The SNEL hype

[FloydV]

After I read this, I was pissed. It is a long read, but to get all of it, you must read past the article to, SNEL's response, and then Motorcyclist's response.

I just bought a SNEL (EXO 700 - worst rated) helmet. The basic premise is: We don't need helmets that repel bullets, we need helmets that will crush and deform to reduce G loads. There are several European standards, especially a new one mentioned in the article.

SNELandYourHead

I stole this from Rocketman and someone else. It's good info.

 

[Mr Bogus]

someone want to summarize the read?

 

[Blue Lightning]

Summary: Snell is not the end-all, be-all of helmet ratings. Also, Snell is not always Snell; a third party is allowed to do the Snell test and certify helmets.

Bottom Line: Make sure it's DOT approved as well as one of the European standards and Bob's your uncle.

Update: I read somewhere else that Snell was putting out new regulations for 2008 that were closer to DOT or European regs. The article is somewhat old.

 

[FloydV]

Summary: Snell is not the end-all, be-all of helmet ratings. Also, Snell is not always Snell; a third party is allowed to do the Snell test and certify helmets.

Bottom Line: Make sure it's DOT approved as well as one of the European standards and Bob's your uncle.

Update: I read somewhere else that Snell was putting out new regulations for 2008 that were closer to DOT or European regs. The article is somewhat old.

The point that is kind of disguised is: If it is SNEL rated, then the helmet is too hard. It allows to many Gs to be loaded onto the head. It won't crush enough. If it has SNEL on it then you get the too hard helmet by agreement with SNEL. Your face may look fine, but the lights won't be on.

Edit: Sorry, I jumped the gun. I missed the new standards you mentioned.

 

[Rayabusa0818]

I think this paragraph from the article sums upt their point...

To Snell? Or Not To Snell?

In analyzing the accident-involved helmets, the Hurt researchers also addressed whether helmets certified to different standards actually performed differently in real crashes; that is, did a Snell-certified helmet work better at protecting a person in the real world than a plain old DOT-certified or equivalent helmet? The answer was no. In real street conditions, the DOT or equivalent helmets worked just as well as the Snell-certified helmets.

In the case of fatal accidents, there was one more important discovery in the Hurt Report: There were essentially no deaths to helmeted riders from head injuries alone.

 

[Hayabusa Fury]

In the article the worst rated SNELL lid (my EXO 700..eek!) is still only barley into the serious head injury AIS4 category. According to this article this means I have a 1% chance to have a serious head injury in a crash.

I do not want a serious head injury, but my point is that this article makes Snell sound pointless when in fact it is still relatively safe.

 

[Charlesbusa]

If I remember correctly,

SNELL will protect your head better on the harder/sharper impacts.  Like bumpers and guardrails.  They transmit more Gs to the head but can take a heavier pounding.

The European standard protects your head from the less sharp impacts, example the ground.  Your head is most likely to hit the ground than anything else.  They absorb more Gs and transmit less to your head, but they can't take the harsh hits a snell can supposedly take.

There is no way to design a helmet to protect your head for any impact.  Different types of impacts require different types of helmet construction.  Think your head will only hit ground, go European.  Think your head will hit car bumpers, go snell.

One is not better than the other.  There is a big culture out there that things SNELL is the best you can get, its not.  But its not worse than the European either.

 

[raildawg]

yes. snell is in the prosess of revamping it's tests and will have a new standard for 2010.

 

[FloydV]

Too bad it won't apply to my 2008 helmet. Oh well. You pays your money and takes your chances.

 

[FloydV]

If I remember correctly,

SNELL will protect your head better on the harder/sharper impacts. Like bumpers and guardrails. They transmit more Gs to the head but can take a heavier pounding.

The European standard protects your head from the less sharp impacts, example the ground. Your head is most likely to hit the ground than anything else. They absorb more Gs and transmit less to your head, but they can't take the harsh hits a snell can supposedly take.

There is no way to design a helmet to protect your head for any impact. Different types of impacts require different types of helmet construction. Think your head will only hit ground, go European. Think your head will hit car bumpers, go snell.

One is not better than the other. There is a big culture out there that things SNELL is the best you can get, its not. But its not worse than the European either.

I'd go with ground every time. I didn't realize that by going SNEL, I negated that option.