Arai 1, Street sign 0, Guard rail 0

CBR929RE · 05-26-2006, 8:01 PM

this is a pretty good testament as to how good those helmets really are (and how much of an idiot that guy is, especially after seeing accident aftermaths firsthand)

http://www.araiamericas.com/news_9.html

ConqSoft · 05-26-2006, 8:05 PM

That's one situation where the helmet should have failed. Arai is battling Darwin.

CBR929RE · 05-26-2006, 8:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ConqSoft

That's one situation where the helmet should have failed. Arai is battling Darwin.

true. I suppose thats a pretty good battle for us consumers to have Arai on the winning side of.

abtech · 05-26-2006, 8:27 PM

yeah, that's what we need is major manufacturer product endorsement of brain dead activity. I'll never buy another ARAI helmet because of their apparent endorsement of this "customer" activity.

Mojave954 · 05-26-2006, 8:28 PM

phucking squid.... 140 mph

But nice to know the lid did its job and now he is lecturing on safety.

luvtolean · 05-26-2006, 9:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by abtech

yeah, that's what we need is major manufacturer product endorsement of brain dead activity. I'll never buy another ARAI helmet because of their apparent endorsement of this "customer" activity.

Yeah, I don't get why in the hell Arai put that up.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mojave954

But nice to know the lid did its job and now he is lecturing on safety.

Community service hours?

sheepofblue · 05-26-2006, 9:14 PM

I printed out the article for my brother as it will be great marketing dispite the guy being a...

SomeStrangeGuy · 05-26-2006, 9:34 PM

Please tell me they got hacked...? If not I'll look forward to never buying anything other then Shoei again, Arai just proved to me their complete jackassdom.

I'll bet if he hadn't had his Arai properly fitted, he never would have lived...underscoring how unfortunate it is they stopped selling on the net.

CBR929RE · 05-26-2006, 9:39 PM

I guess I'm the only one that sees how we can learn ome good product info from this jackasses stupidity.

woulda been nice if they put a disclaimer stating that they don't condone his activity.

license2ill · 05-26-2006, 9:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by luvtolean

Yeah, I don't get why in the hell Arai put that up.

It was posted as a response to the Motoryclist Magazine article that brought into question the shell stiffness issues and load-concentrating impact severities of Snell testing. Soon after that article they posted this story up as an anecdote to the importnace of their belief in those issues or importance, after the info from Harry Hurt and the Cost study were quoted as saying that these types of accidents are rare, and implying that a shell that is too stiff will cause more severe injuries at lower levels of force on flat surfaces, which are more prevalent in the data. The demonstrations in that mag article showed the Arai they tested against a flat surface at lower eenrgy levels transmitted more g-force to the headform, and insinuated that it was more dangerous at those levels fo force. This is a debate within the industry, and the standards, but the perfromance standards all agree that the threshold for brain injury is somewhere between 275G's and 400G's. Wher it gets further complicated by the shell proopery issues is in the duration of those levels, which is typically greater with a stiffer shell. The other question, and the supposed need for a stiffer shell arises from the hemispherical anvil double-impact testing at the level of energy that Snell uses in it's testing protocols.This example by Arai was to show that these impacts can happen, and that a stiff shell and thick enough liner may have saved this guy from injury at impact energies well above those used for those less severe safety standard testing, while still keeping the force levels within that injury threshold.

Hope that made sense, it's not as meaningful of an example without hte context of that Motorcyclist Magazine article information.

luvtolean · 05-26-2006, 9:44 PM

A double impact story...makes perfect sense.

Arai blew it though, they desperately need a disclaimer or something.

ND4SPD · 05-26-2006, 9:47 PM

I sent them a polite note through their website asking them to remove it. I doubt it'll do anything, but maybe I'll be surprised.

Silent_Assassin · 05-26-2006, 11:35 PM

I'm glad to know that My Arai will do it's job and them some, but on the other hand I'm glad I dont do 140 mph on the street either........

Arai should really re-think there line of thinking with using this info as a means of advertisement. Maybe thats not there intended purpose, but thats how I take it.

Great, maybe all the new to the sport first time riders can leave the store with an Arai lid to go with there new liter bikes. Now they will have the fastest bikes and the fastest lids.

OK ........ I'm done.

abtech · 05-27-2006, 8:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Silent_Assassin

I'm glad to know that My Arai will do it's job and them some, but on the other hand I'm glad I dont do 140 mph on the street either........

Arai should really re-think there line of thinking with using this info as a means of advertisement. Maybe thats not there intended purpose, but thats how I take it.

Great, maybe all the new to the sport first time riders can leave the store with an Arai lid to go with there new liter bikes. Now they will have the fastest bikes and the fastest lids.

OK ........ I'm done.

Exactly. As stupid as it sounds, I guarantee this ends up being interpreted by many people to mean that if they buy and wear an ARAI helmet, they can get away with stupid actions relatively unscathed.

Wait till the first spouse/mother etc. uses this post as evidence in their 10 million dollar wrongful death lawsuit against ARAI . . .

nhfirefighter13 · 05-27-2006, 1:40 PM

Did they pull it off the site? Doesn't seem to be working for me.

Silent_Assassin · 05-27-2006, 1:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by nhfirefighter13

Did they pull it off the site? Doesn't seem to be working for me.

Still there. Just worked for me.

nhfirefighter13 · 05-27-2006, 1:53 PM

Ok. Came up this time. Bet ya that had to hurt.

CBR929RE · 05-27-2006, 1:58 PM

yeah I don't see how he didn't sustain any head injuries. that thing looks like its collapses quit a bit.

also thanks for the edit in the first post to make it a direct link

asiliat · 05-27-2006, 3:23 PM

Guys, I think you're reading too much into this thing. It's just nice to know that my Arai can at least provide an open casket funeral if I choose to go that route.

abtech · 05-27-2006, 4:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by asiliat

Guys, I think you're reading too much into this thing. It's just nice to know that my Arai can at least provide an open casket funeral if I choose to go that route.

Unfortunately, about 40% of the cost of a "real" helmet these days is just to cover the manufacturers product liability insurance due to a huge and very stupid successful lawsuit against Bell Helmets several years ago.

A 16 year old kid hit a tree at around 125 mph (and was killed due to massive head injuries) and his parents basically destroyed Bell because they proved in court that their son had a reasonable expectation of safety regardless of the circumstances due to the company's advertisements. I guess some companies don't learn from other's mistakes . . .

CBR929RE · 05-27-2006, 4:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by abtech

Unfortunately, about 40% of the cost of a "real" helmet these days is just to cover the manufacturers product liability insurance due to a huge and very stupid successful lawsuit against Bell Helmets several years ago.

A 16 year old kid hit a tree at around 125 mph (and was killed due to massive head injuries) and his parents basically destroyed Bell because they proved in court that their son had a reasonable expectation of safety regardless of the circumstances due to the company's advertisements. I guess some companies don't learn from other's mistakes . . .

was that the one where they were sued even though he wasn't even wearing one of their helmets?

license2ill · 05-27-2006, 5:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by abtech

Unfortunately, about 40% of the cost of a "real" helmet these days is just to cover the manufacturers product liability insurance due to a huge and very stupid successful lawsuit against Bell Helmets several years ago.

A 16 year old kid hit a tree at around 125 mph (and was killed due to massive head injuries) and his parents basically destroyed Bell because they proved in court that their son had a reasonable expectation of safety regardless of the circumstances due to the company's advertisements. I guess some companies don't learn from other's mistakes . . .

I'd love to see some real evidence of that, I get your point, but don't buy it at all. Bell's sales revenues collapsed in the 90's, and with that, in the bicycle helmet industry they fought for a government standard so as to be able to self-certify and charge for things like Lance Armstrong's face on helmets instead of substantive performance issues. Speaking of Lance, Giro sells his latest recognized lid for $200, meanwhile I picked up a Snell B95 Pro Rider helmet, one of the few available that meets B95 that isn't a full-face, and one the few at all that meets any Snell requirements(5 more Joules at impact, lower coverage, random tested) for how much?.............$6.50. Lance brings Giro a hell of a lot of lawsuit insurance. Alas, the Pro Rider helmets are too round for my head, so I picked-up a Specialized B90 approved helmet that fit better, but CPSC regs which all Bell and Giros only pass here in the US don't even get to that level, the CPSC requirements with the "industry compromises" are similar to Snell B85 regs and levels, all in the name of what? Easier to pass, cheaper to manufacture, and sales based on comfort and name recognition. The Euro regs have been handled similarly covering those helmets, which make up a much larger market and portion of Bells profits than motorcycling helmets.