I'm sorry, but the motorcycle helmet "how much is your life worth" thing is the stupidest argument to use as a comparison to price spending in other things like cheap vs expensive gun brands. It usually used by someone who knows nothing about motorcycle helmets and certification but they have a motorcycle and since they wear an expensive helmet use this poor analogy justification for a weak qualitative argument to denigrate other people's cheaper choices they don't agree with..

In terms of motorcycle helmets, within any impact/use safety certification rating and range for a motorcycle helmet, it either passes what is required for the certification or it doesn't. Any helmet sold with a particular rating (ECE, DOT, Snell) provides just as much certification REQUIRED type of impact and cushioning head safety testing from the lowest cost unit to the highest cost unit with the same cert rating. This means that the cheapo plain white $50 DOT closed face basic helmet from Walmart passes the exact same safety impact tests as the $500 DOT closed face helmet with the fancy mirrored face shield, Gel foam padding, triple venting system, nice graphics, and etc. The $300 cheapest Snell certified helmet passes the exact same safety impact tests as the $5000 Snell custom MotoGP helmet.

Yes, some certifications have higher safety test requirements for passing than other certifications, but within the range of helmets with the same certification rating, there is NO difference in required or tested safety and no certification bonus points for EXTRA safety claims a manufacturer may have (like super duper foam inserts, etc). There is no Snell SUPER MAGNUM +P safety rating that has passed harder or numerically-more safety tests than standard Snell rated motorcycle helmets. Higher tier pricing does NOT bring more "certified" safety or guaranteed better safety results for the particular certification of the helmet or during it's product-lifetime use by a rider. All price increases within a range of particular helmet certifications does is gets you either more features, fancier style/colors, nicer/fancier materials for reduced weight, comfort, or possible non-damaged material usage longevity. The manufacturers may claim their particular inner materials do things like "better cushion your head in the event of an impact", however those "extra" safety claims are NOT validated by actual certification-required tests beyond what even the cheapest helmet with the same particular certification is tested to. In addition, once damaged, either by use or age for any reason, the safety rating certification means NOTHING.

A brand-new manufactured proper-fitting Walmart cheapo $50 DOT helmet is likely physically and materially safer than a used 10 year old originally-$5000 Snell super fancy carbon racing helmet. Why? Because helmets age and are DISPOSABLE regardless of initial cost. The general consensus is that helmets have a 5 year life at maximum that keeps it's initial safety ratings. Even if unused, a $5000 helmet that has been doing nothing but sitting on the shelf in a box for 10 years will have had it's actual safety severely degraded because the foam padding and glue degrades simply from age. Mix in sweat, heat, cold, ground drops, compressions, etc and the head/brain safety aspects of the helmet downgrade immensely as the inner padding condition is far more important to head/brain impact safety than the outer shell. That being said, who among us actually throws away a non-visibly damaged motorcycle helmet after 5 years? I wouldn't if it's a expensive helmet and neither would most people, even though I know that the actual head impact safety degrades significantly with age. However if it's a cheap helmet in that range of certification, and knowing how they degrade with age, then I am far more likely to replace them as they age. So there is a lot to be said about cheap helmets held to product life standards in terms of use and replacement cycles being more safe than expensive helmets kept forever because they were expensive to being with.

Basically using this "higher price is better" helmet argument because what's your head worth, is stupid. I can say my head is priceless, so then I can then insinuate that YOU are the foolish cheapo who only values his head to a mere $5000 helmet. Let's put it this way; if you're life is worth so much to you that you're so fearful of losing it by wearing a <$500 motorcycle helmet and espouse that others are stupid for being interested in value for money (whether helmets or guns), then you wouldn't or shouldn't be riding a motorcycle in the first place, and your opinion is suspect on any other topics you are using it as a comparable cost-more-is-always-better argument.

$5000 helmet? Never seen one of those. Alpinestars new Supertech R10 is carbon fiber this and that, trick this and that, and it’s $1,199. $999 if you don’t need fancy graphics and can deal with plain ol’ white. So a grand is the upper end, MotoGP derived, trick this and that. Where are you getting this $5000 deal?

I’ve been running Shoeis for a few decades now. I buy them at close out and stay 1 gen behind, on purpose, to get a deal. I’ll buy one when I come across a steal, even if I don’t need it yet. I put a new one in service a year ago, but I had bought it several years prior and just kept it in the motorcycle closet for 2 years before cracking it open. Think I paid $250 for this last one, a RF1200. Current one is the RF1400 but I’m not paying $500-600 for one when I get the previous gen brand new close out for less than half that.

The thing with more expensive helmets, is yes, they do have more stringent crash testing but the real benefit is airflow. Cheap ass helmets don’t flow air like a well designed Alpinestars, Shoei, Arai, AGV, etc. All those extra vents are a requirement here. All summer it’s over 100 or right under it, and it’s humid. You have to have excellent venting and if you are hammering corners at speed, the helmet needs to be aerodynamic as well. I’m in a full suit, airbag underneath, and it’s hot as fuck. I cannot use some crapperware helmet.

