DOT, Snell, ECE, or FMI helmets?

[Yasenia]

I have been a big fan of Ryan at Fort9 for a while now. I love how he uses math and well thought out Research to explain things. Due to his videos I don't buy anything less than ECE certified helmets. DOT is a slap in the face to anyone with just two working neurons. Snell, well, I don't trust them much. Their flip flopping makes me wonder. It seems like the care more about money than saving lives.  I think that the Europeans has it right and of course the FIM standards are the best.

 

Here are a couple of his videos. I would love to hear what you think. I think that he explains both the DOT and Snell BS like no one else does in YouTube. May be once you watch his videos you'll stop buying DOT and Snell certified helmets.

 

By the way, not all his videos are like these two, in which he dresses like a 1950's detective. You should check out some of his videos.

 

Snell BS:

 

https://youtu.be/76yu124i3Bo

 

DOT BS and how manufactures regulate themselves: 

 

https://youtu.be/0BUyp3HX8cY

 

[Dougie]

I didn’t realise you had various certs over there. All ours are BS and EC, although I think if you go with any main manufacturer, you’re safe, as they are normally safer than they need to be. I always use arai, since the first one fitted like a glove (even though the tour x4 is loud as f**k).pricy though. But great quality. Their new helmets already pass the new rotational energy tests. 

[Rider 101]

Australia and I think NZ don't recognise DOT or Snell. For years we were fettered with AS/NZ standards but now have the luxury of buying helmets with ECE and JIS standards.

We can now buy from Europe or Japan.

AS/NZ standards were tantamount to a cartel and forced helmet manufacturers to test and certify to a standard not recognised globally. Thankfully that has changed.

[Ray Ride4life]

I follow him on YouTube.

Don't agree with all of them but in these cases it's more about personal preverence.

[AdvCurious]

While the certifications mean something I feel in the day and age we're in, it is up to the manufactures to push the envelope with helmet safety. When Mips was introduced I thought it was pretty neat, then 6D (Omni-Directional Suspension (ODS)) and Fly Racing (Adaptive Impact System (AIS)) took it a level further with their own technologies. They've done testing over and beyond requirements, the big thing is do you believe in your helmet and the technology of it. EPS foam and different shell materials is no longer enough I feel. There needs to be that extra level of protection in rotation. 

Edited April 19, 2022 by AdvCurious

[Wintersdark]

The problem with helmet safety is that outside of certifications you can't really know.  It's all just unverified manufacturer claims.

 

People tend to like to say that more expensive helmets are safer, but there's no objective proof of that at all.

 

This isn't a slight at MIPS. MIPS seems to be the real deal(though without an independent certifying body, you can't know if a given MIPS helmet functions as well as it should), but being manufacturer specific is definitely a problem.  

 

I'd love to see a multi-level global rating system where you can just buy a higher class of helmet = more protective, but that'll probably never really happen.

 

Instead, we'd just get yet another independent standard.

 

I personally just stick with ECE, as it's the largest and an excellent standard, but if I found a good deal on a quality Snell lid, I wouldn't turn it down.  FIM would be ideal but it's super hard to find in consumer lids.

[AdvCurious]

I don't know exactly what goes into ECE or FIM testing, as I don't have experience with them.

I'm coming from real world experiences I've come across from the motocross/supercross side of motorcycles. They tend to take hits often and the tough thing with real world impacts is no accident is ever at the same angle. The more and more I've learned about helmets is that slowing down that rotation and impact, the better chance you have to reduce or avoid injury. Again, I'm going off what Mips, ODS, and ADS technology is trying to achieve. Seems consistent between the 3 brands which is why I believe in it. 

 

It all comes down to what your personal taste is, and what you're comfortable with. I like to point out that there is new technology coming out in the helmet game. 

[Wintersdark]

The upside is that those techs (MIPS and others) exist in addition to ECE/FIM/Snell/SHARP.  

 

The later certifications have very strictly defined criteria, and those criteria are public and certified by third party testing.

 

MIPS etc are very good new technologies and I hope they get certified as well, so you know what actual capabilities you're getting.

