allows better visibility for teh rider like the "reevu" brand.
- quietness - after all, nobody wants to be deaf in their old age...
- glare protection - if you can see past the glare, you can avoid the accident (eg a second internal sunvisor)
- visibility for surrounding cars - I see some helmets have built in LED's or phosphorescence to make them more visible at night

Its a pity that not all helmets have all of these aspects built in...

[tamarillo]

yrs ago US mag reported on official tests and concluded that 'buy new ones that fit really well' and that rest was down to quality of the thing, visors, features, venting, noise...the more you pay the better BUT all established helmets tested passed in broadly similar score - some better at one test but NONE shone.
Just bought a $250 LS-2 flip as I wanted flip front for local duties and it is reasonably well made, fogs up bad in rain, and is really noisy but that is because I did not pay $800. I THINK it isi just as safe in crash. bloody well hope so.

[KITCH]

Lets be honest here, it is a UK government project... the test criteria might well involve firing trained hedgehogs out of a large air gun at the helmets whilst the Ride of the Valkyries plays at full vollume. You have all seen Monty Python... that was a documentary, not a fictional humour progamme. Some years back the TRRL (Transport and Road Research Laboratory) here in the UK made it clear that the tests they were using at that time for motorcycle helmets were primarily focused on point impact resistance, not shock absporbtion or decelleration characteristics in a chaotic and rapidly moving environment. They also pointed out that as a control experiment, they tried 2 plastic pudding bowls, one inside the other... and found that this arrangement actually performed better in their tests than most helmets did. Says something about their testing methodology... These are the guys that ALMOST bought us compulsory leg protectors for all motorcycles, even after it was proven that they broke your legs off if you actually hit anything head on, and only had some minor benefit if you fell off sideways whilst stationary. I

[FastBikeGear]

Lets be honest here, it is a UK government project... the test criteria might well involve firing trained hedgehogs out of a large air gun at the helmets whilst the Ride of the Valkyries plays at full vollume. You have all seen Monty Python... that was a documentary, not a fictional humour progamme. Some years back the TRRL (Transport and Road Research Laboratory) here in the UK made it clear that the tests they were using at that time for motorcycle helmets were primarily focused on point impact resistance, not shock absporbtion or decelleration characteristics in a chaotic and rapidly moving environment. They also pointed out that as a control experiment, they tried 2 plastic pudding bowls, one inside the other... and found that this arrangement actually performed better in their tests than most helmets did. Says something about their testing methodology... These are the guys that ALMOST bought us compulsory leg protectors for all motorcycles, even after it was proven that they broke your legs off if you actually hit anything head on, and only had some minor benefit if you fell off sideways whilst stationary. I

There test procedures are published on their web site. No Hedgehogs were damaged in the testing of the helmets and John Cleese was only used as a crash test dummy.

"SHARP Testing

We run 32 impact tests on a helmet model before awarding a SHARP rating.

Because the world doesn’t operate at one speed, SHARP doesn’t either. Each crash is unique with its own unique set of variables, so we test at a much wider range of impact speeds than standard regulations.

What’s more, SHARP analyses national and international crash studies – helping us to select the test points that are most representative of ‘real world’ crashes.

For every helmet model, we run 32 tests on seven helmets across a range of sizes – assessing how well each helmet could protect the brain in the event of a crash. To ensure the validity of our assessment, we only test helmets that we ourselves have purchased from retail outlets. It is important that the helmets we test are the same as those you would buy yourself.

We then go to work, testing each helmet by impacting them against anvils to represent flat surfaces and kerbs. SHARP tests are carried out at three different speeds to ensure the helmet provides good protection during both high and low severity impacts. Despite the risk of injury being much lower during less severe crashes, even a small risk could result in riders being seriously or fatally injured."

A little more info on their test procedures is available on their web site.

[MrKiwi]

My view is it is a great website with loads of very helpful information to "inform" your decision on what helmet to buy. The old maxim of the 'better and safer helmets cost more' is no longer necessarily true.

[newhere]

Worth a look, its definately an eye opener!

[MrKiwi]

$90 Oxford open face helmets FTW!

You miss his point - the point being price and helmet safety are not necessarily correlated and the SHARP testing shows this very well.

[skippa1]

yrs ago US mag reported on official tests and concluded that 'buy new ones that fit really well' and that rest was down to quality of the thing, visors, features, venting, noise...the more you pay the better BUT all established helmets tested passed in broadly similar score - some better at one test but NONE shone.
Just bought a $250 LS-2 flip as I wanted flip front for local duties and it is reasonably well made, fogs up bad in rain, and is really noisy but that is because I did not pay $800. I THINK it isi just as safe in crash. bloody well hope so.

Got one of those in my garage. It is arse. noisy, fogs, front flip failed twice, once at speed and nearly pulled my head off. Fixed twice under warranty. Got a SHOEI XR1100 and it worked a treat when I face planted, I think the LS2 would have sprung open and looking at the garks on the Shoei, my face would have been munted:gob:

[NordieBoy]

You miss his point - the point being price and helmet safety are not necessarily correlated and the SHARP testing shows this very well.

:facepalm: I was agreeing with him. I would never diss $90 Oxford open face helmets :Punk:

[MrKiwi]

:facepalm: I was agreeing with him. I would never diss $90 Oxford open face helmets :Punk:

my bad, I read your post wrong :facepalm:

[pritch]

The old maxim of the 'better and safer helmets cost more' is no longer necessarily true.

That was never a maxim that I heard.

Once any helmet had the relevant sticker it could be assumed to be "safe". Any money you spent additional to that was probably for comfort, quiet, or a fancy paint job.

Safety aside, cheap helmets just don't do the job as well as more expensive helmets.

[HungusMaximist]

You'd be surprised by Nitro helmets as lot of peeps consider them a little cheap - they're a little flimsy but I've like crashed in them twice and stood to tell the tale.

Price isn't always a good indicator, but brand/reputation do.

[ratchet11243]

Hmm, when's the next set released? I wanna know how well my FFM M-9 will protect me in a crash... I got it cause aparently the M-7 was really good and the M-9 was the follow up to that.

[Phleep]

I was interested in the xtr Mod-e helmet due to the flip front. Isn't on the list though and I struggle to find info.

http://www.bits4bikes.co.nz/ab4bhelmets/xtr-mod-e1-flip-front-road-helmet/3229.aspx

Be a damn shame if it ain't any good since I want to have a go with this style.

[SuperMac]

Hmm, when's the next set released? I wanna know how well my FFM M-9 will protect me in a crash... I got it cause aparently the M-7 was really good and the M-9 was the follow up to that.

According to this:

http://forums.sv650.org/showthread.php?t=112405

"I have an FFM M9 helmet, which is 'manufactured' in NZ. It's a rebadged 1600VN"

. . . Which is a Nitro.

http://sharp.direct.gov.uk/testhelmetlist?sharp-make=121&sharp-model=&sharp-type=All&sharp-rating=1&sharp-price-from=0&sharp-price-to=9999&discontinued=1

[NordieBoy]

SHARP rate my KBC FFR highly.

Lower points are better, right?

[jonnyk5614]

Any one got any opinions on this site - http://www.m.crash.org.au/listing.php?type=fullface

Being Australian, it has R-Jays and whatnot....

[Tazz]

Any one got any opinions on this site - http://www.m.crash.org.au/listing.php?type=fullface

Being Australian, it has R-Jays and whatnot....

Never heard of it. It has different ratings for the same helmets as the Sharp one.

[Big Dog]

Never heard of it. It has different ratings for the same helmets as the Sharp one.

Not necessarily.
Some manufacturers have models that are market specific. Eg HJC do ece-r-2205 rated models for sale in markets that accept this rating. This rating and sharp ratings are fairly similar and focus on survivability at or below the speed limit plus 50% or less with most of the testing base on 55 and 60 kmph impacts which according to studies is the most likely speed at impact.
In markets these rating is not accepted they manufacture to Snell an DOT standards.
DOT is a liability based system where a manufacturer writes to the Provider and says this is a helmet, it works. No proof required... Unless someone sues because it did not work.

