Motorcycle Helmets for Trackdays
Discussion
jarnold88 said:
you are allowed but I wouldnt if I were you, a lad had an accident at a trackday I was at not that long ago, bike helmets have less padding round the front of the face, as a result he broke his nose on the inside of the lid and bit right thru his bottom lip, not good.
J
Really, how do bikers actually survive I wonder? J
As a biker I have gold stickered bike helmets, never had any trouble on car trackdays, and before anyone starts going on about better fire protection, it is a bit meaningless unless the rest of you is in a full nomex suit.
Besides who says bike helmets are cheap a Haga race rep Arai is the best part of 500 quid for example.
Dakkon said:
jarnold88 said:
you are allowed but I wouldnt if I were you, a lad had an accident at a trackday I was at not that long ago, bike helmets have less padding round the front of the face, as a result he broke his nose on the inside of the lid and bit right thru his bottom lip, not good.
J
Really, how do bikers actually survive I wonder? J
As a biker I have gold stickered bike helmets, never had any trouble on car trackdays, and before anyone starts going on about better fire protection, it is a bit meaningless unless the rest of you is in a full nomex suit.
Besides who says bike helmets are cheap a Haga race rep Arai is the best part of 500 quid for example.
J
Dakkon said:
jarnold88 said:
you are allowed but I wouldnt if I were you, a lad had an accident at a trackday I was at not that long ago, bike helmets have less padding round the front of the face, as a result he broke his nose on the inside of the lid and bit right thru his bottom lip, not good.
J
Really, how do bikers actually survive I wonder? J
As a biker I have gold stickered bike helmets, never had any trouble on car trackdays, and before anyone starts going on about better fire protection, it is a bit meaningless unless the rest of you is in a full nomex suit.
Besides who says bike helmets are cheap a Haga race rep Arai is the best part of 500 quid for example.
But there are alot more cheap bike helmets than car helmets.
Although I did see at Oulton that in the shop, they had some open face helmets for only £39.99, which is much cheaper than the Sparco Club helmets at £80 which seem to be the bottom of the range.
Here's a pic (posted with his permission) of the lad Jamie is refering to...
...the brakes on his BMW failed unexpectedly with no warning and he went head on into a tyre wall, estimated contact speed was 70mph (90 mph where he would have braked and the gravel trap scrubbed a bit off), the standard inertia reel seatbelt stretched and his face (in a motorcycle helmet) hit the steering wheel - you have to wonder what damage would have been done if he had worn an open face!
An Arai technician told me very recently (I was having mine re-lined) that their car helmets have a different construction to their motorcycle helmets, the shells are laid up differently to optimise them for the different types of impacts they are likely to encounter. Both are stronger or impact absorbing in different places. That is apparently the main reason car helmets are more expensive than motorcycle helmets, because they are made in smaller volumes and are very different - plus of course they have fireproof lining and "bulletproof" visors (for the benefit of single seater and other low open top racing cars).
Motorcycle helmets are allowed on car track days and are probably almost as good as a car helmet for most purposes. But a proper car helmet would probably be better.
Oh the other point the Arai technician made was about the cheap car helmets that are emerging on the market. Although they pass the Snell standards, is doesn't necessarily mean they pass to the same degree as the more expensive helmets, they may be just scraping through. The leading brands, Arai, Bell, etc, have spent large sums of money on R&D over many years, and continue to do so, to improve and perfect the safety of their helmets. Another reason why their helmets are more expensive. You get what you pay for - and I suppose you pay what you feel your head is worth?
...the brakes on his BMW failed unexpectedly with no warning and he went head on into a tyre wall, estimated contact speed was 70mph (90 mph where he would have braked and the gravel trap scrubbed a bit off), the standard inertia reel seatbelt stretched and his face (in a motorcycle helmet) hit the steering wheel - you have to wonder what damage would have been done if he had worn an open face!
An Arai technician told me very recently (I was having mine re-lined) that their car helmets have a different construction to their motorcycle helmets, the shells are laid up differently to optimise them for the different types of impacts they are likely to encounter. Both are stronger or impact absorbing in different places. That is apparently the main reason car helmets are more expensive than motorcycle helmets, because they are made in smaller volumes and are very different - plus of course they have fireproof lining and "bulletproof" visors (for the benefit of single seater and other low open top racing cars).
Motorcycle helmets are allowed on car track days and are probably almost as good as a car helmet for most purposes. But a proper car helmet would probably be better.
Oh the other point the Arai technician made was about the cheap car helmets that are emerging on the market. Although they pass the Snell standards, is doesn't necessarily mean they pass to the same degree as the more expensive helmets, they may be just scraping through. The leading brands, Arai, Bell, etc, have spent large sums of money on R&D over many years, and continue to do so, to improve and perfect the safety of their helmets. Another reason why their helmets are more expensive. You get what you pay for - and I suppose you pay what you feel your head is worth?
People often tend to talk as if the helmet is the only variable and say 'how much is your head worth'. I personally think the helmet you need depends to a large extent on the car you drive.
I use a cheap open face OMP helmet, and feel perfectly happy with it.
The reason for this is that the car I use on track is my e46 M3 road car which has numerous airbags to provide additional protection.
If I was in something with no airbags, fitted roll-cage etc then I would definitely buy a more expensive full face helmet.
I use a cheap open face OMP helmet, and feel perfectly happy with it.
The reason for this is that the car I use on track is my e46 M3 road car which has numerous airbags to provide additional protection.
If I was in something with no airbags, fitted roll-cage etc then I would definitely buy a more expensive full face helmet.
The old helmet question and "how much is your head worth" has been a subject of threads many times.
Ultimately Motorsport helmets are desgined to a different standard than bike helmets, as has been stated by others in this thread. See the snell website for the exact details.
More people ride motorbikes than race cars therefore Motorsport helmets are more expensive but are designed for motorsport.
Ultimately Motorsport helmets are desgined to a different standard than bike helmets, as has been stated by others in this thread. See the snell website for the exact details.
More people ride motorbikes than race cars therefore Motorsport helmets are more expensive but are designed for motorsport.
timarnold said:
What if you have a big accident with multiple impacts? A barrel roll for example. The airbags are only effective on the initial impact then they deflate. And what if the airbags didn't go off? Wouldn't it be sensible to have the added protection of a decent helmet?
I see your point, but where do you draw the line?Have you seen many multiple impact / barrel roll accidents on trackdays?
There are quite a lot of nasty accidents on the roads, do you wear your helmet everytime you drive anywhere? Wouldn't that be sensible?
Of course you don't, because like a lot of things in life you have to strike a balance of cost/comfort against risk.
I've heard of very few real life instances of trackday accidents where someone would have received a less serious injury if they'd been wearing a more expensive helmet.
Paul_M3 said:
timarnold said:
What if you have a big accident with multiple impacts? A barrel roll for example. The airbags are only effective on the initial impact then they deflate. And what if the airbags didn't go off? Wouldn't it be sensible to have the added protection of a decent helmet?
I see your point, but where do you draw the line?Have you seen many multiple impact / barrel roll accidents on trackdays?
There are quite a lot of nasty accidents on the roads, do you wear your helmet everytime you drive anywhere? Wouldn't that be sensible?
Of course you don't, because like a lot of things in life you have to strike a balance of cost/comfort against risk.
I've heard of very few real life instances of trackday accidents where someone would have received a less serious injury if they'd been wearing a more expensive helmet.
What Snell say about cheaper helmets in their FAQ's is sort of diplomatic, but the message is pretty clear...
What's the difference between a $100 Snell certified helmet and a $400 Snell certified Helmet?
While helmets are primarily a protective device, the true protective capabilities of a helmet, if needed will only come into play for about 2 to 4 milliseconds during the lifetime of the helmet. This leaves a lot of time for that helmet to be doing nothing more than sitting around on a users head. Producing a product that meets the standards is not really very difficult. Producing a helmet that people will buy and wear, and will consistently meet the standards is significantly more difficult. The Snell standards do not measure factors like comfort, ventilation, brand recognition or style, and only indirectly look at fit, weight, materials and workmanship. These are factors that frequently drive helmet cost.
Yes I've seen one or two severe accidents and there have been quite a few I haven't seen. There have been serious injuries and deaths on track days. So, again, why take unecessary risks? As far as safety is concerned, isn't it better to be over the top than perhaps sometime saying (or your family saying) "If only..."
Of course you don't wear a crash helmet on the road, well not often anyway. But in normal road driving you are not going as quickly (or shouldn't be). On track days you are taking part with the intention of going as fast as you can, braking as late as you can, carrying as much speed through corners as you can. You can quite easily be going into a corner at double the national speed limit. But that doesn't mean a crash is only going to be twice as hard!
At the end of the day it's your head not mine, I'm only offering advice/opinion based on years of experience. If you sustain a serious head injury as a result of wearing inferior safety equipment, it's not me who will have to change your nappies and wipe your backside, that'll be your wife/kids/parents! Perhaps they should be consulted in your choice of equipment?
I don't mean that to sound offensive btw, I just think it's my job to point out the reality of the possible consequences! : )
timarnold said:
I don't mean that to sound offensive btw, I just think it's my job to point out the reality of the possible consequences! : )
No offence taken, I like to discuss things and form an opinion. If that means changing my mind and admitting I was wrong then good, as I have learnt something. 
timarnold said:
What Snell say about cheaper helmets in their FAQ's is sort of diplomatic, but the message is pretty clear...
