Helmet certification question

[BruceWayne911]

I'm currently using a HJC DOT certified helmet. I was told that just having the DOT cert is not good enough you gotta have ECE or Snell as well. So I went to the motorcycle dealership shopping for a modular helmet and there were alot of reputable brands that only had the DOT cert.

I noticed some of the smaller sized modular helmets had both DOT and ECE cert but the 3XL sizes(my size) only had the DOT cert. A guy working there said that any modular helmet 3XL and up doesn't get the ECE cert. Is this true? These are the brands I was looking at for modular helmets: Shoei, HJC i90, Scorpion EXO, LS2, Simpson, Schuberth.

[mjh937]

Any name brand helmet that fits properly will be fine.  You can argue certifications forever (just Google it).  I do not think Snell will certify a modular helmet, but that does not mean there are not good ones.  Just do some homework as DOT certification is very easy to get and there are some helmets on the market that are DOT certified but that I would never wear. 

[klx678]

4 hours ago, BruceWayne911 said:

I'm currently using a HJC DOT certified helmet. I was told that just having the DOT cert is not good enough you gotta have ECE or Snell as well. So I went to the motorcycle dealership shopping for a modular helmet and there were alot of reputable brands that only had the DOT cert.

I noticed some of the smaller sized modular helmets had both DOT and ECE cert but the 3XL sizes(my size) only had the DOT cert. A guy working there said that any modular helmet 3XL and up doesn't get the ECE cert. Is this true? These are the brands I was looking at for modular helmets: Shoei, HJC i90, Scorpion EXO, LS2, Simpson, Schuberth.

Simply put, that's BS.  Plus odds are if you look in the HJC it will likely have at least the ECE 22.5 rating.  In the US the DOT rating will be prominent, but an name brand like Bell will be ECE too.   My Bell MX-9 Adventure MIPS helmet has both ratings.

If you do some serious deeper research you will find that the DOT standard is actually pretty good and is, I think, the only one that uses a time dwell on impacts, which is better than just the impact alone.   The problem with DOT from most riders' standpoint is that it is voluntary in testing.  In other words, since a lot of states don't have helmet laws, there is very little DOT agency testing, unlike Snell and ECE.   But the fact is if any lawyer learned a client was seriously injured in a helmet that was supposed to meet DOT standards, but it didn't, they would be winning a lot of money in court.

I put more value in ECE 22.05 than in the new 22.06, because they were kind of coerced by FIM to raise the impact value and it is pretty well documented that the level they have reached is beyond that which would prove fatal.   Previous value was not.

Your problem with the 3X is that the EPS in the helmet is thinned down to make the larger size.   The new ECE 22.06 standard now includes modular helmets.   Personally I wouldn't be overly concerned if a name brand only has DOT, because the standard is fairly rigid and I'd say the litigious nature of the U.S. market would have any of those name brand helmets making the thing as darn close to the best protection as possible.   The reason why I have confidence in the Bell MX-9.   Why would Bell intentionally make a less safe helmet?

As for Snell, I lost confidence in their standards after the infamous Blowing the LId Off article in Motorcyclist in 2005.  They still have some standards that relate more to automobile racing as opposed to motorcycle racing, much less road riding.   Like the double hit in one spot, that, unlike ratting one's helmeted head in a roll cage, is about as likely as being struck by lightning twice in the same spot.   It is virtually unlikely to happen.   They were overboard and wouldn't admit it.  It was proven that $100 polycarbonate DOT and ECE helmets actually transmitted significantly less shock to the skull and brain than did the Snell helmets in the testing directed by Dr. David Thom, a world renown helmet expert.

Racing sets up a different precedent, most organizations require Snell in the U.S.  Overseas Snell is ignored, ECE is the standard.  And as I say, my Bell MX-9 polycarbonate helmet meets ECE 22.05,  the new standard wasn't in effect when I bought the helmet.

Here are some links in a sort of timeline set up of the situation with helmets:

Hurt Report - Wikipedia

Motorcycle Helmet Performance: Blowing the Lid Off

Snell technical response to Blowing the lid off

Reply to Snell - from Sport Bikes Net

The Owner Of 6D Helmets commentary on ECE 22.06   about standards 4:35 min in, listen to his comments at 7:40 min on the best possible standards.   Rotational forces mentioned around 8:50 min.  But then listen to the section about the FIM consulting with 6D, but then listen in at around 11:00 min about the impact velocity called for by FIM and eventually adopted by ECE in the 22.06 standards.

Oh, and no Snell does not approve any modulars.   One other point, most modular helmet wearers could care less if the helmet met Snell standards and also figure that a name brand helmet manufacturer will have their best possible protective quality in any helmet they make.

Bell has a famous quote I clipped from their web page hawking a tee shirt:

       "If you have a $10 head, wear a $10 helmet." This is a motto that Bell has believed in for decades that still rings true to this day. 

Funny part was when they started this campaign I was working in a shop and we carried both the Bell and Shoei lines, plus our low line Vetter road and MX helmets.  The low line Vetter was $49 when the Star was $200.  Funny part - the Vetter was a polycarbonate replica of the Bell Star and Moto Star, made by Bell!  it was branded as such on the strap as well as in design.  Here is one of the high line helmet makers making one of the least expensive helmets while making that statement.   I would bet the EPS in the Vetter was the same as in the fiberglass Star, but with a cheaper textile covering.  I know for a fact that the face shields were interchangeable.

So if Bell had enough faith - in spite of their quote - to make the Vetter version as it did with their banner model, it had to be pretty darn good.   Back then the only Snell test that the polycarbonate shells couldn't meet was the chemical solutions testing.   Bieffe eventually did by simply painting the shell with a resistive paint. 

 

In summary:   Suffice it to say I have no problem with polycarbonate shell helmets either from what I have read and learned over the past forty years from when I started in motorcycle sales to date.  A good helmet maker will make safe helmets with either material.  And most name brand helmets that have DOT stickers also will have ECE 22.05 capability.  In the futur helmets I may buy, I wish I could get an ECE 22.05 with rotational added, but not the impact speed.   

 

 

 

Edited March 6, 2022 by klx678

[M. Hausknecht]

I suggest you take advantage of the info here:

SHARP - THE HELMET SAFETY SCHEME

---

Welcome to SHARP, the Safety Helmet Assessment and Rating Programme, a scheme to help motorcyclists make an informed...

I have one other thing to add. Many people buy helmets that don't fit very well and, typically, they are too large for their heads because a helmet that really fits should be decidedly snug all around your head. You cannot wear a properly snug helmet, however, if your head is the wrong shape for the helmet. For many, a helmet is either too long or too wide for their head but, because of the nice foam padding, the wearer thinks it fits. For example, my head is "long oval" shaped. If I tried to wear a helmet designed for a rounder head, I'd need a helmet that is too large to fit properly (snug front to back but loose side to side).  Unfortunately, many helmet makers don't indicate what shape head each of their helmet models is intended for, which means trying on a lot of helmets and understanding how it should feel, to find one that fits a head with your shape.

[shinyribs]

There is one particular internet personality that decided to go gunning after DOT labels a while back. He's a content creator by trade, so he's always looking to create new content. Likeable guy, but it's his job.  Throughout his video on how bad DOT is he likes to keep reminding us that his mom is a "scientist" and how she helped him with his book report. Eh.

 

The brands of helmets you listed are solid names to choose from. 

 

The only thing I will say is that I used to have a Scorpion EXO modular. It was beautiful and incredibly comfortable. Fairly quiet as well. The beak was too short, so it was functionality useless- decoration only. The return spring for the sun visor was too light, so it ended up sagging partially or bouncing around. Which screwed with your vision at worst, or just made constant banging noises at least. The latches for the modular portion became unreliable. At first it didn't bother me too bad as I figured the fasteners just loosened up and I'd go in with some loctite and fix it. I was shocked at how delicate the latching system was. Tiny little wood screws jammed in little plastic posts that protrude from the plastic helmet shell. Sure, the latches were metal, but the attachments were pityful. I'm talking about screws the size of pencil lead. Just the lead part!

I bought the helmet second hand and I sold it after I did what I could to retighten the latches. I passed the word on to the next guy, but I've always regretted it. I shouldn't have sold that helmet for someone else to put their head. I should've thrown it in the trash where it belonged. 

 

If you don't care about full face helmets and are cool riding with an open face lid, go for it. Dang, that thing was comfy and worked very. well with eyeglasses. If you want full face protection I personally don't think they're system is legitimate. Just my $0.02

[klx678]

I should say I've worn glasses for the past thirty years with full face street, dual sport, and MX w/OTG goggles.  I made sure glasses worked with the helmets and 99-44/100 of the time, no problem.  On occasions I get a bit absent minded and start to pull on my helmet with my glasses on, but realize it quickly.   Just sayin' it becomes an automatic.   But I do know others who love the modulars because they can put the helmet on without taking glasses off, so no argument, just a comment from personal experience, should it become a consideration.

Good fortunes on your research and choice.  Just remember the first five check points in order of importance:

1. fit
2. fit
3. fit
4. brand
5. price

Edited March 7, 2022 by klx678

[cheetahman023]

On 3/6/2022 at 1:55 PM, M. Hausknecht said:

I suggest you take advantage of the info here:

SHARP - THE HELMET SAFETY SCHEME

---

Welcome to SHARP, the Safety Helmet Assessment and Rating Programme, a scheme to help motorcyclists make an informed...

I have one other thing to add. Many people buy helmets that don't fit very well and, typically, they are too large for their heads because a helmet that really fits should be decidedly snug all around your head. You cannot wear a properly snug helmet, however, if your head is the wrong shape for the helmet. For many, a helmet is either too long or too wide for their head but, because of the nice foam padding, the wearer thinks it fits. For example, my head is "long oval" shaped. If I tried to wear a helmet designed for a rounder head, I'd need a helmet that is too large to fit properly (snug front to back but loose side to side).  Unfortunately, many helmet makers don't indicate what shape head each of their helmet models is intended for, which means trying on a lot of helmets and understanding how it should feel, to find one that fits a head with your shape.

If you go to Revzilla's website you can filter by your head shape.   Round oval, Intermediate Oval or Long Oval.  It will list all the Make/Model helmets in their inventory.