I've got a $30 2008 Bell Mako currently painted flat black. It's Snell rated so I feel OK about it. I'm guessing that the Arai's and Shoei's of the world are $400 of fit and finish (which I'll buy when the bleeding from this bike stops cause the Mako may have some hotspots - I'll know once the bike is fixed and I get it on my head for hours at a stretch).
But there's the question. If it's Snell rated is the protection of a full face going to get all that much better for $500 more?
Here's a line from the Snell Foundation site:
"
What's the difference between a $100 Snell certified helmet and a $400 Snell certified Helmet. While helmets are primarily a protective device, the true protective capabilities of a helmet, if needed will only come into play for about 2 to 4 milliseconds during the lifetime of the helmet. This leaves a lot of time for that helmet to be doing nothing more than sitting around on a users head. Producing a product that meets the standards is not really very difficult. Producing a helmet that people will buy and wear, and will consistently meet the standards is significantly more difficult. The Snell standards do not measure factors like comfort, ventilation, brand recognition or style, and only indirectly look at fit, weight, materials and workmanship. These are factors that frequently drive helmet cost."
I think you are certainly better off with Snell rated protection. But I wouldn't necessarily trust all of the other baseline standards. Not all DOT approved helmets are equal in protection. I think it's significant that the above statement admits the limits of their testing standards with regard to fit, weight, materials, workmanship...
Earlier I was just trying to make the point for people to spend at least as much dough on their protection as their paint or handlebars or whatever...Not to say you have to spend $500, although it would automatically make you cool if you did...
