Here’s an excellent argument in favor of wearing a full-face helmet:
Here’s Safety Ed’s helmet. When he went down, he and his bike slid a fair distance down the road. There was a facesheild, but it absorbed the impact by breaking and breaking off.
Had he been wearing one of those “piss-pot” things, his face would have absorbed the impact.
Should you be unfortunate enough to emulate Safety Ed’s spill, remember, the helmet is done… don’t you use it again, and make sure no one else can, either. Many manufacturers encourage you to send your helmet to them if it gets whacked; if your helmet is Snell approved, send it to the Snell Foundation.
I say once again, I don’t ride without a Snell-certified helmet. Safety Ed’s helmet was not; helmets with movable fronts don’t meet the Snell standard, though they do meet DOT requirements. I do like the idea of the movable front, since I wear glasses and such helmets can be put on and taken off without having to remove the specs, a great convenience.
Until such a helmet can achieve Snell certification, however, I’ll take protection over convenience.
UPDATE:
Here’s what Safety Ed replaced the above unusable helmet with:
This is a Nolan N102 N-Com, which can be easily fitted with a Bluetooth communications system, a plus if you ride two-up (not on a Metropolitan, please!). It’s a very well-made helmet, with lots of other nice features. Pricey, yes, but what’s your head worth?
Yes, this one is DOT, not Snell, certified. I’m slowly coming around to the idea that a high-quality DOT helmet like this one can offer sufficient protection. I wear glasses, and it would be nice to be able to put the helmet on without having to take the specs off…
Bookmark or share this article:
Del.icio.us :: 
Digg :: 
Newsvine :: 
Facebook
Subscribe to the RSS feed
April 17, 2007 at 5:02 pm
It’s been proven by MotorCyclist lately that Snell approved helmets actually transmit more g-forces to the brain for the same impact than DOT and ECE approved ones, meaning that they actually protect less.
John
April 17, 2007 at 5:36 pm
The article John refers to can be found here. I would not necessarily agree it “proves” that a DOT/ECE helmet is safer; after all, every accident is different, and most helmet manufacturers remind us that the wearer assumes a risk when using the helmet in its intended fashion. The article certainly shows that there is an ongoing debate, and ongoing research, into helmet design, materials, manufacturing processes, and testing methodologies. This is all good.
An excellent point made by this article is that motorcycle crashes tend to fall into two categories: a colllision with another vehicle at a relatively low speed, and a relatively high-speed individual impact with a roadside obstacle, like a tree. The article goes on to point out that the latter type of collision is much more rare, but that the Snell standard is oriented toward that type of collision. Safety Ed’s spill happened at about 25 mph. Point taken.
However, 25 year of involvement in various forms of motorsports, as a participant and an emergency worker, afforded an opportunity to see helmets put to their intended use under a variety of circumstances. Racing organizations require Snell-approved helmets, and Snell-approved helmets protected these people, as they were designed to do. So that’s why I wear one.
I also own a piss-pot helmet that is DOT-certified.
April 18, 2007 at 7:59 am
hear hear, That story was important and well-researched, and Snell has some retooling to do, but I’m getting really sick of people using that story as an argument to not wear a full-face, or that “Snells are more dangerous than X.” From a benefits vs. risk standpoint, Snells are probably still the best way to go, until a better, and hopefully less commercial, standard is set, and there’s no arguing that a fullface is LESS protective than a half-helmet.
Also, I don’t have data on this, but I would bet that many, if not most quality “name”-brand half-helmets have similar impact characteristics as Snell helmets, just because that’s been the industry standard for a long time. So by wearing a half helmet, you’re covering less of your head with the same padding found in a Snell helmet.
I don’t get half-helmets anyway, it took one yellowjacket in the ear to convert me to full-face for life.
June 15, 2007 at 8:38 am
From the search engine term list: there is no such thing as a Snell-approved half helmet. No way, no how a half helmet will meet the Snell standard. Why would you wear something like that anyway?