# Latest GRM +Snell 2005 helmets



## Mr Paddle.Shift (Dec 19, 2001)

Grabbed a copy of November 2005 GRM. Good read for the article on "Go Racing". I can definitely see a clearer future where I would like to be in 8 years time.

Appears to me that SA2005 helmets are popping up in the ads as well. Visited Snell foundation and read through selected topics in SA2000 and SA2005. The extent of protection remains the same so does Peripheral Vision.

There are some differences under Performance testings.

1. Cold cycle conditioning where one sample was tested under -10 +/- 2 C or -30 +/-2 C under SA 2000 and -20+/-2C or -30+/-2C under SA2005.

2. This is included under Impact Management Tests for SA2000 but not SA2005.

*"If in a valid test, the peak acceleration imparted to the headform exceeds 300 G's, the helmet shall be rejected. "*
========================================

I don't think there are anything else dissimilar, unless I skipped a line or two. That being said, I don't suppose there are any reasons to _rush _ out to buy a SA2005?


----------



## SergioK (Aug 14, 2002)

Mr Paddle.Shift said:


> I don't suppose there are any reasons to _rush _ out to buy a SA2005?


I'd have to agree with you... http://www.motorcyclistonline.com/gearbox/hatz/index.html


----------



## scottn2retro (Mar 20, 2002)

and when the SA2005s are out in force, there will be deals to be had on the SA2000s :thumbup:


----------



## Pinecone (Apr 3, 2002)

Already deals on SA2000s.

1) Bell did not change anything on their design to meet SA05 standards. The only difference is the sticker. This according to Bell when I called with some questions before buying a new helmet.

2) You shuld replace your helmet every 5 years anyway. So an SA00 will be good for as long as you should be using it. Also if you ever use the helmet for real (ie accident) or drop it, it shuld be sent to the manufacturer for inspection and/or possibly replaced.

3) When you actually start racing, you may find you need a different helmet anyway. I had to go from my Bell M2, which I still use for DEs, to a Bell GTX for the aero, since I race an open cockpit car.


----------



## Mr Paddle.Shift (Dec 19, 2001)

See, I am curious about the "replace helmet per 5-years" policy. People at the track I know recommend that as well.

If the helmet has never been dropped or involved in any kind of impact, why would it deterioate in 5 years? Is there a shelf/use life for the form or/and shell?


----------



## geri (Aug 19, 2005)

I'm no auto helmet expert, but I am actively shopping for a new one since I recently signed up for an autox event in an attempt to recover some of my lost youth and my old helmet belongs in a museum. Also, I've also done several other sports where helmets are required and have generally followed a 5-10 year rule. 

There are a number of reasons to replace your helmet at regular intervals:

1) New Technology or changes in standards. Of course, one could probably safely take a helmet to 10 years if it is seldom worn and regulations have remained pretty much stagnant, but past 10 years the issues below take over.

2) Believe it or not the shape of your head can change over time and the helmet that wore in to fit 5 years ago may not fit as well today. ( Guys, less hair on your head makes a signigicant difference as well.)

3) All helmet shells begin to deteriorate to some degree the minute they come out of the mold due to UV exposure. The materials lose strength and can become more brittle. I'm told that even the best composite shells have a lifespan due to the natural breakdown that occurs in the resins. In the old days they used polyester and then vinylester that was clearly subject to aging effects. Modern epoxies (and I don't know to what extent they are used in today's helmets) produce very long lived products but everything deteriorates with UV exposure.

4) The interior materials breakdown due to aging and exposure to the heat and oils from your head and scalp. The interior foam loses its elasticity, rebound and shape reducing fit quality and impact protection.

I'm sure there have been significant improvements in materials but it is striking how much deterioration you can see in a 20 year old helmet even when seldom worn and carefully stored. You just can't see it in the 5 year old helmet, but it is happening. The helmet may still meet spec. but there is no way of knowing unless you test it and that would probably ruin the helmet.

There are probably some other good arguments out there as well, but given that you're protecting your head it seems prudent not to take chances.

What surprises me is that excellent helmets are available at such reasonable prices. In inflation adjusted dollars even a $300 helmet is a bargin. And don't forget at 5 years it's only costing $60 a year.


----------



## Pinecone (Apr 3, 2002)

The other thing is, there can be hidden damage accumulating over the years, that you cannot see.

But the rest of the things mentioned are right on.


----------

