New Proposed Safety Rules for Motorcycle Helmets

[user 213]

EU regs already require the certification label to be under the clear coat. Custom paint jobs typically just mask off the label so that it remains visible after the paint job is done. Small price to pay.

We value choice in the US. I know no rider that bought a novelty helmet w/o fully understanding what they were buying and exactly what it was. The typical novelty helmet costs $15-50, my DOT half shell carbon/kevlar cost $180. At least in OR, they are very hard on retailers selling "fake" DOT helmets. Sadly, that still doesn't prevent a retailer selling novelty helmets, and selling fake DOT stickers too. It's the riders choice to sticker their helmet or not.

You can not legislate safety. Sure, you can pass a law, but that doesn't mean everyone is going to follow it. Better to let cause and effect run it's course. If you can't learn from others, maybe you shouldn't be here, eh?

 

[kulwen]

I must say I have found the replies interesting. I am very impressed it did not become political.

My Arai helmet has the manufactures date stamped into the chin strap.Arai recomends replacing the helmet within 5 years of first use or 7 years from date of manufacture.

That is a great idea. I wish Shoei did that. I wonder if they would consider making that a regulation based on feedback.

I'd never heard of the "Doing Our Thing" dodge, but I have to admit it's clever.
I thought it was about using decent stickers with anti-forgery measures, but it's not.... it's just putting them under the clear-coat with the helmet brand name on it so you can't sell generic stickers. Jesus H. Christ on a pogo-stick, is this the best they can do? They estimated a real sticker with a hologram on it would cost about 70 cents and be too much of an economic burden on the manufacturers! Wow. I find it hard to believe helmet profit margins are that low...

I must admit I never heard of the "Doing Our Thing" dodge. However, I agree it is clever.

I personally prefer the hologram sticker. However, with an estimated 5.1 million helmets being manufactured it would cost over $3.5 million at 70 cents each. I am sure that large number is a factor.

I have mixed feelings. My "survival of the smartest" impulse says anyone stupid enough to wear a 'novelty' helmet, or no helmet at all, is simply inviting death.

On the other hand, I've always been a little perplexed by helmet safety standards (i.e. does "Snell" make it safer?), and would welcome a little more regulation when shopping.

I do agree with the "survival of the smartest". I consider myself someone of average intelligence. I was upset to learn it is possible to monkey with the tests to get a passing score. It is good the NHTSA caught the offender and still failed the helmet. However, I wonder how many more helmets out there would fail random testing. Modifying the regulations to close loopholes in the testing procedure I think is a good think.

Does Snell make it safer? That is one of those questions like "which came first, the chicken or egg?" People have debated as long as I can remember and both side have valid arguments and test results.

They're doing it backward, put the tamper-resistant (and probably ugly as hell) stickers on any piece of headgear that DOESN'T provide reasonable protection, let the 2-wheeled tractor pilots deal with it, not us!

You know, I am more interested in the modifications to the testing process then the sticker itself. The proposed regulation changes are not related to helmet law enforcement. Helmet law enforcement is at the state level rather then the federal level. The new sticker will clearly help law enforcement at the state level.

With that said, you have an interesting idea. I wonder how it would work. Would all helmets not designed and tested to me DOT standards get the sticker? Would that include toys helmets from Wal-mart that look like firefighter helmets? I am not knocking your idea. I find it interesting.

This is what happens when those who don't ride make laws and regulations.
My wife's new helmet has an ugly DOT sticker under the clearcoat. It looks cheap and detracts from the helmet. I covered it up with a more decorative design. I guess if this becomes law I will have to uncover it or the police will think my wife is wearing a full faced novelty helmet.

Oddly enough U.S. Transportation Secretary Mary E. Peters does ride. I don't know how long she has been riding, but I know she does ride. She broke her collar bone a couple years back in a crash.

I do agree some of the current DOT stickers are ugly. That is one downside to the current regulations. They are not uniform and only need to meet size, location, and contrast requirements. That can use a white DOT label on a white helmet or a black DOT label on a black helmet.

EU regs already require the certification label to be under the clear coat. Custom paint jobs typically just mask off the label so that it remains visible after the paint job is done. Small price to pay.

That is some good info. I was not aware of that.

Thank you everyone for the comments. Some of this might make it into the feedback I am going to send in.

I must say I was surprised how many commented about the stickers rather then the changes to the testing itself.

 

[Checkswrecks]

A few thoughts, copying comments from a few of the above posts...

First, this is a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) which means that it was posted specifically for NHTSA to ask for and get public comment before they make this a rule. Just like in voting, if you don't do something, you deserve what you get form those who speak up.

