Helmet Safety Classification Question

Many believe that ECE is even better than SNELL and DOT, especially for MX helmets.


There was a great article in one of the magazines, Motorcyclist, I believe, that discussed all the different approvals and how SNELL may not be the best for MX, as it requires a helmet to be too firm and not allow some give for the multiple blows a head takes in a MX crash.

SNELL is a single blow requirement and it is too high a load to be applicable to MX.


I know FTE has that article saved somewhere and I will look for it, but it is one of the best articles on helmet safety ever written

Here it is...read all of it

http://www.motorcyclistonline.com/gearbox/motorcycle_helmet_review/inde…

in a short sense, ece is just another safety rating. while snell seems to be the elite of ratings, any dot rating is good, snell is even better. ece, i believe is the british standard and seems to be upheld as elite as snell

SNELL is not the "main" one.

In the US, DOT certification is compulsory, SNELL is voluntary.

ECE certification (wich includes production batch testing) is compulsory.

this is an absolutely uneducated statement based on "I hears" and "as far as I knows".

ECE is not the British standard (that would be BSI) and this shows you are making a statement out of very poor knowledge of helmet safety, certifications and ratings.

Oh snap!

Youse got tolded

Got my knowledge from a well known Fl. mini dad who went to europe to better understand the testing, He then went from brand A to brand B helmet due to it showing better testing at the lower impact G's that normally come from mx racing. Thankfully my son has only had 1 minor concussion in almost 4 years of riding.

Seems like pitbike502 should read the article posted by Dave.

Check this excerpt, lol

"How good is your helmet? Will it actually protect your brain in your next crash?

These seem like easy questions, ones you probably think you can answer by reciting the lofty standards your helmet meets and the lofty price you might have paid for it. But the real answers, as you are about to see, are anything but easy"

Snell Foundation and ECE certifications are incredibly expensive for manufacturers.

Most now simply choose one or the other to add to your DOT stamp.

Current thinking is that the ECE argument for MX/off-road helmets is a good one. It does make sense.

BTW - ECE is the standard across the common market in Europe and is the required standard in 50 countries.

Actually, I believe I am at liberty to talk about helmet safety and ratings. For 2 years in a row I participated to a helmet safety conference at Parts Unlimited NVP, this last year as one of the representatives who took question from the room.
Even though I am employed by a European manufacturer, I have never hidden my preferences towards the better structured, better researched, European safety ratings, from body-armor and other protections to helmets. I have never been a fan of things you can pay to obtain.

Here's a small reply I had posted on a friend's forum:

OK, here we go I am going to try to give as much info on this, but it's probably going to be an ongoing conversation.

First of all, I do not want to offend anyone but the idea that the most expensive helmets are the safest ones is an urban legend, used in marketing by mainly 2 brands over the past years, in the US. The amount of $$ you spend in your helmet doesn't have an direct correlation with the level of safety, even though "too cheap" is surely not good neither.

What you buy when you spend money in an "expensive" (above $500) helmet is mainly comfort, better fabric, better cheek-pads feel, more features, usually more venting because more work has been spent in design and development of the lid. More vents, more complicated mold and eps.)

In some cases, the major brands, Fox, TLD, Thor, One, increase the price of the helmets depending on graphics (as an example, our high-end road racing helmet retails around $670 but one of our graphics retails at $759 because as you know it's all decals manually applied on the helmets by workers (mostly ladies in Italy) and the more complex the graphics, the longer it takes to apply them correctly.)

a quick example about helmet prices vs. safety:
The June 2005 Motorcyclist magazine addressed this controversy. That issue contains a detailed article on an extensive test that was conducted on 16 different motorcycle helmets, ranging from the $89.00 Z1R to the $700.00 Schuberth S1.

Their conclusion is that the inexpensive, polycarbonate shell Z1R transferred an average of 152Gs to the head-form, vs. 211Gs of the Snell-approved Scorpion EXO-700.

Also, the UK's RIDE magazine tested 28 helmets in the May 2005 issue (and over and over again since then, finding the same results). While the testing methodology was slightly different, they also found that the HJC AC-11 provided the second best impact absorption of the lot. Could it be that a motorcycle helmet doesn't necessarily have to be expensive to provide good protection?

There's much, much more to the story, and I strongly suggest reading both articles and studying this subject before you buy your next helmet. One of the conclusions in the Motorcyclist magazine article is that a softer polycarbonate DOT-only approved helmet may provide the highest levels of protection.
This has been proven by the 2008 introduction of the SHARP standard in the UK which has proven, by testing helmets further and harder than any other standards that the more expensive Arais and Shoei didn't necessarily provide better impact absorption.

The confusion is due to the various standards and the war between SNELL and DOT and the ECE standards. Both the DOT and the ECE being compulsory, DOT for the US and ECE for the 27 nations of the European Union. SNELL is not compulsory and a paying standard (manufacturers pay the SNELL sticker $0.40 per helmet).
SNELL of course, being an American company has a very good image in the US market (SNELL helmets do not pass the ECE tests so cannot be sold in the EU) and the Snell sticker has become a marketing gimmick. A manufacturer puts that sticker in his helmet and he can increase the price by $50 to 100. Because the image associated with Snell means a better and stronger helmet. Therefore must be worth a whole lot more money.