I don’t listen to much of anyone when it comes to riding motorcycles or buying gear. Most people aren’t doing track days putting a puck on the ground or going to rural twisty roads, and leaning her over hard all day and punching hard out of apexes. The type of riding you do dictates gear imo. I have a 125cc scooter that I will ride around my own neighborhood like a squid but if I’m getting on one of my sportbikes, I’m in a full armored suit, airbag, and all my gear is top shelf. I just buy all of it at close out as top quality suits are bank, armored gloves more bank, and boots? Fuck they are expensive. It’s an expensive hobby. If some clown is giving you the business and they aren’t doing track days, and highly skilled, it’s all image/status bullshit so ignore it.

quote:

Originally posted by Prefontaine:

$5000 helmet? [/QUOTE]

I was just referencing something like custom graphic professional team helmets.

As to helmets that cost more having much better features like airflow design, materials, comfort, build quality, etc, I agree completely, but that doesn't have anything to do with certification SAFETY aspects that pertain protecting your head/life better over cheaper helmets with the same certs, which is the problem with using "what's your life worth" analogies to helmets and implying others being stupid for not wanting to spend a lot.

As to your statement that more expensive helmets receiving more stringent crash testing, you cannot know by by DOT, Snell or any other certification for helmets that a particular helmet with a Snell logo, is actually safer than any other helmet with the same Snell logo, even if it really is safer. You only have the manufacturers word that their helmets are better tested and safer than others and worth any premium on price. Like I mentioned, they probably ARE better for things like user experience with airflow, comfort, etc but that has nothing to do with crash damage testing head safety. Certification testing requires helmets conform and pass certain crash testing criteria, not beyond that. The problem is that you could have a certain manufacturer's best design in the world that is 10 time better than Snell's testing matrix. But one can't prove it beyond the manufacturer saying it is. The certification tests the design in a pass or fail manner for certain tests. Even if the super helmet could run through the battery of tests 10 times over without a fail, the manufacturer will get a standard certification permission to use the cert logo which means the helmet will survive X. There is no advanced or Super logo for even better helmets safety levels. And in the end the manufacturer needs the certification or even their super helmet or it can't be sold to the public or used in professional events regardless of how good it may be..

So while I have no doubt that high end expensive helmets are actually better in usage performance than cheaper ones with the same cert, there is no professional certification to guarantee that that value is truly measurably better in safety than a lower end helmet with the same certification.

Old Bell helmet ad

“Got a 10 dollar head?
Wear a 10 doller helmet”

quote:

Originally posted by Xer0:
As to your statement that more expensive helmets receiving more stringent crash testing, you cannot know by by DOT, Snell or any other certification for helmets that a particular helmet with a Snell logo, is actually safer than any other helmet with the same Snell logo, even if it really is safer.

Nah, there are other certs. ECE 22.06, DOT, and FIM certified are just a few. Snell is not the only game in town. And there are numbers after the Snell rating such as Snell M2020D. $5000 helmets are a figment of your imagination. MotoGP riders do not pay for helmets nor do the helmets cost that. People tend to favor GP helmets because those guys are hitting 227 mph down the long straights. They are low siding, high siding, breaking bones, various injuries, etc. Motorcycle gear, in many cases the more expensive the more protection. Boots, this is certainly the case. Suits, the same. Good suits cost good money. The design is better, the armor is better. Same for gloves. Cheapo gloves, boots, and suits do not offer the same protection as the higher priced versions from companies like Sidi, Dainese, Alpinestars, Held. Helmet liners, cheek pads, are not the same from cheapo to expensive. I’ve never seen someone at the track running a “$50 Walmart helmet” in my life. But we aren’t the types riding down to the bar on a Hardly either.

quote:

Originally posted by Prefontaine:

quote:

Originally posted by Xer0:
As to your statement that more expensive helmets receiving more stringent crash testing, you cannot know by by DOT, Snell or any other certification for helmets that a particular helmet with a Snell logo, is actually safer than any other helmet with the same Snell logo, even if it really is safer.

Nah, there are other certs. ECE 22.06, DOT, and FIM certified are just a few. Snell is not the only game in town. And there are numbers after the Snell rating such as Snell M2020D. $5000 helmets are a figment of your imagination. MotoGP riders do not pay for helmets nor do the helmets cost that. People tend to favor GP helmets because those guys are hitting 227 mph down the long straights. They are low siding, high siding, breaking bones, various injuries, etc. Motorcycle gear, in many cases the more expensive the more protection. Boots, this is certainly the case. Suits, the same. Good suits cost good money. The design is better, the armor is better. Same for gloves. Cheapo gloves, boots, and suits do not offer the same protection as the higher priced versions from companies like Sidi, Dainese, Alpinestars, Held. Helmet liners, cheek pads, are not the same from cheapo to expensive. I’ve never seen someone at the track running a “$50 Walmart helmet” in my life. But we aren’t the types riding down to the bar on a Hardly either.