 

I would absolutely not buy, for example, a DOT only helmet with MIPS, but I'd definitely choose an ECE certified helmet with MIPS over one without.  This is because a DOT helmet with MIPS is literally untested.  There's no actual proof that it will survive any given impact/abrasion, and even the MIPS technology itself is not independently tested.

 

The ECE certification, on the other hand, requires the helmet transfer no more than 275G peak on impact and survive over 600G shell load.  It requires the strap survive a specified load strength without stretching or breaking.  It requires either the shell slip on abrasion or be ablatively ground down without transfering dangerous rotational force to the helmet, and care is taken to test this rotational force transfer on any helmet protrusions.  

 

Snell's requirements are different, IMHO not as practical, but are definitely good enough and here is where you get into personal preference.  Snell is generally better protected against multiple impacts, ECE better against distributed impacts and abrasion.  Snell face shields have to survive 3 impacts from lead pellets fired at 500kph!

 

But it's this testing where I draw the line between "good to have" technologies and "must haves".  Because without third party certification all those other technologies sound good but may just be marketing babble - you don't *know* if they do what it says on the box, but more importantly you don't know what other safety is provided.  

 

Major body certification is, then, an absolute must for anyone who cares about preserving their noggin. It's objective fact.  Because if your helmet doesn't have an ECE/Snell/etc rating, I'd ask: Why not?  The cost is clearly not prohibitive, which leads me to believe if the helmet doesn't have one of those certifications it's because it *cannot* meet their testing standards.  That's scary.

 

But to each their own.  Some people don't wear helmets at all, others wear silly novelty helmets from Amazon that are arguably worse than nothing at all.  

 

As you said, it's about people tolerance to risk.

 

But remember: there are safety statements from manufacturers, who would never lie or be incorrect or misleading, and there's safety *standards* that are objectively tested by third party organizations.

 

I do feel I need to repeat though: these new safety technologies are *awesome*, and I 100% would prefer helmets with them vs without, so long as they *also* have actual safety certification.

[whisperquiet]

The helmet that fits the best and has decent safety ratings……because it gets worn.  I used to wear only Shoei until the shell design was changed and didn’t fit properly or comfortably.  I bought a new HJC modular with the integrated sun shield about 12-13 years ago and have wearing HJC ever since.  Helmets are a consumable to me as I ride a lot and get replaced every 2-3 years.

[AdvCurious]

This is all great info, thanks @Wintersdark. I did go back and verify that both helmet companies I posted above both say ECE on them, or as they say "exceed ECE & DOT standards."

Great point as well @whisperquiet no amount of protection will do you much good if the helmet doesn't fit and chin strap isn't buckled. Also to add, it is a great idea to replace helmets fairly often and especially if they have taken an impact. The EPS foam in helmets has a lifespan as far as I understand so replacing helmets every so often is a good idea. 

[Wintersdark]

Yup.  Personally, I rotate helmets out after 3 years, buying a new helmet then putting my 3 year old helmet on the shelf as an emergency lid Just In Case, throwing away the prior (now 6 year old) helmet.  

 

And yeah, fit is crucial - a too loose helmet may come off, may focus an impact too much in one spot, or any number of other things.  Shape too.  Helmet choice is complicated!

 

Of course, it's got to be comfortable *for you* too.  Gonna spend a lot of time wearing it!  As a guy with a gigantic, wierdly shaped noggin (3xl helmets generally) that's always been a PITA for me.  Choice narrows down significantly after 2XL.

[Landshark]

I have an 6 or 7 year old HJC helmet that I'm going to cut up and inspect the foam inside.  First I'm going to put a weight in it and then let it fall from about 6 ft. to the concrete.  Then I'll disect it and see what happened to the foam and shell and whatever else is in there.  I'll do this in the coming week.  It will be interesting to see the outcome.  I hope to get the results on video.

[Wintersdark]

3 hours ago, Landshark said:

I have an 6 or 7 year old HJC helmet that I'm going to cut up and inspect the foam inside.  First I'm going to put a weight in it and then let it fall from about 6 ft. to the concrete.  Then I'll disect it and see what happened to the foam and shell and whatever else is in there.  I'll do this in the coming week.  It will be interesting to see the outcome.  I hope to get the results on video.