Second, this does indeed appear to be all about closing loopholes, but I'm sure ABATE will make this into a new cause celeb' (or however you French speakers say it). Yes, there are probably those who are less than scrupulous and who take stickers off one helmet to jack up the price of other helmets to make a buck. The problem, though, are the people who do it on their own to skirt the rules in a helmet-law State. Unfortunately, police in a lot of places have to use that sticker to cut what is a legal helmet from a non-legal Walmart plastic toy. Guys with non-approved helmets know that simply putting a sticker on a toy helmet is a double way to not only disagree with the helmet law, but also to thumb their nose at the officer. I agree the sticker is ugly, but there's a huge loophole the proposed rule is trying to address. If you have a better way, put it in your written comments to NHTSA.

Same idea about closing loopholes with the change to the test procedure.

Different topic, the "expiration" of helmets. Most people are aware that the plastics break down and we are supposed to replace helmets. However, the arguments have been (1) that a helmet ought to be replaced "on condition" of no longer being able to do what it was supposed to do. The FAA has had the same "on condition" argument create problems in deciding how long a hose should remain in service on an airplane. (2) By not putting a manufacturing or expiration date in helmets the companies can run an efficient production run and sell from stock on hand. (3) Mandating replacement is further Government burden. Notice that here's a place where those who don't want regulations have prevailed.

Bob

 

[mdisher]

Wow, if this is just about a tamper proof sticker... Those folks have never seen the fabulous fakes that come out of China/Singapore...

They quickly and easily duplicated Microsoft's hologram labels, and DVD's...

I would suspect said stickers will be easily available shortly thereafter by the truck load if there's a market for them.

Oh, and those who are not concerned with the safety of their helmets will care not if the sticker is legit.

 

[monk69]

When I was in the Navy,I would fit helmets to pilots(needless to say anything you do in the Navy,there's a class for it).

I'm + 1 'ing some stuff,but not all.

Snell is a Useful upgrade of DOT ; + 1 , 5/7 years life span ; Visual checks,and flex test are also good reasons to replace a helmet.Needless to say,if you hit it hard you need to have it tested,or replace it.($$$$) ; As far as the sticker thing. IMHO, I don't think the police will be checking any helmets that are more than ½ , like a ¾ , to full face .

While I am on helmets if you have hotspots (places in the helmet that hurt your head) after wearing a long time,I use two ways to fix the problem ( which is not a safe thing to do,so I'm just telling you what "I" do ).

I first wear the helmet to see were it hurts,then remove liner,and either press that area with my thumb,or something like a golf ball(doesn't take much but it's hard to compress).

Another method is to shave the area down without compressing. " I REPEAT THIS IS WHAT I DO,AND NOT A RECOMMENDED SUGGESTION ! ! ! "

Helmets come in different shapes,some people have long narrow front/rear heads,some have round,and some in between.For the helmet to do its job,as well as stay in place on the head,it is best if it touches all parts of the head,and not be able to move in any direction.The front of the helmet(ladies) should not be more than one or two fingers above the eyebroughs.Hence,shopping around takes a lot of time and patience,to try all the diff.types (also diff. models,within the same brand can fit).

A flash from the past,for all the pilots on here.When I was in the USAF this general came into my shop!(1970 ± a year),(Who I didn't know)escorted by all the lower ranked brass.He asked me if I could fix his helmet,it was intermitting,and I asked was it coming from "between" the earphones(old but he was a general,I get props for that).....Sooo anyway,I take the helmet in hand,and the first thing I do is give it a quick flex test(waaaay limp).So,I ask him how long has he had the thing,and he says"Well,I broke the sound barrier with it,and it's my lucky helmet.(I'm thinking,who hasn't,I still need a date reference).Well,that's when I learned who,Chuck Yeager was! I got to spend a couple of hours with him,one on one while I fitted a new helmet for him,and told him to take both helmets and wear which ever one he wanted.Real nice guy!

 

[jekirby]

After follwing and reading the link, I still don't see the point in wasting money on new stickers/testing just to discourage the use of or educate the rider who purchase 'novelty helmets'. I still believe that folks that buy those know what they are getting in to. The only reason I know some wear them is to look like they are folowing the helmet laws to keep Johnny Law at bay--they would prefer to wear no helmet at all if given a choice. I support their right to choose and still think that Darwin had it right on some points. I like the comment above about survival of the smartest. I am all for improved testing and technology to make sure the type of helmet I wear is safer, but I don't feel like telling the beanie wearer that they are not being safe.

I have a feeling that someone has tried to sue the Gov't or state or has bugged the piss out of their congressmen because their loved one purchased a mirrored Nazi helmet and got killed.

Maybe if there were no legislated standards then there may be no standards at all.....don't know......going riding.........

add>>>BTW nice story about Chuck Y.

 

[kulwen]

After follwing and reading the link, I still don't see the point in wasting money on new stickers/testing just to discourage the use of or educate the rider who purchase 'novelty helmets'.

