PDA

View Full Version : Gatehouse HS1 skull cap?



Hampton Bay
Nov. 14, 2009, 03:19 PM
I am due for a new helmet very soon, so it is going to be a Christmas gift. This is one of only two helmets that has been tested and certified by SNELL, so I am very interested in it. However it is only available in the UK.

Does anyone have any experience with this helmet? I currently have a CO J3 skull that is very very comfy and fit me nicely, just as a comparison if anyone knows how they tend to fit.

lmno
Nov. 15, 2009, 10:11 AM
The Gatehouse HS1 is NOT ASTM/SEI certified.

However, I find it is rounder than the CO's. I don't fit into any of the CO's but my Gatehouse fits nicely. Its also a little heavier.

Hampton Bay
Nov. 15, 2009, 02:52 PM
The Gatehouse HS1 is NOT ASTM/SEI certified.

However, I find it is rounder than the CO's. I don't fit into any of the CO's but my Gatehouse fits nicely. Its also a little heavier.

I actually ride dressage, so it doesn't matter about the certification to me. I'm just going for safety. My poor head has taken too many blows already :)

Does it fit more like the GPA's then? I have heard they are more round. Or is there anything else that you can compare them to that would be available in the US?

riderboy
Nov. 15, 2009, 03:59 PM
The Gatehouse HS1 is NOT ASTM/SEI certified.

However, I find it is rounder than the CO's. I don't fit into any of the CO's but my Gatehouse fits nicely. Its also a little heavier. I thought the Gatehouse was this uber helmet as far as safety. That is, had every certification availble and then some. Not true?

Hampton Bay
Nov. 15, 2009, 04:16 PM
I thought the Gatehouse was this uber helmet as far as safety. That is, had every certification availble and then some. Not true?

It's only sold in the UK, so they didn't bother getting it certified with the American certifications. It's Kitemarked and SNELL approved. SNELL is the most stringent testing done on helmets.

lmno
Nov. 15, 2009, 09:07 PM
For me it compares to the shape of my Tipperary( the older model). Almost a cross between the Tiperary and a well fitting motorcycle helmet. My troxel can not compare.
I had tried on all the helmets at the tack shop and ordered the HS1. I bought mine from rideaway.co.uk, they have a 14 day return policy but you lose out on the shipping.

Hampton Bay
Nov. 16, 2009, 02:56 PM
Thanks for the info! A friend of mine has an older Tipperary Sportage that I should be able to try on.

RAyers
Nov. 16, 2009, 03:23 PM
May I ask where folks think that Snell is the best testing?

Their impact testing allows for 100 more g of impact force than ASTM standards (from their own website and the ASTM standard for riding helmets). Most likely this is because racing is done at an order of magnitude faster than riding, but at the same time....

Things such as the face shield penetration, flammability tests etc. have no bearing in riding, obviously.

ASTM also requires the same retention and stability testing for sporting helmets as Snell does for racing (ASTM F1446).

So I see no advantage to a Snell approval given they test/establish standards for helmets for racing and not riding horses. The SNELL E2001 standard was biolerplated from the racing helmet standards. Heck the even still include full face protection (chin bar) as part of it.

Reed

His Greyness
Nov. 16, 2009, 04:11 PM
If you really want to understand protective helmet issues this article from Motor Cycle Magazine (http://www.motorcyclistonline.com/gearbox/motorcycle_helmet_review/index.html) is a good place to start. Just because it's about motorcycle helmets doesn't mean that the same issues don't apply to riding helmets. It's a long article but well worth reading. The SNELL organization was upset over the article's conclusions but couldn't refute them. :eek:

One advantage of motorcycle helmets is that the National Highway Transport Safety Administration randomly tests helmets for conformance to the Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard 218 (FMVSS 218) and publishes the results on their website. Here are their latest test results. (http://www.nhtsa.dot.gov/cars/testing/comply/fmvss218/2008s218.pdf) If you examine the results for the Z1R ZRP-2M half helmet, 7th in the list and which could easily pass for a riding helmet, you will see that in the primary impact test, a very similar test to that in ASTM F1163, the Z1R helmet comes in well under the limit set in F1163. (200g versus 300g). One downside of motorcycle helmets is that FMVSS 218 penetration test precludes the provision of large ventilation slots.

If you really want a helmet that gives maximum impact protection take a look at the HGU-56/P Aircrew Integrated Helmet System (AIHS) (manufactured by the Gentex Corporation, Carbondale, PA). But then it isn't really suitable for riding. Why US Army helicopter pilots can only take a 150g max clout to the head while little Amy falling off Buttercup can take a hit of 300g I don't know.

I think it's about time we saw test results from riding helmet manufacturers published.

Hampton Bay
Nov. 16, 2009, 05:10 PM
RAyres, can I ask where you found the actual standard from ASTM? I did a google search but I cannot find it without paying $33 to read it.

Greyness, after my fall three years ago, I did wonder why the helmet was so darned hard. I know I hit hard, and I have had several other head injuries over the years, but the helmet did seem to transfer a ton of energy to my poor head.

So which helmets would be softer then? The ones that make you look more like a mushroom head? I know may people do care about that, but I am not one of them. I really just want to try to keep my poor head safe. It's been through a lot. Also, I prefer a very stable helmet that covers more of my head. The old-school Troxel helmets don't stay put on me very well at all, so they are horribly uncomfortable and thus I don't like to wear them.

