I wanted one of those Nolan X-Lite; X-551 explorer helmet with the cool flip down sun visor ...but they don't sell them here So I too have gotten myself the cheap Bilt explorer with the flip down sun visor and I'm very happy with it (it does get foggy a tiny bit...)
I like my AFX FX39 also. A very nice helmet when you have to do a lot of pavement mixed in with your trails. Probably a wee bit on the heavy side...but not terribly noticeable, and doesn't get buffeted or lifted by the wind, and is fairly quiet.
I'm wearing the Icon Variant with sunglasses under the visor. Love the style and fit is spot on. Was worried at first about the visor buffeting in the wind but have not had problems at all. This comes after going without or using an open face on my cruiser so the protection is something I really like. Now that I have the TR I'll only wear this type helmet. PS: I got it at revzilla
Lol...to be fair...it's a $200 helmet on sale for $100 right now I too preach the "my head is worth paying the extra $$ for" but I just didn't have the cash right now and I REALLY needed a new helmet.
Ken, My take is that a helmet's ability to protect the head is not necessarily proportional to price - more often, weight, features and advertising overhead (high-profile sponsorship, for example) account for much of the differences in pricing. You can get well-made and feature loaded helmets that are fairly inexpensive and sometimes are actually better in many ways than the expensive units. I have fun with my riding buddies who buy expensive Arai's and the goggles squeeze their noses because they don't fit well inside the helmet opening- My last high-end Thor helmet fell apart in less than one year, so now I buy the less-expensive units and have found them to be better! I guess the company doesn't feel like it has to change the design every year on the lower-priced units so the quality is more consistent. Back when I was young and worked in a garage as a mechanic, we sold many different kinds of tires. The top-end tires were self-sealing, blow-out proof and expensive as heck. They were also the tires with by far the most problems...LOL, I'd chuckle when a customer said they would only buy the best. I learned back then to look beyond price when buying gear of any sort. I'm not saying expensive helmets are junk, but I am saying cheaper helmets are also not necessarily junk. Tom
That's exactly right Tom. The test with which the helmets must comply to gain accreditation to a particular standard only test that the helmets meet that minimum standard. Although there are different standards around the world, there is no graduated standard rating, so although it might be quite right that a more expensive helmet offers greater protection than the cheapest helmet, they all meet the minimum standard, and there is no way of judging exactly how much better any particular helmet might be. It's more likely to be the difference between a headache and no headache than it is to be the difference between an acquired brain injury, and no head injury.
What you say is maybe right between 400 and 500 bucks, but now between 100 and 500. You just cant produce very good helmet for 100 bucks.
This is a long article but a good read if you're interested in helmets and how they perform. After testing multiple helmets of varying cost their advice was that the $70 helmets performed equally as well as the $700 helmets in their impact tests. http://www.westcoastweasels.com/archives/PDF/Blowing_the_Lid_Off.pdf
Here are some excerpts from that comprehensive and well thought-out article: "All the helmets we tested performed exactly as the standards they were designed to meet predicted. And they seemed to exceed those standards—that is, the DOT-only helmets were better at high-energy impacts than they had to be just to pass the DOT standard, and the Snell helmets were better at absorbing low energy impacts than they had to be to pass DOT or Snell. So choosing a helmet, at least in terms of safety, is not a question of choosing high or low quality, it's one of choosing what degree of stiffness you prefer, finding a helmet in that range by choosing a particular standard, and then worrying about fine points like fit, comfort, ventilation, graphics, racer endorsements or computer-generated spokesmodels."... "Helmets are getting better, and some of the least-expensive helmets provide truly amazing protection. But just how good can helmets get? Stay tuned—we'll explore that topic very soon." BTW, in my 50 years of dirt riding and racing I've hit my head pretty hard more than just a few times, and always (in my later years, LOL) inspected the foam for any signs of crushing...I've never found any measurable deviation. It made me think, that, at least for for dirt riding, the softer standard is better - but who knows? Tom
It did seem odd that you couldn't wear glasses with the helmet, but I was going off the comment I quoted. I use a Shoei Hornet DS. Quality is good except for the plastic screws that hold some parts on. Shoei's used this kind of design for decades, but the clear screws on this helmet are brittle and break easily when you drop the helmet off a table or your bike seat. Get spares. Other than that, I'm fairly happy with the helmet. It IS pricey (it's a Shoei), but at the time (several years back) there were few options for ADV helmets.
