Aldi - Helmets @ $69

[Rorz de Puniet]

"sprouting delusional drivel". The article I linked contains empirical testing of various helmets that actually show the softer DOT helmets transfer less G to the head in the same tests. Your counter argument is based on you-tube clips and...

The youtube clips are actual high speed crashes with heavy impacts to the head yet no fatal bodily injuries. The type of accidents that your article says don't really happen?

I'm a club racer, nothing special. Plenty of guys faster than me. Even if I went to 3 ride days a year to pootle round in the slow group though, I'd still wear a decent helmet.

BTW that X-lite X-802 that Lorenzo is wearing is not Snell certified or even DOT certified for that matter, so fuck me he's lucky he survived that crash eh

actually hardly any of the top GP helmets are Snell certified, Snell certified helmets tend to be heavier im guessing due to the extra reinforcing


and for what its worth the $70 aldi helmet usually retails between $160 and $300

You've been trying to change the argument for the last couple pages from quality reputable brand helmets vs cheapies to Snell vs DOT/AS/whatever. The fact of the matter is that Snell is a higher level testing. Whether you agree with the methods of those tests is up to you but there is no denying that it is a higher level of testing. You will find DOT and AS stickers on the shittiest open face and convertable helmets on the market, you'll seldom see a Snell logo on anything but a quality full face because nothing else will pass.

In regards to the Xlite, they are actually made by Nolan (same lid Stoner wears) which carry full Snell approval. The reason the Xlite isn't Snell or DOT approved is it was never intended to sell in the US so they only bothered to get ECE 22.05 approval as they were to be mainly sold in Europe. ECE 22.05 exceeds DOT.

[BigMuz]

That is what is called 'clinging to straws'.
To compare a top of the line F1 helmet to one you get from Aldi is not what you'd call a good argument.
The Aldi one may perform better in some crashes, but sure as shit not that one or many other typical F1 accidents.

Come on Bill- how do you know that is true?

You are assuming- nothing more. Assumptions != Facts.

PS I'm not saying to wear an aldi helmet in your F1 car. I'm just saying that you helmet snobs are trying to make people feel bad for only having basic helmets and there is NO EVIDENCE that your expensive ones make you any safer.

PS This is my last post in this thread. If you can't understand the crux of my argument I give up. Try to be scientific- if we give up on evidence based science we may as well head to the local church and sign up. They make persuasive arguments using made up stuff and assumption too.

[Rorz de Puniet]

actually hardly any of the top GP helmets are Snell certified, Snell certified helmets tend to be heavier im guessing due to the extra reinforcing

As far as I'm aware:

Arai: Snell
Shoei: Snell
Nolan: Snell
Bell: Snell
AGV: ECE 22.05
Xlite: ECE 22.05

[zeusch]

so this argument seems to be going round in circles a lot
seems like muz is arguing for cars with crumple zones and bill is arguing for bullbars

[Billzilla]

Come on Bill- how do you know that is true?

You are assuming- nothing more. Assumptions != Facts.

There comes a point where common sense overcomes sweeping statements like that.
I am extremely comfortable and confident in saying that an F1 helmet is going to be better in just about every way you can think of and measure than one you can get at Aldi. I say it again - there may be some accidents where the Aldi one may be better you'd be lucky to find anyone that could be honest in saying that it's a better helmet overall.

so this argument seems to be going round in circles a lot
seems like muz is arguing for cars with crumple zones and bill is arguing for bullbars

Precisely what I am not arguing.

[morerevsm3]

impact testing standards are identical to bike helmets.

Snell Standards specific question
What are the differences between the SA, M and K standards?

The SA standard was designed for competitive auto racing while the M standard was for motorcycling and other motorsports. The K standard was released to accommodate helmets used in karting. There are three major differences between them:

The SA standard requires flammability test while the M and K standards do not.
The SA and K standards allow for a narrower visual field than the M standard (Some SA and K certified helmets may not be street legal).
The SA and K standards include a rollbar multi-impact test while the M standard does not.

so much for identical tests, seems snell test to likely actual situations

[hrd]

The youtube clips are actual high speed crashes with heavy impacts to the head yet no fatal bodily injuries. The type of accidents that your article says don't really happen?

how many times do you need to be told the article does not say anything like that?

also, exactly how heavy are those crashes? what force was measured in them?? did anyone study the helmets to determine what force they were subjected to??? if you don't know, what you are really saying is "look at these dramatic looking crashes..." Its not evidence of anything.

You've been trying to change the argument for the last couple pages from quality reputable brand helmets vs cheapies to Snell vs DOT/AS/whatever.

have I? 4 pages ago, your first post on the subject, and the very first statement you made about the article I posted was

The problem with his line if thinking is that he feels that the kind of hard impacts that Snell tests for are unlikely to happen in the real world. I put it to you that this is a terrible assumption to make as those kind of extreme high impacts can be reproduced on the street or track no problem at all....<and you go on to say>...Look at the late Simoncelli accident. The impact actually snapped his chin strap, the forces involved to do that were massively beyond even the Snell tests....<and end with this>...I had a friend have a head on with a car which was on the wrong side of the road in the hills last year. He not only survived (long recovery though) but has now bought a brand new Aprilia RSV4.... He was wearing a Snell approved helmet. No hard evidence that he wouldn't have survived in a cheaper helmet but that's enough to keep me in reputable brand helmets that carry the Snell approval.

Butnow you say I've "been trying to change the argument for the last couple pages from quality reputable brand helmets vs cheapies to Snell vs DOT/AS/whatever."??? Seems you don't even read/understand what you're writing let alone anyone else.
And the whole article you were responding to was about the differences between Snell and softer DOT helmets...

The fact of the matter is that Snell is a higher level testing. Whether you agree with the methods of those tests is up to you but there is no denying that it is a higher level of testing. You will find DOT and AS stickers on the shittiest open face and convertable helmets on the market, you'll seldom see a Snell logo on anything but a quality full face because nothing else will pass.

Snell stipulate more difficult tests to pass, but also allow the passing mark to be as high as 300G transferred to the headform in those tests, which according to medical, scientific and military opinion is not survivable. That sure is a higher level of testing

[Norminator]

wow... motoGP isn't "run what you brung?"

to make some progress on the certs ain't certs debate... what is medical, scientific and military opinion on 400G?

DOT 400G. ECE 275G. Snell 300G.

tests are same shit, different smell (refers Snell 2005 not 2010 which i think brings them even closer);

http://smf.org/docs/articles/mcomp2.html

difference in shoei shell weights to satisfy different standards;

http://www.shoei-europe.com/uk/ecesnell-uk

a lot of those weight differences are less than the difference between 2 sizes of the same model helmet ie. fuckall.

anyway, i do all my own testing. time to post up your helmet pussy







can you figure out what hit the road first??

which helmet would you cunts tell your child to buy??

[hrd]

so much for identical tests, seems snell test to likely actual situations

I wasn't aware of the 50mm roll bar test, but otherwise the impact tests and their conditions are identical:

the head forms are the same.
the extent of protection (ie areas covered by the helmet) are the same.
conditioning for testing is identical - special conditioning, cold, heat and wet conditioning... all identical.
positional stability (roll off) testing is identical
dynamic test of retention system is identical
motobike testing has special considerations for flip-up helmets in their Impact Management tests, but are otherwise identical.
the flat anvil, hemisperical anvil and edge anvil tests are identical
the permitted G forces in the anvil tests are identical
chin bar test is identical
shell penetration test is identical
face sheild penetration test is identical

given that the rest of the tests are identical in every aspect, I doubt a karting standard helmet is manufactured or engineered any differently to a motorcycle helmet to provide a different kind of impact protection.

I was aware of the extra flame test and different feilds of vision, which is why I said impact tests...

[Gassed250]

I'm just saying that you helmet snobs are trying to make people feel bad for only having basic helmets and there is NO EVIDENCE that your expensive ones make you any safer.