This is a phenomenal idea, and one I think I'm going to do myself with my old Joe Rocket helmet that's getting scrapped when I buy the new helmet.   Will need an appropriate head form though; maybe I'll do a cast of my head and try that; maybe try two different heights on either side of the helmet?  Hmmm.  Sounds really interesting. 

[Yasenia]

On 4/14/2022 at 11:38 PM, Dougie said:

I didn’t realise you had various certs over there. All ours are BS and EC, although I think if you go with any main manufacturer, you’re safe, as they are normally safer than they need to be. I always use arai, since the first one fitted like a glove (even though the tour x4 is loud as f**k).pricy though. But great quality. Their new helmets already pass the new rotational energy tests. 

I have been thinking about getting me an Arai. 

[Yasenia]

On 4/14/2022 at 11:40 PM, Rider 101 said:

Australia and I think NZ don't recognise DOT or Snell. For years we were fettered with AS/NZ standards but now have the luxury of buying helmets with ECE and JIS standards.

We can now buy from Europe or Japan.

AS/NZ standards were tantamount to a cartel and forced helmet manufacturers to test and certify to a standard not recognised globally. Thankfully that has changed.

It seems like Australia and NZ have some smart people in charge of safety. 

[Yasenia]

On 4/18/2022 at 10:48 AM, AdvCurious said:

While the certifications mean something I feel in the day and age we're in, it is up to the manufactures to push the envelope with helmet safety. When Mips was introduced I thought it was pretty neat, then 6D (Omni-Directional Suspension (ODS)) and Fly Racing (Adaptive Impact System (AIS)) took it a level further with their own technologies. They've done testing over and beyond requirements, the big thing is do you believe in your helmet and the technology of it. EPS foam and different shell materials is no longer enough I feel. There needs to be that extra level of protection in rotation. 

A Canadian study showed that a pretty good percentage of helmets that are DOT approved failed to pass testing. Manufactures are expected to at least meet some level of standard, but when they are self certified, they can and often do cut conners. I think it was Ryan's DOT video that talks about the study.

 

May be one day the day will come when we can trust manufactures, and even some government agencies to do the right thing for us the riders, but as of right now even if manufactures met the DOT standards, those standards are so outdated that it's not even funny.

 

Which is what I like about those videos,  Ryan does a great job at exposing the truth. But that is just my opinion. 

[Yasenia]

On 4/19/2022 at 12:25 PM, Wintersdark said:

The upside is that those techs (MIPS and others) exist in addition to ECE/FIM/Snell/SHARP.  

 

The later certifications have very strictly defined criteria, and those criteria are public and certified by third party testing.

 

MIPS etc are very good new technologies and I hope they get certified as well, so you know what actual capabilities you're getting.

 

I would absolutely not buy, for example, a DOT only helmet with MIPS, but I'd definitely choose an ECE certified helmet with MIPS over one without.  This is because a DOT helmet with MIPS is literally untested.  There's no actual proof that it will survive any given impact/abrasion, and even the MIPS technology itself is not independently tested.

 

The ECE certification, on the other hand, requires the helmet transfer no more than 275G peak on impact and survive over 600G shell load.  It requires the strap survive a specified load strength without stretching or breaking.  It requires either the shell slip on abrasion or be ablatively ground down without transfering dangerous rotational force to the helmet, and care is taken to test this rotational force transfer on any helmet protrusions.  

 

Snell's requirements are different, IMHO not as practical, but are definitely good enough and here is where you get into personal preference.  Snell is generally better protected against multiple impacts, ECE better against distributed impacts and abrasion.  Snell face shields have to survive 3 impacts from lead pellets fired at 500kph!

 

But it's this testing where I draw the line between "good to have" technologies and "must haves".  Because without third party certification all those other technologies sound good but may just be marketing babble - you don't *know* if they do what it says on the box, but more importantly you don't know what other safety is provided.  

 

Major body certification is, then, an absolute must for anyone who cares about preserving their noggin. It's objective fact.  Because if your helmet doesn't have an ECE/Snell/etc rating, I'd ask: Why not?  The cost is clearly not prohibitive, which leads me to believe if the helmet doesn't have one of those certifications it's because it *cannot* meet their testing standards.  That's scary.

