James,
As I understand it, yes, the 1990's are no longer allowed once manufacturers
are actually shipping the Snell 2005 certified helmets. And of course someone
will always remind you that older helmets may have deteriorated, etc. etc.
There was a temporary exception given last time around as XXL and larger
helmets were not in the retail channel simultaneously as the other sizes, I
think.
There was a quite interesting test, run by a motorcycling magazine recently,
that showed (my simplistic summary) that helmets meeting the latest Snell
rating often imparted more damage to one's noggin in any impact significantly
below the design basis maximum impact, more than a helmet meeting a different
standard. My interpretation is that they have to be enough stiffer and
stronger to meet the increased maximum, thereby reducing the amount of "give"
for lower and statistically more likely impacts. Snell Foundation response at
http://www.smf.org/response.html. Original article, including Snell's
response and a rebuttal comment, at
http://motorcyclistonline.com/gearbox/hatz/. Of course, the SCCA does not
give us a choice in this matter.
Other thoughts: If you are anticipating only auto-related usage, you could
pick up an SA-rated helmet and be prepared for the upper level auto racing
events which do not allow M-rated helmets. Probably bigger $$ though.
The other major difference is said to be that the M helmets are better against
a point-type intrusion (fence post) where the SA's are built for better
protection when bashed by something like a roll cage member.
Finally, if you want an M-rated helmet, I have had great luck at Cycle Gear in
Hayward (on Mission), and Road Rider in San Jose (on Monterey Highway) for
selection and decent price. The place in Oakland, formerly Bell Motorsports
and I can't remember the new name, is notable in having auto-type SA helmets,
and for advertising in SCCA's papers.
Paul T
|