SHARP helmet ratings
 

Well this has been discussed before, and there has been a recent thread going on another forum.

I've felt that the single "star" rating doesn't give much information as to how the helmet performed, and would like to see more of the detailed results. This was brought to the fore when the rating for my Schuberth S1 (the Pro version anyway) was announced as a mighty...............2 stars, practically the worst of anything.

I e-mailed Schuberth asking if they had any explanation and could they reassure me to buy another Schuberth. No reply kind of means a "no" in my book.

Anyway, another forum member posted this from someone who had visited the SHARP stand at the NEC, which in my view contains as much info as the entire SHARP site.

Update. I visited the Sharp stand at the NEC and talked to their chief test engineer while an article in this weeks comic covered similar ground.

Firstly the results. The two star Schuberth uses foam inserts of variable density. The inserts have to bear the full force of any impact individually and end up being overwhelmed, passing more of the shock into the helmet. Not good. One of the two star Schuberths was on display, looking very sorry for itself post test. Not all Schuberths are built this way, they have four star rated helmets that use a single insert. The two star Arai's use a single insert of variable depth. Arai believe that the side of a helmet takes less damage in a collision and use less foam around the ear area, making their helmets lighter and more comfortable. Government research shows that impacts are evenly distributed around the helmet in road crashes and make no allowance for this weak area, thus the low score for some Arai helmets.

I had all of my questions answered in a simple and straightforward manner, including the big one about low scores. The engineer confirmed what Arai claim- their helmets exceed legal safety requirements by a considerable margin. However, they have weak spots where a fifty pound thermoplastic lid will offer more protection. Put another way, if you take a hit to the temple or crown (both common on the racetrack) an Arai offers unparalled protection. Unfortunately, if you smack the side of your head an Arai wouldn't be your best choice and even more unfortunately the available data shows an even distribution of impacts in road accidents. The government take on all of this is simple- reduce road fatalities. The Sharp team believe that things are a little more complex, but think that a rating system can only improve safety. All their data is available to manufacturers, including detailed test results. More tellingly, the helmet manufacturers were consulted throughout the programmes set up.

Where next? The government has no plans to make Sharp a legal requirement. The team constantly review both the test process and research into accidents and fatalities. They are willing to change the tests if compelling new data appears to indicate they should. Existing tests, including the American Snell, don't compare in terms of helmet coverage and variety of impacts. The team welcome feedback from individuals as well as manufacturers. The engineer I spoke to was at pains to point out that there are things they don't test, such as comfort, fit, likelyhood of misting or noise and that a comfortable helmet can prevent you having an accident in the first place. At the same time he was convinced that these tests are the most comprehensive independant safety rating in the world.

It was suggested that as many people as possible should add a request for more info on the SHARP website, so if you're interested then please do. If we all ask, it might just happen.

Re: SHARP helmet ratings
 

If you do a bit more research you'll find that the SHARP people misinterpreted the data they were given regarding distribution of impacts on helmet shells. In effect they got their maths wrong when working out the percentages of impacts in certain areas.

I won't take the blindest bit of notice of their results until they rectify the test proceedure to fall in line with what the original crash statistics showed. In other words, they need to go and buy a new £3-99 calculator, redo their sums and then start retesting helmets in the correct areas.

Re: SHARP helmet ratings
 

Yes, indeed the more you look into it the worse it gets. Found this page http://www.carolenash.com/insidebike...lmet-tests.htm where it says

The latest round of test results have seen lids like the Marushin Tiger, which retails for around £100, receive a 5 star rating, whilst a Schuberth S1 Pro, which costs £400, is rated with just two stars.
insidebikes asked the Schuberth UK importer, Henry Rivers-Fletcher at Oxford Products to comment;
“This is difficult because it comes across as sour grapes, but we - along with other importers and manufacturers - have some problems with the SHARP testing regime. Basically they use a range of helmet forms, a kind of dummy metal head if you like, which they place the helmets on when doing impact tests.
Because the Schuberth S1 Pro in an L size, does NOT fit the SHARP L size head form, they place it onto an M sized form, and then boost the impact speeds by 10-15%. The reason that SHARP give for this is that the M sized head form is lighter than an L sized one, so they say that gives Schuberth some type of advantage. Obviously we disagree.
The Schuberth S1 Pro in an L is slightly smaller than the industry average, it also has extra sound insulation materials inside the shell, which is why an L sized metal head form will not fit. It will fit an M sized head form, but I don’t see how a perfect fit offers any real advantage.
We feel that adding an extra 10-15% on the impact speeds is just bad science, we want a level playing field when it comes to helmet testing.”

Now if those claims about the testing method are correct, then the whole thing is a fiasco.

It's someone's law that says once you open a can of worms, the only way to get all the worms back in is with a bigger can. This appears to be one of those cans.

Re: SHARP helmet ratings
 

Oh dear.

One thing I saw in one of the various mags, was that the stat work used to justify the all-round impact argument made no differentiation for impact severity. IE, a small chip on the side of the helmet was given the same significance as a massive dent in the forehead, since both show an impact. The suggestion was that the main impact points identified by Arai among others from their own research don't take any less impacts, but they take more major ones in initial impacts, while sides take more light knocks in subsequent impacts. If that's true- I don't know if it is- then it would seriously undermine the methodology.

Re: SHARP helmet ratings
 

+ 1, the recent results are a load of rubbish and have already proven to be inaccurate. Now the people doing the SHARP tests are redoing it and learning where they went wrong.

Re: SHARP helmet ratings
 

Well for a while now my brain/eyes have been pre-editing "SHARP helmet ratings" as "CARP helmet ratings"

Re: SHARP helmet ratings
 

All Chinese whispers and witch hunts. I certainly wouldn't buy a lid that scored less than 4.

Re: SHARP helmet ratings
 

Why not? The high performance lids are just as good, just in different ways. It's pot luck which one you need.

The decent helmet makers have put a lot of effort into making lids work, SHARP peoples have been about for about 25 minutes and don't know half as much. As evidenced by them going on dodgy statistics.

Re: SHARP helmet ratings
 

Well i would actually, given that i really choose a lid on how good it looks! Just saying all this SHARP tabloid frenzy is just a load of nonsense, they were always onto a loser. They didnt give these large greedy corporates the good press they are accustomed to and so were thrown to the tabloid dogs and punished for it. All these stories about totally flawed testing methodologies and an entire department somehow missing an error in a calc - load of b@lls i reckon. Bike press is just the same as normal press - they need to fill pages and if there aint the news around to do it......

Re: SHARP helmet ratings
 

I don't think Arai are one of the biggest helmet manufacturers, though- that probably comes down to the re-branders, whose cheap lids often get good marks. Schuberth certainly aren't a big manufacturer.