Originally Posted by jbhawley
Conspiracy theory. HMM Maybe? But not really am I posing a conspiracy, but questioning the status quo. Its the helmet mfg, Snell etc that should post hard-cold data and not some friggin' "CONSENSUS". Do you agree?
I'm trying to figure out what you are expecting. A 200 page report with data for 50 different head types and 1000 different usage patterns? Maybe a 100 question form where you add up the points at the end and that determines how long your helmet will last?
It would be inane or useless, and most likely would only open the manufacturers up to lawsuits, and that would hurt all of us. I think Snell said it well. Only YOU know what your helmet has been through. THERE ARE NO HARD AND FAST RULES, yet you seem to want to pretend there are.
This sort of post usage testing is what I would like to see from Snell. Take a helmet that has actually been worn by an average rider that is 2, 5, 7 etc years old and see if it still hold to the initial testing criteria.
What is an "average rider"?
Does this average rider have oily hair or dry hair?
Does the rider sweat much? How much is "much"?
What was the average length of continuous helmet usage?
What was the longest length of continuous helmet usage?
How many hours was the helmet used annually?
How tight was the helmet initially? (exact head size vs helmet size)
What temperature was the helmet stored at (usually)?
What humidity was the helmet stored at (usually)?
What part of the world did the rider live in?
Given the VERY LARGE number of variables in the above answers, how would any testing be useful for ANYONE except that "average rider"?