Flip Front Helmets

[mst3kguy]

i never know where to put my reply when i'm quoting someone. 

hah, you know i'm just joshing you, we've been in the same riding group for years it seems.  i think you're a really good rider, despite having so much more extra weight.

<ducks>

( :

randy,

i got the cl-max at N/E.  i had it at the spring rally, didn't you notice?  oh, wait, you probably had trouble seeing it thru the dust i was leaving you behind in.  at.  to.  ( :

Had we been in the same riding group even once this year, I have no doubt that you would have...  but then, I never claimed to be fast.    

Randy T
Indy

Can you tell my internet has been down for a week?

Damned top posters, anyway...   

Randy T
Indy

i kinda thought on top, since you'd see it and it's the most recent.  who knows...

[the fan]

i never know where to put my reply when i'm quoting someone. 

hah, you know i'm just joshing you, we've been in the same riding group for years it seems.  i think you're a really good rider, despite having so much more extra weight.

<ducks>

( :

Its more fun if you have to look for it

randy,

i got the cl-max at N/E.  i had it at the spring rally, didn't you notice?  oh, wait, you probably had trouble seeing it thru the dust i was leaving you behind in.  at.  to.  ( :

Had we been in the same riding group even once this year, I have no doubt that you would have...  but then, I never claimed to be fast.    

Randy T
Indy

Can you tell my internet has been down for a week?

Damned top posters, anyway...   

Randy T
Indy

i kinda thought on top, since you'd see it and it's the most recent.  who knows...

[rktmanfj]

It's been tough to see anything posted for about a week, since the only access I've had was tiny text on my phone.

And you can't do the smilies on the phone either.   

i kinda thought on top, since you'd see it and it's the most recent.  who knows...

If I didn't need bifocals before, I do now.   

Randy T
Indy

[rktmanfj]

Just the other day, I noticed that one of my favorite vendors had an outstanding price on flip-front helmets (in this case HJC CL-Max), but nagging safety concerns kept me from ordering.

Then, over the weekend, a good friend of mine was seriously injured while wearing one (a Fulmer model).

Details of the accident vary, but no one disputes that the 18 year old female failed to yield right-of-way, and pulled out in front of him.  He t-boned her car, and flew some 150 feet, landing on the pavement.  He was wearing a Teknic jacket, which did it's job well.  I doubt if he was wearing any lower body armor, and his left leg is broken in three places (two pins).  He also got a dislocated finger.

What really concerns me is the head injuries... broken jaw and orbit.  It appears that the entire front of the helmet came off upon impact with the car,leaving him partially unprotected for the subsequent impact with the pavement. It also appears that his facial injuries occurred upon initial impact with the car.  While it no doubt saved his life, I have to wonder if a conventional full face helmet would have performed better.

Randy T
Indy

Update: My friend finally was able to email me, with a little bit of news, and a pic of his helmet.  As you can see, the reports of the condition of his helmet turned out to be very inaccurate.  Although the faceshield pivots broke away, the chinbar pivots and latch are quite intact.  Also erroneous were reports that said the helmet struck the car.  Given that the impact with the pavement was hard enough to cause a broken jaw and orbit, I'd have to give this one a pretty high rating.




Probably all we'll know about this one, since he was out cold after hitting the deck, and does not remember anything prior.

Randy T
Indy

[terryk]

Flip fronts are a great idea for comfort and convenience. But, they have a reputation for failure in a crash. Until they produce a testing standard to ensure independent verification of crash worthiness then I will stick to safer and more tried ground. SNELL 2010 is the way to go for me, personally.

[Arnie]

TerryK -

You've every right to your opinion, and equally every right to state it, but don't you think we've been able to determine that YOU think Snell 2010 is the way to go? 
Your message has been delivered 3 times now.  Time to take a break.

What "reputation for failure" do flip front helmets have?
I'll agree that none have a Snell 2010 rating, but that does not mean that they have failed, or would.  Nor does it mean that in normal street riding that they would be any less protective than your Snell 2010 helmet.

I've owned many helmets in the last 45 years I've ridden.  I've only once touched a helmet to the pavement, and it happened to have been a Snell rated hat.  Does that mean They are the only ones  to hit the ground?  Or, that they are the only ones that you can hit the ground with and live?  Of course not!

Either you're a Snell stockholder, or you've been brainwashed into believing that there is only one right answer no matter what the question.

Arnie

[terryk]

Arnie, usually your posts make sense, not in this case. SNELL is the golden standard for helmet safety for many reasons. DOT and their standard is 28 years old and with inferior testing requirements. Every credible racing organization requires a SNELL rating. I have ridden with SNELL helmets for 32 years on the street. Flip face helmets, 1) First responders may not know how to operate in a rescue 2) The mechanisms can and do get actuated in a crash. 3) Solid and integrated shell is stronger. 4) They are almost always noiser and heavier than a full face comparable helmet. I share this information for others who are curious and not biased. I have no affiliation wiuth SNELL and will not be censoired because this subject gets you twisted in a bunch. Safety equipment is important inm this hobby and newbies need info not grumpy and illogical run ons. Now if you have a fact about SNELL or flip face helmets that add to the discussion please do respond. If you want to be grumpy, many will just ROFL at your posts. If my posts seem poorly constructed to you and others so be it, do not read it. So, once again, SNELL rocks and is the best choice out there for many logical reasons. Flip and DOT, not so much.

[andyb]

Uh, don't be a dumbass, stop.

Snell isn't the golden standard.  Not even fucking close.

Go ahead and read up on some modern research that's been done on crash helmets.  In fact, shockingly, with some searching you can find the study that I'm thinking of on this very site.  Give you a quick hint though, the best helmet was a relatively cheap Z1R in the tests done.

