SHARP Ratings - a load of rubbish?

[JoshRS]

I got to talking about SHARP ratings the other day in my local HG. And basically, they're al pretty much redundant. They test the helmets on the front and side of the helmet. Then they're given x amount of stars for how well they fair. However, the testing on the side part of the helmet is virtually where the wearer's ear sits.

Now, in virtually all of the higher quality helmets, that empty space for the ear has little to no padding etc in there. Obvisouley, so that your ear can fit in uncrushed, but this affects the SHARP rating when it comes to testing. Often resulting in more top of the range Arai's, Shoei's etc only recieve 4 stars sometimes even 3. A vast majority of this being due to that lack of padding by the ear.

Although, most of those £50 helmets such as nitro and the other more 'budget' brands, are recieving 5 star reviews. Why do you ask? The manufacturers are aware are the SHARP testing regime so they construct the helmets to fair well in them. The main thing being a tiny bit of padding near that ear area. I was told that all it would take would be a polystyrene cut out to be inserted into the ear area, and that helmet would get a higher SHARP rating that what it would have originally scored. The impact zones used on the test aren't even that relevant to where the helmet usually falls in the event of a crash.

Is it just me or does this make the SHARP rating system seem a bit irrelevant? Would you want to take the more expensive fibre glass/carbon alternative with 3 or 4 stars? or the £50 5 star plastic helmet with a bit of padding in the ear?

I know what i'd choose...

[Bogof]

Is it just me or does this make the SHARP rating system seem a bit irrelevant? Would you want to take the more expensive fibre glass/carbon alternative with 3 or 4 stars? or the £50 5 star plastic helmet with a bit of padding in the ear?

I know what i'd choose...

 

It's a level playing field though. All helmets are tested on the same basis and all could be modified to fare well in the test if the manufacturers could be arsed.

That some apparently choose not to modify their helmets in order to increase protection in vulnerable areas worries me, and as a result of this and many other considerations I will generally steer clear of any helmet that achieves fewer than 4 stars... so that's most of the "poser" ranges out then

The test areas were not chosen at random by the way. The reasoning behind testing the side of the helmet seems to me to be quite sound....

To ensure that the protection offered by helmets to riders is appropriate, it is necessary to ensure the impact conditions are representative of those experienced in real life. Our data suggests that the impact sites currently used in UN ECE Regulation 22.05 are appropriate and we will impact test at each of the sites as specified. The side of the helmet is the most frequently impacted area - 53%. We will therefore complete an additional side impact test meaning that both sides of the helmet will be tested.

 

This next quote is interesting as it seems to conflict with what you have been told about the little bit of padding added in a specific area to affect the outcome of the test. Maybe the information related to you is slightly wrong as it seems that the test will not allow "helmet optimisation" to affect the outcome?

 

Helmet impact sites will be marked using the methods and criteria described in UN ECE Regulation 22.05 (paragraph 7.3.4.2 and annex 4 (fig 3)). A test area has been defined, over which the helmet can be tested, to prevent helmet optimisation and ensure a higher level of protection of the whole of the helmet.

 

http://sharp.direct.gov.uk/about-sharp/

In answer to your question, in terms of safety alone, I would choose the helmet with the 5 star rating.

If you factor in other considerations such as comfort, noise reduction, venting system, visor availability, pose value and price, then my decision may well be different.

What I would not do however, is choose a helmet on the basis that it says "Arai" and costs in excess of £300 so therefore must be good.

[PhatDad]

Was the person you were speaking to at HG one of their staff as it would seem obvious to me that they would say such things to possibly make more sales of the higher end and I presume more profitable models. You don't always get what you pay for.

Also, fit is possibly more imoportant and of all the flip up helmets I've tried on the cheaper £150 viper or something helmet fits better than the more expensive ones so I'd go for that one, especially as it has one star higher than the shoei.

[Guest]

I don't believe the sytem is at fault... I believe the major manufacturers are currently (to echo bogof) not bothered.

I, for the last 12 years have always had Caberg .... But currently have a shoei ... The Caberg scores higher but The Shoei is sooooooo much quieter! So where is the rating for hearing protection??? Obviously I always use earplugs but I couldn't believe the difference when I changed to Shoei. On just that note, i won't go back to Cabergs unless they improve the wind noise. I believe that currently the SHARP rating is a good guide

[Guest akey]

First post is not entirely accurate, as they use a head form inside the helmet so the lack of padding is not always an issue, but the lack of strength in Arai for example is (IMO). The Arai team say that this area is protected by the riders shoulder in a crash, but this is almost exactly where my helmet took the impact in my recent off.

SHARP is just another set of data to look at when you are making the choice on what helmet you are going to get.

[urbanmark]

The sharp rating fails for me because it rates some open face helmets higher than some quality full face ones. How can it be five stars if someone could punch you and kill you? They should use my urbanstar rating system.

0 stars = You forgot to put a helmet on

1 stars = Offers some protection but is not a helmet (bowl, Saucepan, salad spinner etc)

2 stars = Is a helmet but offers minimal protection (WWII helmets, Builders helmets, fake fighter pilot helmets etc)

3 stars = Any helmet that when worn by a test monkey. Protected said monkey from harm after being hit at 30mph with a kerbstone fired to the head from the front, back and sides..

4 stars = Any helmet that passes the above test and also allows the monkey to survive having its head driven over by a BMW 3 series.

5 stars = Passes the above tests and is worn by any class of pro Motorcycle racer in any class.

The helmet makers would have to pay into a pot to have a helmet rated (£87.94) and the money would be used to breed more test monkeys.

I think the result would be a safer bike riding public and a boom in monkey breeding and monkey related industries like monkey funerals and monkey wheelchairs.

Monkeys are shit. We evolved, why didnt they? Lazy, furry, f**k sticks.

[Bogof]

The sharp rating fails for me because it rates some open face helmets higher than some quality full face ones. How can it be five stars if someone could punch you and kill you?

 

The test protocols do not include an impact on the chin guard of full faced helmets (impact site S). Proposals have been made for testing chin guards at 5.5m/s with 275g limit and this was incorporated into the latest revision of UN ECE Regulation 22.05. Thus, all new helmets conforming to UN ECE Regulation 22.05 will incorporate effective chin guard protection, based upon the very latest research.

 

That is how it can be

[urbanmark]

But helmet with no chin can be crushed. Its not as rigid? I have one and If I wanted, I could crush it so the sides touch each other with my bare hands?

I didnt realize until the bloke in the shop showed me.

[Bogof]

But helmet with no chin can be crushed. Its not as rigid? I have one and If I wanted, I could crush it so the sides touch each other with my bare hands?

I didnt realize until the bloke in the shop showed me.

 

And the moral is... wear a full face helmet

[urbanmark]

I think the moral is SHARP

Shit

Helmets

Are

Rated

Perfect

[JoshRS]

I'm saying i'd use SHARP rating's religousley or anything. And yep, the way a helmet fits is the most important parts.

But those helmets for 20 quid, surely they aren't going to protect you as well as an Arai. I'm fully aware the variation in prices are due to other things such as vents, wind noise, paint graphics etc. But when buying a helmet, i'd be forking out as much as i could for the best lid i could find, as, IMO my head is very important to me.

[Bogof]

But those helmets for 20 quid, surely they aren't going to protect you as well as an Arai. I'm fully aware the variation in prices are due to other things such as vents, wind noise, paint graphics etc. But when buying a helmet, i'd be forking out as much as i could for the best lid i could find, as, IMO my head is very important to me.

 

£50 Caberg 5 stars

£340 Arai 2 stars

"Forking out as much as I could" will not necessarily buy you the best lid you could find, if best is determined by safety rating

[Guest]

Bogof,....

buy whatever you want mate, I shall not ever replace an Arai with a piece of crap 50 quid lid because a flawed test tells me its better. If you truly believe this then go ahead.

This subject was done to death 6 months ago and the conclusion was simple you pay your money you take your choice.

Arai have said they will not be altering anything to comply...and just for your info a lot of the low end helmets put kevlar and reinforcement where the tests are carried out...not anywhere else...does that make them safer in reality??? course not! It just means where the impact for the test is its capable of taking the stress...not anywhere else potentially

[j4ff]

Crap to a degree.

My Arai rx7 only gets a 3 star for 550 notes.Do i care?? Not a jot.The thing Arai said and why they dissagree with SHARP is that one of the impact zones in which their helmets fail the test is not a common place for an impact unless you have no arm or shoulder.The impact test should be higher.

Motogp stars Edwards,Hayden and Pedrosa trust their life in a 3 star Arai over a 5 star Calberg.

[Netmeister]

I see sharp as just extra information to look at when looking for a new lid, not the be all and end all, but neither redundant.

To say it's totally pointless is pretty ridiculous, sounds like someone trying to justify £500 for the latest Arai (not aimed at anyone personally)

Agreed you are paying most of the price of an Arai for it's name, but I think I would still buy one because I like them, just like I'd spend more on a pair of name brand jeans because I don't want £5 Tesco jobbies.

[Pete]

Speaking of fit, don't all police riders wear Shoei Multitec helmets...does that mean they've all got the same shaped head? Haha!