emman123

browsing through the list of Snell foundation approved helmets, I have noticed that most (if not all) of Specialized helmets have been rewarded with the Snell foundation seal, (they do some serious testing there)
however I cant find the POC helmets listed there so its either they haven't been tested at Snell or haven't passed the test, what would you think would render a better protection between these two?
I was also interested in the Hövding helmet

https://www.hovding.com/en/how

but it looks more like a fashion statement and im worried about the electronics failing it has too many things that can go wrong I think, like the gas or the electronics or the sensors etc..

Chris516

Check the Bicycle Helmet Safety Institute(https://wwww.bhsi.org) to see if, they say the same thing.

emman123

thanks I went on that website but it looks like they dont mention the new Snell revised standard the B90A and B95A, I dont know how often they update the info on that website,
it seems that POC helmets pass the CPSC but maybe not the Snell who knows? POC is not on the Snell list, the Specialized however pass the Snell but maybe not the CPSC, I cant even find a list of CPSC approved helmets, what a mess.... why cant there be a list of the most protective helmets with listing of the standards they have achieved?

GrouchoWretch

I have a recent thread here about this topic. Didn't come up with a whole lot.

If that's because one helmet protects you about as well as the next, then it's a sign that there's not a whole lot of protection to be had there. With any product that really performs a task, different models at different prices perform very differently. Bikes, for example, or hand tools. It's easy to distinguish a department store bike or saw or handplane from a boutique one just by using.

If it's difficult or impossible to distinguish the performance of my Walmerde Bell helmet from that of a helmet costing two to ten times more, what does that say about what these products can accomplish?

That's not an ironclad case against helmets, but it's not promising if they're all about the same. It makes the whole prospect seem a bit futile.

I-Like-To-Bike

In regards to safety performance, it can be said that they are all built to meet the same performance standard. How high or low that standard is for protecting the individuals wearing a helmet is a topic debated ad infinitum on the helmet thread.

GrouchoWretch

I realize that they all meet the same standard. I have found it literally impossible to avoid being told exactly that every single time I have ever asked anyone about any difference among bike helmets. So yes, I got that.

What I wonder is, are there bike helmet manufacturers who set out to beat the minimum standard by miles, the same way that some car manufacturers do, so that they can brag about it in their marketing copy?

If not, why not?

And if so, then why isn't it evident when we shop for helmets?

This is a more specific question than "helmets good vs helmets bad," which is debated ad nauseam in the sticky thread.

GrouchoWretch

BTW, when I say I am told the same thing about safety standards no matter what question I ask about bike helmets, I mean that I have asked around at different bike shops about helmets that might be better ventilated or have wicking liners or nice visors and so on, and the answer always, I mean always, starts with, "well, they all meet the same safety standard." And I don't remember one time when that wasn't the only substantial part of the answer. It's like these salesmen (salesmen!) are telling me all these products are pretty much the same, ergo there's no reason to buy one from them, or to spend more than $25 on one. I've never had this experience before, shopping for anything, much less in a bike shop.

Anyway, I can't imagine that it's possible to be unaware that all bike helmets meet the same safety standard unless it's the first time you've ever asked any question about a bike helmet.

con

I don’t really understand your frustration. It could be that you have never shopped for a product that is constructed to meet a set of standards. It is just like buying a motorcycle helmet, you can spend $100 to a $1,000, they all meet the same standards and studies show the cheapo protects just as well as the big buck ones. So why the difference in price? It is everything else about the helmet, weight, comfort, features, venting, looks, paint, etc.

There is not going to be a helmet that is rated to protect you more than the standards. How could there be, there would have to be a new set of standards and testing system for that. Manufactures don’t rate their own helmets. If they were to say it was safer, what would that really mean.

FMB42

The fact is that certain motorcycle helmets "meet or exceed" the Snell certification.

The key word here is "exceed."

Claiming that all motorcycle helmets only go as far as "meeting" the Snell certification is utter nonsense.

GrouchoWretch

You'll understand my frustration if you think about what I said and what you said for a minute.

How can a product manufacturer boast that his product is safer than a competitor's, or indeed, safer than absolutely minimally necessary? I dunno, man, but car makers do it all the time. Manufacturers of all sorts of products do it, and sales personnel really harp on it, and so do consumers, on forums like this. That whole scene is conspicuously absent from the field of bike helmets. Why?

And it's not just safety performance. I said I get the same answer pretty much no matter what features I ask about. At least in the field of motorcycle helmets, there are tons of different features that distinguish one product from the next, and the effort to sell you on these distinctions is very conspicuous. The most you usually see in bike helmet copy is claims about the shape of the helmet or the holes in it. That is not a lot to distinguish one helmet from another.

