Is Snell worth it?

Eric Vey said:

I think it is time to buy a new helmet. My old Walmart bought Bell
helmet's plastic was eaten up by the sun, turned yellow, then started
breaking up. It never did fit right.

I used to ride motorsickels, and way back in the 70's Snell was king
when it came to helmet ratings.

So I'm looking at helmets and I see that Specialized apply for and get
Snell ratings where Bell and many other Co. don't bother. Maybe they
don't want to pay Snell to test them, I dunno.

So what's the straight [censored]? Does Snell matter?

You want the helmet that can be most easily modified into a Faraday shield.

--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
"And never forget, life ultimately makes failures of all people."
- A. Derleth

vey said:

I think it is time to buy a new helmet. My old Walmart bought Bell
helmet's plastic was eaten up by the sun, turned yellow, then started
breaking up. It never did fit right.

I used to ride motorsickels, and way back in the 70's Snell was king
when it came to helmet ratings.

So I'm looking at helmets and I see that Specialized apply for and get
Snell ratings where Bell and many other Co. don't bother. Maybe they
don't want to pay Snell to test them, I dunno.

So what's the straight [censored]? Does Snell matter?

Dear Vey,

Table at bottom shows differences between tests, text explains some
details:
http://www.cyclehelmets.org/papers/c2023.pdf

Cheers,

Carl Fogel

Tom Sherman said:

Quoted message said:

You want the helmet that can be most easily modified into a Faraday shield.

Well of course I do! I would love that. I would also love a helmet that
ward off [censored]. Can I buy one of those?

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

So what's the straight [censored]? Does Snell matter?

Dear Vey,

Table at bottom shows differences between tests, text explains some
details:
http://www.cyclehelmets.org/papers/c2023.pdf

Cheers,

Carl Fogel

TMI. I think I read here that Snell matters, but in the UK, Snell
approved are not much available. Is that about right?

"vey" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

So what's the straight [censored]? Does Snell matter?

Dear Vey,

Table at bottom shows differences between tests, text explains some
details:
http://www.cyclehelmets.org/papers/c2023.pdf

Cheers,

Carl Fogel

TMI. I think I read here that Snell matters, but in the UK, Snell approved
are not much available. Is that about right?

Sounds about right. Trouble is, the Snell standards are higher than the
others, so it's easier to make a light well ventilated helmet which meets
just the lower ones.

cheers,
clive

Clive George said:

"vey" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

> So what's the straight [censored]? Does Snell matter?

Dear Vey,

Table at bottom shows differences between tests, text explains some
details:
http://www.cyclehelmets.org/papers/c2023.pdf

Cheers,

Carl Fogel

TMI. I think I read here that Snell matters, but in the UK, Snell
approved are not much available. Is that about right?

Sounds about right. Trouble is, the Snell standards are higher than the
others, so it's easier to make a light well ventilated helmet which
meets just the lower ones.

cheers,
clive

So here is the bottom line, clive. If I can purchase a bonafide Snell
approved helmet for $5 (2 & 50) more would it be worth it? $10 more? $20
more?

At what price point would it not matter?

Eric Vey said:

Tom Sherman said:

Quoted message said:

You want the helmet that can be most easily modified into a Faraday
shield.

Well of course I do! I would love that. I would also love a helmet that
ward off [censored]. Can I buy one of those?

The evidence of population studies indicates that a helmet that wards
off "[censored]" is about as commercially available as one that
significantly reduces the rate of serious head injury.

--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
"And never forget, life ultimately makes failures of all people."
- A. Derleth

Tom Sherman said:

Eric Vey said:

Tom Sherman said:

>
You want the helmet that can be most easily modified into a Faraday
shield.

Well of course I do! I would love that. I would also love a helmet
that ward off [censored]. Can I buy one of those?

The evidence of population studies indicates that a helmet that wards
off "[censored]" is about as commercially available as one that
significantly reduces the rate of serious head injury.

