Shoei GT Air: rubbish SHARP test result
Discussion
If you wear a Shoei GT Air, don't land on the side of your head
By now, I'd have thought a manufacturer like Shoei would be making helmets by that breezed the SHARP tests. Not so, apparently.
Shoei's usually scored better than Arai in SHARP testing. Then along comes Shoei's flagship sports-touring GT Air, which bombs out with a paltry 3-star result. How could this be?
The GT Air scores amber for low-ish impact protection on one side. Worse still, it scores red for poor impact protection on the other side. How could it give less protection on one side than the other?
Come on Shoei, sort it out!
By now, I'd have thought a manufacturer like Shoei would be making helmets by that breezed the SHARP tests. Not so, apparently.
Shoei's usually scored better than Arai in SHARP testing. Then along comes Shoei's flagship sports-touring GT Air, which bombs out with a paltry 3-star result. How could this be?
The GT Air scores amber for low-ish impact protection on one side. Worse still, it scores red for poor impact protection on the other side. How could it give less protection on one side than the other?
Come on Shoei, sort it out!
SVS said:
The GT Air scores amber for low-ish impact protection on one side. Worse still, it scores red for poor impact protection on the other side. How could it give less protection on one side than the other?
Come on Shoei, sort it out!
Might be something to do with the internal sun visor opening mechanism, which is on the left. Was this the weaker side?Come on Shoei, sort it out!
oh for fk, sharp testing is the best, consistent form of testing with results regularly available to the public.
If you have rose tinted visors on because you are brand loyal or because you bought a poor performing helmet then fine.
I mean its not known for manufactures to make a st product when the rest of theirs line is awesome.
If you have rose tinted visors on because you are brand loyal or because you bought a poor performing helmet then fine.
I mean its not known for manufactures to make a st product when the rest of theirs line is awesome.
Is anyone that worried about the Sharp test?
IE if other country's do a similar test like the US and it scores highly which test is best?
my last lid I bought was a Arai Rx7 GP. I have not looked at the sharp rating now or before I bought the helmet as out of many I tried on this one fit me best. And that was what I was wanted most.
But just my view
IE if other country's do a similar test like the US and it scores highly which test is best?
my last lid I bought was a Arai Rx7 GP. I have not looked at the sharp rating now or before I bought the helmet as out of many I tried on this one fit me best. And that was what I was wanted most.
But just my view
moanthebairns said:
oh for fk, sharp testing is the best, consistent form of testing with results regularly available to the public.
If you have rose tinted visors on because you are brand loyal or because you bought a poor performing helmet then fine.
I mean its not known for manufactures to make a st product when the rest of theirs line is awesome.
Another angry day? If you have rose tinted visors on because you are brand loyal or because you bought a poor performing helmet then fine.
I mean its not known for manufactures to make a st product when the rest of theirs line is awesome.
RemaL said:
Is anyone that worried about the Sharp test?
IE if other country's do a similar test like the US and it scores highly which test is best?
my last lid I bought was a Arai Rx7 GP. I have not looked at the sharp rating now or before I bought the helmet as out of many I tried on this one fit me best. And that was what I was wanted most.
But just my view
we have done this.IE if other country's do a similar test like the US and it scores highly which test is best?
my last lid I bought was a Arai Rx7 GP. I have not looked at the sharp rating now or before I bought the helmet as out of many I tried on this one fit me best. And that was what I was wanted most.
But just my view
US do fire tests and a few more that really aren't up to much and in no way simulate bike crashes.
but they also do the same tests as sharp.
they however just pass or fail
sharp rate out of 5
which is why many manufactures like Arai who score poorly in sharp testing then turn around and go well we only think the American one is up to code as it has more tests. The have passed both but the sharp reflects how well it passed as where the USA one is pass or fail. I bet you a pinch of st if they rated it like the uk they would be quick to rubbish it as well.
The public, generally being a fking morron, swallow this, and go more is better.
They belittle sharp without merit and side with the manufacture.
mean while the PR department of Arai etc sit there thinking, we haven't lied and we have played a blinder.
end thread.
s3fella said:
Bugger, I have £1000 invested in my GT Air. May as well strap a could of baguettes to my head.
WTF? How do you invest £1000 in a £400 helmet? Did you biy a super large Area to fit over the top of it?MTB, would you be satisfied that the above arrangement would be sturdy enough?
I see the NXR only got 4 stars too - that must be disapointing for Shoei. Ultimately this should be good as manufacturers must pick up on this and build better protection into future lids. I do see Americans on forums often refering to the Sharp tests so via the internet they are not just a UK thing in practice.
I have a GT Air, am I bothered by this news? A little but not enough to stop me using the helmet. All tests try to replicate real life but we all know that no two accidents are the same so I take most results with a slight pinch of salt and trust the manufacturers to have built a reasonably safe helmet for us to use for the majority of purposes. And I try not to fall off as a rule, which seems to help.
I like my GT Air. It's quiet, comfy, and has a sun visor. That last feature alone probably (in my entirely unsubstantiated view) makes it more safe than a host of other helmets by making me less likely to crash.
The other helmet I seriously considered was the Schuberth S2, again on account of the secondary sun visor. Interestingly it scored slightly worse for side impact than the Shoei.
ETA: ... but the Schuberth didn't fit, so I went for the GT Air. I'm sure that if I went for a high SHARP-rated helmet, I would now have something that either didn't fit, or didnt' have a second visor, or botht.
The other helmet I seriously considered was the Schuberth S2, again on account of the secondary sun visor. Interestingly it scored slightly worse for side impact than the Shoei.
ETA: ... but the Schuberth didn't fit, so I went for the GT Air. I'm sure that if I went for a high SHARP-rated helmet, I would now have something that either didn't fit, or didnt' have a second visor, or botht.
Edited by bitwrx on Tuesday 21st October 13:05
The big brands dont need 5* ratings to sell helmets, people buy them because the quality, life expectency and fit is generally superior.
Most new riders are advised by their instructors of SHARP and are likely not to spend £400 on their first helmet.
Personally, I'd rather spend £200 every few years on a 5* helmet than £400-500 on a 3 star helmet to "last"
At the end of the day they all meet the minumum standard and its personal preference, If i did more miles I'd probably spend more money
Most new riders are advised by their instructors of SHARP and are likely not to spend £400 on their first helmet.
Personally, I'd rather spend £200 every few years on a 5* helmet than £400-500 on a 3 star helmet to "last"
At the end of the day they all meet the minumum standard and its personal preference, If i did more miles I'd probably spend more money
Gassing Station | Biker Banter | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff