Watch This: Certified Versus Non Certified Helmet Impact Testing

This is like wearing a fashion seat belt made of silk. Any retailer selling these non certified helmets are setting themselves up for increased liability.

As preface, I definitely recommend wearing a certified helmet when you ride, and I practice what I preach.

But my skeptic sense is tingling!

Here’s the breakdown:
* The Athlete Recovery Fund produces the video. Bell is a sponsor.
* Bell runs a single test, as a bonus, their product has one arm tied behind its back!
* The people from ARF look impressed. They’re not scientists, but how can they be wrong?
* If that doesn’t influence you, they have numbers. NUMBERS, people!
* You should buy a certified helmet, maybe an Easton-Bell (nice exterior shot to mention Giro)!

But by their own scale, the 1m drop test is as bad, if not worse than a severe football hit. Not that concussions are a significant issue in the NFL.

And despite these test rigs, this is the same industry that can’t tell you if their helmets are durable enough to handle being dropped from a table, kept in a hot trunk, or given a funny look. “You should probably buy another helmet”.

Suffice it to say, I don’t give these people any more money than necessary.

@Champs, I’d have to agree, while the test is the test, and the results prove the point very nicely, the heavy Bell influence did have a bit of a fishy smell to it. Maybe if for the test they would not have used a Bell helmet for comparison, or even better, had actually used an independent test lab.

@bigcow I would say that pretty much NO ultracool custom frame would pass the EN test. That said, I think the EN tests are ultimately flawed, the testing practices somewhat unrealistic, and as has been put to me, some factories test higher to cover themselves on warranty, hence frames end up being over built.

Uhm, the tests do have to conform to a standard. Even if you think the test setup is wrong, you can’t deny the deceleration that each helmet experiences. The setup is stupid easy: attach accelerometer, apply force, read accelerometer output with computer, display on screen. Please, conspiracy folks, tell us exactly where the data is being fudged. How many here have worked with accelerometers? How many here have collected data? What’s in it for Easton to “fake” results on a publicly distributed video?

Now some realistic perspective. The SNELL standard of 275 or 300g (it recently has changed) max deceleration has become the red headed step child of helmet testing as 200-250g decelerations are quite often fatal.

Wearing non-certified helmet in a skatepark is still much, much better than wearing nothing at all. Especially for kids who can not afford to buy a new helmet after every fall.

When I skate pool I do fall. And graze my head on a regular basis. I have a certified POC, which is supposed to be good for multiple impacts. Before that I was wearing a non-certified one – as it is not feasible to replace it after every small hit.

Wear frigging something.

I have a real hard time with this study. I personally fell after folding a front wheel about 8′ or 2.4 meters lawn darting into the ground. I did not get my hands up at all and according to their study should have sustained over 1600Gs to my noodle. Some 270 is accepted as lethal by the US military. I felt the foam squish and had no worries about my head tough I thought I broke my neck. In the end I walked away with a sore neck and a new respect for quality front wheels. And will not ride with anything other than the Pro-Tec non certified. I honestly feel it saved my life.