I SWTG there are people that routinely write in to the local newspaper
wondering about helmet use after some poor kid gets nailed by a car when
said kid is is standing with his bike on a sidewalk!

"Kid would have survived if he had been wearing a helmet! That would
have saved him!"
I kid you not, they actually say those things.

I rally need a way to ward off [censored]. If you come up with an idea, I
am all ears.

"vey" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Clive George said:

"vey" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

[email hidden] wrote:

>> So what's the straight [censored]? Does Snell matter?
>
> Dear Vey,
>
> Table at bottom shows differences between tests, text explains some
> details:
> http://www.cyclehelmets.org/papers/c2023.pdf
>
> Cheers,
>
> Carl Fogel

TMI. I think I read here that Snell matters, but in the UK, Snell
approved are not much available. Is that about right?

Sounds about right. Trouble is, the Snell standards are higher than the
others, so it's easier to make a light well ventilated helmet which meets
just the lower ones.

cheers,
clive

So here is the bottom line, clive. If I can purchase a bonafide Snell
approved helmet for $5 (2 & 50) more would it be worth it? $10 more? $20
more?

At what price point would it not matter?

That's not a very easy question to answer. "not matter" is entirely up to
how you rate the various features of a helmet - protection, weight, looks,
ventilation, comfort, etc, and also how much money you've got to spend.

Protection doesn't correlate very well with price at all - in fact, some of
the best helmets in this regard are the cheapest. You pay more for less
weight and more vents - which don't help with protection.

What you need to decide is why you're wearing the helmet, and if the extra
protection implied by the Snell certification is important to you. This can
then help you with your purchasing decision.

Me - if I were buying one, I'd probably want it to work. So I'd go for a
Snell one, initially at least. I may then change that decision if there
isn't one available which is sufficiently comfortable at a price I feel
happy with.

cheers,
clive

vey said:

So here is the bottom line, clive. If I can purchase a bonafide Snell
approved helmet for $5 (2 & 50) more would it be worth it? $10 more? $20
more?

At what price point would it not matter?

The odds are overwhelming that it won't matter, period.

What are you after, more impact protection? Then wear a cheaper
helmet. Less expensive helmets tend to have more styrofoam (and more
weight, and less ventilation). They do this because it's the cheapest
way to pass the certification test on the first try. And the cheapest
helmets don't bother with the greater expense of the Snell standard.
OTOH, the more expensive helmets are designed to maximize vents,
minimize weight, and maximize fashion while just barely passing the
tests - and most of them don't bother with Snell either.

But it really doesn't matter. The overwhelming majority of helmets
never see an impact. Those that do see impacts have not reduced the
head injury rates or fatality rates of cyclists. See
http://www.cyclehelmets.org/mf.html?1041 for example.

So again: it really doesn't matter.

- Frank Krygowski

vey said:

I used to ride motorsickels, and way back in the 70's Snell was king
when it came to helmet ratings.

So I'm looking at helmets and I see that Specialized apply for and get
Snell ratings where Bell and many other Co. don't bother. Maybe they
don't want to pay Snell to test them, I dunno.

So what's the straight [censored]? Does Snell matter?

After Bell Sports acquired their main competitor (Giro), they promptly
discontinued their efforts to meet Snell standards in both lines.

Note that unlike motorsport helmets, bicycle helmets are designed less
for preventing injury and more for promoting mandatory use. Meeting
actual engineering standards is relatively unimportant as long as
uninformed users and promoters continue to believe that such helmets
constitute strong protection against death.

Chalo

Tom Sherman said:

Eric Vey said:

Tom Sherman said:

You want the helmet that can be most easily modified into a Faraday
shield.

Well of course I do! I would love that. I would also love a helmet that
ward off [censored]. Can I buy one of those?

The evidence of population studies indicates that a helmet that wards
off "[censored]" is about as commercially available as one that
significantly reduces the rate of serious head injury.

