Helmets ?
- Thread starter Bosshound
- Start date
don't forget...
I dig Shark helmets for fit and looks, in that order - safety goes without saying.
I tried the Shoei's on, just weren't as comfortable as the Sharks to me. Probably just my cue ball head-shape.
Here's mine: http://www.sharkhelmetstore.com/rsx.html
2nd row, 4th from left
I tried the Shoei's on, just weren't as comfortable as the Sharks to me. Probably just my cue ball head-shape.
Here's mine: http://www.sharkhelmetstore.com/rsx.html
2nd row, 4th from left
dentonbusa
Registered
shoei rf-1000 for me
good one.
84Ninja
Registered
I just bought an HJC all-carbon helmet and it is significantly lighter than my Bell.I almost Got Talked into buying a $400 SHOEI Helmet........
The Parts Guy at the Dealership Insisted that ARAI and SHOEI are the Best Helmets. After ALL it's only Your HEAD is what He Said !!!!!
That's after I Told Him that I Wear a BLUE ZEP Helmet that I got for $75.00
Just Wanna be Safe !!!!
Rocketman
Registered
The post was looking for some data. The motorcyclist magazine posted studies that questioned Snell's ratings. It's an important read 'if' you're looking for data.
Most people make a helmet decision based on the look, the feel, the fit, the vents, and the 2 stickers: DOT & Snell. If you're really concerned about your brain bucket - read the study here. It actually states that a softer helmet, not necessarily a harder one, is better protection for a head banger.
Here's an egg-zerpt:
"The Snell Foundation may have no reason to think anything else. But every scientist we spoke to, as well as the government standards agencies of the United States and the 50 countries that accept the ECE 22.05 standard, see things quite differently.
The European Union recently released an extensive helmet study called COST 327, which involved close study of 253 recent motorcycle accidents in Germany, Finland and the U.K. This is how they summarized the state of the helmet art after analyzing the accidents and the damage done to the helmets and the people: "Current designs are too stiff and too resilient, and energy is absorbed efficiently only at values of HIC [Head Injury Criteria: a measure of G force over time] well above those which are survivable."
Thought I'd stir the pot a bit on this thread.
Most people make a helmet decision based on the look, the feel, the fit, the vents, and the 2 stickers: DOT & Snell. If you're really concerned about your brain bucket - read the study here. It actually states that a softer helmet, not necessarily a harder one, is better protection for a head banger.
Here's an egg-zerpt:
"The Snell Foundation may have no reason to think anything else. But every scientist we spoke to, as well as the government standards agencies of the United States and the 50 countries that accept the ECE 22.05 standard, see things quite differently.
The European Union recently released an extensive helmet study called COST 327, which involved close study of 253 recent motorcycle accidents in Germany, Finland and the U.K. This is how they summarized the state of the helmet art after analyzing the accidents and the damage done to the helmets and the people: "Current designs are too stiff and too resilient, and energy is absorbed efficiently only at values of HIC [Head Injury Criteria: a measure of G force over time] well above those which are survivable."
Thought I'd stir the pot a bit on this thread.
fullthrottle185
Registered
Yep, make sure its certified, then find the best fit. Its just to bad you can't test them for wind noise first. I have the HJC AC-12 carbon fiber helmet, nice and light but on the busa it puts a small air stream right under the chin and into my eyes. Fixed it with a mesh chin piece that came with my girlfriend Shoie. Good luck.
That was a very good and aggravating article. It would seem that I paid about $200 for a SNEL helmet(EXO700) that will subject my head to about 50 more Gs than a $100 DOT helmet. At least I didn't spend $400 or more.The post was looking for some data. The motorcyclist magazine posted studies that questioned Snell's ratings. It's an important read 'if' you're looking for data.
Most people make a helmet decision based on the look, the feel, the fit, the vents, and the 2 stickers: DOT & Snell. If you're really concerned about your brain bucket - read the study here. It actually states that a softer helmet, not necessarily a harder one, is better protection for a head banger.
Here's an egg-zerpt:
"The Snell Foundation may have no reason to think anything else. But every scientist we spoke to, as well as the government standards agencies of the United States and the 50 countries that accept the ECE 22.05 standard, see things quite differently.
The European Union recently released an extensive helmet study called COST 327, which involved close study of 253 recent motorcycle accidents in Germany, Finland and the U.K. This is how they summarized the state of the helmet art after analyzing the accidents and the damage done to the helmets and the people: "Current designs are too stiff and too resilient, and energy is absorbed efficiently only at values of HIC [Head Injury Criteria: a measure of G force over time] well above those which are survivable."
Thought I'd stir the pot a bit on this thread.
To get the complete picture, you need to read all the way to the end which would include SNEL's response and then the rebuttal to it. I was particularly amazed at the SNEL idea that the most common object a cyclist would hit would be orange sized, ball shaped objects (79%) with flat surfaces occurring only 9% of the time.
I was also impressed by the fact that the military considers 150 gs the max for their helmets instead of the 200-250 that SNEL sees as OK.
thanks for the link
I think this is pretty much the same article I read from a previous post. The one that made me feel stupid for buying a SNEL helmet.
SNEL in a nutshell is saying that they want to protect me from 50 cal machine gun slugs at the cost of subjecting my head to 200+ gs. In the real world, we are confronted with much less dramatic danger, and reducing the g load could mean the difference between surviving and surviving and being able to function.
I totally agree with SNEL being marketing hype at the expense of our heads. How do we communicate this to the rest of the bike guys?
SNEL in a nutshell is saying that they want to protect me from 50 cal machine gun slugs at the cost of subjecting my head to 200+ gs. In the real world, we are confronted with much less dramatic danger, and reducing the g load could mean the difference between surviving and surviving and being able to function.
I totally agree with SNEL being marketing hype at the expense of our heads. How do we communicate this to the rest of the bike guys?
snell is going to change their standards for 2010.motorcyclist mag. is right on the money with this artical.ece standard has your best intrest in mind.Ididnt know it existed untill I read this artical about a year ago,But it makes the choice a bit easier.read the artical,find out all you can,then make your choice.I have a z1r and a shark.like them both.very different prices.
Similar threads