I dont feel bad for buying it and i give no fark what they think, i bought it because i needed a helmet to race my street car that would maybe do a low 12 pass, its something that i'd only wear a few times a year so i didnt see the need to spend the extra, if it were up to me i wouldnt wear any helmet in this car as i dont think its any more dangerous than driving it on the street

Now if i were driving a car like Dales I'd definitely look at something better as theres greater risks of a hard impact and belting my head on roll bars etc

The thing that shits me is the people that are quick to say the helmet is poorly built, heavy, not well ventilated hard to get bits for or its not certified, WITHOUT EVEN SEEING ONE but only because it was on special for $70 at Aldi, then they drivel on by saying that you can get a better one for only a couple hundred more yet don't know that if you buy it direct from the manufacture it DOES cost a few hundred more putting it in the same price bracket as the "better" helmets they're directing you to

Ignorant cunts need to look into shit before throwing out comments on something that they have never seen


The Aldi unit replaced a Shoei RF800 Mankato that i bought new back around 2002 for nearly $500, apart from being on the heavy side and out of date it was a good helmet

[piss98]

Nice faceplant Norm. :D:D

You cunts argue like fucking women sometimes I swear!

[Norminator]

churs brah! i ate shit like a mofo, then i had a powernap.

[Rorz de Puniet]

I've been stating the whole time that Snell is a higher level of testing. Whether you agree with the testing methods or not is up to you but the statement you have quoted was in response to people saying that DOT was actually a "better" standard than Snell which I don't believe to be true considering the real world performance of Snell approved helmets. I felt obliged to mention that but my main point has always been: quality helmets bought at a resonable price > Aldi helmets that aren't much cheaper.

I've got a few things on this afternoon but if I can be arsed I'll quote the sections of your article that cover what I'm talking about although I can't help but think I'm wasting my time. Can you not just read it yourself?

You're still banging on about the same things you were two pages ago which I have already covered. Answer some of the points I have raised in the 10 paragraphs I've already wasted my time typing.

I dont feel bad for buying it and i give no fark what they think, i bought it because i needed a helmet to race my street car that would maybe do a low 12 pass, its something that i'd only wear a few times a year so i didnt see the need to spend the extra, if it were up to me i wouldnt wear any helmet in this car as i dont think its any more dangerous than driving it on the street

Now if i were driving a car like Dales I'd definitely look at something better as theres greater risks of a hard impact and belting my head on roll bars etc

The thing that shits me is the people that are quick to say the helmet is poorly built, heavy, not well ventilated hard to get bits for or its not certified, WITHOUT EVEN SEEING ONE but only because it was on special for $70 at Aldi, then they drivel on by saying that you can get a better one for only a couple hundred more yet don't know that if you buy it direct from the manufacture it DOES cost a few hundred more putting it in the same price bracket as the "better" helmets they're directing you to

Ignorant cunts need to look into shit before throwing out comments on something that they have never seen


The Aldi unit replaced a Shoei RF800 Mankato that i bought new back around 2002 for nearly $500, apart from being on the heavy side and out of date it was a good helmet

I have no problem with that mate. You bought a cheap helmet as it was going to better than the 10 year old helmet you had which would be brittle by now and for what you want to do, it's pretty much fit for purpose.

I'm just not big on then singing it's praises on a forum where other people will get the idea that Aldi helmets are on par with something like a Shoei, purchase one then use it for an entirely different purpose.

[JOHN MAYER]

can you figure out what hit the road first??

which helmet would you cunts tell your child to buy??

Pretty much this. Even my "Cheap and nasty" KBC did the job when I needed it to... That was a similar High-Side ending in head first road impact at about $1.40. I was lucky, because at the time my visor was up and the road surface slammed it closed.

[hrd]

I've got a few things on this afternoon but if I can be arsed I'll quote the sections of your article that cover what I'm talking about although I can't help but think I'm wasting my time. Can you not just read it yourself?

lol - from the guy who thinks it says "high speed crashes with heavy impacts to the head yet no fatal bodily injuries don't really happen"

You're still banging on about the same things you were two pages ago which I have already covered.

what exactly have you "covered"? show me anything you've said that offers better evidence to counter that article and its test results.

fucking lol - you say their research doesn't cover enough situations and types of crashes, then support your opinion with a couple of fucking youtube clips of high-sides. can you hear yourself?

Answer some of the points I have raised in the 10 paragraphs I've already wasted my time typing.

show me one I haven't answered???