Will the SNELL Certification Get You Killed?

[flyinlow]

I can attest to why you want the Snell rating. The argument about a single impact versus multiple impacts is valid, but everyone seems to be thinking that the only impact you will have on your head is a single impact which usually is in a lowside accident.

I can testify to the value of a helmet that can withstand mulitple impacts. I had a high side a few years ago at about 35mph. My head banged on the pavement several times as I later recalled and also was validated by the marks on my helmet. I'm sure some of those impacts were in the same spot. It was an HJC AC-11 full face helmet. I have no lingering effects from the crash, no headaches, nothing. The helmet was beat up but no visible cracks. Obviously, I tossed the helmet.

So which is it, do you buy a helmet betting you will have only a single impact, or do you go with the worst case scenario of multiple impacts. The choice is clear for me.

I will continue to buy Snell helmets.

 

[ShinyPartsUp]

I've owned Snell helmets and DOT since the 80's. They are both fine as far as I have read over the years, just built for different crashes. As Jestal noted, it would be nice to know if you are going to crash into a flat anvil or not (DOT)

Currently I own several DOT approved helmets, including the one that cracked and shows tons of road rash from my crash last year. I am thinking of running some passes down the local drag strip next Spring, and NHRA rules for motorcycles require Snell certification, so I am looking for one now for that purpose.

This should be in pointless and never-ending threads. Even the experts can't agree, what makes anybody think a concensus will be built here?

There. I feel better B)

 

[waldmana]

I can attest to why you want the Snell rating. The argument about a single impact versus multiple impacts is valid, but everyone seems to be thinking that the only impact you will have on your head is a single impact which usually is in a lowside accident.
I can testify to the value of a helmet that can withstand mulitple impacts. I had a high side a few years ago at about 35mph. My head banged on the pavement several times as I later recalled and also was validated by the marks on my helmet. I'm sure some of those impacts were in the same spot. It was an HJC AC-11 full face helmet. I have no lingering effects from the crash, no headaches, nothing. The helmet was beat up but no visible cracks. Obviously, I tossed the helmet.

So which is it, do you buy a helmet betting you will have only a single impact, or do you go with the worst case scenario of multiple impacts. The choice is clear for me.

I will continue to buy Snell helmets.

All the helmets in the test were hit repeatedly, just not in the "exact" same place. So, all of the helmets, whether snell or not can take multiple hits. The ones that are not snell enusre your head has less G's applied to it when it hits. Personally, I will continue to get a snell helmet, however, I will go for the ones that produce less G's on your head per the article.

 

[jestal]

All the helmets in the test were hit repeatedly, just not in the "exact" same place. So, all of the helmets, whether snell or not can take multiple hits. The ones that are not snell enusre your head has less G's applied to it when it hits. Personally, I will continue to get a snell helmet, however, I will go for the ones that produce less G's on your head per the article.

I'm not sure this is exactly right......

I always understood that the Snell test requires multiple hits in the same exact spot which is the fundamental difference between their helmet standards and others. A repeat hit in the same exact spot is far more likely in a car (heat against the roll bar example) than a motorcycle maybe but I would find it perfectly believeable to have multiple impacts in the same spot on a bike helmet in a crash. The likelyhood of this happening in a bike crash is less maybe but still possible. A driver's head rattling around in a roll cage is almost certainly to have multiple impacts in the same exact spot in a car wreck.

 

[waldmana]

All the helmets in the test were hit repeatedly, just not in the "exact" same place. So, all of the helmets, whether snell or not can take multiple hits. The ones that are not snell enusre your head has less G's applied to it when it hits. Personally, I will continue to get a snell helmet, however, I will go for the ones that produce less G's on your head per the article.

I'm not sure this is exactly right......

I always understood that the Snell test requires multiple hits in the same exact spot which is the fundamental difference between their helmet standards and others. A repeat hit in the same exact spot is far more likely in a car (heat against the roll bar example) than a motorcycle maybe but I would find it perfectly believeable to have multiple impacts in the same spot on a bike helmet in a crash. The likelyhood of this happening in a bike crash is less maybe but still possible. A driver's head rattling around in a roll cage is almost certainly to have multiple impacts in the same exact spot in a car wreck.

Re-read the test the magizine did on the helmets. They were all hit in the front left, right and rear left and right. I agree about the roll cage in a car, but I would think that hitting the "exact" same spot on a motorcycle get off if much less likely. Hitting in the general area as the initial strike is much more probable. Personally I prefer the helmet that will transfer less G's to my head in a crash. The Vemar is snell rated but still puts up average G's much lower than many other snell helmets. I decided to go with it. I just can't over look the importance of keeping the G's down.

 

[ShinyPartsUp]

All the helmets in the test were hit repeatedly, just not in the "exact" same place. So, all of the helmets, whether snell or not can take multiple hits. The ones that are not snell enusre your head has less G's applied to it when it hits. Personally, I will continue to get a snell helmet, however, I will go for the ones that produce less G's on your head per the article.

I'm not sure this is exactly right......

I always understood that the Snell test requires multiple hits in the same exact spot which is the fundamental difference between their helmet standards and others. A repeat hit in the same exact spot is far more likely in a car (heat against the roll bar example) than a motorcycle maybe but I would find it perfectly believeable to have multiple impacts in the same spot on a bike helmet in a crash. The likelyhood of this happening in a bike crash is less maybe but still possible. A driver's head rattling around in a roll cage is almost certainly to have multiple impacts in the same exact spot in a car wreck.

Re-read the test the magizine did on the helmets. They were all hit in the front left, right and rear left and right. I agree about the roll cage in a car, but I would think that hitting the "exact" same spot on a motorcycle get off if much less likely. Hitting in the general area as the initial strike is much more probable. Personally I prefer the helmet that will transfer less G's to my head in a crash. The Vemar is snell rated but still puts up average G's much lower than many other snell helmets. I decided to go with it. I just can't over look the importance of keeping the G's down.

IIRC, that is the exact reasoning why DOT does not require the same spot to be hit repeatedly in their tests. That is, the likelihood of that scenario occuring is much smaller than hitting blunt surfaces (e.g. tarmac) in several different places, and the risk of G forces causing injury more pertinent as a safety issue. The Snell standards are placing a premium on avoiding puncture injuries to the skull.

But I also like Snell foundation standards being tested on off-the-shelf helmets; rather than just manufacturer statements of compliance with the DOT standards. That and the rumor I have heard over the years that fake DOT stickers can be bought for non-DOT standard skid lids and such is scary.

Just my 2 Lincolns.........