BILT Helmets

[Yakoo752]

But
(1) is 'per helmet' mean per helmet model, or per individual helmet?
(2) Okay, I can see a fly-by-night operation trying to get away with selling shitty helmets but is it worth it for Arai, Shoei, even AGV or HJC to jeopardize their whole brand to sell one or two subpar models? I can't really see it.

I assume it to be per helmet model -

common sense says no... but common sense and business never go hand in hand

 

[davidji]

this one is ECE compliant:

http://www.cyclegear.com/CycleGear/...-Full-Face-Motorcycle-Helmet/p/40576_59435_21

Thanks! I can't find the weight specs for that Bilt Chicane FF helmet. Anyone willing to weigh theirs? If so, please list the size also.

If it's significantly lighter than my Arai I'll probably go try it for fit.

A big appeal for me for getting a ECE and non-Snell lid is that even with Snell 2010 the helmets are heavier. I think Snell still has a multi-impact requirement that increases helmet weight. It may also increase energy transferred to the head in a single impact.

The best way we have to compare actual safety performance of helmets is via the Sharp ratings, but they rate UK models. So some of the models they list differ from helmets of the same name sold in the US. If the US model isn't Snell approved I think you're more likely to find it on the Sharp site.

 

[frozenuts]

you can see how many are "randomly tested" up to 2008 here

http://www.nhtsa.gov/cars/testing/comply/fmvss218/index-doom_04-25-2013.html

I'm not willing to dig too deep and I don't know what a fail due to labeling means

and a $5k fine per helmet line is a joke when that might be the profits from 10 helmets

Failure due to labeling has something to do with the mandatory locations for certain labeling that has to be visible on the inside without removing the headliner.

 

[edscholl]

you can see how many are "randomly tested" up to 2008 here

http://www.nhtsa.gov/cars/testing/comply/fmvss218/index-doom_04-25-2013.html

So there are Snell approved helmets there that failed... So helmets that passed the independent, stricter standard failed the lesser standard? What does that tell you about the value of the independent testing of manufacturer provided samples vs the self compliance with random verification?

 

[davidji]

So there are Snell approved helmets there that failed...

Which page, which helmet(s)? Did you see why it failed? I only read the 2008 page and didn't see any failures that I recognized as being Snell.

If a Snell lid failed for performance reasons I'd be interested. Labeling reasons, not so interested.

 

[edscholl]

Which page, which helmet(s)? Did you see why it failed? I only read the 2008 page and didn't see any failures that I recognized as being Snell.

If a Snell lid failed for performance reasons I'd be interested. Labeling reasons, not so interested.

Checking through 05 for performance, looking at major names only, in 07 an icon, in 06 an icon and an arai, in 05 a scorpion.

 

[MC BumSlap]

Well, it's 2014, so companies can/do improve their products, no?

 

[Yakoo752]

absolutely, but I think the discussion went towards - would a "solid" company like "Arai" sell a DOT helmet that wouldn't/couldn't pass DOT testing.

According to post #126 - the answer is yes.

I can't find any newer/more current data then what I posted previously so...

 

[ThumperX]

I didn't start seeing the Icon, Scorpian, Shark, brands until about 2005is and on when I worked at Progressive.
SHOI, Arai, and Nolan were the most common.

 

[RaptorFA]

I think this all comes down to personal choice. If you trust it, and who wouldn't like the price - go for it. I have picked up a couple of Bilt helmets just to see what they were like and even tried on one of their modulars - the Demon I think it was, and put it right... back... down. Crap it was. No way would I ever trust those things to protect my skull. But then there are different models - maybe some are better than others. I dunno. Not me, man. But again, that is just me and my personal choice. I'll stick with Shoei.

Now, having said that, I also tried one of those 7 zero 7 lids, and guess what? Not bad at all! A little more money than the Bilt, but it just seemed like a waaaay better helmet to me. Fit, finish, etc. So if I were on a tight budget and needed to get something, I would consider the 7 Zero 7 line.

 

[Caddywumpus]

707, at least from what I hear, is re-branded bells.

 

[Triple Threat]

Go for it! What's the worse that can happen?

Triple

 

[Yakoo752]

707, at least from what I hear, is re-branded bells.

I don't think so - it may be that Bell has sold it's previous designs to a contract manufacturer.

Ultimately, I will only buy a helmet that has the support to follow it.

Go to the 707 webpage - crap - all of the links bring me to a point of sale site.

same happens with BiLT

I refuse to purchase a product from a manufacturer that doesn't support it

I have a problem with my Arai, Bell, Shoei, Fox helmet I can pick up the phone and reach someone, I can email, hell I can go to a sporting event and run into one of their staff and get the contact support I need. Not the same with these other brands. You do get what you pay for but not necessarily as protection.

 

[Gabe]

you can see how many are "randomly tested" up to 2008 here

http://www.nhtsa.gov/cars/testing/comply/fmvss218/index-doom_04-25-2013.html

I'm not willing to dig too deep and I don't know what a fail due to labeling means

and a $5k fine per helmet line is a joke when that might be the profits from 10 helmets

Except it's each helmet sold--up to $16 million per helmet line. You made an incorrect assumption. A quick Google search revealed:

"12. What are NHTSA�s penalties for importing non-compliant helmets or failing to cooperate with an investigation?

A person may not manufacture for sale, sell, offer for sale, introduce or deliver for introduction in interstate commerce, or import into the United States, any motorcycle helmet for on-road use unless the helmet complies with FMVSS No. 218. A person that violates this regulation is liable to the United States Government for a civil penalty of not more than $5,000 for each violation. A separate violation exists for each motorcycle helmet that does not comply with the standard. The maximum penalty for a related series of violations is $16,050,000.

