Are more expensive Motorcycle Helmets really any safer?

[HotRodZilla]

My last two helmets have been Scorpion EXO1000s. I really like my current one, as it fits better than the smaller original one I had. I had an HJC, and I wasn't impressed. I liked the KBC I had afterwards more than the HJC. My wife has a SHOEI RF1000 that needs to be replaced. I was never impressed with that helmet. I just bought a Scorpion replacement, and it is a much nicer helmet.

I have a tendency to keep things for too long. A couple weeks ago I finally got rid of my KBC and my original Scorpion. To be sure they didn't get recycled to some kid, I stripped the insides and cut them in half. They were nearly identical underneath the shell, and both had good hard shells.

The lower priced FOX VR1 dirt bike helmet in have is one of the best on the market, and I have a $400 replacement still in its box, waiting for me to wear it. That helmet was a gift, and I'll enjoy every minute I wear it, but is it a better helmet just because it was $300 more? Maybe, but 3x better? I doubt it.

Buy what you want, and enjoy your choice. I'm happy with my helmets, and have no doubt they will protect as well as any other.

 

[Fred W]

The reason I found the link in the 1st post was that my son and I were discussing helmets this past weekend.

Except the discussion didn't start out talking about motorcycle helmets. It started out discussing equestrian riding helmets, and the ridiculous prices that they get for Eventing (equestrian jumping competition) helmets. They get the same kind of money that people pay for a Shoei or Schuberth MC helmet for what amounts to a gussied up bicycle helmet with their (all important) name printed on the back. There are other brands and models of helmets that are available for reasonable prices (in the $50- $100 range) that are every bit as good as, in many cases actually safer than, the $500-600 ones, but the dressage judges would find faults and add points to your score (points are penalties) if they noticed you were wearing a "school grade" protective helmet in the dressage ring.

Naturally, both of us being FJR riders, the conversation turned to our bike lids. As Denver_FJR noted, the vast majority of the brain protection to impact is provided by the EPS (styro-foam) foam liner, which is probably the cheapest part of the helmet to produce. They make disposable coffee cups out of the stuff because it is an inexpensive product (though it is losing favor due to inability to recycle, but I digress).

In some cases the comfort features and functionality of the convenience items, shield(s) etc. may be better, but certainly not all of them. And according to the study the most expensive helmet brand actually scored among the worst in the safety ratings as they measured them.

There is another, older, US based study that showed that many DOT only helmets were actually safer in normal street use than the Snell rated helmets because the type of impacts you expect on the street (head falling to hit street from the bike) are different that the type of testing Snell was doing then for racing applications, where they are attempting to protect from hitting things other than the ground at speed. But you would pay more for the Snell rating, and those helemts all charged a lot more money than just the Snell rating added.

Why do these "big name" helmets command such higher prices? It certainly goes without saying that it does not cost them that much more to manufacture them. And the UK study indicates that it has nothing to do with increased safety. So why do they get so much more money for helmets of comparable comfort and convenience features, and possibly even worse safety ratings? Because they can. Because of the premise in the line re-quoted from above:

Apparently an 80s commerical for the helmet manufacturer Bell bore the slogan: "If you've got a $10 head, wear a $10 helmet". Nowadays it's a deeply-ingrained and widely accepted idea among bikers that it's worth spending a lot of money on your headgear.

If you line up 10 random MC riders and showed them a lineup of different helmets with the brand names on them and the price tags showing, and asked them which they believed to be the safer helmets, I think we all know what the results would look like. They would assume that the more expensive ones are the safest and of the highest quality.

Yeah, we all make our choices and take our chances. My son and I both wear Scorpion brand helmets. Mine is an old EXO-900 modular (soon in need of replacement) and his and his GF's are 1 year old EXO500 full faces. They seem to test reasonably well in the safety, have great fit and finish, and were bought at very reasonable prices (each less than $200), especially since they were all bought on closeouts.

So why would anyone who owns a $16k motorcycle balk at paying $600 - $700 for a helmet? Let me give you an apt analogy that most here should understand: We paid $16k dollars for an FJR because it is an excellent motorcycle that ticks all the boxes of what a Sport Touring motorcycle is at a reasonable price of ownership. If you had paid more (much more) for a BMW sport touring bike would that have been a better choice? Many BMW owners think so.

Higher cost of a product does not always indicate higher quality or that something is "better". You do not always get what you pay for. Caveat emptor!

 

[ionbeam]

If you are a hard core reader click >>THIS<<. This link is still wordy but it does provide an adequate over view of testing including a mention of G Force trauma.

How Hurt is Hurt?

Doctors and head-injury researchers use a simplified rating of injuries, called the Abbreviated Injury Scale, or AIS, to describe how severely a patient is hurt when they come into a trauma facility. AIS 1 means you've been barely injured. AIS 6 means you're dead, or sure to be dead very soon. Here's the entire AIS scale:

AIS 1 = Minor
AIS 2 = Moderate
AIS 3 = Serious
AIS 4 = Severe
AIS 5 = Critical
AIS 6 = Unsurvivable

A patient's AIS score is determined separately for each different section of the body. So you could have an AIS 4 injury to your leg, an AIS 3 to your chest and an AIS 5 injury to your head. And you'd be one hurtin' puppy. Newman is quoted in the COST study on the impact levels likely to cause certain levels of injury. Back in the '80s he stated that, as a rough guideline, a peak linear impact—the kind we're measuring here—of 200 to 250 Gs generally corresponds to a head injury of AIS 4, or severe; that a 250 G to 300 G impact corresponds to AIS 5, or critical; and that anything over 300 Gs corresponds to AIS 6. That is, unsurvivable.

Ionbeam notes: Helmets need to protect the head from impact injuries, but they also need to limit the G Force transferred to the brain. If you want to buy a safe helmet you should try researching the G Force measurements for a given helmet. It does the rider no good if a helmet stands up to a hard impact with no penetration if the helmet then transfers 400 Gs to the brain. Your perfectly intact head would be contain a dead brain. Near the end of the Hard Core Reader link, on the right side of the page is a short list of helmets and the G Force transfer measurements.

 

[FreakyFastFreddie]

"Comfort" and "Airflow" is an important aspect to a helmet as well for me. I have not found these two critical items in the lower end helmets. The proper fit can also be the difference in survival. I have an oblong shaped head and have found Arai fits my head the best along with providing outstanding comfort and airflow. I do think the construction is better in a $500+ dollar helmet than a $100.

 

[timk]

I just came back from Iron Pony and after almost 3 hrs of tryin on helmets, I ended up with another Nolan because it just feels right. Beside my stuff is much better than your shit.(George Carlin)

 

[El Toro]

Up until this post I'd never heard of the British standard on which the study is based.

In the US we use Snell and DOT.

One of things that impressed me several years ago is that when Snell upgraded their standards, neither Shoei nor Arai had to actually modify their helmets to meet the new levels. Most other companies did have to introduce new lines if they wanted to maintain Snell approval.

Regarding which helmet is safest at protecting your head in a crash, it certainly depends on how you crash. There has always been controversy about ratings. Back when I was on the faculty at the University of Michigan in Ann arbor (25 years ago), I had a master's student who devised a whole new scheme, with new apparati for helmet testing, and did comparisons between his results, DOTs, and Snell. It didn't prove anything except that you can devise tests, determine a rank order, publish your results, and claim that your ranking is better than someone elses.

Even though I know that Snell isn't going to approve any moveable chin bar helmets, I still wear Shoei NeoTec and Schuberth C3. I like them. They have good air flow, no pressure points on my crown, and it is downright convenient to be able flip up the bar so that I don't have to find a place to stick my glasses when the helmet is going on or off.

The real bottom line on helmets is that you should buy a comfortable helmet that you will wear. A reputable company that has been around for a long time and has a track history and good reputation should serve you well. I prefer to buy one that was not made in China, but that's more of a statement on trade policies than on helmet safety. YMMV.

 

[Gaoler]

<blockquote class='ipsBlockquote'data-author="timk" data-cid="1322899" data-time="1467894972"><p>

I just came back from Iron Pony....Beside my stuff is much better than your shit.(George Carlin)</p></blockquote>

I assume you packed a smaller version of your shit to take with you...

Awsome GC bit.... "Get this shit outta here, I gotta put my stuff here."

 

[0Face]

this is a good article on helmet safety and standards: https://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/27/automobiles/27SNELL.html?_r=0

And this is what happens when you tell the truth: https://jalopnik.com/5582380/how-the-truth-about-motorcycle-helmets-got-a-journalist-fired

 

[Mr_Canoehead]

I went to an excellent Snell presentation last year at the BMW rally. The speaker was an MD who was a Snell founder. The presentation was one of the highlights of the rally for me.

Some interesting points:

1) Snell won't approve flip face helmets because the hinge requires thinner padding in the area of the hinge and it creates a dangerous stress riser point. He says that on principle, they are not opposed to flip helmets, just the decreased protection.

2) In his opinion, dropping a helmet on the floor isn't reason to replace it

3) In his opinion, the whole 8 years lifespan is also not a valid indicator of life - he says that they keep samples of all the helmets that they test and after 20 years on the shelf, a helmet tests the same as a brand new one did at the time. He says that usage and changing standards are a better way to judge a helmet's life.

4) He also recommended donating old helmets for first responder training classes

5) He said that price also wasn't an indicator of test results, although he cited the example of the F1 Superhelmet, which is state of the art for automobile helmets, as being the ultimate cost-is-no-object limit of what protection a helmet can provide and how it couldn't prevent all injuries (Jules Bianchi being the example).

I still wear a flip helmet (C3Pro) and I'll probably still replace it every 8 years or so, but I won't stress so much when my helmet tumbles off my bike seat and hits the dirt - who am I kidding, I'll still stress over that.

 

[Denver_FJR]

...
One of things that impressed me several years ago is that when Snell upgraded their standards, neither Shoei nor Arai had to actually modify their helmets to meet the new levels. Most other companies did have to introduce new lines if they wanted to maintain Snell approval.

...

The interesting thing about the "upgraded" Snell certifications is the helmets are actually "softer". The criticism against the early Snell certification was it was designed to protect against multiple impacts that most riders wouldn't survive anyway.

What frustrates me as a buyer is lack of solid information to make an informed decision. There are online reports saying DOT is superior, others saying SNELL is the way to go, then the sales people who say "if you have a $10 head get a $10 helmet", like they could back up such a statement.

 

[Redfish Hunter]

1. Fred, this was a good find and it started an interesting and worthwhile discussion. My thanks.

2. 0Face, thank you for that link. I always wondered what happened to Dexter Ford and I never liked Catterson. I remember reading "Blowing the lid off", it was a two part article that was very well done, very informative and (to me) astonishing. I remember that one of the cheapest helmets at that time, the Z1R I believe, was the safest helmet in a crash. I have approached helmet purchasing from a different perspective since that time.

I never liked Catterson, the magazine went downhill with him at the helm. I recently read his evaluation of the 2016 FJR and was reminded of what a complete douchebag he actually is. Thank goodness that Mark Cook has taken over Motorcyclist.

 

[Denver_FJR]

I went to an excellent Snell presentation last year at the BMW rally. The speaker was an MD who was a Snell founder. The presentation was one of the highlights of the rally for me.
Some interesting points:

1) Snell won't approve flip face helmets because the hinge requires thinner padding in the area of the hinge and it creates a dangerous stress riser point. He says that on principle, they are not opposed to flip helmets, just the decreased protection.