All motorcycle helmets sold in the U.S.A. must meet DOT standards, but they are not required to meet Snell standards. A motorcycle helmet that meets both DOT and Snell standards may have gone through different testing schemes, but may not necessarily be superior to helmets that meet only the DOT standard, although many motorcyclists look for helmets that meet both DOT and Snell standards.

There's some level of controversy regarding which standard or testing regime is the "best", and it gets more complicated if you consider the European ECE 22.05 standard. For example, it's our understanding that Snell uses an edge anvil test that is not required in the DOT standard.

You may hear different opinions about this particular test, and some manufacturers claim that a helmet designed to meet the Snell edge anvil test may end up being heavier than the same model designed to meet DOT-only or ECE 22.05.

Heavier helmets may not be as desirable as lighter helmets, and may cause different types of trauma in case of an accident. Especially here, we are talking motocross and off-road. unfortunately most tests and standard are based on road motorcycling and road accidents.

Here's an interesting comparison study (http://www.msf-usa.org/imsc/proceedings/a-Thom-ComparisonTestsofMotorcy…) by the Motorcycle Safety Foundation comparing the forces transmitted to helmets that meet different safety standards.

The hardest Snell test for a motorcycle helmet is a two-strike test onto a hemispherical chunk of stainless steel about the size of an orange. The first hit is at an energy of 150 joules, which translates to dropping a 5-kilo weight about 10 feet—an extremely high-energy impact. The next hit, on the same spot, is set at 110 joules, or about an 8-foot drop. To pass, the helmet is not allowed to transmit more than 300 Gs to the headform in either hit.

Tough tests such as this have driven helmet development over the years. But do they have any practical application on the street, where a hit as hard as the hardest single Snell impact may only happen in 1 percent of actual accidents? And where an impact as severe as the two-drop hemi test happens just short of never?

For SNELL the manufacturer has to send some helmets to SNELL before production. SNELL tests the helmets with 2 blow to an area that encompasses the top of the helmet, mostly the crown.

ECE tests the helmets on 6 impact points (sides, chin, rear, front and crown). ECE imposes batch testing, which means that every certain number of helmet produced, a small amount is taken our of the line of production and re-tested. The maximum batch allowed is 3,200 units.

So, ECE helmets are always lighter than the SNELL helmets, therefore resulting in less concussions because more emphasis is put on the absorption of the impact, which is actually more important to us off-road/MXers.
The Arai, Shoei, Fox, etc used in Europe are lighter than the SNELL ones found in the US and the FIM required standard is the ECE standard.

All this was all good and fine and the SNELL versus ECE war was raging nicely while we were all sipping our Diet Coke and ice-tea until out of the blue, SNELL decided to amend their standard and from SNELL M2005 moved to SNELL M2010 this past October.

Motorcyclist magazine:
“Snell sees the light
Sometimes it's hard to be humble. The Snell Foundation recently announced major changes to its proposed M2010 motorcycle helmet standard that would bring it more in line with the U.S. DOT and European ECE 22.05 standards.
Snell is now acknowledging the fact that smaller heads weigh less than bigger ones—and that the helmets we put on those heads should be designed around that fact.
Practically speaking, this means smaller-sized Snell 2010 helmets will likely be designed using less-rigid shells and softer Styrofoam liners (EXACTLY WHAT THE ECE STANDARD HAVE BEEN SAYING FOR A DECADE), because the head forms they will be tested with will be considerably lighter, reducing the total energy of the test impacts.
This is a very good thing. It also means a smaller helmet designed to meet Snell M2010 might not pass Snell 2005. Which would we pick? The 2010 helmet, every time.
We questioned Snell's position that "one weight fits all" in our "Blowing the Lid Off" helmet-impact-test story (Motorcyclist, June 2005).
Snell's recent reversal of its position acknowledges that the respected head-injury scientists who have been arguing with the Foundation about this for years were right.”

For your info, 2.2% of severe head injuries result from impact on the crown of the helmet, where SNELL do their impact test.

Anyway, to go back to the pricing questions, there's more than just safety when it comes to the cost of a helmet.

Choosing a motorcycle helmet would be easy if it was simply matter of picking out a size and a color. Unfortunately, different brands of helmets or even different models within the same brand can have a completely different fit and feel – and cost has nothing to do with it, because some of the least inexpensive helmets will fit and feel better than helmets costing twice as much or more.

Apparently, many motorcyclists don’t realize that in addition to size, motorcycle helmets come in a variety of different internal shapes.

Shape is one of the most important factors to understand when purchasing a motorcycle helmet. Helmets are expensive, and if you can only own one, it should be the highest quality, best fitting helmet you can find within your budget constraints.

