Opinons on internal visors safety impact.

**sleemanj** · 5th September 2009, 15:44

I have (had!) a helmet with one of those internal sun visors that slide down when you want it and slide back inside the helmet when you don't. From a utility point of view it was great.

Then the attached photo happened in what I perceieved to be a "small off", low side, with no marks on the outside of the helmet at all.

The crack goes right through and if I were to provide a bit more thumb pressure there I think the whole forehead section would snap off. Fairly clearly the helmet is a write off like that, I guess that's why we buy them, but for such a small impact it seems a bad way to fail.

It seems that the gap between the foam and the shell where the visor slides in and out - about 15mm at the widest, means that there is nothing to stop the foam breaking at that point. In a larger impact I could imagine the foam could have fully broken forward giving the helmet an instant 15mm or more of play in which to move about on your head.

What does everybody else think?

I really liked the internal visor, I REALLY liked it, but...

**AllanB** · 5th September 2009, 16:33

I was looking at a HJC that does that last weekend. I had a look online and notice that it only has a DOT rating not DOT/Snell. Now I know there is a big argument about ratings and helmets but it made me wonder....... (he he now I have that Led Zep tune going through my mind ohhhhh she makes me wonder).

**sleemanj** · 5th September 2009, 19:06

The one I pictured above meets (so they say) ECE 22.05, same as this (and bought from same place)

http://www.trademe.co.nz/Trade-Me-Mo...-239510246.htm

**YellowDog** · 5th September 2009, 19:25

I would not be at all impressed if that happened to my helmet.

Get a flip up one next (Nolan N103), they're great.

**LBD** · 6th September 2009, 12:12

Thats a valid point you raise about supportwhere the insert dark visor recesses. I have a shuberth with that system and I am happy with it, but from now will keep a close watch on that area.

Tks for posting

**James Deuce** · 6th September 2009, 13:33

Originally Posted by AllanB

I was looking at a HJC that does that last weekend. I had a look online and notice that it only has a DOT rating not DOT/Snell. Now I know there is a big argument about ratings and helmets but it made me wonder....... (he he now I have that Led Zep tune going through my mind ohhhhh she makes me wonder).

Both Snell and DOT are pointless. if it is ECE22.05 you're all good. Comparatively.

**BMWST?** · 6th September 2009, 13:37

Originally Posted by YellowDog

I would not be at all impressed if that happened to my helmet.

Get a flip up one next (Nolan N103), they're great.

looks like a Nolan to me....

**sleemanj** · 6th September 2009, 13:47

Originally Posted by YellowDog

I would not be at all impressed if that happened to my helmet.

Get a flip up one next (Nolan N103), they're great.

How does the N103 handle the gap where the internal visor goes though, is there support for the foam in that area?

**grbaker** · 7th September 2009, 11:42

Check out the Sharp standard rating for your helmet.

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

Site is a bit loopy but you can compare different models of helmet to each other where results come from actual impact testing.

**ital916** · 7th September 2009, 12:42

Originally Posted by grbaker

Check out the Sharp standard rating for your helmet.

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

Site is a bit loopy but you can compare different models of helmet to each other where results come from actual impact testing.

except that some brilliant helmets which are known to be fantastic get poor ratings....example arais rx7 corsair.

Until they release details in their testing process, it firmily goes into the bullshit category.

**vifferman** · 7th September 2009, 12:55

I'm sure that'll buff out.
If it doesn't a bit of tape will cover it up OK.

Oh - and the lyrics are "...and it makes me wonder."
Stairway to Heaven, Led Zeppelin.

**sleemanj** · 7th September 2009, 13:30

It's not rated by Sharp last time I looked unfortunately.

Marks to cnell (S & S Products), got an email today from them simply asking me to send it back for replacement.

I'm still undecided about the internal-visor design of helmets though. Some "recognisably named" manufacturers seem to be coming out with them, and I've read of people also feeling unsure about similar things, but that testing shows that it doesn't make much difference. Of course, all tests have flaws :-/

I'm beginning to conclude that it's a tradeoff. Having an internal visor makes it a little less secure in the forehead region (with the helmets I've seen) so it might be a little less safe in certain types of crashes.

But equally the internal visor may help prevent some crashes because you've always that shade there when you need it, and not when you don't, meaning your ability to see is probably improved on average.

**James Deuce** · 7th September 2009, 16:33

Sharp isn't a standard.

**Big Dave** · 7th September 2009, 17:16

It's an ABS plastic helmet. That is probably quite a good result.

The reason Arai eg doesn't rate well in sharp is because it uses variable density materials.

Thicker at highest likelihood impact points - thinner at lower likelihood.

Sharp rating impacts them the same all over the helmet.

**Big Zappa** · 7th September 2009, 20:04

Originally Posted by ital916

except that some brilliant helmets which are known to be fantastic get poor ratings....example arais rx7 corsair.

Until they release details in their testing process, it firmily goes into the bullshit category.

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