POC's multisport helmets (some of them) have an inner part that can detach on impact and rotate independently of the shell. I won't go into the idea behind this feature or whether it's likely to really contribute to safety. I'll just say it's the sort of thing I'm talking about, and I wonder why there's not more of it in the helmet market, and why I had to look so hard to even find out about it.

Mostly we're told that the helmets are the same. That's kinda lame, isn't it? For a supposedly must-have product that your life supposedly may depend on? You wouldn't expect, I dunno, some level of interest in the product itself?

I-Like-To-Bike

So stop asking the same question.
The bike helmet manufacturers have no interest in beating the minimum standard even by inches, let alone miles.
Why? They don't need to, since they can get far more profit and sales by promoting weight, ventilation, and styling features. Silly as it may sound, additional safety is not necessary for the buyers of this product to pay a far higher price for a product that costs no more to manufacture than a plainjane/basic model.

I-Like-To-Bike

It isn't lame to tell the truth. For more on the lameness of helmet promotion go to the helmet thread.

con

Well, let’s talk Snell. It is a standard that is subject to some debate. The standard for the outer shell they use calls for a much harder one that does the DOT standards. It is considered by some to create more injury than the DOT standard. Snell has revised that standard a few timesand is doing so again. There is no simple answer.


I'm just not sure what else you want the helmet makers to say?

GrouchoWretch

I didn't mean you were lame for telling the truth. I mean if that's the truth, then the helmet market is lame. I actually suspect you're right, and that's all we hear because there's not a lot more to say about it.

GrouchoWretch

They could at least make up goofy stories about wanting to build a better bike helmet, like Dyson does with its vacuum cleaners. I mean jeez, sell me a product.

gcottay

From a practical point of view, good fit and preferred level of ventilation are biggies. Weight is also important to some and style to others.

unterhausen

I really don't see how there can be much difference between helmets. And ventilation is pretty good on modern helmets. One day I decided to ride to work without a helmet because I didn't want to sweat so much. Turns out it didn't make a noticeable difference to skip the helmet and I feel uncomfortable without one, so I've never repeated the experiment.

I-Like-To-Bike

How 'bout this for selling? "Replace your helmet every 3-5 years due to invisible degradation, otherwise you are at much greater risk !!"

unterhausen

ok, enough helmet thread material in here

emman123

I have found on the Specialized website under:

https://www.specialized.com/us/en/support/faq
Masterlink Customer Self Help




I searched for "Snell" and a few results popped, one of them a fella inquired "Which one of your child helmets that is available to buy in the UK has been certified to SNELL B90 / B95 standard?" and the reply from SPECIALIZED Agent was "All of our helmets are CPSC and Snell certified." so I suppose these helmets have both the Snell B90 certification as well as the CPSC...the Specialized Align Helmet is sold for 40 bucks I suppose its a good deal

wsbob

The technology for helmet protective material and design that would enable certain helmet manufacturers products to offer vastly superior protection to that of other manufacturers, just isn't there. Maybe not for lack of trying. There does seem to be ongoing efforts to come up with helmet material and design that can do a better job of protection. There just doesn't currently seem to be a sure-fire development that's better by far than what basic foam is capable of offering. Nothing really to brag about, yet, but maybe if people keep bugging manufactures to try harder to come up with something better, they will.

The link below leads to a page that explains about liner technology and materials.

https://www.helmets.org/liners.htm

con

Good point. The NFL can not even develop a helmet to protect their players from brain injury and that is at running speeds!

Burton

Naaaaahhhh - bikes aren't all that different from helmets. Some have better finishes, some use more exotic materials, some are more aerodynamic, and some have 'better' styling. They all still have two wheels, tire sizes are pretty interchangable, and you still have to pedal all of them. And in spite of some bicycles costing 50x the price of another - the same rider will likely be able to achieve about 90% of the performance on the cheaper one that they did on the one costing 50x the price.

The biggest difference is that bicycles are status symbols to some people and helmets aren't - at least not yet.

GrouchoWretch

Can't agree that the level of parity among bikes is even close to what we're talking about among helmets. A $20 Bell from Walmerde works roughly the same as some $200 thing from the bike shop. You can't tell me a $150 Walmerde bike is functionally similar to what you get from the LBS for $1500. Certainly, no salesman or cyclist has ever said that to me about bikes, but they say it about helmets all the time.

GrouchoWretch

Does that work? This industry just doesn't seem to be trying very hard. They could at least make up some revolutionary new trade names for roughly the same materials now and then. New for 2014: ImpaX Polycarbonate shell! Or something.