The testing and standards change do more then change the stickers.

Here is some additional information:

Here are the random testing results for the last eight years

https://www.nhtsa.dot.gov/cars/testing/comp...s218/index.html

Here are some of those numbers:

Failures for performance test (not just a labeling issues):

2007 - 33.33% (13 of 39 tested failed performance tests)

2006 - 35.00% (14 of 40 tested failed performance tests)

2005 - 17.50% (7 of 40 tested failed performance tests)

2004 - 19.05% (8 of 42 tested failed performance tests)

2003 - 20.51% (8 of 39 tested failed performance tests)

2002 - 25.64% (10 of 39 tested failed performance tests)

2001 - 23.08% (9 of 39 tested failed performance tests)

2000 - 15.38% (6 of 39 tested failed performance tests)

Total - 23.66%

Over the last eight years 24% of all helmets randomly tested failed performance testing. Let us just assume the 33% (33.33%) failure rate in 2007 will carry over to 2008 and there really are 5.1 million helmets sold in 2008. This means there will be 1,683,000 (almost 1.7 million) helmets sold with a DOT sticker attached by the manufacture that really do not meet DOT performance standards.

Failures for performance, labeling, and inspection:

(NOTE- Some helmets failed performance and label, it only counts as one failure are is it is a single helmet)

2007 - 48.72% (19 of 39 tested failed performance tests)

2006 - 47.50% (19 of 40 tested failed performance tests)

2005 - 42.50% (17 of 40 tested failed performance tests)

2004 - 30.95% (13 of 42 tested failed performance tests)

2003 - 48.72% (19 of 39 tested failed performance tests)

2002 - 38.46% (15 of 39 tested failed performance tests)

2001 - 46.15% (18 of 39 tested failed performance tests)

2000 - 56.71% (22 of 39 tested failed performance tests)

Total - 44.79%

In the last eight years 45% of the randomly tested helmets failed some sort of testing. Let us once again assume 5.1 million helmets will be sold in 2008 and the 2007 failure rate of 49% (48.72%) will carry over to 2008. This means there will be 2,499,000 helmets being sold with a DOT sticker attached by the manufacture that really do not meet DOT standards. In just 2008, the numbers predict there will be just shy of 2.5 million helmets that do not meet DOT standards sold in the US with manufactures DOT stickers attached.

Personally, I am all for changing the standards to make the more clear and close any loopholes. I do not believe most manufactures go out of their way to interrupt the standards in such a way to make a helmet pass. However, I do believe if the standards are more clear manufactures many do less interpretation and just test to the standard.

I know many (including me) feel is someone wants to wear a fake helmet that is their decision. However, some of us make a decision to wear a helmet tested to DOT standard. I was upset to learn my wife was wearing a helmet that failed performance testing. I may not have been as upset if I was notified of a recall, but that did not happen.

I still believe that folks that buy those know what they are getting in to.

I am not directing this at you, but rather a general statement.

I had no idea I purchased a helmet for my wife that did not meet DOT performance standards. The helmet had a DOT sticker attached by the manufacture and ICON is not an off brand for helmets.

As for the new stickers, I think it is a good idea. Many manufactures have failed the labeling requirements since they are vague. After the helmet fails, the manufacture is “supposed” to request all the helmets back from retailers. The costs to get all the helmets back and re-label or destroy could be outrageous. Maybe this is why some manufactures do not work harder to get helmets back after failing the random testing.

If, the label became a standard such is it will look like this, be place in this location, and be this size the manufacture will have less helmets fail random testing for labeling. I think a set label size, look, and location will help save the manufacture in the end.

Will law enforcement be better able to spot the fake stickers? Maybe, but that is a local issue rather than NHTSA issue.

 

[jekirby]

John T. I agree that any particular helmet that is rubber stamped (notice I did not mention the sticker ) PASSED, then it should be and there should be a vehicle to make sure it is as advertised. I interpreted the impetuous of the new testing standards to be novelty helmets and from my point of view did not see the point. To add, I thought I read the entire link but I have missed more obvious things in the past.

To add to your point about your wife's helmet not meeting standards, I was surprised to find out that not all sizes in a paricular model of helmet passed the same standards. I know this applies to Snell ratings, but it still was a surprise.

 

[monk69]

'jekirby' To add to your point about your wife's helmet not meeting standards, I was surprised to find out that not all sizes in a paricular model of helmet passed the same standards. I know this applies to Snell ratings, but it still was a surprise.

As you are saying about test results within the same models.We really need to watch this with the influx of the "flip-up full-face".A lot of good(dot/snell)fullface helmets in the same company,don't pass the same standard with there flip ups.But others do just a heads up(on)about flip-ups(not slip ups,no I don't have a lisp)FYI....