I dare to disagree. Its not the question if they meet standards, its the question which of them exceed standards most. While you can buy cheap helmet that is quite safe but the probablity of finding good helmet among cheaper ones is much lower than in the group of more expensive ones. I believe one of the best helmet tests are carried out in Germany by independent agency (TUV) and presented by eg. 'Motorrad' magazine. And their tests show it clearly - active impact safety combined with passive safety features like fit are almost proportional to price. There are exceptions but rare... British SHARK helmet tests confirm that. Out of 41 helmets that got highest 5 star rating, only 8 are of price lower than 100 pounds. (~150 bucks): http://sharp.direct.gov.uk/testhelm...&sharp-type=All&sharp-rating=5&discontinued=1 Heres TUV example based on ADV helmets - in German but you will get the picture easily (prices in euro on right; test carried out in 2011): Full test here - use translator for English: http://www.motorradonline.de/motorradhelme/produkttest-sieben-endurohelme-im-test/374677
I have that same helmet. Got a great deal on it from Bills when buying my TR650. Its an inexpensive helmet but I love it. Lots of room for goggles but I wear sunglasses under. I ended up liking it so much I got a off road only version of it too.
Lots of different brands of helmets are made by the same manufacturer and many times the exact same helmet cost twice as much with the name on them. Like computers and tires and other things you just need to see what works for you because a lot of it is nearly the same. Some reports I read were the cheap helmets were better protection but at the price of weight. Also there are so many different materials. Carbon fiber, plastic, etc. On top of this testing is varied, inconclusive and crashes impart far different forces than the next crash. IMHO it is a bit of a crap shoot. I am not of the thinking that you get more protection per $$$. I used to buy the $450 Arias, I don't do that any more. I buy the semi inexpensive ones and replace them more. Helmets do wear out, inner cushions collapse (less impact resistance) shells breath out and get brittle, light crashes or even falling from your seat to the ground can cause fractures. I also believe helmet tech and manufacturing has come a long ways and we are seeing lots of very nicely built inexpensive helmets. Some of the cheap plastic helmets were rated a good bit higher then the fancy CF ones because the plastic withstood impact better. Its a crap shoot IMHO.
That's exactly what I started doing about 10 years ago. I replace about every two or three years - I sweat a lot when riding off-road (still do it every week) and the constant washing really takes a toll on the liners - and, I also noticed they start becoming a looser fit after a lot of rides. Some of the guys I ride with have custom paint jobs so they REALLY have a lot of money in their helmets - they need to keep them for at least for a decade to justify the costs...LOL...
Almost all manufacturers will tell you painting helmets is bad. The solvents can and will change the strength of the shell on many of them. I know many people paint helmets, I have done it myself but it is generally looked at as a bad thing for the helmet.
Yep, forgot to mention the stink and clean factor. I ride right through the winter and my helmet is wet and muddy a lot. I can ruin a helmet in a good year. Another factor for my inexpensive helmet decision.
Well, good helmet lets you remove/wash/replace liner with no problem. I replace liner every 2-3 years. In fact I just replaced all the liner pads, all (plastic) screws that were mentioned and shield/dash mounting hardware. I replace pinlock every year. I dont see any reason my helmet wouldnt be usable for a total of 7-8 years (3 of them already). Surely, I'm not a dirt rider per se and I dont ride in winter. For dirt riding I would choose different helmet, although with similar objective in sight - removable/washable liner.
I think they all have removable liners. But riding 2 times a week, water, mud, sweat, repeat takes a toll. To each his own, there is no wrong answer here.
I'm waiting on the new Arai XD-4 Diamante Helmet. Frigg'n arai keeps pushing the arrival date back. http://www.revzilla.com/motorcycle/arai-xd-4-diamante-helmet Doug
