These tests are without any doubt the most stringent EVER applied to safety helmets and thats a FACT. I simply don't understand why some people have such a problem admitting they were WRONG!

SHARP is a UK government (Department of Transport) scheme paid for by the UK taxpayers. Are you really suggesting these government scientists don't know what they are doing???

The BIG boys in helmet manufacturing (Arai, Shoei) were involved in the concept and test regime from the start. It was only AFTER their products got a good slating that they raised doubts as to the effectiveness of the tests. It's "sour grapes" pure and simple...

The helmet makers that got good results are very happy with the test regime.

Sales of the £50 Lazer LZ6 have increased enormously since the SHARP tests were published.

I have had a look at this helmet myself and can confirm it appeared very well made and reasonably comfy, cetainly worth a mere £50!

GRAB YOURSELF A BARGAIN WHILE YOU STILL CAN...

I read a very good article on independent tests recently (can't find it again, sorry) which suggested that making helmet to meet existing (pre-SHARP) tests produced helmets that weren't that good in the real world.

The end result being 'flimsy' cheap chinese helmets worked better in real world crashes than their more robust and expensive rivals.

I don't buy on price personally, I buy on fit. For my over-sized square head that means expensive Arais. Oddly it used to mean expensive Shoeis but the designs seem to have changed in recent years.

So... makes not odds to me either way.

This is partly the basis of my doubts on the scheme too.

What may provide perfect protection for city commuters and scooter riders may be totally inadequate for a track day junkie, even those in the slow group. Most of us will seek out country roads for a nice Sunday ride out and you're looking at the closing speed of oncoming traffic being at least 100mph.

And lets not forget, it's only in recent years that a non-sportsbike has been able to break in to the top 5 best sellers in the UK, i.e. BMW GS, due to the "Ewan and Charley" phenomena. Maybe the scheme has chosen to ignore that but to sum up, we have a ratings system assessed at less than 20mph, where as the top 4 best sellers in the UK can all double the national speed limit with ease!

RIDE mag, unlike MCN, has no obvious affiliation with a helmet manufacturer and they use an impact speed of 120mph in their independent tests. Not realistic you may say but I see a regular indicated (and perfectly legal) 150mph+ on the autobahn's every time I go to Germany and that's with luggage and still accelerating. Some helmets (even the cheap ones) came off better in RIDE's tests, some worse, and yes, Arai did throw their toys out of the pram as expected. Whether you favour RIDE's or SHARP's results would depend on your definition of reasonable road use and being fit for purpose.

What is worrying is that if a helmet is capable of absorbing such a low speed impact so well and apparently so much better than an carbon or composite lid, are they able to retain these same characteristics after a minor drop, off a chair for example, or does the deformation (like a crumple zone) make the helmet unsafe? Like I've said before, I respect Neil's viewpoint but I think the tests leave a lot of questions unanswered. One thing is certain and that is more people will give more thought to their choice of helmet, whether they choose to trust the SHARP ratings or not. Do your own research before you buy and make an informed choice.

One of the bike magazines tested this a few years ago. They lobbed a helmet off a mountain. It looked battered and tested exactly like a new one.

I don't know what the build was, but I've always suspected the 'of you drop it buy a new one' myth was started by helmet manufaturers.

As for 100mph impacts with oncoming traffic. I wouldn't worry. Even if your head survives the rest of you won't.

I AGREE

Now that is beyond refute...

Just a thought on RIDE's 120mph impact speed is that not surely for a Sportsbike Helmet as is the 150mph plus on the autobahn. Are the majority of adventure riders ever going to go much over the ton for very long. Most fully laden trail bikes struggle to go much quicker and suffer vibes etc. Then theres the other issue of why we travel. Personaly I do it to see countries and on foreign unfimiliar roads you dont take a lot in if you are concentrating at going over the ton. Ditto the survival rate at in impact speed of much more than 60 mph. I cant imagine many folk surviving a head on at much over 40 mph into any hard object. No matter how good the helmet is.

I'm just off to buy a pair of £200 evisu jeans why because I'm sure they will look so much better than my mates £5 tesco specials, I'm sure they will last 50 times longer as well !

I think its harsh when someone says someone else is " full of crap ", just because they havnt understood the main point of the topic.

If you strike a good deal on a £400 helmet does it cease to be a £400 helmet, rrp is just that recomended. ie the price any idiot will pay not the price some may pay. I always try to strike a deal on anything I purchase, idiots are the ones who pay the ticket price, they push the price up for other idiots.

Maybe we could resolve this discussion with a butt off. Those in favour of value and Test results could run head on at those wearing their Arishoegv Lids and the winner is the last helmet standing.

4 days till travel, and I can ignore this...
 

the problem is, the nonsense peddled that started this thread:

"These tests are without any doubt the most stringent EVER applied to safety helmets and thats a FACT"

there is no FACT in that statement, it's a complete mis-representation of the truth.

in addition, this thread seems to confirm that fit, feel and intended use over-ride price and safety rating. so we pretty much all agree.

somewhat confirmed by the original poster buying an open face (due to high degrees of heat in the Kent area), which was a non-SHARP-rated helmet.

but this has almost nothing to do with travel.....

Very true. A friend of my uncle was decapitated after hitting a truck. No idea what helmet he was wearing but it's performance was obviously irrelevant. I was simply trying to illustrate that the test speed used is a little on the low side compared to the capabilities of modern bikes. Maybe my viewpoint is only relevant to sportsbike riders who are much more likely to throw themselves into a field but let's be honest, no-one buys an R1 or any other litre sports bike to ride at legal speeds.

:rofl:. I'd pay to watch that.

I always try to pay below list too and don't buy into paying over the odds because some Moto GP or WSB rider gets paid to wear one. I don't buy ones with graphics or iridium visors either as I don't feel the need to look like a power-ranger.

I'm not going to ignore these tests as they do have some validity, but I'll certainly be cross-referencing them with other tests before I part with any cash.

Neil is a former motorcycle traffic cop. Are you insinuating that his statements would be anything other than the truth?


Sorry, couldn't resist

:Beach:

"Neil is a former motorcycle traffic cop. Are you insinuating that his statements would be anything other than the truth?"

you ride/rode a fast bike, so I guess we have similar views on the status of traffic cops...

but yeah, I think there's mis-information here.

PS. I just thought ( in a general sense ) poo smells like poo not matter what animal it comes out of. make of that what you will...

It seems like everyone is starting to agree wow. Yes there may be flaws to the new tests but it would be stupid to disregard the results just because a cheaper helmet seems to perform so well. I know that before I choose my next lid I will study the results and try on a few of the highest performers and if the one that suits me the most costs £60 well then thats my luck.

I am not in a position to spend £300 plus on a Helmet it doesnt make me stupid or selfish toward my loved ones. I am just living in the real world, paying the bills and getting out on the bike whenever I can. If a cheaper helmet can save me in a fall and lets be fair thats what we need a helmet to do, because when you factor in fast moving solid objects then the odds are always against us. I have had £200 helmets but presently my lid cost £35 quid its a no namer but made in the very same factory as one that sells for £100. Mines plain grey and it keeps me safe. I agree 100 % that fit and feel are important factors noise doesnt worry me as much, I ride to music most of the time it keeps me alert. I would be happy to ride without a helmet, I have and I will again, when conditions allow.

The day I decide bikes are too dangerous is the day I stop riding, not the day I buy a more expensive lid because clever marketing brainwashed me into beliving it was safer.

Dougie have a safe and great journey :scooter:

"The day I decide bikes are too dangerous is the day I stop riding"

that's perfect....