BILT Helmets

[Hyperborea]

Source: NHTSA 2007 http://www-nrd.nhtsa.dot.gov/Pubs/810856.pdf

Not what you asked for, but you can see about ½ of unhelmeted riders that die in crashes die from head injuries and 35% of helmeted ones die from head injuries.

It actually says that 35% of riders who died had a head injury - not that they died from it. They may have died for a number of other reasons (e.g. internal organ trauma, loss of blood).

So helmet vs. no helmet makes a difference--not a huge difference, but it's significant.

Because the study doesn't break out helmet types the differences may actually be very large but we can't tell with the data given. "Helmet" includes everything from those skirting the law dinner plate helmets favored by Harley riders to the best full face helmets. Considering that something like 35% of head injuries occur to the face/jaw area and that those beanie helmets give no protection there then the numbers for those wearing full face helmets would drop just for that.

 

[Gixxergirl1000]

Can someone please explain to me how a helmet that has never touched the ground in a crash "ages" to the point where it's no longer safe to wear? Does polystyrene foam really degrade to the point that it's no longer safe after five years or so?

What I was told is that one of the things that contributes to the helmet "aging out" is that your sweat helps to degrade the foam over time. Additionally, the plastic shell ages, as well... I think there was something about UV rays affecting the plastic over time... you know how plastic can become brittle? Something like that...

 

[Gabe]

It actually says that 35% of riders who died had a head injury - not that they died from it. They may have died for a number of other reasons (e.g. internal organ trauma, loss of blood).



Because the study doesn't break out helmet types the differences may actually be very large but we can't tell with the data given. "Helmet" includes everything from those skirting the law dinner plate helmets favored by Harley riders to the best full face helmets. Considering that something like 35% of head injuries occur to the face/jaw area and that those beanie helmets give no protection there then the numbers for those wearing full face helmets would drop just for that.

Good points! All of which point to helmets being less important than we assume. But still important to wear a good-quality full-face helmet.

 

[gixxerjeff]

Can someone please explain to me how a helmet that has never touched the ground in a crash "ages" to the point where it's no longer safe to wear? Does polystyrene foam really degrade to the point that it's no longer safe after five years or so?

Without getting too deep in to perception, rumors and 'industry standards' my bottom line is if it fails tech at the track due to the manufacturing date, its of little use to me.

 

[Archimedes]

One of the reasons that the SHOEI is expensive is that it is manufactured in Japan where the cost of materials and labor are quite a bit higher than the Chinese product.

If you think that's the only or even primary reason, I'd suggest you grab a copy of Shoei's catalog from last year (or Arai's for that matter) and get a better sense of what goes into their helmets in terms of investment in design, testing, materials and manufacturing. Given how well designed and made they are, I'm surprised they don't cost even more.

 

[GAJ]

If you think that's the only or even primary reason, I'd suggest you grab a copy of Shoei's catalog from last year (or Arai's for that matter) and get a better sense of what goes into their helmets in terms of investment in design, testing, materials and manufacturing. Given how well designed and made they are, I'm surprised they don't cost even more.

And yet inexpensive helmets pass the DOT standard and the last time Motorcyclist tested helmets the one that passed the least G's to the skull was under $100.

 

[Caddywumpus]

And yet inexpensive helmets pass the DOT standard and the last time Motorcyclist tested helmets the one that passed the least G's to the skull was under $100.

+p90x

 

[Kornholio]

What I was told is that one of the things that contributes to the helmet "aging out" is that your sweat helps to degrade the foam over time. Additionally, the plastic shell ages, as well... I think there was something about UV rays affecting the plastic over time... you know how plastic can become brittle? Something like that...

How much of your sweat gets to the foam though? Assuming you have pads installed (who wouldn't?), I would think you'd have to be sweating to the point of total immersion for that to happen. As for the plastic, again, I have my doubts that five or even ten years of direct sunlight exposure (not like it's going to actually be exposed that long anyway) is really going to do any sort or realistic damage.

 

[Archimedes]

And yet inexpensive helmets pass the DOT standard and the last time Motorcyclist tested helmets the one that passed the least G's to the skull was under $100.

So what you're saying is that those $45 helmets at CG aren't illegal, not-DOT approved helmets? I thought Chinese made products were exempt from US laws....

Seriously, my comment had nothing to do with whether a helmet was DOT approved or not.

 

[Kornholio]

It's kind of funny to me how the same people that hate the government for its intrusion into their lives with regulations and such are the same ones that are willing to conceded that the DOT test is "good enough". The reality is, DOT is the bare minimum and even then, the chin-bar is not tested as it is with the Snell test. Furthermore, DOT testing is done by the manufacturer of the helmet, not the government (save for some occasional spot checks) and thus you have no guarantee that the helmet really even did pass the tests. Snell personally tests any manufacturer's helmet that they want to certify and thus the "Snell" sticker shows that the helmet was fully tested and conforms to the more stringent standards that Snell requires. When it comes to probably the most important piece of safety equipment you wear, short-changing yourself seems like a faulty way of thinking. YMMV.

http://www.smf.org/docs/articles/mcomp2

While I will admit that a lot of the pricier helmet's features are mostly cosmetic or for increased comfort, there's no denying that the more expensive manufacturers put far more thought into a helmet than simply meeting DOT and Snell standards. That is what you're paying for when buying a helmet from Shoei, Arai, Suomy, etc.

