SHARP helmet ratings released

[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

[NordieBoy]

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

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

[MrKiwi]

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

my bad, I read your post wrong

[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/ab4bhelm...lmet/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/testhelme...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?