Okay - This will be my last post on the subject....
"A little MORE education" - FROM HJC - on their description of the shell of
the CL-14: HJC's CL Series ... Features like SNELL approved advanced
polycarbonate composite shell construction...
So it appears "plastic" is how Jason defines the CL-14, not how HJC does.
Whatever it is they use, it appears that it is, in fact, a composite.
You statement that plastic will impart more impact is not based on any cited
fact, and is so broad as to be uncredible.
I don't ride the way a MotoGP rider rides, that's why I don't wear the same
kind of leathers, the same kind of boots, or gloves or helmets or eyewear or
rain gear. Different animal. But you can bet that not a small part of
that decision is based on what the helmet company wants to market - and
that's usually going to be their "flagship" product.
Again, no citation as to the inferiority of the "plastic" helmet - just your
assertion.
And my favorite statement: "Do you really think a $49 helmet is going to
protect your head like a good fibreglass helmet?"
Well, would it be better protection if I paid full retail (mine would have
been $169.99)? The Composite Shell that you are so enamored with retails
for $20 more....so where, exactly, is the price cutoff for helmet
protection? Since the Composite can be had for $80 (I bought both, by the
way), does that provide less protection than if I had paid retail for the
"plastic"?
I agree that two helmets that pass the same test are not necessarily the
same quality. And many of those qualities have nothing to do with safety,
and much more to do with comfort features, bells/whistles, etc. (My CL
doesn't have "Advanced Channeling System", or "Aquatrans moisture wicking"
or the like) I guess the question I have is this: Should I put more faith
in Snell when it comes to rating my head gear, or in Jason? I gotta go with
the Snell engineers.
I agree about opinions. That's why I try to base my safety decisions mostly
on fact. And there are no facts present that indicate my CL-14 will protect
me less than my AC-11.
Dan B
-----Original Message-----
From: vfr-bounces@xxxxxx [mailto:vfr-bounces@xxxxxx] On Behalf Of
Jason Mellen
Sent: Monday, April 03, 2006 6:34 PM
To: VFR mailing list
Subject: CL 14 Helmet
A little education.
1) Plastic is not a composite. It is plastic. It is manufactured in one
pouring/injection operation. Composites are an alloy, if you will.
2) Plastic will impart more energy to your head.
Ask how many MotoGP riders wear plastic helmets, and then think about why
they don't...
No offence to those wearing plastic helmets ( I have one myself). But it is
inferior to fibreglass, at least in a helmet application.
Do you really think a $49 helmet is going to protect your head like a good
fibreglass helmet?
And just because two helmets pass a test, does not mean they are the same
quality. For instance, back when the CL series was a CL-10, I bought one
for snowmobiling. All CL-10 helmets were Snell rated, except the XXXL size.
Why do you think that was? Because the helmet failed!
Anyway, opinions will differ, especially when somebody already owns what
they're touting....
SNIP
_______________________________________________
Vfr mailing list
Vfr@xxxxxx
For subscription and delivery options:
https://lists.cs.wisc.edu/mailman/listinfo/vfr