My helmet specs

[rotor]

I am unable to find a helmet I want. The specifications are quite simple:

1) Full face
2) As low mass (weight) as possible
3) White, with no graphics and lettering on it
4) Reasonable cost

The specifications are listed in order of importance. Please note that I do not believe any one particular helmet make/model will offer significantly better protection than another in case of a crash. I do not need any formal "certification" as I have yet to observe it be examined on the road by an agent of the government in any jurisdiction I have been riding in.

Specifically, if you own a full-face helmet and weighting scale, and if your helmet weights less than 1250 grams (2.75 pounds) please post the make/model and mass in either metric or imperial measure.

TIA

 

[alprider]

The color you can make self for 2-3 bugs in case of case

 

[the Ferret]

Motorcycle Helmet Weight Comparisons (272 Helmets Compared!)

You can probably get 3 of the 4 things you want.. due to the rule of life (you can never get everything you want)

You can get light, you can get white, you can get full face..... but it won't be cheap

you can get cheap, you can get white, you can get full face....... but it won't be light

you will probably have to make a choice between light and cheap lol

 

[emptysea]

Weight and noise are the factors driving price. Pretty much what Ferret said. "Reasonable cost" is a completely subjective term -- I assure you that Ferret's "reasonable" is different than my "reasonable". I like my Shoei x14. It is white. I could have peeled off the Shoei logos. It is light, although I'm going to leave it to you to reasearch the exact weight. Problem is that it's probably not priced right for you. As far as the certifications, well, it's your noggin.

HJC and their RPHA line have good quality products at what I would call "reasonable" prices. Not as light as some, though

 

[Houtman_imp]

Kenny Roberts said a long time ago : " if you have a $ 5 head , buy a
$ 5 helmet "
Cheap is never good and good is never cheap.
I only have one head and bought (in my opinion ) the best helmet for my head . ARAI Signature X

 

[LongRanger_imp]

I believe that was an '80's marketing slogan by Bell Helmets, not by Kenny Roberts. I'm sure I still have the magazines with the ads.

For cheap, white, full face, check JC Whitney or Cycle Gear. They carry inexpensive off-brand helmets which will likely meet your requirements. As far as weight, you'll need to rely on the manufacturer's specs and do your own comparisons.

 

[rotor]

Quote:Cheap is never good and good is never cheap. In my experience this is far from a universal rule. But note that the price was specifically placed on the last position in my list.

There is no statistical data to prove that a more expensive helmet will substantially reduce the probability of an injury, at least not that I know off. Until I see some, I will assume that price is in more direct correlation with the marketing expenditure than it is with the quality of the product. But I don't mind paying a premium for comfort, which to me means low weight and good fit.

I believe that was an '80's marketing slogan by Bell Helmets, not by Kenny Roberts. I'm sure I still have the magazines with the ads.

For cheap, white, full face, check JC Whitney or Cycle Gear. They carry inexpensive off-brand helmets which will likely meet your requirements. As far as weight, you'll need to rely on the manufacturer's specs and do your own comparisons.

Thanks. I note however that weight is hardly ever published by the helmet makers, and even when it is, it appears that around 3 pounds is the norm. This is why I was wandering if anybody on the forum has a helmet that I would consider "light".

 

[the Ferret]

SHARP - THE HELMET SAFETY SCHEME

 

[rotor]

Motorcycle Helmet Weight Comparisons (272 Helmets Compared!)

You can probably get 3 of the 4 things you want.. due to the rule of life (you can never get everything you want)

You can get light, you can get white, you can get full face..... but it won't be cheap

you can get cheap, you can get white, you can get full face....... but it won't be light

you will probably have to make a choice between light and cheap lol

I am prepared to pay for "light". I am however not prepared to swallow murketing fluff such as: "The center of gravity of a motorcycle helmet will affect how the weight is carried, which can make a lighter weight helmet feel heavy and vice versa."
With due respect to the retailer, this is nonsense.
Or:
"The fit of the helmet is paramount, because a proper fit will distribute the weight more evenly around the head and down through the shoulders".
Fit is important, but it will not do much to solve the problems caused by a heavy helmet. The weight causes fatigue and after a time pain in the base of the skull and shoulders, not on the top of the head where a bad fit will cause discomfort - a different problem altogether. At least, this has been my experience.

 

[Cormanus]

SHARP - THE HELMET SAFETY SCHEME

The SHARP site and this one too, https://www.crash.org.au/ratings.php lend weight to the view that safety and cost are not correlated. As I recall, the SHARP site shows a number of inexpensive helmets with very high safety ratings.

 

[the Ferret]

The sharp site also tests modulars and the HJC IS Max 2 which is the IS (internal sun screen) version of what I wear (had the IS helmet but the screen rattled so I returned it and got the non IS version) got a 4 start safety rating and a 100% rating on the latch staying closed for the chinbar. Plus it fits me well. I don't notice it being any nosier than the full face, or 3/4 helmets I own for that matter ( they are ALL noisy IMO) , or being excessively heavy, although I'm sure it's middle of the road in that regard and at $129 it is " reasonable" to me. ( I bought it on sale at Motorcyclegear.com ... I bought 2 of them in fact, one for my wife also) AND they are white!

 

[rotor]

SHARP - THE HELMET SAFETY SCHEME

The SHARP site and this one too, https://www.crash.org.au/ratings.php lend weight to the view that safety and cost are not correlated. As I recall, the SHARP site shows a number of inexpensive helmets with very high safety ratings.