Furthermore, NHTSA is authorized to conduct any investigation that may be necessary to enforce Chapter 301 of Title 49, U.S. Code and requires a manufacturer to make reports to NHTSA if requested. A manufacturer's failure to respond promptly and fully to such a request could subject the manufacturer to civil penalties pursuant to 49 U.S.C. � 30165 or lead to an action for injunctive relief pursuant to 49 U.S.C. � 30163. Under 49 U.S.C. � 30165, NHTSA is authorized to impose penalties up to $5,000 per day for failure to provide requested information in accordance with 49 U.S.C. � 30166."

http://www.nhtsa.gov/cars/rules/import/faq site/pages/page3.html#Q12

Building a helmet to pass the test isn't rocket science. Nobody sane is going to knowingly sell non-compliant helmets (unless they label them "novelty").

And what company makes $500 profit per helmet? You (and other posters) show a very shaky knowledge of the profit margins in this industry. I'll bet half the motorcycles sold don't have $500 profit in them.

 

[Yakoo752]

Except it's each helmet sold--up to $16 million per helmet line. You made an incorrect assumption
And what company makes $500 profit per helmet? You (and other posters) show a very shaky knowledge of the profit margins in this industry. I'll bet half the motorcycles sold don't have $500 profit in them.

I actually saw that and since it lacked all reference I dismissed it. Can you find that anywhere else? I have dug through the CFR and can't find reference to a penalty for 517.218 and the GPO isn't listing anything...

I made it clear it was an assumption since I don't believe any current company in the last 8 years has been fined... atleast not anywhere near the max (last record I could find was in '04 for $100k.)

on that previous list where it was clear a helmet failed due to performance how many were fined?

I am well aware how much money it costs to make a helmet and what it sells for... physically. I also understand that operating costs need to be made up for in product sales and helps determine margin among other things.

I can get ISO9000 certified helmets FOB for under $10.
I can get DOT certified helmets FOB for $46.
I can get ECE certified helmets FOB for $59...
fwiw minimum purchase order is 3000
and they are fully packaged for sale.

these are coming straight out of the factory of a major helmet manufacturer

 

[WWWobble]

I've followed the helmet controversy DOT vs SNELL vs ECE over the years, and it seems to me you can summarize like this:

DOT and ECE allow less rigid structure which may prevent concussions in more typical street speed crashes. The more rigid SNELL may not cushion quite as much and may allow injury, but probably non fatal.

SNELL will protect better in hard impacts, or multiple impacts, enough to perhaps reduce the chance of a fatal injury as compared to DOT.

Is this a fair summary?

So, how are you gonna crash? Two really hard hits against something like a curb, maybe you'd be better with SNELL. One softer impact against the street, maybe better with DOT.

Some choice to make huh??

WWWobble

 

[Yakoo752]

FOUND IT:

Once NHTSA has made a Final Decision of noncompliance or a safety-related defect and issues a recall order, the affected manufacturer has two options: either challenge the order in federal district court or ignore the Final Decision and attack it in an enforcement action if NHTSA sues. This latter strategy, however, risks exposing the company to massive penalties if the court sustains the Final Decision, because failing to comply with a recall order is itself a violation of the Act. Specifically, the Vehicle Safety Act provides for civil penalties of $5,000 per violation and $16,050,000 for a related series of violations.

Technically, NHTSA does not bring the enforcement action. If NHTSA wishes to sue in order to enforce compliance with a recall order, NHTSA must refer the matter to the Attorney General, who may bring an enforcement action in a federal district court to recover civil penalties as well as to obtain appropriate injunctive relief.

So the fine is only there if the manufacturer refuses the recall order from the NHTSA and loses in civil court.

so about that fine again?

fwiw - This is enforcable under the Vehicle Saftey Act. The value of the fine ($16M) was created due to the Ford - Firestone tire recall of 2000.

 

[Gabe]

FOUND IT:

Once NHTSA has made a Final Decision of noncompliance or a safety-related defect and issues a recall order, the affected manufacturer has two options: either challenge the order in federal district court or ignore the Final Decision and attack it in an enforcement action if NHTSA sues. This latter strategy, however, risks exposing the company to massive penalties if the court sustains the Final Decision, because failing to comply with a recall order is itself a violation of the Act. Specifically, the Vehicle Safety Act provides for civil penalties of $5,000 per violation and $16,050,000 for a related series of violations.

Technically, NHTSA does not bring the enforcement action. If NHTSA wishes to sue in order to enforce compliance with a recall order, NHTSA must refer the matter to the Attorney General, who may bring an enforcement action in a federal district court to recover civil penalties as well as to obtain appropriate injunctive relief.

So the fine is only there if the manufacturer refuses the recall order from the NHTSA and loses in civil court.

so about that fine again?

fwiw - This is enforcable under the Vehicle Saftey Act. The value of the fine ($16M) was created due to the Ford - Firestone tire recall of 2000.

This is how most federal regulations are enforced. I don't understand your point.

 

[MC BumSlap]

How about people who buy "novelty" helmets and wear them to get around the helmet laws?

http://business-ethics.com/2013/04/...lty-helmets-boost-tolls-of-motorcycle-deaths/

 

[Yakoo752]

This is how most federal regulations are enforced. I don't understand your point.

I feel it's disingenuous to call it a fine for manufacturing a helmet that fails when the penalty is really for failing to recall per NHTSA mandate.