Government helmet ratings - top rated for £30

[guile]

Are these ratings considered reliable? Just started looking at them and you can get a 5 star-rated helmet for £30 on ebay (duchinni d832). Looks too good to be true.

https://sharp.direct.gov.uk/testhelmetlist?order=field_price_value&sort=asc&sharp-make=All&sharp-model=&sharp-type=All&sharp-rating=5

[stinkwheel]

Yes. They are measuring energy dissipation.

Some of the cheaper helmets smash entirely to bits on impact. This is actually, in all probability, what you want to happen if your head is inside it as it dissipates the maximum amount of energy.

They are only good if they fit though. A badly fitting helmet could easily be more dangerous than not wearing one at all.

Even a well fitting one doesn't help as much as most people seem to think they do. This is why I consider visability to be of more importance than the star rating of the helmet. Seeing and avoiding the crash in the first place is the best strategy.

So try it on to make sure it fits and that you can see out. Don't buy a helmet off ebay unseen.

It would be in interesting exercise to make the shittiest helmet that still passes the EU regulations. I bet you could do it using cloth-covered polystyrene. You could show it to people on their CBT and say "The helmet you are wearing has to be no better than this at protecting you in a crash. Try not to fall off.".
____________________
“Rule one: Always stick around for one more drink. That's when things happen. That's when you find out everything you want to know.”
I did the 2010 Round Britain Rally on my 350 Bullet. 89 landmarks, 3 months, 9,500 miles.

[lihp]

the star ratings are also comparable only to helmets of similar style.

An open face helmet can also score 5 stars, which is stupid.

[Ste]

A £600 top of the range 2014 latest and greatest Arai lid will be worse in a crash than a £30 no name lid that fits you better than the Arai.

Fit is everything. But as Mein Führer points out, avoiding crashing in the first place is the best plan.

[dave666]

People pay hundreds of pounds for looks, comfort, features and name recognition.

a £30 helmet is fine safety wise.

[pinkyfloyd]

My issue with SHARP and many instructors I know have the same views. Its not a real world test. They test impacts in various areas and run all the tests they run but the reality is, the only way to really test how a helmet performs is by having an accident in it.

But as said a few times. Fit is more important than price etc.

We have been informed that if you do have an accident involving a head impact then get in contact with the manufacturer. Many big names would want you to send your damaged lid back to them and some offer discount on a replacement because the info stored in your helmet is gold dust to their tech guys.
____________________
illuminateTHEmind wrote: I am just more evolved than most of you guys... this allows me to pick of things quickly which would have normally taken the common man years to master
Hockeystorm65:.well there are childish arguments...there are very childish arguments.....there are really stupid childish arguments and now there are......Pinkfloyd arguments!
Teflon-Mike:I think I agree with just about all Pinky has said.

[Tungtvann]

[Rogerborg]

[lihp]

[_Iain_]

I did a bit of research into the whole SHARP thing and concluded it was bollocks that made it easier for me to sell lids to joe public.

The one that interested me was the Snell testing. Its significantly more thorough, I'm of the opinion that if it's Snell M2015 approved it's significantly more likely to save your head.

https://www.smf.org/testing
____________________
Please be aware that the above post may be full of complete nonsense.
Riding: '07 KTM Duke II, Baotian BT49QT-20 Driving: '88 Volvo 340

[stinkwheel]

[Rogerborg]

[Motorhate]

[iooi]