Originally Posted by
rekmeyata
You read more into my statement then I ever said or alluded to, which is typical around here.
Snell is a volunteer system, the other companies don't want to pay to have the Snell sticker on their helmets. It's not that other manufactures can't pass the Snell tests, but it does provide insight into the manufactures trust concerning their helmets abilities. The cost for the testing is not so prohibitive that no one can afford it, if Specialized can afford it then others can too, therefore there must be some doubt in some of the engineers making helmets whether not they could pass the Snell testing, so instead of having the hassle of paying then failing the test then pay to redesign the helmet to pass then repay for another test, they just don't bother. For those manufactures the CPSC is good enough since that's all the federal government requires.
Question is...is a helmet that is just good enough good enough for your head? Some think so, some think that wearing no helmet is good enough. You have to decide what is good enough. At one time most helmets passed the Snell, but the industry cried about the cost of the construction and the testing to pass the Snell, so our Federal folks in their infinite wisdom reduced the requirement so helmet manufactures could make lower costing helmets and sustain more profit. Funny thing is, Specialized helmets are pretty much on par price wise as other LBS offerings.
You don't say to whom it is you're replying, but I'll answer: if you browsed the information on the page I provided the link to, you'll have run across a statement on that page which says the amount of money Snell was asking for certification was a reason many bike helmet manufacturers dropped Snell and went to the voluntary ASTM standard, and the U.S. CPSC standard.
In terms of impact absorbency, the Snell, ASTM, CPSC standards are very close to the same. (read pt 3). Also according to this page, Canada has its own test standard, which specifies lower g levels for kids bike helmets.