I have said before and I will say again, the numbers and specs on a helmet don't mean shit to me, other than if I'm racing and require them to meet a specification.  The reality is that there aren't any bad full faced helmets today, and wearing any of them is better than wearing none of them in an accident.  Mind you I do wear a retardedly expensive Shoei RF1100 with a retardedly expensive mirrored shield, but that's because I find it comfortable and pretty (and I got one hell of a deal on it). 

The best helmet is the one that is comfortable enough that you aren't fatigued and avoid the accident you were going to get into.

[rktmanfj]

Uh, don't be a dumbass, stop.

Snell isn't the golden standard.  Not even fucking close.

Go ahead and read up on some modern research that's been done on crash helmets.  In fact, shockingly, with some searching you can find the study that I'm thinking of on this very site. 

http://www.fjowners.com/index.php?topic=984.0

[terryk]

Uh, usually I don't call others a dumbass or feel free to do so. It really does not help to make an argument bud.

But, I have and do read a lot of reports and the SNELL helmets are the way to go. 1) SNELL consistently updates their standards and conducts a ton of research on force distribution, force dwell time and peak force protection. So, physics and bioengineering principles do mean something. 2) The DOT does not do anywhere near the testing and verification of helmet quality as does SNELL, this is just a fact. 3) If SNELL was not on their game and respected why would so many racing organizations and insurance companies insist on the SNELL rating, in a word integrity of testing and excellence in test engineering. So one dumbass test that claims to shows a DOT rated helmet is better or as good as a SNELL rating is not very compelling. It is tempting for some folks to poo poo research and quality standards or wish that cheap construction and materials are as good as expensive materials, research and engineering. This is simply wishful thinking. If you can not pass a SNELL test then your product is not designed to the strictest quality and safety standards, this is why they are the accepted golden standard and defacto requirment for racing. The best and unfortunately the almost always most expensive helmets are SNELL rated and tested. I will pay for a SNELL rating, you do not need to do so but this is gambling with your brain bucket, not a good idea and not something any responsible rider will endorse. My AGV K3 helmet is ECE and DOT rated and a good lid, and stays on the shelf when going for a ride above casual cruise.

[rktmanfj]

Uh, usually I don't call others a dumbass or feel free to do so. It really does not help to make an argument bud.

But, I have and do read a lot of reports and the SNELL helmets are the way to go. 1) SNELL consistently updates their standards and conducts a ton of research on force distribution, force dwell time and peak force protection. So, physics and bioengineering principles do mean something. 2) The DOT does not do anywhere near the testing and verification of helmet quality as does SNELL, this is just a fact. 3) If SNELL was not on their game and respected why would so many racing organizations and insurance companies insist on the SNELL rating, in a word integrity of testing and excellence in test engineering. So one dumbass test that claims to shows a DOT rated helmet is better or as good as a SNELL rating is not very compelling. It is tempting for some folks to poo poo research and quality standards or wish that cheap construction and materials are as good as expensive materials, research and engineering. This is simply wishful thinking. If you can not pass a SNELL test then your product is not designed to the strictest quality and safety standards, this is why they are the accepted golden standard and defacto requirment for racing. The best and unfortunately the almost always most expensive helmets are SNELL rated and tested. I will pay for a SNELL rating, you do not need to do so but this is gambling with your brain bucket, not a good idea and not something any responsible rider will endorse. My AGV K3 helmet is ECE and DOT rated and a good lid, and stays on the shelf when going for a ride above casual cruise.

This post paid for by the Snell Foundation.

Fixed that for ya...     

[terryk]

  Cute retag of my post. But you nor anyone lese has yet to refute that the SNELL 2010 helmet is a superset of both ECE and DOT meaning that all SNELL 2010 helmets pass both ECE and DOT standards. This includes peak force and dwell, softening up the SNELL 2010 force profile. Racing organization choose SNELL. Cheap is cheap in helmets. To each his own but SNELL is the gold standard, like it or not.

[rktmanfj]

Cute retag of my post. But you nor anyone lese has yet to refute that the SNELL 2010 helmet is a superset of both ECE and DOT meaning that all SNELL 2010 helmets pass both ECE and DOT standards. This includes peak force and dwell, softening up the SNELL 2010 force profile. Racing organization choose SNELL. Cheap is cheap in helmets. To each his own but SNELL is the gold standard, like it or not.

If you weren't so closed minded, and would actually read the fucking article, you just might change your thinking.

Stop drinking the Kool-Aid and think for yourself.  It might be a new concept to you, but you'll catch on to it in time...       

[Dan Filetti]

SNELL is the gold standard, like it or not.

You seem like a 'black and white' kind of guy, this or that, yin or yang -no middle ground;  like one that adheres to the strictures of the scientific method.  So riddle me this? 

I assume we can agree that that the fundamental purpose of a helmet is to reduce g-force transmission to the head/ brain.  The test that Motorcyclist did (had commissioned really) was to measure that g-force to skull transmission with the same precise test, meant to specifically simulate an impact at various speeds, on different helmets.  How then did they come up with LESS g's on some of the non-SNELL helmets over the SNELL helmets?

Are you calling them liars?  Is their science faulty?  Or is it that you cannot/ refuse to see that there *may* be advantages to non-SNELL helmets?

Dan

[BSI]

My AGV K3 helmet is ECE and DOT rated and a good lid, and stays on the shelf when going for a ride above casual cruise.

what I don't understand is if you are so sold on Snell only, how can you say the above and EVEN CONSIDER leaving your driveway with anything BUT a Snell on your head?...a "casual cruise" can getcha knocked plumb silly as easy as any other ride will