Well here's a close figment of my imagination on expensive helmets. https://www.araiamericas.com/corsair-x-rc-variation. $4095.00 Ok it's a $1000 cheaper than $5K, but if you were to add a custom paint job and/or graphics, I bet the price would pushing pretty close. So if you want to say it's my imagination, then here's an example of an exorbitantly priced helmet. From what I found in research, the top quality protective riding gear of professional MotoGP racers and similar who do it for a living approaches $75K easily (although generally paid by teams, and not individuals), so a guesstimated $5K for custom best of the best racing helmets does not seem too little out of a $75K total.

I think you are misunderstanding what I am saying about the certs. There are many, but each only defines the minimum required for passing each cert. They have no provisions for scoring greater than passing. I use Snell because it's the most widely known and is appropriate to racing requirements, while ECE and DOT are not.

Snell's M2025D motorcycle helmet cert documentation is brand new. It's barely different than the Snell M2020D you referenced which was drafted in 2019. What's the difference? Simply that M2025D has a few additions or modifications to previous Snell certs like the M2020D that keep the certification relevant.
Another example exerp of required guided fall safety testing from the Snell M2025D document:

a. Each site tested against the flat anvil shall be tested in two impacts according
to the values in Table 4 adjusted for the mass of the head form assembly.
b. Each site tested against the hemispherical anvil shall be tested in two impacts
according to the values in Table 4 adjusted for the mass of the head form assembly.
c. Each site tested against the edge anvil shall be tested according to the values
in Table 4 adjusted for the mass of the head form assembly. No helmet shall be
subjected to the second impact for this anvil.

A cheaper properly constructed helmet can pass this two impact part of the Snell cert requirements. So can a very expensive helmet. Assuming both pass the rest of the M2025D requirements, both will become Snell certified. So in terms of certification and save-your-life "safety", both the cheaper helmet and very expensive helmets are equal in actual impact safety testing, since they both have the same cert. A company that produces things that require these certs to be sold on the market is not going to invest lots of money producing a helmet that does more than meet these cert test level requirements. I can bet you that $4000 Aria above, while it may pass the two impact test (as it has a Snell cert), the helmet would not likely pass a three impact test (because it's beyond EXTREMELY difficult (without making the helmet much heavier regardless of material used in shell), but neither will any of the cheaper priced Snell rated helmets pass a third impact test for the same reason. So the Snell certification tells the customer nothing to differentiate the actual safety differences between the two helmets. It only tells the customer that both meet a MINIMUM level of impact safety protection to pass the tests for certification. It basically only tells the customer. If you wear this Snell approved helmet, fall and impact ground with you head in the helmet, it will protect your head from injury. It does NOT tell the customer that that If you fall with a Snell helmet costing >$1000, your head will be safer than if you were wearing a Snell rated helmet costing $150. It can't according to the required tests, they are equal in certified safety tests. This is the same with ANY helmet certification. That's the point why its a improper price analogy. PRICE does not dictate a safer helmet when both have the SAME certification rating.

My whole argument has been that price is a terrible analogy to use when determining safety, nothing more.

If you want a good explanation of Snell certification being worthless, watch fortnine as he explains it better than I can.

I'm not convinced Snell certification, or the way Snell tests helmets, is as meaningful as some other certifications. But any certification is probably better than none. Most of mine are Snell, DOT, ECE, or some combination of them.

I feel proper fit is often overlooked. It has to fit snuggly everywhere to be most effective. Often people select a particular helmet because it looks cool, is the right color to match their bike or jacket, or is simply the most affordable one on the shelf, even though it's not shaped correctly for their head. It could be more round, while their head is more narrow and long. The size that is snug on the sides of their head is too snug at the front, it hurts their forehead. So they get a larger size that doesn't press against the forehead. Unfortunately the larger size is too loose on the sides.

I doubt there are any $50 helmets with the highest certifications. But a $700 helmet probably does have very high certs.

High price isn't proof by itself of a safer helmet, but it probably is. The other features not included in certification may well improve safety, too.

Same thing goes for child car seats. Each one sold on the market meets the safety requirements. Everything thing else is just cosmetic or comfort.

Same goes for Sunglasses. My $15 Radians from SafetyglassesUSA meet the same specs as $200 Oakleys.
My latest pair of Radians just underwent a real world test (face plant onto pavement) and worked great!
My helmets are all HJC. Good bang for the buck! I replace every 5 years.
Todays helmet tip: Use a lightweight helmet liner to help keep your brain bucket clean and funk free. Bring it with you when you try on helmets to get your fit right.

Speaking of helmets do you guys wash them? I mean as in the removable liners in the washer, the inside sprayed with cleaner, gently scrubbed, the entire helmet immersed and swished around under warm water in a tub?
I am always amazed how dirty the water gets from and all the stuff that comes out from the vents, as well as oils from your hair, face, and just road dirt.

I do this annually but in-between wipe the insides out every few weeks. Maybe I should try wearing a liner.

Circulation, noise reduction, Bluetooth ready/plugs, flip down sun shields, quick release straps, anti fog shield…these are things my head is worth. Usually in more expensive helmets.

I understand your beef. Numerically proving how much more expensive helmets are better once you reach a given safety certification is tough. But I believe they are, but not in a linear correlation to dollars.

But haven’t talked myself into a Schubert, just yet.

Fact: Price does not equate to quality.

Also, fact: Certification requirements are *minimums*. To dismiss that all items that pass X certification test are the same is, by extension, claiming every lawyer who passes the bar in their state is equally competent.

Simply because tests are not commonly done to determine the outside edge of a product's performance envelope does not mean there isn't a difference.

quote:

Originally posted by Aeteocles:
Fact: Price does not equate to quality.

Also, fact: Certification requirements are *minimums*. To dismiss that all items that pass X certification test are the same is, by extension, claiming every lawyer who passes the bar in their state is equally competent.

Simply because tests are not commonly done to determine the outside edge of a product's performance envelope does not mean there isn't a difference.

I agree with you that the numerous certifications are merely "minimums". I am only arguing against using price as a false analogy to actual "head safety" as people do. For your example with lawyers passing the bar. Lawyers are evolving people, not static products like a helmet. Lawyers do have to pass minimum bar testing, but tend to get better over time as their experience grows and evolves and you can expect to pay more for a proven-good lawyer with a lengthy track record of success.

Helmets only get worse (less safe) as they age, and there is no way to compare any actual head safety stats or numbers beyond helmet vs no-helmet traffic accidents.

I don't dismiss the fact that costlier helmets MAY be safer than cheaper ones. But merely argue against the idea that helmet cost has any actual valid comparisons to "what's your life worth" justifications that cannot be proven or even inferred regardless of current helmet certifications.

Novelty helmets sold in all levels of bike shops as well as off the internet.. several are less than $100... No safety certification... but in the box you just might find a certification sticker that was not applied to the helmet... To be applied later by purchaser........ So as to get past a police officer on a traffic stop.... Again trying to look cool or get by on the cheap side can be the outcome of a serious injury or death.... ............... drill sgt.

You must find the manufacture date of the helmet you want to buy. Shoei told me that after five years, the helmet styrofoam has lost 50% of its protective property. So, those closeout helmets may be so attractively priced, but can be literally five years old and brand new.

Shoei dates are on the label under the inner liner, near the top of the head. You can find the date by ooching the liner padding around a bit.

Arai dates are stamped on the strap D-ring.

I would budget at least $500.

I just damaged a 7yr old Arai on my Ktm, while riding single track, it got retired and now have a new Klim K5 Koyro with the latest technology . It was right at 700 bucks..

The argument that helmets degrade with age is not relevant to the price vs safety issue. Any 10 yr old helmet is likely a lot less protective than it was when new.

However, it is fair to say that if given the choice between some random $100 helmet or a random $900 helmet, it is almost certainly true that the more expensive one is more protective.

Most of us don't choose randomly, so the market demands more performance for the higher price. In similar price points there will certainly be differences in features and certifications, but the issue isn't a $400 vs $500 helmet is it? The issue is the el cheapo open face or skull cap helmet vs the mid- to higher price range full face helmets.

quote:

Originally posted by kyoung:
I just damaged a 7yr old Arai on my Ktm, while riding single track, it got retired and now have a new Klim K5 Koyro with the latest technology . It was right at 700 bucks..

The wife fell last week while training at BMW Mottorad in SC and got a pretty good whack to the back of her head resulting in a concussion. We will be replacing her 3 year old custom painted Schuberth.

I own two Snell M2020 helmets and there are definitely differences:

Shoei RF1400 (~$500 at the time of purchase). The shell is definitely more flexible of the two due to being a multilayer matrix, and the foam is superior due to being multi density. I'm not very concerned about getting hit twice with an anvil, and if I'm banging my head off the asphalt I'd rather be in this one.

HJC i10 (~150 at the time of purchase). The shell is definitely less flexible due to being polycarbonate and the foam isn't as good. I bought this helmet as a placeholder until the RF1400 was available, and now it's my loaner/back-up helmet.

---

Ego is the anesthesia that deadens the pain of stupidity

DISCLAIMER: These are the author's own personal views and do not represent the views of the author's employer.