Updated Government Run Helmet Testing And Evaluation Websites

[charlie b]

Making an informed decision is important, which is why it is good that the UK and AUS have come up with their own testing agencies.

The Snell 2005 standards were incredibly strict, again, targeted at racing, not street use. The standards they set meant that the helmet had to be made of fiberglass and be heavier than some others. Even carbon fiber would fail the double impact test. But, helmets could meet the standard and still be competitive in weight. My Shoei RF-1000 is a good example of that (Snell 2005 certified). It is still lighter than most of the modular helmets out there today and is lighter than many FF helmets, some of which don't meet the Snell standards.

The 2010 standards have changed to reflect more of the street needs. The testing of modular helmets is a perfect example of that. Current Snell certified helmets aren't that much different weight wise than any others

I just wish there was better crash data on which to base these tests. That is what caused the big rift between the folks at Snell and resulted in the big changes from 2005 to 2010. How hard should the helmets be hit and how many times. What shapes should be used. Is penetration testing important at all? Is face shield testing important?

Bottom line is that a helmet that is tested by any of these independent agencies is better than what we used to be able to get. Until ECE and the European testing I would not accept anything except a Snell certificate.

 

[RedLdr1]

Snell has released a new M2015 Standard for motorcycle helmets... That standard is only for Motorcycle helmets so the multiple impact requirements for race cars of the two generation back obsolete 2005 Standard required are long since gone...

If you are interested in all the engineering requirements and other "stuff" the new M2015 Standard has you can visit the Snell website Here... The .pdf of the M2015 Standard can be downloaded Here.

EDIT: You can view the list of Snell approved Motorcycle helmets Here.

 

[RedNigel]

making my helmet decisions based on how pretty the helmet looks

That's totally how I am going to decide

 

[Rmcapozzi]

I thought the Fed contracted with several testing vendors that randomly select DOT labeled helmets to conduct tests. The contractor then reports the findings and the manufacturer is notified and required to make the necessary changes.

I don't think it is a fully self-monitoring system as you described though not as thorough as other standards testing requirements.

The problem with DOT is that the govt does NOT do the testing. They just set the guidelines. Each mfg tests their helmets and puts the sticker on them. Horrible way to run the system. At least the Brits and Aussies test and approve the helmets independently. ...

 

[DirtFlier]

Helmet manufacturers submit helmets to DOT for their approval. These "sample helmets" usually pass the standard and the winkle starts when they go into production as some manufacturers - with approval in hand - suddenly decide to change how the helmet is made to reduce costs. The real problem is that such substandard helmets are still out there in the marketplace and recalls of suspect helmets rarely if ever occurs. Sometimes having more government is better.

Manufacturers who want Snell approval, not only have to submit helmets for periodic testing but also pay x-dollars for every helmet that bears the Snell sticker which is the main reason that lots of good helmets are not Snell approved. I've had three HJC modulars that worked well for me and none had the Snell approval.

ps. I'm glad that Snell will now have a motorcycle-only testing regime because the penetration and impact tests were mainly for auto racing.