Honda Motorcycles - FireBlades.org - Reply to Topic
Riding Gear / Luggage Discussion of Helmets, Boots, Gloves, Leathers, Jackets, Pants, Back Protectors, Earplugs, Tank Bags, Tail Bags, Saddlebags, etc.

Thread: Motorcyclist Helmet Article Reply to Thread
Title:
Message:

Register Now



In order to be able to post messages on the Honda Motorcycles - FireBlades.org forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.

User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.

Password:


Confirm Password:
Email Address
A valid e-mail address is REQUIRED. You will not have access to any site features until you activate your account using the activation e-mail that is sent to this address.

Email Address:
OR

Log-in










  Additional Options
Miscellaneous Options

  Topic Review (Newest First)
04-17-2006 1:41 PM
license2ill
Re: Motorcyclist Helmet Article

Quote:
Originally Posted by abtech
My point exactly. I was under the impression from your comments and the text in the article that the EX-700 had failed the DOT test. I did some further checking and it does currently pass the DOT impact test, as well as the dual strike Snell test (and well below the Motorcyclist published G levels). I am reasonably familiar with the SMF and have submitted some crashed examples to them in the past for their database.

Helmet safety development is something that I have followed fairly closely over the past 40 years (after I destroyed a Bell Star on the track in 1966).
Oh, it failed the DOT test, the random compliance test, the only one that really matters as far as the standard being upheld. But NHTSA, who handles the testing, investigated the failure and took no further action, than apparently deciding to include the Scorpion in next year's batch as well. It was a small failure in the scheme of things, but any failure is fairly important when you consider the age and importance of the standard to your business when you're a helmet designer/manufacturer.

Here's the report that shows the failure in the cold conditioning penetration test and the cold condition flat anvil impact attenuation time/peak G allowance by a minimal amount .16ms, but it's numbers were higher overall, especially in the duration than many others. One of the strange things to me is that the peak numbers are higher after the shell has lost integrity, duing the second impact in a couple of the tests, which requires what should be the softer liner to absorb more of the impact energy. The numbers are kind of all jumbled across the board in terms of finding a pattern with the Scorpion:

http://199.79.180.163/prepos/files/A...7878-21805.pdf

Something Motorcyclist left out of their testing and recommendations is that the envirnmental conditions seem to greatly affect most helmets, and that doesn't follow a pattern of materials or standards. They all work "better" when wet, most worked better in warm temps, though strangely some acutally showed lower numbers in cold temps. The funny thing is that the difference in numbers between the Z1R and the Scorpion in the Motorcyclist test can be shown and maybe even reversed in some examples just by changing the temperature or moisture level, or the area of the impact. I also wonder if the examples of a single model can vary that much in G levels on a regular basis. Of course, that is exactly the reason you wouldn't want a helmet that shows borderline numbers in the first place, breathing room is good if there is such a large range of variance betwenen examples.

Take a look at some of hte numbers in that article, and you see differnces in numbers that don't make a lot of sense, like the two AGV examples that swap numbers from front corner to rear corner, with the only difference between the two being one is made to pass the same tests at slightly higher energies than DOT, meaning BSI.

Here's a complete listing of last year's DOT random compliance test results. You can click on any of the specifc reports and check the numbers:

http://www.nhtsa.dot.gov/cars/testin...8/2005s218.pdf
04-17-2006 1:11 PM
abtech
Re: Motorcyclist Helmet Article

Quote:
Originally Posted by license2ill
Not sure what you mean. They've always been DOT-approved, it's a self-certifying process that is only upheld by random testing by NHTSA each year of only a few examples. No batches were ever recalled by NHTSA or Snell, though I did stumble upon the EXO-700 being removed from the Snell list of certified helmets for about a month or so. A friend enquired to Snell about it at the time, and funny enough, they said that it had nothing to with a failure, but that Scorpion was changing the name of the helmet. I guess they may have thought a name change, more than anything, was a good idea, but that never happened. Definitely not too keen on that Snell response, but they may not have known of the failure at the time either, as they are not responsible for DOT testing. They do their own random testing based on shelf sales numbers, in which the Scorpions apparently passed the penetration test, which is exactly the same as the DOT requirement, but Snell does not use the same impact energies or time limits for peak accelarations, which is where the EXO-700 also failed. I guess Scorpion thought the idea that changing the name might make it go away a little easier. That Motorcyclist article was written some time after the DOT random complaince test was performed earlier in the year.
My point exactly. I was under the impression from your comments and the text in the article that the EX-700 had failed the DOT test. I did some further checking and it does currently pass the DOT impact test, as well as the dual strike Snell test (and well below the Motorcyclist published G levels). I am reasonably familiar with the SMF and have submitted some crashed examples to them in the past for their database.

