Wednesday, September 30, 2009

Motorcycle Helmets: The Snell debate rages on

Some people just won't wear a Snell-rated helmet...
Via Dealer News

Dexter Ford of The New York Times has written an interesting article on helmet ratings and whether motorcycle riders should choose Snell-rated helmets. 'The certification by Snell, a nonprofit research and testing organization financed by helmet makers, is not mandatory for road use but it is for some racing series, which can lead consumers to assume that a Snell-compliant helmet is safer — an assumption that is not agreed upon by researchers,' says Ford.

According to Ford's article, 'Many head-injury scientists, motorcycle-accident researchers and helmet makers say they are concerned that the “premium protection" proffered by current Snell-certified helmets may not be better after all. They argue that current Snell-rated helmets are too rigid and unyielding to properly absorb impact energy in the great majority of motorcycle crashes, subjecting riders to preventable brain injuries.'

'Hugh H. Hurt, a researcher who developed the Head Protection Research Laboratory at the University of Southern California, and author of the Hurt Report, a seminal study of motorcycle crashes, calls the current Snell M2005 standard 'a little bit excessive,' says Ford's article. 'People are wearing these so-called high performance helmets and are getting diffuse brain injuries. Well, they’re screwed up for life. Taking 300 g’s is not a safe thing,' says Hurt.

If you ride motorcycles, you should definitely read the full story on The NY Times here

Ms Wilde and Ms Knightley certainly don't care about Snell ratings...

1 comment:

walter said...

isnt this old news? motorcyclist did an in depth article on the fallacy of Snell a few years ago -- 2005 to be exact.

here's a link:


Random Ramblings