[Author Index] [Date Index] [Thread Index]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]

[ST] Requirements versus standards



>From Matt:
> But in all of this, and 50 years of Snell, no one
> has ever written a requirement for what a helmet must do.

Um, I'm pretty sure the DOT considers their spec a requirement for the
US. I'd imagine other countries have similar rules.

Matt Knowles - Ferndale, CA -

Yeah, and a couple of years ago, Kalifornia decided what constituted a
"safe" handgun, as well.  But that is a whole other thread for a different
forum.

I stand by my point, which is DOT, Snell and other test standards are just
that.  If a government body "requires" that helmets sold in their domain
pass a certain test standard, which does not make the standard a performance
requirement.  A performance requirement would have to relate to humans
surviving impacts while wearing the helmet.  The test standards make an
abstraction to the transmission of g-levels or g's versus time due to
various helmet impacts.  Snell used to and maybe still does, change their
standard every five years.  Does that make the previous standard not good,
and the new standard just right?  Helmet standards have evolved on a
more-is-better basis, but the industry and the government have never settled
on how much performance is enough.  Or, maybe we humans are just evolving
into more fragile critters.  Or, maybe the bikes are just getting too durn
fast.  Yeah, that's it.

Had a great ride today, clear skies, temps in the mid-80's (F, about 29C for
TROTW).  We rode west through Rancho Santa Fe to Encinitas and north along
the coast to a Jamaican restaurant for lunch.   Cool, mon.

Happy motoring,
Rich Rumble



_______________________________________________
Triumph Sprint ST/RS mailing list
Send list posts to ST@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Change your list options at www.Triumphnet.com