Since it IS Friday the 13th, here's a short article regarding helmet history and statistics.
Just in case you decide to tempt the fates (yes; plural) by jumping on your bike today with a naked head....
DON'T do it.
The History of Motorcycle Helmets

 

Interesting article. Thanks for posting it up.

Have you seen any stats on helmet effectiveness improvement with a Snell rating over DOT? I'm currently using a fairly inexpensive AFX FX-39 dual sport helmet with DOT rating (cost about $125). The Snell DS helmets run about 4 to 5 times that amount and I can only find that Arai meets the Snell M2010 standard. I like the AFX, but am thinking its time to get a little better protection.

 

The best of both worlds

 

Hey, ID. I've seen a couple studies which indicate that the TYPE of impact makes a huge difference in the effectiveness of a helmet; i.e. "point source" impact versus "blunt object." My own gut tells me probably 75% of helmet-involved events are of the blunt-object or "scraping" (against the road/concrete, etc.) variety. You're riding down the highway, have a get-off at 50-60-70 mph, bang your head on the tarmac and potentially slide/grind against an abrasive surface. I think the majority of DOT-approved helmets would suffice (using the tried-and-true styrofoam liner with outer shell of hard plastic-lexan/carbon/or other tough plastic resin.) As for "point-source" impact, each (real world) event is so unique with regard to physics involved, the standard "drop from 3 feet against a metal chisel" is kinda superfluous (IMHO.) Is the impact straight-on? Glancing? Head-only or is your body weight behind it, too? (F=MA.) Putting a bowling ball or pumpkin inside a test helmet and dropping it 3 feet (6 feet? Whatever) against a pointy rod only tests that particular 2 sq inch spot at that specific angle on THAT specific helmet with THAT specific mass/acceleration on that specific day. We can't infer (false logic) that ANYWHERE else with any other helmet, at ANY OTHER set of variables will have the exact same result (specifically with regard to point-source impact).
Overall, I personally feel like there's a cost/benefit ratio involved. Will a $600 dollar helmet protect you any better than a $200 helmet; both DOT and/or Snell rated? Much depends on your riding style/risk style/hazard level/experience/....and ALSO the variable none of us can control: WRONG PLACE WRONG TIME. I wouldn't automatically assume a high-zoot, big ticket, DOT/Snell/ABC titanium/carbon fibre helmet will save your punkin any better than the $200 hat from Tractor Supply......especially if you ride at redline. Helmet manufacturers may WANT us to believe that (so they can sell big ticket hats) but again; IMHO, anything above the 60-75% typical get-off against a blunt-scraping surface........each statistic is unique.
I don't claim to be any expert on the subject, though. Anybody else care to weigh-in??

 

hmm, since most if not all tracks that I have played on, the Snell standard is needed. I am due for new helmets again. Lovely

 

I saw an interesting article on this somewhere. I'll look for it and try to post it on here as soon as I do. It compared all safety ratings; DOT, Snell and ECE I believe.

 

Don't most helmets have both ratings these days anyway?

 

I am due for a new helmet, found a pretty good deal on new Arai at a local shop here, but it is the same price for the new rf1200 by shoei so i am not sure what to get, maybe i will get one like these guys, looks pretty safe...

 

haha it blanked out S P I C S as part of news-p-i-c-s

Nigerian Motorcycle Riders Using Pumpkin Helmets from Bikes in the Fast Lane - Daily Motorcycle News

 

"...or they cast an evil spell on the helmet, causing the wearer to lose consciousness, so they can be easily robbed."

(In my best Butthead voice): Uhhhh........