racing helmet

[Frey, Richard K]

I guess it's a moot point if your sanctioning body requires snell certification.  As stated, IMO, 2005 snell standards are too rigid.   There doesn't seem to be definitive data that the Drs can look at to see where things really stand and I certainly don't pretend to have info they don't have.  I certainly have never held myself out as a safety equipment expert.   I am guessing the article George mentions can be found at:

http://www.motorcyclistonline.com/gearbox/motorcycle_helmet_review/index.html

I think it's a 2005 article and therefore dated, but it's a good read and is the basis for my mentioned opinion.  I ride a bike, not race a car, so I understand that there might be different goals here as a 300 g helmet strike while on a bike is probably going to be pretty rough on other important internal organs.  In a car, you have the luxury of being strapped in and that should help out your torso but might also require hits to the exact same spot of a roll cage, etc.   Hopefully you've covered those with the proper type of foam.

I will say that snell has apparently reduced its g standards from 300 gs to 275 gs in the 2010 standards but what's  +/- 25 gs to your brain.  My main point was that Styrofoam in helmets can be too dense and snell seems to be on board with that thought.  Form your own opinions and choose the 2005 or the 2010 standards and by all means ignore mine.

rick
From: se-r-bounces at se-r-list.org [mailto:se-r-bounces at se-r-list.org] On Behalf Of Tim Rogers
Sent: Monday, August 24, 2009 12:39 PM
To: se-r list
Subject: Re: racing helmet

Rick wrote:
IMO, don't buy a helmet with a snell rating. Snell has too rigid of standards on G forces and to get that standard, the manufacturer needs to use Styrofoam that is too rigid and won't crush enough and slow the deacceleration of your brain properly.

Rick wrote the above as a matter of opinion.  Unless Rick wants to let us know which part of the safety equipment industry he is in and has the numerical test data to prove the above statement, I suggest that everyone ignore that statement.

The reason for the upgrading of the stiffness of the foam is this; the foam in the older helmets actually compressed too much and let the head essentially come in contact with the shell.  Since the usage of the helmet is based on the idea of the helmet striking something solid (roll bar, steering wheel, door frame, etc.) then the head was basically striking that solid object.  The stiffer foam does a better job of not over compressing and cusions the load better in high G impact situations.  Just because the newer Snell rated helmets give better protection in high G impacts does not mean they give worse protection in low G impacts.

I know the Snell rating system may not be perfect for every accident / equipment scenario but right now, it is the best we have.

Tim Rogers
On Mon, Aug 24, 2009 at 9:48 AM, Frey, Richard K <rfrey at iupui.edu<mailto:rfrey at iupui.edu>> wrote:

The advice saying you need to try on helmets is right on.  Brand is insignificant really.  Fit is more important.  When trying on helmets, grab the back of the helmet and see if you can peel it off, forward over your head.  You'd be surprised at how many helmets can be pulled off that way.  If you can, obviously it isn't going to work for you.  IMO, don't buy a helmet with a snell rating. Snell has too rigid of standards on G forces and to get that standard, the manufacturer needs to use Styrofoam that is too rigid and won't crush enough and slow the deacceleration of your brain properly.  The motorcycle guys have debated this for awhile and seem to prefer DOT or European standards.  Interestingly, Snell 2010 standards have been relaxed to conform to DOT and European standards, therefore, requiring softer Styrofoam.  They had to succumb to the argument that their Styrofoam was too stiff.  Snell 2010 helmets are supposed to be out in October '09.  Avoid Snell unless its 2010 s
 tandards.  Zues, Shark, HJC, Zox, Scorpion are brands that come in for lower prices, check 'em out.  Obviously, protect your brain, but spending money on the name brands doesn't necessarily do that.  ECE (euro) standards are the most certain but harder to find here the States.  If it meets those it is a proper helmet IMO. If I were buying a helmet today, I'd seek the ECE standard, they're available here.  If you can wait for Snell 2010 you'd get the safety that is advertised, something a DOT rating might not provide.  I am also a fan of the plastic shells rather than fiberglass or carbon fiber. They're cheaper and dent rather than fracture.  You can buy a lot of protection for not much cash these days.

The graphics are  up to you,  :)

rick


-----Original Message-----
From: se-r-bounces at se-r-list.org<mailto:se-r-bounces at se-r-list.org> [mailto:se-r-bounces at se-r-list.org<mailto:se-r-bounces at se-r-list.org>] On Behalf Of Jon
Sent: Friday, August 21, 2009 10:31 PM
To: se-r list
Subject: racing helmet

Anyone have a helmet they really like that would be good for auto-x or
road race events? I have a Shoei motorcycle helmet that I like pretty
well, but it is time to replace it. I am limited to about an hour in
most helmets and my forehead starts to get sore. I don't mind spending
some jack to get something nice... but I don't like putting out money to
have a name brand on my head.

thanks,

Jon Davis
+----------------------------------------------------------------------+
The mailing list home page is http://www.se-r-list.org/
To modify your subscription, go to http://www.se-r-list.org/mailman/listinfo/se-r
+----------------------------------------------------------------------+
The mailing list home page is http://www.se-r-list.org/
To modify your subscription, go to http://www.se-r-list.org/mailman/listinfo/se-r



--
Tim
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.se-r-list.org/pipermail/se-r/attachments/20090824/374a23ca/attachment.html