For what it's worth, I am doubting this helmet will fit me properly. I have a very oval head, and from what I have read this one is a bit more round than would probably work for me.

You two have brought up some interesting points, and I would certainly like to learn more about all this.

RAyers
Nov. 16, 2009, 05:35 PM
I am lucky as I am a materials scientist so I have access to the standards at my university library for free.

A few years ago I posted here a pretty extensive review about the differences between the ASTM and EU standards on helmets. I can't find the posts but like the article in the magazine, helmet success depends all on lots of factors. There is no one all-encompassing wonder standard that answers or addresses all questions/risks.

Reed

His Greyness
Nov. 17, 2009, 12:56 AM
So which helmets would be softer then? The ones that make you look more like a mushroom head?

It's a bit of an over simplification but, yes, you are likely to get more protection the more you look like a mushroom.

The option I have taken after my fall, which resulted in hospitalization and brain surgery, was to investigate the NHTSA test results published every year and pick out a motorcycle half helmet whose test results exceeded the requirements of ASTM F1163. I had e-mail conversation with members of the ASTM committee after my accident as to why my approved helmet didn't protect me more.

Hampton Bay
Nov. 17, 2009, 02:53 PM
It's a bit of an over simplification but, yes, you are likely to get more protection the more you look like a mushroom.

The option I have taken after my fall, which resulted in hospitalization and brain surgery, was to investigate the NHTSA test results published every year and pick out a motorcycle half helmet whose test results exceeded the requirements of ASTM F1163. I had e-mail conversation with members of the ASTM committee after my accident as to why my approved helmet didn't protect me more.

Do you still have those emails? I would love to see them if you do and can share. I can PM you my email addy.

I have felt that my helmet should have given me more protection when I fell, but I did land directly on my head too. I just remember thinking how hard it was. That's about all I remember from my fall, was that my helmet seemed so hard. That's why I find your comments and the article interesting.

His Greyness
Nov. 18, 2009, 04:02 AM
Do you still have those emails? I would love to see them if you do and can share. I can PM you my email addy.



My e-mail exchange with members of the ASTM committe was several years ago so the e-mails are lost in the mists of time. However I can summarize what I learned from that exchange and other research:

Helmet manufacturers do not guarantee that their helmets will protect you in any particular accident. They only guarantee that their helmets pass the ASTM F1163 test.
The objective of the ASTM F1163 standard is to prevent death and permanent injury.
The biggest obstacle to developing more protective helmets are the fashion and appearance conscious riders who "do not want to look like a mushroom". (There's no point in developing a "safe" helmet if nobody will wear it)
The development of safety equipment is a whole lot more complicated than most people realize. Many of the principles are counter-intuitive.
The fact that some equipment makes someone feel "safe" and "comfortable" bears no relation to whether that equipment actually provides any worthwhile protection.

SparklePlenty
Nov. 18, 2009, 08:49 AM
GPA has a skull cap called the Jock-up.. there are 3 different versions of it. I'm going to ask for one for Xmas as my CO doesn't fit very well.. :no: I have a round head and the CO is just not my friend.. but i've made it work for 2 years.

Reed - do you know anything about these and their standards? It seems that they are tested and approved but that's also per the website i found them on.

http://www.amirashop.co.uk/acatalog/GPA_Riding_Helmets_for_Adults.html

TIA!

His Greyness
Nov. 18, 2009, 01:44 PM
SparklePlenty

The SEI maintains a list of products it has certified. Go to the SEI website (http://www.seinet.org/search/search.php) and search under "Equestrian Helmets" to find the helmets that are currently certified. The helmet you reference is not on this list.

As someone who has been involved with conformance testing to international standards, admittedly for computer communications software - not helmets, I recognize marketing weasel wording when I see it. "Complies with" is not the same as "Certified against". Also ASTM F1163-01 is the 2001 standard. The current standard is ASTM F1163-04a, the revised 2004 standard.

Helmet testing is an expensive activity (as is obtaining product liability insurance). To be certified against ASTM F1163 helmets have to be submitted to a SEI accredited testing laboratory and pass all the elements of the ASTM standard as well as the SEI inspection procedures. All the international standards for riding helmets are quite similar. So if Heaume Activit├ęs, S.A., the maker of GPA helmets in Switzerland, has submitted their helmets to a testing laboratory accredited for the European standards, they could see from the test results whether the helmets could meet (comply with) the ASTM standard. Unless they submit the same helmets to a SEI accredited lab and pass the test they can't claim certification. Heaume Activit├ęs, S.A., has only done so with part of their product line.

Product liability insurance in the USA is extremely expensive. I know of at least one helmet maker who withdrew from the US market because the volume of business didn't justify the expense of the insurance premiums. Low volume sale forecasts for a particular product would be another reason not to introduce a helmet to the American market.

You pay your money and you make your choice.

SparklePlenty
Nov. 18, 2009, 02:08 PM
thank you for that info! Though i am bummed, better be safe than sorry.

Hampton Bay
Nov. 18, 2009, 06:03 PM
Sparkle, that amira equine site is a royal pain to order from. It takes months to get your item, and you better be positive you are ordering the correct size because it's cost-prohibitive to return anything.

Grey, thanks for that link. I just checked on the helmet I am going to get, and it is listed.