The SHARP site and this one too, https://www.crash.org.au/ratings.php lend weight to the view that safety and cost are not correlated. As I recall, the SHARP site shows a number of inexpensive helmets with very high safety ratings. Worse, all so called "safety" testing/ratings I have seen measure is the resistance of the helmet to the damage to the helmet itself.

I am not interested in a helmet that I can re-use after an accident, I am interested in a helmet that will absorb the energy of the impact instead of transferring it to the base of my skull, the anatomical locale where the injuries are many time more deadly than skull dome fractures. The rest of this topic should be addressed by a competent, impartial head-trauma surgeon, and since I am not one I will stop here.

 

[emptysea]

SHARP - THE HELMET SAFETY SCHEME

The SHARP site and this one too, https://www.crash.org.au/ratings.php lend weight to the view that safety and cost are not correlated. As I recall, the SHARP site shows a number of inexpensive helmets with very high safety ratings.

The SHARP site and this one too, https://www.crash.org.au/ratings.php lend weight to the view that safety and cost are not correlated. As I recall, the SHARP site shows a number of inexpensive helmets with very high safety ratings. Worse, all so called "safety" testing/ratings I have seen measure is the resistance of the helmet to the damage to the helmet itself.

I am not interested in a helmet that I can re-use after an accident, I am interested in a helmet that will absorb the energy of the impact instead of transferring it to the base of my skull, the anatomical locale where the injuries are many time more deadly than skull dome fractures. The rest of this topic should be addressed by a competent, impartial head-trauma surgeon, and since I am not one I will stop here.

The SHARP site and this one too, https://www.crash.org.au/ratings.php lend weight to the view that safety and cost are not correlated. As I recall, the SHARP site shows a number of inexpensive helmets with very high safety ratings. Worse, all so called "safety" testing/ratings I have seen measure is the resistance of the helmet to the damage to the helmet itself.

I am not interested in a helmet that I can re-use after an accident, I am interested in a helmet that will absorb the energy of the impact instead of transferring it to the base of my skull, the anatomical locale where the injuries are many time more deadly than skull dome fractures. The rest of this topic should be addressed by a competent, impartial head-trauma surgeon, and since I am not one I will stop here.
No helmet should be reused after an accident. It shouldn't even be reused if it is dropped on a hard surface. The safety ratings (from DOT to ECE to Snell) ALL measure damage to the helmet as you say, but also measure impact energy absorption. Beyond that though, an unrated helmet tells you NOTHING at all about it's relative safety. Even if I grant you your notion that safety ratings don't tell you about energy absorption (although they do), at least the rated helmets tell you SOMETHING about their ability to protect your skull. All rated helmets absorb impact energy. You may think they should absorb more energy and that's fine, but it's flawed logic to think that an unrated helmet is as good as an unrated one -- it could be, but you're just guessing at that point.

 

[LongRanger_imp]

Interesting dialogue. To the OP's point, my Schuberth C3-Pro carries ECE and DOT safety ratings but because I purchased it locally in Italy, not from a U.S. retailer, it does not have a DOT sticker and therefore is not compliant on U.S. roads. I could be cited for wearing it!

 

[emptysea]

Interesting dilema, LR, at least where helmet laws exist. I have to think, though, that any officer smart enough to know about the DOT sticker, will likely know that ECE is at least as good....then again. LOL

 

[Cormanus]

The poor old LEO will have no choice no matter how well informed she is. The law is likely to say that, if the helmet doesn't carry a sticker showing compliance with either DOT or SNELL, it's illegal. End of story. Australia, thank the lord, has recently moved from a tediously rigid requirement for compliance with only an Australian-New Zealand standard to one that allows for acceptance of the European standard.

 

[emptysea]

True enough, Cormanus. I don't think that many folks are getting pulled over in the states to check for compliance on the type of helmet. Maybe they are, though. Illinois does not require helmets at all, so the LEOs don't care what the sticker says.

 

[rotor]

True enough, Cormanus. I don't think that many folks are getting pulled over in the states to check for compliance on the type of helmet. Maybe they are, though. Illinois does not require helmets at all, so the LEOs don't care what the sticker says.

We are not much of a statistical sample, but has anyone here ever had his or her helmet inspected for those stickers when stopped on the road? Or heard first-hand from someone who has?

In hot weather on short in-town hops, I sometimes wear a light skiing helmet. It resembles vaguely an open-face motorcycle helmet. Never a problem. I was only once in my life stopped for wearing no helmet at all (crossed from a no-law state to a mandatory helmet state without realizing it) but there was never, ever any interest shown by any government agent in the helmet stickers (or lack thereof) in any jurisdiction I had the pleasure of riding a motorcycle in.

Accordingly, the presence of any stickers on the device is not on the list of requirements in my opening post If I want stickers on my helmet, I can always get some from the kiddie department of my local dollar store

 

[LongRanger_imp]

I was pulled over several times while living in California (a mandatory helmet state) and not once was my equipment questioned or inspected. To MTC's point, no such requirement in Colorado. We don't even need to have turn signals.

 

[Cormanus]

So, let's draw breath and summarize. This antipodean was a bit confused for a moment.

Rotor wants a helmet. His initial criteria were: full face, light, white, cheap. However we've since established that safety tests are generally unreliable and stickers can be bought in the dollar store.

We can rule out the ski hat and an ordinary bicycle helmet as they don't meet the full face test.

Given that safety is apparently not an issue and cost is, I'd be wondering about a spot of fabrication with a couple of plastic ice cream containers, a clear lid from a plastic yoghurt container and an old belt.

Good luck.