 

[gixxerjeff]

So what you're saying is that those $45 helmets at CG aren't illegal, not-DOT approved helmets? I thought Chinese made products were exempt from US laws....

Seriously, my comment had nothing to do with whether a helmet was DOT approved or not.

I don't think that's what he said at all.

 

[GAJ]

So what you're saying is that those $45 helmets at CG aren't illegal, not-DOT approved helmets? I thought Chinese made products were exempt from US laws....

Seriously, my comment had nothing to do with whether a helmet was DOT approved or not.

Anyone who buys a non DOT helmet is an idiot.

 

[Kornholio]

Anyone who buys a non DOT helmet is an idiot.

Considering that DOT-certification is a requirement for legal on-road use, wouldn't it mean that the helmet they bought is illegal?

Unless it's a parade helmet or something else in which case who cares?

 

[GAJ]

It's kind of funny to me how the same people that hate the government for its intrusion into their lives with regulations and such are the same ones that are willing to conceded that the DOT test is "good enough". The reality is, DOT is the bare minimum and even then, the chin-bar is not tested as it is with the Snell test. Furthermore, DOT testing is done by the manufacturer of the helmet, not the government (save for some occasional spot checks) and thus you have no guarantee that the helmet really even did pass the tests. Snell personally tests any manufacturer's helmet that they want to certify and thus the "Snell" sticker shows that the helmet was fully tested and conforms to the more stringent standards that Snell requires. When it comes to probably the most important piece of safety equipment you wear, short-changing yourself seems like a faulty way of thinking. YMMV.

http://www.smf.org/docs/articles/mcomp2

While I will admit that a lot of the pricier helmet's features are mostly cosmetic or for increased comfort, there's no denying that the more expensive manufacturers put far more thought into a helmet than simply meeting DOT and Snell standards. That is what you're paying for when buying a helmet from Shoei, Arai, Suomy, etc.

When my ZR1 helmet hits five years I may go back to an Arai.

The new SNELL standard is far better than it was when Motorcyclist did their test...in fact I think it was changed specifically because of that test which was won by the ZR1.

So yeah, compared to SNELL helmets I could purchase at the time the "cheap" ZR1 offered better protection.

In terms of comfort and long term parts reliability the ZR1 has been every bit as good as the Arai's I've owned in the past.

In terms of wind noise the Arai's were better.

 

[Gixxergirl1000]

How much of your sweat gets to the foam though? Assuming you have pads installed (who wouldn't?), I would think you'd have to be sweating to the point of total immersion for that to happen. As for the plastic, again, I have my doubts that five or even ten years of direct sunlight exposure (not like it's going to actually be exposed that long anyway) is really going to do any sort or realistic damage.

I'm guessing it's the salt in your sweat that does the damage. Just like it will eat leather over time- which is why it's so important to clean your tack on a regular basis (for those of us who owned horses)... and why it's important to at least rinse out the inside of your leathers on occasion, as well.

 

[Kornholio]

But again, the salt only contacts the pads, not the foam. I can see replacing pads, but I just think having to replace an entire helmet under the premise that the foam and/or plastic is "worn beyond a safe point" after 3-5 years is more superstitious/rumor/unfounded than anything else.

I'd obviously love to read a science-based article refuting my point...I just can't seem to find one.

 

[gixxerjeff]

The actual amount of time is open to debate, but I have no doubt the inner liner gets hard/less absorbent over time.
5 years, 8 years, 10 years, whatever. Why risk it. Besides, I'm usually tired of looking at that particular color or design well before then anyway.

 

[250gpracer]

I'm guessing it's the salt in your sweat that does the damage. Just like it will eat leather over time- which is why it's so important to clean your tack on a regular basis (for those of us who owned horses)... and why it's important to at least rinse out the inside of your leathers on occasion, as well.

she's right... sweat, blood, urine or semen will dramatically impact the integrity of your gear... so use caution.

I ended up trying the BILT helmet on at CG - felt like a cheap bicycle / skate boarding helmet; there is no way I would wear that unless I was on a moped or razor scooter.

Decided to go with the new Scorpion 2000- major bang for buck based on what I've read. And the scorpions fit me the best.

 

[Kornholio]

The actual amount of time is open to debate, but I have no doubt the inner liner gets hard/less absorbent over time.
5 years, 8 years, 10 years, whatever. Why risk it. Besides, I'm usually tired of looking at that particular color or design well before then anyway.

Guess I'm just a skeptic then.

 

[Caddywumpus]

Just checked. My bell Star is an 08.

I dont wear it a whole lot since it was $500 (not that I paid that).

Im going to wear the shit out of it!