The flip-up comment is interesting. From Snell's helmetfaq:

Why won't Snell certify some types of helmets like flip up front designs?Snell does not dismiss out of hand any helmet design that strays from the conventional. Snell does not point out any design specifications other than general requirements in its standards. We are, however, always concerned with innovations and new designs that may effect helmet's ability to protect the wearer, or in some cases helmet's potential to cause injury. At present the Foundation has not had the opportunity to test any of the flip up front type helmets for certification. We do not find any fault with these designs as long as they are used according to the manufacturers instructions and meet all of the requirements of the standard. We will also certify any size of helmet as long as it meets the same requirements as any other Snell certified helmet.

When Snell says they haven't had the opportunity to test flip-up helmets, I wonder if the mfgs know the flip-up design won't pass and therefore don't submit them to Snell.

 

[FreakyFastFreddie]

this is a good article on helmet safety and standards: https://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/27/automobiles/27SNELL.html?_r=0
And this is what happens when you tell the truth: https://jalopnik.com/5582380/how-the-truth-about-motorcycle-helmets-got-a-journalist-fired

I remember saying to myself after reading the article; Rut-Roh, some heads will roll from this one!

 

[LittleJon]

These types of discussions give my anxiety.

I'm due for a new helmet.

I've accepted paying more than $200 for it.

I'm going to buy the wrong one......

 

[ionbeam]

...I've accepted paying more than $200 for it.
I'm going to buy the wrong one......

If it fits, it's comfortable, doesn't fog excessively, is cool in the summer and you don't crash test it, you can't have bought the wrong one

If you are concerned about needing the helmet to do its job in a crash and try to keep you AIS 3 or less you need to do some research.

 

[Hudson]

I used this site to help identify some objective criteria on helmet safety. It's run by the UK gov't, and while you can argue with the methodology of various testing modes (they employ 32 tests for each helmet), it is a helpful resource. Note that many of the higher priced helmets don't outperform their mid-priced competition. I agree with comments here that above a certain min. price point, price is not an indicator of higher safety.

That said, I am partial to Shoei helmets for their build quality and features, though I've used a few Scorpion helmets for off-road riding.

 

[Redfish Hunter]

With regards to the "8 year Replacement", that has never been an issue for me. Living in this high heat and high humidity environment and riding in all sorts of weather means that I do not want to keep a helmet 8 years. The interior just will not last. Perhaps my sweat is like the rest of me, bitter and acidic.

 

[SacramentoMike]

Interesting stuff. I was just wondering if a $25,000 motorcycle is safer than a $15,000 one.

And I think Little Jon's fear about buying the wrong helmet is valid. Except for Ionbeam's sage advice not to crash test it. Or at least, if only I knew what kind of crash I was going to have?

 

[900gc]

With regards to the "8 year Replacement", that has never been an issue for me. Living in this high heat and high humidity environment and riding in all sorts of weather means that I do not want to keep a helmet 8 years. The interior just will not last. Perhaps my sweat is like the rest of me, bitter and acidic.

When Vemar came out with the Jiano many years back, I bought one from England before they were available in the US. That helmet had a 'self regulated' replacement cycle, it fell apart after 5 years with the EPS liner becoming un-attached from the shell. Perhaps my sweat is like yours...I'm glad I never had to crash test it!

 

[Fred W]

Wow... I knew that Motorcyclist (like most other magazines) is beholden to their advertisers and usually write puff pieces that amount to thinly disguised advertising in "test and review" format articles. And, I already disliked Catterson for his editorial content and was thrilled when Mark Cook took over. But, I didn't know that there was such an incestuous relationship surrounding the Snell Foundation and helmet manufacturers.

Supposedly, the foundation is a not-for-profit, but it is funded by the helmet manufacturers, ostensibly the ones who have passed the testing and use the certification to sell more, and more expensive, helmets (conflict of interests much?). So the people who fund the foundation are making money off that certification in their businesses. How is that "not for profit" other than in the tax code. Just getting that emblem on those helmets allows them to charge more money for them, far more than the cost of the certification.

And if the big two players at the foundation (Shoei and Arai) are throwing their weight around at publishers when a journalist publishes a free-lance article in a completely different publication, what does that say about them? Is that the kind of business that you want to support with your purchases?

I'm starting to understand the inflated pricing on these "top brands" a little better.