Approved Helmet Certifications

Snell Spec Diagram

Many times I come across articles discussing the purchasing of a motorcycle helmet; what to look for, how to measure your head to ensure the right fit, and how various types of helmets perform in impact testing. Sure there are lots of types of helmets like skull caps, half shell, 3/4 shell, full-face, modular (or flip-lid), etc and all perform differently in a crash. Some riders take helmet safety quite seriously and others don’t care in the least and opt to not wear one at all if they can legally get away with it. Others only care about how cool it looks. Some riders care so little about helmet safety, that if they are forced to wear one, they will buy the cheapest skull cap they can and slap on a DOT sticker that they picked up at some motorcycle swap meet in an attempt to fool whatever cop who happens to pull them over.

For those riders who really care about their noggin and care about being a law abiding citizen, choosing and wearing an approved helmet is important. Most riders in North America know that DOT is the most common type of certification for motorcycle helmets. Now I can’t speak for all regions but as a rider in Ontario, Canada, there are more than one. More educated riders will also be familiar with SNELL as another approved type of helmet. But there are more! It’s a shame that more motorcycle dealerships and equipment stores don’t keep up on the latest rules and regulations because they are limiting the options they can provide to their customers.

I know of at least one BMW dealership in Ontario that stopped selling their own preferred brand of helmet because they found out that it wasn’t legally approved. Well…it is now. As safety standards around the world are improved and compared against the currently approved standards in North America, it’s been realized that other types of certifications are just as good, if not better than, other types of certifications…for example the DOT standards. In fact it’s been realized that DOT is actually the lowest in performance standards compared to SNELL or the European Union regulation known as ECE. As a result, more and more certification types are now approved for on-road use. ECE 22.05, which is considered one of the best, was just added to the list in the past year.

Who knew? It turns out…not many. Motorcycle dealers don’t know, equipment supply stores don’t know and many cops don’t know. This is unfortunate in so many ways. Not only are we as riders limited in our purchase options, but we may also get a ticket for wearing an unapproved helmet which is actually approved. Take that ticket to court folks.

So how many approved certifications are there? Well at the time of writing this, there are five for Ontario (check your local laws…carefully). They are the Canadian Standards Association (CSA), SNELL, British Standards Institute (BSI), DOT, and European Union (ECE 22.05). Take a look at the appropriate section of the Highway Traffic Act below. If you have doubts, I encourage you to look it up for yourself and print out a copy. Show it to your dealers, shops and if need be…the cop who pulls you over. Be warned though, don’t be a jerk to the cops. They don’t generally pull riders over because they think you’re wearing an unapproved helmet. They may just add that one to the list of infractions that they did pull you over for.

 

Highway Traffic Act

R.R.O. 1990, REGULATION 610

SAFETY HELMETS

Consolidation Period: From July 1, 2012 to the e-Laws currency date.

Last amendment: O. Reg. 102/12.

1.  A helmet worn by a person,

(a) riding on or operating a motorcycle; or

(b) operating a motor assisted bicycle,

on a highway shall,

(c) have a hard, smooth outer shell lined with protective padding material or fitted with other energy absorbing material and shall be strongly attached to a strap designed to be fastened under the chin of the wearer; and

(d) be undamaged from use or misuse. R.R.O. 1990, Reg. 610, s. 1.

2.  The helmet referred to in section 1 shall conform to the requirements of the,

(a) Canadian Standards Association Standard D230 Safety Helmets for Motorcycle Riders and shall bear the monogram of the Canadian Standards Association Testing Laboratories;

(b) Snell Memorial Foundation and shall have affixed thereto the certificate of the Snell Memorial Foundation;

(c) British Standards Institute and shall have affixed thereto the certificate of the British Standards Institute;

(d) United States of America Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard 218 and shall bear the symbol DOT constituting the manufacturer’s certification of compliance with the standard; or

(e) United Nations Economic Commission for Europe Regulation No. 22, “Uniform Provisions Concerning the Approval of Protective Helmets and of Their Visors for Drivers and Passengers of Motor Cycles and Mopeds”, and shall have affixed thereto the required international approval mark. R.R.O. 1990, Reg. 610, s. 2; O. Reg. 102/12, s. 1.