In fact, it's almost impossible to find the "perfect" fit, or even an acceptable fit, without trying on at least several different helmets and wearing each one for an extended period of time. Even a helmet that feels great in the shop may feel like a medieval torture device after only a few minutes on a motorcycle.

Obviously, the problem of finding a helmet with the correct fit will be compounded when purchasing from an online vendor, because the sale is usually completed without actually seeing the helmet and without trying it on.

Safety is the primary reason for wearing a motorcycle helmet, but one of the most important factors to consider when purchasing a new helmet is comfort. Any protection that a helmet can offer is of no value if it is too uncomfortable to wear.

The first and one of the most important manufacturer who have decided it was time to stop creaming on the consumer and that safety wasn't only linked to high dollar, is SHOEI! You must have noticed that drastic price reduction in the Shoei off-road helmet. Protection is the same, the SNELL sticker is still on there, but it dropped about $250 over the last year.

Arai themselves, the arrogant (but oh so good) company that refuses to change things, especially in the off-road segment (they got to pay-off those molds and machines at some points) is now introducing a new street helmet that will retail in the $600, after all the blah-blah about their $800 lid. Is the $400 Arai less safe than the $600 which is less safe than the $800? Absolutely not. The price difference is reached by features and comfort.

Keep an eye on this one too, very much criticized by lobbies led by Arai and Shoei importer in the UK and Europe, it does give some good idea. unfortunately they are late on their MX helmets test releases.

My point
By any helmet you feel comfortable, Fox, Thor, One Industries, Arai, Shoei, Bell, Shark, AGV, TLD, Shift, HJC, KBC, as long as the price is right for your budget, as long as the fit is good and the helmet comfortable over a 30 minutes moto or a long off-road ride, those are all as safe as each others. There's been as many concussion on Arai and Shoei helmets in MX/SX (Josh Grant, Travis Preston, Travis Pastrana, Zach Ozborne, Broc Hepler, Steve Ramon, Trey Canard) as in other helmets.
Try your helmet, get comfortable, it is very important to try different cheek-pads and crown-pads to find the right fit and go with what you can get. The DOT ECe helmets will be lighter than the DOT SNELL helmets and the SNELL released after October 2009 are lighter and offer better absorption than the previous SNELL M2005.

China, Indonesia, Korea produce great helmets, as good as what we do in Europe and what's done in Japan. But China produces what you ask them and if you don't control the quality, the production, be ready for some surprises, some untold cost savings, etc.
Our helmets are designed, developed, first produced, tested and finished in Italy (Fox, Thor, TLD, etc, do that here in the US). We all then take our production to Asia because the labor is overall much cheaper and because the main 3 helmets factories have the best tools and machinery right now. A mold costs between $1.5M and $2M over there (if that mold was done here, it would cost up to 45% more than that).

The most important point with China, Indonesia or Korea is that the manufacturer need to very strongly control production. We have 3 Italian guys living there as expats' who are accountable for the quality control. With the ECE batch testing, there is really no mistake allowed for us. Hence why we are sometimes late in delivering our helmets to our partners. When you have to throw away 5,000 lids because your resident dude found a screw up on 5 lids, it is painful. Result, we are 2 months late on the delivery in the US, but my son will wear our helmet because I have been through the development process and I know how it was made.

But Tanner has been wearing his One Industries, Taao his Thor and me a Bell, Axo, Shoei, One Ind. and Arai in the last years. All good. Tanner now uses his One for BMX and an AGV for go-kart. I have moved to the AGV for road riding and karting of course and will be using our MT-X and AX-8 when those come available.

By the way, as soon as I receive my size test samples for the AX-8 (our carbon/kevlar composite lid) Brad and I will organize a test private Club 57 test sessions. I will need guys who wear from S to XXL

Man, that was a long read.

May not be the most cost effective approach for the consumer, but I would value maximum protection / one hit use helmets over a helmet that was engineered to sacrifice some level of additional protection or firmness for multi-hit/use helmets.


"Over the last 30 years," continues Newman, "we've come to the realization that people falling off motorcycles hardly ever, ever hit their head in the same place twice. So we have helmets that are designed to withstand two hits at the same site. But in doing so, we have severely, severely compromised their ability to take one hit and absorb energy properly."

The AMA has minimum requirements for AMA Pro racing, the helmet has to be certified by one of the major certifications standard, ECE, DOT, SNELL, BSI, I believe the Australian certification system too.

Again, don't forget that the SNELL rating is a voluntary one, manufacturer decide if they want to do it or not. It is not recognized nor imposed as the only standard. It should not since it's a private institution.

All helmets in the US have to be DOT. Some manufacturers decide to go DOT + SNELL or DOT + ECE or still a small amount DOT + BSI or DOT alone.

The most important in all the rating is that SNELL M2010 is a recognition that the ECE rating was pretty right all those past years, it is also a negation of the SNELL M2005 rating, even if they say it isn't. But they are now demanding for lighter shells for smaller size helmets (up to Large or XL I believe).