Helmet Recommendation?

[Kev m]

So you'd argue that not having a chin bar will result in less impacts to the helmet, by roughly 1/3?

Nope, I just said it's not that simple.

[Testarossa]

Another way to look at the hits chart is that 45% of impacts are ahead of the ears and below the eyebrows. That suggests that I want a thick visor supported all around its perimeter. Ymmv. And no one has mentioned taking a rock to the jaw at 65 mph. Motocross helmets are designed that way for a reason.

[twowheeladdict]

It's not that simple.

First that's one OLD study that IIRC simply noted if there was any sign of impact on a FF helmet in the accidents in the study yes?

But the chin bar on a FF helmet by design must necessarily protrude farther from the center mass of the head than a chin. So wouldn't that alone increase the chance of a chin bar contacting something that a chin might not?

As a matter of fact many 3/4 helmets protrude in such a way that if you hit the forehead part of the helmet on a flat surface it keeps your face away.

And 3/4 helmets vary in design but depending on the size and shape they may cover some of the areas included in those percentages.

I'm not saying it's any guarantee, but I am not sure those are necessarily accurate percentages of the "risks".

But then again my anecdotal evidence is three get offs without ever hitting my helmet on anything, so much for percentages.

Nice try at justification for your decision. 

Wear what you want, but don't try and use the results of a study that shows these numbers.

Now, if you would have said that the study doesn't show the force of impact or the distance the chin bar slid down the road so there is no indication to the level of injury incurred...

[Kev m]

Nice try at justification for your decision. 

Wear what you want, but don't try and use the results of a study that shows these numbers.

I'm questioning the validity of the numbers and showing reasons why they may not mean what is suggested by earlier posts (i.e. a simple and accurate prediction of statistical risk to injury in those areas).

Now, if you would have said that the study doesn't show the force of impact or the distance the chin bar slid down the road so there is no indication to the level of injury incurred...

Well there you go there is that as well.

That further raises into question such a "simple" analysis of the numbers.

[Steph]

I�m not sure what the debate here is.

Google image �motorcycle facial injuries� and see the difference between FF and open face protection.

Here�s my relatable experience: about 15 years ago, I was going home from work and filtering between cars. A motorcycle courier, on an old ex-police BMW, bike was aggressively riding my ass revving his engine.
I let him go by and he raced ahead. He cleared a path for me and I followed him.
Near a busy roundabout, with traffic stopped, a passenger opened a car door. It caught the horizontal cylinder of the BMW bike and instantly projected the rider over the bars. The rider, with an open face helmet,  smashed his face on the fairing edge and was pretty bloodied. I tried the help him out after, apart from having lost 1 tooth (and many others loose), he was shaken-up and walking around ok, looking for one of his boot.
-yes, it could have been me.  I would like to think that my FF Arai would have provided some protection from my LeMans V fairing.-In traffic, I ride with my visor down or cracked open. I don�t want to kiss that handlebar

The car door was pretty much ripped, what�s the G force on an instantaneous 30-0 MPH deceleration? Would bigger biceps strength or black belt  taekwondo skills helped him out? I think not.
.

I did once have a faceplant on my road bike (bicycle) after I hit the kerb. That was pretty nasty.

[Kev m]

The car door was pretty much ripped, what�s the G force on an instantaneous 30-0 MPH deceleration? Would bigger biceps strength or black belt  taekwondo skills helped him out? I think not.

I dunno, why was he riding so aggressively?

I think what would have helped him out the most would have been more situational awareness and less aggression.

Of course, we don't even filter here so that's a whole other level of never mind.

I can see that with some here this topic might as well be religion. We all take risks just choosing to ride motorcycles instead of driving cars. Just THAT change in risk alone (ATGATT or not) likely is the largest statistical "risk" we've chosen.

I've asked before on this board, what's worse, riding ATGATT at 8 or 9/10's or STGATT (Some of...) at 5/10's? No one has the answer for sure, but I know what I suspect.

You pay your money and you take your chances. I don't think anyone here is about to convince anyone else to change their ways.

[Testarossa]

Beginning to resemble the back-and-forth between freedom-to-die bareheads and helmet believers.

Datasets are always questionable -- that's how we get better data. Until new research is done, I lean toward using the best data available now.

[Kev m]

Beginning to resemble the back-and-forth between freedom-to-die bareheads and helmet believers.

Datasets are always questionable -- that's how we get better data. Until new research is done, I lean toward using the best data available now.

No I'm suggesting the data doesn't say what people are suggesting it says.

I'm not saying a FF doesn't offer more protection. I'm not saying helmets cause injuries. I'm simply saying I suspect the risk analysis math has more complicated factors. And I suspect many have not been accounted for.