- This topic has 11 replies, 7 voices, and was last updated 13 years, 8 months ago by ranette.
Modular helmet
-
AuthorPosts
-
August 4, 2010 at 1:01 am #4151ncBikerParticipant
Im thinking about getting a modular helmet. Are there any out there for less than or around $150 dollars that meet more then just dot? Also what are the pros and cons of modulars? Thanks
August 4, 2010 at 2:06 am #27898WeaponZeroParticipantPros – convenience. That’s really it.
Cons – the chin bar is really just for show and doesn’t offer a significant amount of protection really over just having a half helmet with a full face shield. They’re DOT certified but only as half-helmets. They’re significantly louder than full face helmets as air has more pathways to pass through. They’re also noticeably heavier.
You’ll never find a modular helmet that’s SNELL approved because the way they’re designed it’s literally impossible to meet SNELL testing standards. As I said above they’re technically actually half helmets and are only certified as such. Only a true full-face helmet can be built to meet SNELL testing standards. It is also for this same reason they’re not allowed to be used on racetracks as they are not technically true full face helmets.
The Shark EVOline is currently the only modular helmet that meets ECE standards as a full-face helmet, so it’s the best safety-wise. But it’s $400. If you really want a modular helmet and don’t want to spend much just get an HJC IS-Max. I hate HJC but that thing isn’t bad for the money, just be certain to buy a lot of spare cheek pads/top pads. If it were me though I’d hold out for the Shark or simply get a full face.
Still, I’d rather be in a true full-face.
August 4, 2010 at 3:07 am #27907ranetteParticipantWZ is correct in that modulars cannot meet Snell standards, so DOT is the only certification that you’ll find on modulars in the US. I also realize that they cannot be worn on the track. However, “the chin bar is really just for show and doesn’t offer a significant amount of protection really over just having a half helmet with a full face shield” is just plain wrong. Here is the SHARP(British government rating) page for my modular, the Nolan N-102, http://sharp.direct.gov.uk/testsratings/nolan-n102. Note at the top, the percentage of impacts where the face guard remained fully locked is 100. To say that a FF offers the maximum amount of protection is fair, but to take the next step and essentially say that the chin bar is nothing more than cosmetic is giving incorrect information.
As for sub $150 modulars I can’t make any suggestions as I don’t have first hand experience with any. My N 102 which has been discontinued can still be found, lowest price I’ve seen is about $175 for the solids. I can tell you that I now ride more frequently with my FF for the two reasons that WZ mentioned above. The modular is significantly heavier and noisier(and my Suomy FF has a reputation for being noisy itself). However the Nolan still gets taken out and I never feel that I am compromising my safety in any way.
August 4, 2010 at 3:20 am #27908AParticipantModular helmets are likely to be heavier than most full face helmet.. cause neck fatigue, general fatigue.. i like my helmet as lightweight as possible.
August 4, 2010 at 1:16 pm #27369WeaponZeroParticipantThe chin bar in most (not all, but most) modular helmets is not EPS-lined, so all you have basically is the hard outer shell. That’s what I meant by “The chin bar is really just for show.”
August 4, 2010 at 2:49 pm #27370ranetteParticipantAre you certain that most modular chin bars are not EPS lined? I don’t have extensive experience, but the two that I tried on, the higher end HJC and the Nolan that I eventually ended up with certainly are.
I could see how trying to build a modular, with all of the moving parts, at a low cost could lead to an inferior product, but from what I’ve seen the better modulars are anything but. My Nolan is built like a ton of bricks, and some say it weighs that much. You can actually see the latching mechanism and it is a metal latch over a metal dowel, not something that would come apart at impact. If I remember reading correctly some of the less expensive modulars, Fullmer was one I believe, have plastic latching mechanisms, not something I’d have extreme confidence in.
August 4, 2010 at 4:12 pm #22177TrialsRiderParticipantTalk about cheap helmets reminds me of my uncle who died from head injuries sustained in a snowmobile accident. ( and yes, alcohol was involved ) One of the last things I said to him, as he proudly showed me the cheap deal helmet he had just purchased, was ” how much is your head worth ? ” At that time a top of the line Bell Star in white cost around 90$ and he paid less than 30$ My most recent helmet purchase was 190$ for a plain white, open faced Trials helmet and my next helmet purchase will be to replace my full coverage Shoei street helmet. Once I actually find one I like, quite frankly I don’t care what it costs.
August 4, 2010 at 11:35 pm #20955Jeff in KentuckyParticipantI like the idea of modular helmets- able to put on sunglasses easier, and easier to talk to others at a stoplight or gas stop without removing your whole helmet. This article below stopped me from buying one:
August 5, 2010 at 12:30 am #20918TrialsRiderParticipantI know this concept is decades old, but we always said; hand laid fiberglass is designed to absorb the impact and save your bean, throw it out after one use, plastic springs back to it’s original shape nicely, sadly heads don’t.
August 5, 2010 at 7:53 pm #27930ranetteParticipantThe linked article claimed that the hinge mechanisms on his Nolan hit his temples and did severe damage. It seems like the weak point of many helmets is a side impact. The same SHARP survey that I linked to in a previous post gives barely satisfactory ratings to Arai helmets for this same reason, not because of a hinge mechanism but because of the visor attachment mechanism. Incidentally the Nolan modular scored better in this particular test than many of the FF’s.
The description of his friend’s injuries are pretty graphic. However the writer, to my knowledge, isn’t an expert in head injuries that could explain what happened at the moment of impact. Did you see the bike? It was a pretty hellacious accident and though he did come out with serious injuries the helmet did save his life and there is absolutely no way from that article to ascertain whether a different helmet would have done a better job.
Of course protective gear is a personal choice. However, I would base my choice on professionally conducted tests rather than the observations of one person who is not qualified to analyze what may or may not have happened in a crash. The first time I posted on this site someone responded with a great quote that I think applies here, to the linked article and not to JiK, “The problem with the internet is that everyone gets the same font”.
August 5, 2010 at 8:28 pm #27931CBBaronParticipantVery good point.
However it does make you think about helmet construction and testing.
First mechanisms for modular helmets and visors require some mechanical space. Modular mechanism more than visors due to the forces and sizes.
That space can be handled in multiple ways but it seems most often it replaces EPS within the helmet shell.
If the shell is sufficiently rigid in that area then it is probably not a problem, but that point is also probably a weak point due to the pivot and visor opening.Second are helmets tested with impacts to the side of the helmet taken into consideration? Like mentioned above, this seems to be a weak point in helmet design so it seem reasonable to test it to ensure sufficient protection.
Can anyone point to some studies?
Craig
August 5, 2010 at 8:49 pm #27932ranetteParticipantThe SHARP study, which I’d mentioned in my initial post, rates the helmets effectiveness at four points of impact; front/crown, rear, left and right. In addition, the modular helmets have an additional rating for the effectiveness of the chin bar.
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.