 

But to each their own.  Some people don't wear helmets at all, others wear silly novelty helmets from Amazon that are arguably worse than nothing at all.  

 

As you said, it's about people tolerance to risk.

 

But remember: there are safety statements from manufacturers, who would never lie or be incorrect or misleading, and there's safety *standards* that are objectively tested by third party organizations.

 

I do feel I need to repeat though: these new safety technologies are *awesome*, and I 100% would prefer helmets with them vs without, so long as they *also* have actual safety certification.

I agree! In my opinion I would not go with a SNELL helmet because they theorize that a helmet needs to survive larger impacts, compared to ECE. As someone who was a medic for 10 years and have been to plenty of motorcycle accidents in the Angeles National Forest (a magnet for bikers because of the canyon roads), I would agree with the ECE studies. In the real world the vast majority of motorcycle accidents involve multiple lower energy impacts rather than two or three on the same spot. And when that happened there are already other fatal blows, so whether your helmet can survive one or two or three strong blows is irrelevant at that point.

 

Also, I might go with a SNELL but only if it was their new standard for Europe. That basically copies the ECE standards but without the rotational protection. Rather than their standards for the none European market. Which is the junk we get here in the US. Thinking about it, nhaaa, I wouldn't buy any helmet with the SNELL sticker on it, even if it was their European standard, they lack rotational protection like ECE and FIM.

 

Ride safe!

[Yasenia]

On 4/20/2022 at 5:09 AM, Landshark said:

I have an 6 or 7 year old HJC helmet that I'm going to cut up and inspect the foam inside.  First I'm going to put a weight in it and then let it fall from about 6 ft. to the concrete.  Then I'll disect it and see what happened to the foam and shell and whatever else is in there.  I'll do this in the coming week.  It will be interesting to see the outcome.  I hope to get the results on video.

That sounds like fun, but only for entertainment purposes. Without the ability to measure energy transfer, you can't really tell how good the protection is. 
 

Also remember that in the real world most motorcycle accidents involve multiple lower energy impacts in various locations, versus one, two, or three large impacts on the same location. Which is what the outdated DOT and the laughable SNELL US standards claim is the way to go. Like Ryan says in his video (above), when riders experience those large impacts there is typical one or two other fatal injuries, so your helmets ability to take some big blows is irrelevant at that point.
 

Like I said before, as someone who was a paramedic for ten years and went to plenty of motorcycle crashes up in the Angeles National Forest, I saw first hand how the DOT and SNELL standards are incredibly wrong. SNELL standards are good for a race car, but not for bikes.

 

I would love to watch the videos.

[Yasenia]

On 4/19/2022 at 6:28 PM, Wintersdark said:

Yup.  Personally, I rotate helmets out after 3 years, buying a new helmet then putting my 3 year old helmet on the shelf as an emergency lid Just In Case, throwing away the prior (now 6 year old) helmet.  

 

And yeah, fit is crucial - a too loose helmet may come off, may focus an impact too much in one spot, or any number of other things.  Shape too.  Helmet choice is complicated!

 

Of course, it's got to be comfortable *for you* too.  Gonna spend a lot of time wearing it!  As a guy with a gigantic, wierdly shaped noggin (3xl helmets generally) that's always been a PITA for me.  Choice narrows down significantly after 2XL.

Oooh, a smart man!

[Rider 101]

On 4/20/2022 at 11:28 AM, Wintersdark said:

Yup.  Personally, I rotate helmets out after 3 years, buying a new helmet then putting my 3 year old helmet on the shelf as an emergency lid Just In Case, throwing away the prior (now 6 year old) helmet.  

 

And yeah, fit is crucial - a too loose helmet may come off, may focus an impact too much in one spot, or any number of other things.  Shape too.  Helmet choice is complicated!

 

Of course, it's got to be comfortable *for you* too.  Gonna spend a lot of time wearing it!  As a guy with a gigantic, wierdly shaped noggin (3xl helmets generally) that's always been a PITA for me.  Choice narrows down significantly after 2XL.

I have a bunch of old helmets going back about 20 years. I am currently disposing of unwanted rubbish so these old helmets will go to our local fire and recue to practice helmet removal at an accident scene.