What's the difference between a $100 Snell certified helmet and a $400 Snell certified Helmet?
While helmets are primarily a protective device, the true protective capabilities of a helmet, if needed will only come into play for about 2 to 4 milliseconds during the lifetime of the helmet. This leaves a lot of time for that helmet to be doing nothing more than sitting around on a users head. Producing a product that meets the standards is not really very difficult. Producing a helmet that people will buy and wear, and will consistently meet the standards is significantly more difficult. The Snell standards do not measure factors like comfort, ventilation, brand recognition or style, and only indirectly look at fit, weight, materials and workmanship. These are factors that frequently drive helmet cost.
That to me says more that an expensive helmet will be more comfortable, better ventilated etc and that is where most of the cost difference is. That's how I read it. It says the actual crash is a tiny part of what the helmet is designed for.What's the difference between a $100 Snell certified helmet and a $400 Snell certified Helmet?
While helmets are primarily a protective device, the true protective capabilities of a helmet, if needed will only come into play for about 2 to 4 milliseconds during the lifetime of the helmet. This leaves a lot of time for that helmet to be doing nothing more than sitting around on a users head. Producing a product that meets the standards is not really very difficult. Producing a helmet that people will buy and wear, and will consistently meet the standards is significantly more difficult. The Snell standards do not measure factors like comfort, ventilation, brand recognition or style, and only indirectly look at fit, weight, materials and workmanship. These are factors that frequently drive helmet cost.
timarnold said:
Yes I've seen one or two severe accidents and there have been quite a few I haven't seen. There have been serious injuries and deaths on track days.
That's surprising. I thought there had a never been a death at a UK car trackday? I even considered serious injury to be relatively rare.If that's not the case then it's something I never knew.
timarnold said:
Of course you don't wear a crash helmet on the road, well not often anyway. But in normal road driving you are not going as quickly (or shouldn't be). On track days you are taking part with the intention of going as fast as you can, braking as late as you can, carrying as much speed through corners as you can. You can quite easily be going into a corner at double the national speed limit. But that doesn't mean a crash is only going to be twice as hard!
BUT.....you are all going in one direction. On a single carriageway 'A' road you have two people with a closing speed of 120 mph. (If not a bit more, realistically) I would be surprised if I ever hit a barrier at over 130mph in my road car. My top speed on a long straight is only that, so I'd have to hit a barrier without losing any speed at all.In that respect the road is more dangerous than the track. (Not to mention you don't have medical support instantly available on the road)
Now in a race car that is achieving much higher speeds, I agree that things are different. If I ever got a go in a Formula one car, I certainly wouldn't be wearing my OMP! It's all back to the calculated risk thing.
timarnold said:
At the end of the day it's your head not mine, I'm only offering advice/opinion based on years of experience. If you sustain a serious head injury as a result of wearing inferior safety equipment, it's not me who will have to change your nappies and wipe your backside, that'll be your wife/kids/parents! Perhaps they should be consulted in your choice of equipment?
This is my issue though, people are always coming out with sensationalist statements like that.That is fine, except I still haven't seen a lot of evidence to back up my original question. In a road car, even if the airbags didn't go off (unlikely in itself) what are the chances that a £300 helmet will result in a less significant injury than a £100 one?
At the end of the day, both are shells with padding inside which have passed a standard test. As someone with an engineering background I like to see facts and testing.
This is quite a long but interesting article. If nothing else it shows that things aren't black and white and a higher certification isn't necessarily better. (It's for bikes, but the principle is the same)
http://www.motorcyclistonline.com/gearbox/motorcyc...
As I said, it's merely a discussion and I'm not saying you're wrong. I'm just saying that I remain to be convinced that a more expensive helmet would actually give a benefit for my personal use.
Paul_M3 said:
timarnold said:
I don't mean that to sound offensive btw, I just think it's my job to point out the reality of the possible consequences! : )
No offence taken, I like to discuss things and form an opinion. If that means changing my mind and admitting I was wrong then good, as I have learnt something. Paul_M3 said:
timarnold said:
What Snell say about cheaper helmets in their FAQ's is sort of diplomatic, but the message is pretty clear...
What's the difference between a $100 Snell certified helmet and a $400 Snell certified Helmet?
While helmets are primarily a protective device, the true protective capabilities of a helmet, if needed will only come into play for about 2 to 4 milliseconds during the lifetime of the helmet. This leaves a lot of time for that helmet to be doing nothing more than sitting around on a users head. Producing a product that meets the standards is not really very difficult. Producing a helmet that people will buy and wear, and will consistently meet the standards is significantly more difficult. The Snell standards do not measure factors like comfort, ventilation, brand recognition or style, and only indirectly look at fit, weight, materials and workmanship. These are factors that frequently drive helmet cost.