You could glue some old styrofoam cooler pieces to a baseball hat,
paint it, and call that an a__hole repellent bike helmet.

Face it, ANY bike helmet is good enough to ward off the helmet nazis.
As long as you wear any helmet, it's good enough to shut up them and
their lawyers. And that's the main reason I wear one...

Pat

Email address works as is.

vey said:

I think it is time to buy a new helmet. My old Walmart bought Bell
helmet's plastic was eaten up by the sun, turned yellow, then started
breaking up. It never did fit right.

I used to ride motorsickels, and way back in the 70's Snell was king
when it came to helmet ratings.

So I'm looking at helmets and I see that Specialized apply for and get
Snell ratings where Bell and many other Co. don't bother. Maybe they
don't want to pay Snell to test them, I dunno.

So what's the straight [censored]? Does Snell matter?

i do not think it matters. dot testing is all you need
chris
http://www.bikingthings.com

vey said:

I think it is time to buy a new helmet. My old Walmart bought Bell
helmet's plastic was eaten up by the sun, turned yellow, then started
breaking up. It never did fit right.

I used to ride motorsickels, and way back in the 70's Snell was king
when it came to helmet ratings.

So I'm looking at helmets and I see that Specialized apply for and get
Snell ratings where Bell and many other Co. don't bother. Maybe they
don't want to pay Snell to test them, I dunno.

So what's the straight [censored]? Does Snell matter?

No.

Population studies show no benefit to wearing a cycle helmet, regardless of
certification.

Quoted message said:

vey said:

So here is the bottom line, clive. If I can purchase a bonafide Snell
approved helmet for $5 (2 & 50) more would it be worth it? $10 more? $20
more?

Quoted message said:

At what price point would it not matter?

The odds are overwhelming that it won't matter, period.

What are you after, more impact protection? Then wear a cheaper
helmet. Less expensive helmets tend to have more styrofoam (and more
weight, and less ventilation). They do this because it's the cheapest
way to pass the certification test on the first try. And the cheapest
helmets don't bother with the greater expense of the Snell standard.
OTOH, the more expensive helmets are designed to maximize vents,
minimize weight, and maximize fashion while just barely passing the
tests - and most of them don't bother with Snell either.

But it really doesn't matter. The overwhelming majority of helmets
never see an impact. Those that do see impacts have not reduced the
head injury rates or fatality rates of cyclists. Seehttp://www.cyclehelmets.org/mf.html?1041for example.

So again: it really doesn't matter.

- Frank Krygowski

This would be easier for many people if Lance had not retired.

tf

vey said:

I think it is time to buy a new helmet. My old Walmart bought Bell
helmet's plastic was eaten up by the sun, turned yellow, then started
breaking up. It never did fit right.

I used to ride motorsickels, and way back in the 70's Snell was king
when it came to helmet ratings.

So I'm looking at helmets and I see that Specialized apply for and get
Snell ratings where Bell and many other Co. don't bother. Maybe they
don't want to pay Snell to test them, I dunno.

So what's the straight [censored]? Does Snell matter?

From:
http://www.bhsi.org/standard.htm#SNELL

"Snell has a rigorous certification procedure, with follow-up testing
of helmets procured in the field from retail outlets. For this service
the manufacturer pays about 35 cents for the Snell certification
sticker placed in each helmet, plus the costs of the follow-up
testing. We estimate that the net result to the consumer is a maximum
of $1 added to the cost of a bicycle helmet at the retail level. Under
present market conditions, the manufacturer is forced to eat some or
all of that."

Art Harris

Quoted message said:

On Jan 21, 9:01 pm, [email hidden] wrote:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

What are you after, more impact protection? Then wear a cheaper
helmet.

And there's the smoking gun. (Again.) Frank* flat-out states that helmets
provide impact protection. (Again.)

Bill "so what's all the fuss?" S.

*quoted by someone else, as I plonked Mr. Pomposity long ago

Clive George said:

"vey" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

> So what's the straight [censored]? Does Snell matter?

Dear Vey,

Table at bottom shows differences between tests, text explains some
details:
http://www.cyclehelmets.org/papers/c2023.pdf

Cheers,

Carl Fogel

TMI. I think I read here that Snell matters, but in the UK, Snell
approved are not much available. Is that about right?

Sounds about right. Trouble is, the Snell standards are higher than the
others, so it's easier to make a light well ventilated helmet which
meets just the lower ones.

A big difference is self-certification versus third-party certification.
As far as I know, Snell doesn't allow self-certification, but CPSC and
ASTM do allow self-certification.

See "http://www.oninjuryresources.ca/downloads/cf128031450656958768.ppt"

IMVAIO, if a cyclist is going to wear a helmet they should at least get
the Snell certified helmet to be sure that the design has been tested by
an independent organization. I have a Snell certified Specialized helmet
that is no less ventilated and no heavier than a self-certified helmet,
so it's certainly possible to make a light, well-ventilated, Snell
approved helmet.

That said, all the studies of helmet effectiveness don't take into
account whether or not the helmet was self-certified or third party
certified. Given the huge body of evidence showing the benefits of
helmets in head impact crashes, it's not clear how much more protection
the Snell approved helmet gives verses self-certified helmet.

For a good review of the helmet effectiveness studies, see
"http://www.helmets.org/henderso.htm"

On Tue, 22 Jan 2008 09:17:09 -0800, SMS <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

Clive George said:

"vey" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

[email hidden] wrote:

>> So what's the straight [censored]? Does Snell matter?
>
> Dear Vey,
>
> Table at bottom shows differences between tests, text explains some
> details:
> http://www.cyclehelmets.org/papers/c2023.pdf
>
> Cheers,
>
> Carl Fogel

TMI. I think I read here that Snell matters, but in the UK, Snell
approved are not much available. Is that about right?

Sounds about right. Trouble is, the Snell standards are higher than the
others, so it's easier to make a light well ventilated helmet which
meets just the lower ones.

A big difference is self-certification versus third-party certification.
As far as I know, Snell doesn't allow self-certification, but CPSC and
ASTM do allow self-certification.

See "http://www.oninjuryresources.ca/downloads/cf128031450656958768.ppt"

IMVAIO, if a cyclist is going to wear a helmet they should at least get
the Snell certified helmet to be sure that the design has been tested by
an independent organization. I have a Snell certified Specialized helmet
that is no less ventilated and no heavier than a self-certified helmet,
so it's certainly possible to make a light, well-ventilated, Snell
approved helmet.

That said, all the studies of helmet effectiveness don't take into
account whether or not the helmet was self-certified or third party
certified. Given the huge body of evidence showing the benefits of
helmets in head impact crashes, it's not clear how much more protection
the Snell approved helmet gives verses self-certified helmet.

For a good review of the helmet effectiveness studies, see
"http://www.helmets.org/henderso.htm"

Dear Steven,

It's a very painstaking but very poor review, if not outright
nonsense.

No reader could guess from the passage below that the Thompson-Rivara
comparison of two groups of helmeted and unhelmeted riders concluded
that helmets reduced serious head injury and death by ~85% (they later
admitted that their arithmetic was wrong) without noticing that the
helmets also reduced leg injuries by 75%.

Either helmets magically protect legs, or else the two groups were not
comparable.

"Thompson et al (1989) conceded that they could not completely role
out the possibility that more cautious cyclists may have chosen to
wear helmets and also had less severe accidents. Spaite et al (1991)
compared injuries sustained by helmeted and unhelmeted riders in
collisions with motor vehicles, finding that the helmeted riders had
less injury to other parts of the body as well as to the head. They
concluded that the collisions for these riders had been less severe,
because the riders had been more cautious. However, Thompson et al
(1989) made adjustments made for age, experience, and accident
severity should have largely accounted for such potential differences
between case patients and controls."

Cheers,

Carl Fogel