 

Motion Induced Blindness

Motion Induced Blindness (MIB) is not likely a term you’re familiar with but it is something you’ve experienced, whether you realize it or not. It’s also known as Troxler’s Fading discovered in 1804. It’s the affect whereby objects that are stationary, in relation to your eyes, simply vanish from your peripheral sight when near things that are moving, again in relation to your eyes. In the first example (click here to open the image) you see a grid of blue crosses that are spinning, three stationary yellow dots and a flashing green dot in the centre which is also stationary. Focus your attention on the flashing dot in the middle and you will soon become aware that the yellow dots start vanishing. Sometimes just one vanishes, or in pairs, or all three will vanish from your sight, but they also randomly re-appear without any rhyme or reason. The reality is though…they never actually vanish. They just look like they do.

Some experiments suggest that motion-induced blindness is linked to a visual mechanism that allows us to experience the world in sharp detail. Our visual system has a time lag, and acts somewhat like a camera with a slow shutter speed. This means we should perceive “motion streaks” behind moving objects. While this can be apparent when we watch the movement of sparklers at night, we are not usually aware of motion streaks because there is a mechanism that prevents them from reaching awareness. Motion-induced blindness appears to be linked to that mechanism.



Focus on the yellow cross (click on the image if there’s no movement)

Research data demonstrates that targets located towards the trailing edges of motion undergo greater MIB than targets at the leading edges of motion.

In the images above, stare at the central crosses and be aware of the yellow dots to either side. They should seem to intermittently disappear. Observers signaled that the dots disappeared more when the moving dots drifted away from, rather than toward, the static yellow dots.

Click on the image if nothing is moving.

In this example, the lilac spots in the lilac chaser fade away after about 20 seconds, leaving a grey background and black cross. Some viewers may notice that the moving space has faded into a moving blue-green spot, possibly with a short trail following it. Furthermore, moving one’s eyes away from the image after a period of time may result in a brief, strong afterimage of a circle of green spots.

Sources
Bonneh, Cooperman & Sagi (2001)
Motion-induced blindness in normal observers. Nature 411:798–801
Wallis TSA & Arnold DH (2008)
Motion-induced blindness is not tuned to retinal speed. JOV 8:11, 1–7
Wallis TSA & Arnold DH (2009)
Motion-induced blindness and motion streak suppression. Current Biology 19:325–329 [website]
New JJ, Scholl BJ (2008)
“Perceptual Scotomas” A functional account of motion-induced blindness. Psychological Science 19(7):653–659

Post to Twitter

Are Electric Cars Finally Worth Investing in?

Chevy Volt, Tesla Roadster, Nissan Leaf

Greener cars are becoming more of a priority for manufacturers all around the world and the vehicles they are producing are as varied as the cultures where they are made. Each company seems to be taking very different directions. In some markets one may hit the mark perfectly, whereas another comparable vehicle could be a total flop. Now we’ve all heard the complaints about electric or hybrid vehicles (takes too long to charge, doesn’t go very far, not fast enough, etc) and despite how far the technology has come, many of those complaints are still valid.

I recently got to sample more of these types of cars, which were the Chevy Volt and the Nissan Leaf. As a benchmark, they were compared against the Tesla Roadster which I’ve driven many times before. Now those of you who are familiar with these three cars will surely be raising an eyebrow as to how one can compare the Volt and the Leaf, which are designed as average city cars, against the Tesla, which is by every measure a sports car. Yet some comparisons can and should be drawn as far as how they perform when it comes to acceleration, braking and overall handling. This was when I raised an eyebrow when it came to seeing and feeling the results.