That to me says more that an expensive helmet will be more comfortable, better ventilated etc and that is where most of the cost difference is. That's how I read it. It says the actual crash is a tiny part of what the helmet is designed for.What's the difference between a $100 Snell certified helmet and a $400 Snell certified Helmet?
While helmets are primarily a protective device, the true protective capabilities of a helmet, if needed will only come into play for about 2 to 4 milliseconds during the lifetime of the helmet. This leaves a lot of time for that helmet to be doing nothing more than sitting around on a users head. Producing a product that meets the standards is not really very difficult. Producing a helmet that people will buy and wear, and will consistently meet the standards is significantly more difficult. The Snell standards do not measure factors like comfort, ventilation, brand recognition or style, and only indirectly look at fit, weight, materials and workmanship. These are factors that frequently drive helmet cost.
Paul_M3 said:
timarnold said:
Yes I've seen one or two severe accidents and there have been quite a few I haven't seen. There have been serious injuries and deaths on track days.
That's surprising. I thought there had a never been a death at a UK car trackday? I even considered serious injury to be relatively rare.If that's not the case then it's something I never knew.
Paul_M3 said:
timarnold said:
Of course you don't wear a crash helmet on the road, well not often anyway. But in normal road driving you are not going as quickly (or shouldn't be). On track days you are taking part with the intention of going as fast as you can, braking as late as you can, carrying as much speed through corners as you can. You can quite easily be going into a corner at double the national speed limit. But that doesn't mean a crash is only going to be twice as hard!
BUT.....you are all going in one direction. On a single carriageway 'A' road you have two people with a closing speed of 120 mph. (If not a bit more, realistically) I would be surprised if I ever hit a barrier at over 130mph in my road car. My top speed on a long straight is only that, so I'd have to hit a barrier without losing any speed at all.In that respect the road is more dangerous than the track. (Not to mention you don't have medical support instantly available on the road)
Paul_M3 said:
Now in a race car that is achieving much higher speeds, I agree that things are different. If I ever got a go in a Formula one car, I certainly wouldn't be wearing my OMP! It's all back to the calculated risk thing.
You can probably achieve higher speeds in your M3 than some race cars can (not F1 obviously) on some parts of some circuits. That's not the point though, the point is having the best possible protection at all speeds.Paul_M3 said:
timarnold said:
At the end of the day it's your head not mine, I'm only offering advice/opinion based on years of experience. If you sustain a serious head injury as a result of wearing inferior safety equipment, it's not me who will have to change your nappies and wipe your backside, that'll be your wife/kids/parents! Perhaps they should be consulted in your choice of equipment?
This is my issue though, people are always coming out with sensationalist statements like that.That is fine, except I still haven't seen a lot of evidence to back up my original question. In a road car, even if the airbags didn't go off (unlikely in itself) what are the chances that a £300 helmet will result in a less significant injury than a £100 one?
Paul_M3 said:
At the end of the day, both are shells with padding inside which have passed a standard test. As someone with an engineering background I like to see facts and testing.
I have an engineering background myself. Surely with your engineering bckground, you will appreciate how something can just pass a required standard and how something else could pass the same standard with a huge safety factor built in?Paul_M3 said:
This is quite a long but interesting article. If nothing else it shows that things aren't black and white and a higher certification isn't necessarily better. (It's for bikes, but the principle is the same)
http://www.motorcyclistonline.com/gearbox/motorcyc...
I don't think it actually shows anything other than somebody there has a vested interest in discrediting Snell. It may be right or it may be wrong, who knows? But I wouldn't trust a cheapo helmet myself, I'd be far more likely to trust something the looks and feels to have the quality of build that an Arai has. I looked at those V2 helmets at the Autosport and to me they looked and felt like poor quality. http://www.motorcyclistonline.com/gearbox/motorcyc...
Paul_M3 said:
As I said, it's merely a discussion and I'm not saying you're wrong. I'm just saying that I remain to be convinced that a more expensive helmet would actually give a benefit for my personal use.
I agree, and I might be wrong too, in fact I wish I was wrong, then I could have three or four or even five helmets for the price of one Arai! timarnold said:
What if you have a big accident with multiple impacts? A barrel roll for example. The airbags are only effective on the initial impact then they deflate. And what if the airbags didn't go off? Wouldn't it be sensible to have the added protection of a decent helmet?
I really think you should wear a helmet and full body armour and a nomex suit the next time you pop to the shop.Gassing Station | Track Days | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff