Helmet Performance -- Motorcyclist Magazine -- Some Surprises

[doc47]

Gray Dog emailed me a very interesting article on impact tests conducted by Motorcyclist Mag.

Well worth reading.

 

http://motorcyclistonline.com/gearbox/motorcycle_helmet_review/

 

Not sure if I got the URL right but you geniuses should be able to figure it out.

Discussion?

[soboy]

I read their test last week and their conclusions are interesting, the safest helmet in their testing (the one that transmitted the fewest g forces to the rider's head and brain upon impact) was the ZIR ZRP-1 (aka Strike), which is a lower priced helmet that is DOT approved but not Snell approved. I am not surprised, as I have read other helmet articles on the internet in the last 6 months that claim that helmets which meet the Snell standards are too stiff and transmit more g forces to the rider than the DOT only helmets.

[jjohnson24]

Thanks for posting this report. Gives one pause to think about what you wear.

[Drake]

Thanks for the link. That was a heck of a read.

 

I really enjoyed and learned something from reading that article. I thought they did a great job explaining their findings from the testing!!

They also mention at the bottom of the article that part two is coming in the next few months!

[Deaner]

Thank you for the "heads up". The article kind of throws into question the adage "What's your head worth"

[taters]

i wear an arai rx7 corsair. cost $500. i will be ordering the zprzip1 for $90.00 just wish i knew about this months ago. but better late than never

[gezerbike]

Gotta love the internet

 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

Below is a copy of a post I put up on the ADVrider forum under the equipment segment. As I stated below, I looked all the info included up on the internet at the Helmet Reasearch Protective Labs site. You can read it for youself there. The site also comments on what wonderful and informative articles Mr Freidman has written on helmets and how we should all have these filer for reading. My point in researching this was not whether Snell is good or bad, but did we get true, objective reporting ? My feeling is no since they did not identify any connections to Dr Hurts company and who did the testing. I forworded this post to Snell and received a prompt response from Ed Becker, Exec Dir of Snell. He was, IMHO, honest and sincere in his e mail to me, which I will not post since I did not ask if I could....but he did make it clear that there is big money in helmet certification and that major co's come to Snell for certification due to the fact that a Snell csrtiicate sells helmets. I wouls suggest you re read the original Motorcyclist article, avai on the web, then read the thread on ADV and check out the sites I mentioned and then form your own judgement. I will also say that Dr Newman received very positive comments from Mr Becker as to his abilities in this field.

 

 

 

 

 

Since I got this going , I guess I will need to stop at some point...but not quite yet. I went back over the Motorcyclist article to see if I might be missing something. It was clear to me that they were bashing the Snell test methods and actually said that the Snell endorsement was nothing short of a sales/marketing gimmick. I don't know the standards from atom and couldn't tell you which is better. But I can smell a skunk a mile away. So I looked up the 3 total people quoted in the article , Ed Becker from Snell, Dr Jim Newman, rocket scientist and the famed Dr Harry Hurt of the Hurt report fame. A google of Dr Jim Newman turned up a Dr who is also anstronaut but no reference to him ever being on the Snell board and no degree in head research...most noted for Applying GPS technology in NASA. Same guy....maybe. But in looking up Dr hurt, who somewhat bashed the Snell testing, reveals that he left the USC facilities he had for years and opened up and independent guess what.........that's right, an independent helmet research company that test helmets and works on improving all types of helmets. Could he be considered a unbiased source to be quoted in this article ? I guess he could be if his independent company wasn't in the helmet testing industry, which appears to be quite lucrative, and probably a direct competitor to the Snell Foundation. His company, Helmet Research Protection Labs, is described on their web site as being made up of the former dedicated employees who brought us the Hurt Report, but a continued Google search brought up an ad placed by Dr Hurt in the May 7,2002 AMA looking for researchers and accident reconstuction people . BFD you say, so what has this proved ? Well, nothing actually, but there is still one more little thing. As you will remember from the Motorcyclst article, there was no bashing, questioning, or any derrogative comments made against any other helmet standard, just Snell. A look at the Board of Directors of Dr. Hurts company reveals a name well known to readers of Motorcyclist magazine, a one Art Friedman. Mr Friedman is, as some of you may know, Senor Editor of Motorcyclist magazine. Maybe it's just me, but Motorcyclist writes an article bashing Snell testing procedures, qoutes the revered Dr Hurt but fails to mention that Dr Hurt has a helmet testing company and then fails to mention that the Senor Editor of Motorcyclist is on the Board of Mr Hurts company. One might get the impression that Mr Hurts company might benefit if the Snell reputation was impuned. At the very least, they should have acknowledged Mr Hurts new company and Mr Freidman's association with it and then let readers decide just what the purpose of their article was. Talk about blowing the lid off. All the above information was gathered off the web earlier this evening...the site address of Helmet Protection Research Labs is as follows HPRL.org. At this point, I would have to question whether Mr Ford has any association to HPRL, since twice in 14 years he has questioned the Snell standards.

[Tom P]

Great Read! Thanks for the link.

 

Just wondering...if DOT (only) helmet faired better than most Snell, how would a DOT full face flip-up helmet compare. Like see that safety comparison.

[Drake]

I read you post, thanks for doing the back ground checks on everyone, it's good info to have and to think about when analyzing articles like these. I do think that no matter how you cut it, anyone doing "independent" research in a field that also helps to pay their bills will be biased one way or the other. With that being said, what struck me most interesting about this testing was the results.

The bottom line: (according to these testers findings) was a helmet that had more "give" and was a little more flexible proved it would absorb the energy from a hit and spread that energy out to protect you head better in the typical accident scenarios. Where as the results from harder shelled Snell rated helmet allowed the accident impact energy to be directed more to the wearers skull, but this same helmet could protect you better if you impacted the helmet with a harder/sharper object. This logic of these test results makes sense to me....