Helmet safety development is something that I have followed fairly closely over the past 40 years (after I destroyed a Bell Star on the track in 1966).
04-17-2006 12:24 PM
license2ill
Re: Motorcyclist Helmet Article

Quote:
Originally Posted by TraumaOne
Unfortunately for motorcyclists, it seems the helmets are the only thing tested to any real standards. Please correct me if I am wrong but all other "safety" gear is independantly "researched" by the companies that make them and there is no real data to support that this set of leathers or back protector is better than another. The only other certification I can think of is the CE certified protectors in some suits/jackets.
Yep, just the set of CE standards the Euros have set-up. Those are being 'loosely" enforced as well. It's up to the public to challenge them, but regardless most of hte companies are just side-stepping them anyway, with everything but the impact protectors. It's a type-approval, with an initial test, then honor system after that.

There are a number of other standards that cover suits for approval as a whole, with zoning requirements for the stitching, tear strength, abrasion resistance, impact protection, and seam burst performance. For boots, and for gloves. There's a few examples of approved boots, but no gloves. I emailed Alpinestars after they started showing the CE label on their website for their boots recently to ask about it. I got a response that it meant Alpinestars were high-quality, and that's it. The other thing these companies are supposed to be doing when carrying that label is providing infomation about what it means with the purchase, something else they don't appear to be doing, which can only lead ot the conclusion that they are not complying even if they are stamping the label on their goods.

The only ones that seem to be complying with the suit standards are a few small British custom leather suit makers. Those are the same manufacturers that continually win the comparison tests performed by Ride Magazine each season.

Here's some info on those available standards, how the tests are performed, the history of their development and implementation, and compliance within the industry:

http://www.bmf.co.uk/briefing/bmfBri...rcyclists.html

Here's a list of the standards for motorcyclist ppe:

http://www.roadsafety.mccofnsw.org.au/a/93.html
04-17-2006 12:11 PM
smoothrideronli
Re: Motorcyclist Helmet Article

Well I imagine helmets would be the most important safety device. I believe that helmets are the only thing that is mandatory in most states...everything else is optional (not for me....but by law).
04-17-2006 12:10 PM
sheepofblue
Re: Motorcyclist Helmet Article

Quote:
Originally Posted by TraumaOne
Unfortunately for motorcyclists, it seems the helmets are the only thing tested to any real standards. Please correct me if I am wrong but all other "safety" gear is independantly "researched" by the companies that make them and there is no real data to support that this set of leathers or back protector is better than another. The only other certification I can think of is the CE certified protectors in some suits/jackets.
Yep CE level one and two
04-17-2006 12:05 PM
TraumaOne
Re: Motorcyclist Helmet Article

Unfortunately for motorcyclists, it seems the helmets are the only thing tested to any real standards. Please correct me if I am wrong but all other "safety" gear is independantly "researched" by the companies that make them and there is no real data to support that this set of leathers or back protector is better than another. The only other certification I can think of is the CE certified protectors in some suits/jackets.
04-17-2006 12:00 PM
license2ill
Re: Motorcyclist Helmet Article

Quote:
Originally Posted by smoothrideronli
Very well said. I have to admit I never thought of questioning the article and I wish there could be a debate with the folks from Motorcyclists and to hear their responses to your information. I just purchased another Snell helmet and I am very happy with it...I hope I dont have to ever test whether it is better than a DOT in impact resistance. License2ill is this topic somehoe related to your job or is this something that you independently researched?
I just find it interesting, and important. I think each and every rider should ahvethese same concerns and be looking for better information and better understandings when it comes to safety equipment.
04-17-2006 11:57 AM
smoothrideronli
Re: Motorcyclist Helmet Article

Very well said. I have to admit I never thought of questioning the article and I wish there could be a debate with the folks from Motorcyclists and to hear their responses to your information. I just purchased another Snell helmet and I am very happy with it...I hope I dont have to ever test whether it is better than a DOT in impact resistance. License2ill is this topic somehoe related to your job or is this something that you independently researched?
04-17-2006 11:26 AM
license2ill
Re: Motorcyclist Helmet Article

Quote:
Originally Posted by abtech
FYI, my Scorpion is DOT certified, I hadn't even noticed, but it came with the standard NHTSA paperwork in addition to the Snell blurb. Guess they made a change or two since the article was written . . .
Not sure what you mean. They've always been DOT-approved, it's a self-certifying process that is only upheld by random testing by NHTSA each year of only a few examples. No batches were ever recalled by NHTSA or Snell, though I did stumble upon the EXO-700 being removed from the Snell list of certified helmets for about a month or so. A friend enquired to Snell about it at the time, and funny enough, they said that it had nothing to with a failure, but that Scorpion was changing the name of the helmet. I guess they may have thought a name change, more than anything, was a good idea, but that never happened. Definitely not too keen on that Snell response, but they may not have known of the failure at the time either, as they are not responsible for DOT testing. They do their own random testing based on shelf sales numbers, in which the Scorpions apparently passed the penetration test, which is exactly the same as the DOT requirement, but Snell does not use the same impact energies or time limits for peak accelarations, which is where the EXO-700 also failed. I guess Scorpion thought the idea that changing the name might make it go away a little easier. That Motorcyclist article was written some time after the DOT random complaince test was performed earlier in the year.
04-17-2006 11:18 AM
abtech
Re: Motorcyclist Helmet Article

Quote:
Originally Posted by license2ill
Thanks.

Speaking of Shoei and tests, NHTSA tested a Shoei TZR for DOT compliance last year as well, here's the report, page 7 has the impact attenuation results, which are similar to other Snell-approved lids. Again, I don't think it's clear that the lower the number the better once down to levels conservatively below those known to cause profound injuries. If injuries will not change over the range, then the important issue becomes the amount of impact energy that can be absorbed down to those survivable injury levels.

http://199.79.180.163/prepos/files/A...38025-2005.pdf
FYI, my Scorpion is DOT certified, I hadn't even noticed, but it came with the standard NHTSA paperwork in addition to the Snell blurb. Guess they made a change or two since the article was written . . .
04-15-2006 7:19 PM
license2ill
Re: Motorcyclist Helmet Article

Quote:
Originally Posted by abtech
I made a few calls before buying my latest helmet and evidently, since early 2005, Scorpion has updated their shell laminate formulations and the current offerings would easily pass the DOT test. Snell won't release the figures, but they are substantially better than implied in the Motorcyclist article. I don't know if you have had a chance to view our informal survey on helmet ownership, but interestingly, Motorcyclist didn't test a single model of the most popular (and most owned by .org members) helmets (namely Shoei).

BTW, welcome to the org, it's refreshing to see a new member roll up their sleeves and jump right in .
Thanks.

Speaking of Shoei and tests, NHTSA tested a Shoei TZR for DOT compliance last year as well, here's the report, page 7 has the impact attenuation results, which are similar to other Snell-approved lids. Again, I don't think it's clear that the lower the number the better once down to levels conservatively below those known to cause profound injuries. If injuries will not change over the range, then the important issue becomes the amount of impact energy that can be absorbed down to those survivable injury levels.

http://199.79.180.163/prepos/files/A...38025-2005.pdf
04-15-2006 4:25 PM
abtech
Re: Motorcyclist Helmet Article

Quote:
Originally Posted by license2ill
No, I am actually saying that Parts Unlimited, distributor of Icon and Z1R, is simply rebadging existing cheap helmets, with different paint schemes and vent covers for their Icon and Z1R brand names. The Icons are specifically J-Tech(Xpeed) helmets that are "polished", and the Z1R's appear to be from various sources including Xpeed, HJC, and/or possibly another Chinese-based manufacturer. The Z1R Stance is a direct carryover of the Xpeed 503 or I think it's known as the XF or XG here, and the Stance is in fact even a few bucks less expensive than the Xpeed, same as the Icons, XF and/or XG's in fancier finishes. The Strike, the helmet that "won" that Motorcyclist comparison appears to be an older HJC design, the CL-10, I believe, it's still sold in Europe, the Z1R scooter helmet that failed DOT last year appears to be another HJC, the CS-22, or something like that, I think. The Duke, I'm not so sure about that one. Z1R claims that their helmets are made for North American headshapes, but it would make sense that they are actually just the same as the Euro head shape shells, and with the Strike being DOT-only it makes sense that it is just the same helmet made to ECE spec.