Snell is aimed at race speeds. This is arguably less useful at road speeds.

Is one better than the other?
Read up on what they test and compare apples with apples. Going back to the HJC example, a CLSP bearing ece-r-2205 labels weighs 50g more than the snell labelled product so there is a difference.
I don't know if they still do but when I bought my FG15 in 2007 sharp had separate ratings for the Snell approved vs the ece. The ece rated much better for side impact. Significantly less so for a top of the dome 100+ km test.



Stupid phone / Tapatalk, apologies in advance.

[Tazz]

Fo sho. Fully could be the case for the ones you mentioned. I only really looked at a few Shark ones. Evoline 3 is different on either site.

[liljegren]

So some geek in a shed somewhere decides to 'test' helmets for the World in a way devised by himself. Who checks the results? Is there any corroborating evidence gathered from actual accidents, proving or disproving the said results of these 'tests'?
Buy the best helmet you can afford which fits, that is, the more you spend, the better. I dont intend to test my helmet, but fuck lying in hospital with head injuries thinking 'maybe I should have spent more!'

[NordieBoy]

Buy the best helmet you can afford which fits, that is, the more you spend, the better.
Do people still believe that these days?

[SuperMac]

So some geek in a shed somewhere decides to 'test' helmets for the World in a way devised by himself. Who checks the results? Is there any corroborating evidence gathered from actual accidents, proving or disproving the said results of these 'tests'?
Buy the best helmet you can afford which fits, that is, the more you spend, the better. I dont intend to test my helmet, but fuck lying in hospital with head injuries thinking 'maybe I should have spent more!'


"Because the world doesn’t operate at one speed, SHARP doesn’t either. Each crash is unique with its own unique set of variables, so we test at a much wider range of impact speeds than standard regulations.

What’s more, SHARP analyses national and international crash studies – helping us to select the test points that are most representative of ‘real world’ crashes.

For every helmet model, we run 32 tests on seven helmets across a range of sizes – assessing how well each helmet could protect the brain in the event of a crash. To ensure the validity of our assessment, we only test helmets that we ourselves have purchased from retail outlets. It is important that the helmets we test are the same as those you would buy yourself.

[Usarka]

This dudes designed a new off road helmet and Bell have copied it. The old Snell is too rigid and unrealistic argument. http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-hy-helmet-safety-20150409-story.html#page=1

[Maha]

This dudes designed a new off road helmet and Bell have copied it. The old Snell is too rigid and unrealistic argument. http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-hy-helmet-safety-20150409-story.html#page=1

One post last year, two posts this year, you're making a habit of this :eek:
Hows life on planet arse biscuit?

On topic....helmet helmet I love helmets. :rolleyes:

[smmudd83_1999]

Having read what the Snell, ECE and DOT test all consist of, I think the SHARP test procedure seems to be pretty thorough ish - as good a test method as can be widely adopted, anyhow.
Due to variances in tests one helmet may prove amazingly well in one standard and slightly less so in another. How you interpret this information is up to you.
There is a TREND (and it is only a trend) that the more you spend the better you will fare in a crash, but there are some expensive donkeys out there.

I personally went for a helmet that was ECE rated, SHARP 5 star rated (although 4 star would have been more than adequate for my use), was fluro yellow/green (- it helps if cagers see you in the first place and then the accident won't happen). Was about $300 - the HJC IS17.
But picking a helmet that fits you best is more beneficial than an extra star rating.

[brooklyn101]

Really good info, thanks!

[R650R]

Bit of shoei adbut some great tips here about fitment. After previously blaming changing manufacturer standards etc I’ve since added a slight pad to lift helmet ever so slightly and transformed to a perfect fit. And now my sunglasses fit inside easier!!!


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C9QzfY3nF3Q