Yes of course the Tesla out performed the other two in the acceleration tests and being able to stick to the road better in the lateral G-Force tests. However the real surprise was everywhere else with all three cars performing about the same. Braking distances were comparable for all three and the Volt and Leaf were pretty much the same in the lateral G-Force tests. For the most part the Volt and the Leaf performed quite comparably to most other cars in the same size class. What I found surprising was the slalom test. The parking lot where we were doing the testing consisted of slightly uneven pavement, just like most roads. We expected the Tesla to out perform the Volt and the Leaf but this turned out to not be the case. Sure it handled well but due to the uneven surface, it did suffer from some noticeable front end chatter and under steer. The Chevy Volt however was jaw droppingly nimble. It turned in beautifully and rotated really nicely around the cones. Just steer where you want to go and it went there with no fuss, no under steer and no scary moments. The Nissan Leaf however wasn’t as confidence inspiring and felt very much like a drunken Hippo trying to flick itself from side to side. I will give credit to its stability control system though. Just as my heart rate began to climb, as the car began to truly disagree with what was being asked of it, the stability system kicked in and nicely prevented the total loss of vehicle control had the system not been there. It’s important to mention that the speed for this exercise was 65km/hr for each vehicle. NOT something I would recommend anyone trying on their own. Leave it to the professionals please.

What about the differences between the cars beyond just handling? Each manufacturer took a very different direction. The Tesla Roadster and the Nissan Leaf are pure electric vehicles….not hybrids or what some refer to as ‘extended range’. The Chevy Volt however, is considered an extended range car. For the Tesla and the Nissan, the concept is pretty simple, even though the technology isn’t. The batteries power electric motors which drive the wheels. Simple enough right? The Volt however went in a different direction because it has both a gas engine and an electric motor. The wheels are driven directly by the electric motor period. The power is first delivered by the batteries but when the batteries drain, the gas engine kicks in and provides power to the electric motor, which drives the wheels. Not so simple. I would truly hate to be a mechanic nowadays.

There isn’t too much of a cost difference between the Leaf and the Volt with the Nissan Leaf retailing for $38,395 and the Chevy Volt comes in at $41,545. The Tesla Roadster however retails for $125,000 but hey, the Tesla really is a sports car, packs way more technology and has a huge range. It’s important to note that some Provinces offer a government rebate program. In Ontario the rebate is $5000-$8,500 for purchasing a green vehicle and certainly helps offset the cost of the car.

The main complaint about ‘green cars’ is their limited range. Pure electric vehicles are at the mercy of the power in the batteries and charging stations are few and far between. Once the batteries are drained, you either charge it up or call for a flatbed tow truck. Obviously if you let the batteries drain while in the middle of a trip, you will find yourself up the proverbial creek without a paddle. The Volt however can keep going for as long as you keep feeding it gas and is not dependant on electricity at all really. It’s just like any other car in that regard. The benefit for both is that if you are diligent about keeping it charged up, your operating costs are about 1/5 per kilometre than a similarly sized gas powered car. For example, a regular car with an internal combustion engine and an average fuel efficiency of 8 litres/100 kms will cost about $1,760 in gas per year (assuming a gas price of $1.10/litre and a distance of 20,000 kms/year). To travel the same distance in the Nissan LEAF will cost approximately $320 per year (with electricity at $0.11 kWh).

As for how far you can go per charge, well that depends on many factors including temperature, but the Leaf gets about 110km per charge and the Volt gets about 68km per charge. Sure that’s a pretty big difference but the reality is that most people only commute about 40-50km per day round trip. So as a short range commuter car, these may be perfect for your needs and both cars can be fully charged over-night. If you’re the type who likes to do road trips or needs to be able to take the car to the cottage on the weekends, the Volt would be a wiser choice. I guess at this point I should mention that the Tesla Roadster gets about 350km per charge. Yes you read that correctly and it can also be fully charged overnight.

I’m sure I’m not the only person wondering why such a difference in electric range. Well it’s partially because the sizes of the battery cells are different and so is the battery technology. Seriously though…if Tesla can implement a power cell technology providing such incredible range why aren’t other companies making similar headway with their own cars?

If auto makers really want people to get excited about their ‘green cars’ they better start plugging into the technology used by Tesla. Although the thought of spending $100,000 for a four door Chevy sedan may not sit well with consumers in general.

Here is what Wheels.ca had to say about the two cars. You can also find me in the video review. (click here)

.
Powered by WordPress and MagTheme