I think PU sensed some competitoin in the strategy of Scorpion for both of their lines, and used their relationship wiith Motorcyclist mag to get the ball rolling on the article and test after the Scorpion DOT failure became known. The whole Dr. Sloan gimmick and their intended markets, Scorpion has already taken a huge chunk of what may have become Icon helmet buyers. They somewhat did that the right way too, by designing and building their own helmets, which seems to have allowed them to upgrade certain aspects, despite the older, heavy, possibly more brittle shell materials they seem to have used to keep costs down with the higher-end comfort features. Whether that means either one is actually safer or not is a whole other story, but it's easy to point at numbers, skew them the right direction to a crowd you know is oblvious to their meaning, and give people jsut enough information to make a poor decision in a dfferent direction.
I made a few calls before buying my latest helmet and evidently, since early 2005, Scorpion has updated their shell laminate formulations and the current offerings would easily pass the DOT test. Snell won't release the figures, but they are substantially better than implied in the Motorcyclist article. I don't know if you have had a chance to view our informal survey on helmet ownership, but interestingly, Motorcyclist didn't test a single model of the most popular (and most owned by .org members) helmets (namely Shoei).

BTW, welcome to the org, it's refreshing to see a new member roll up their sleeves and jump right in .
04-15-2006 2:20 PM
license2ill
Re: Motorcyclist Helmet Article

Quote:
Originally Posted by seamus
:Threadjack:

Ill, I notice it says you have a 211v. Is that true or is it simply the Repsol?

:Threadjack complete:
I musta had delusions that I was Nicky when reg'd on this site. Sorry, no such luck.
04-15-2006 2:13 PM
seamus
Re: Motorcyclist Helmet Article

:Threadjack:

Ill, I notice it says you have a 211v. Is that true or is it simply the Repsol?

:Threadjack complete:
04-15-2006 1:34 PM
license2ill
Re: Motorcyclist Helmet Article

Quote:
Originally Posted by abtech
Interesting first post .

I'm not quite certain whether or not you are saying that the Scorpion helmets are made by one of the trio of Chinese manufacturers you mentioned, but according to Eric Anderson, Scorpion owns their entire manufacturing/R&D/sales operation and they don't currently build helmets for any other manufacturers.
No, I am actually saying that Parts Unlimited, distributor of Icon and Z1R, is simply rebadging existing cheap helmets, with different paint schemes and vent covers for their Icon and Z1R brand names. The Icons are specifically J-Tech(Xpeed) helmets that are "polished", and the Z1R's appear to be from various sources including Xpeed, HJC, and/or possibly another Chinese-based manufacturer. The Z1R Stance is a direct carryover of the Xpeed 503 or I think it's known as the XF or XG here, and the Stance is in fact even a few bucks less expensive than the Xpeed, same as the Icons, XF and/or XG's in fancier finishes. The Strike, the helmet that "won" that Motorcyclist comparison appears to be an older HJC design, the CL-10, I believe, it's still sold in Europe, the Z1R scooter helmet that failed DOT last year appears to be another HJC, the CS-22, or something like that, I think. The Duke, I'm not so sure about that one. Z1R claims that their helmets are made for North American headshapes, but it would make sense that they are actually just the same as the Euro head shape shells, and with the Strike being DOT-only it makes sense that it is just the same helmet made to ECE spec.

I think PU sensed some competitoin in the strategy of Scorpion for both of their lines, and used their relationship wiith Motorcyclist mag to get the ball rolling on the article and test after the Scorpion DOT failure became known. The whole Dr. Sloan gimmick and their intended markets, Scorpion has already taken a huge chunk of what may have become Icon helmet buyers. They somewhat did that the right way too, by designing and building their own helmets, which seems to have allowed them to upgrade certain aspects, despite the older, heavy, possibly more brittle shell materials they seem to have used to keep costs down with the higher-end comfort features. Whether that means either one is actually safer or not is a whole other story, but it's easy to point at numbers, skew them the right direction to a crowd you know is oblvious to their meaning, and give people jsut enough information to make a poor decision in a dfferent direction.
This thread has more than 15 replies. Click here to review the whole thread.

Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

 
For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome