Hybrid helmets (Page 1 of 2)

I ran that very helmet at Reno...approved by HRH Lamm personally. It's SA2005 and it's very comfortable. Wish I could afford a HANS to go with it

Cool, good to know.

One more question.  I heard at the last CMP race that you had to have a helmet with faceshield to do refueling, so I'm assuming I can't use this to help refuel on a pit stop.  I have another M2000 helmet that has a face shield.  Could I use it just for refueling?

cpmskinny is spot-on on the lack of flame retardant materials in M helmets. Bottom line, you shouldn't bring an M helmet anywhere near a Lemons race unless you rode a bike to get there. And even then the bike better be something cool like a Hodaka or some kind of two-stroke death trap. No V-Rods.

Just consulted with Jay on the hybrid helmet issue, and this was his reply:

If I really ok'd one of these, it was a mistake on my part. These are NOT acceptable--fixed hybrids like these, are just half-face helmets with a rigid glass front instead of a snap-down front. Either way, they're not full-face and don't have the same level of protection.

SA 2005 should be all you need to know...never heard of an approved helmet being rejected because it doesn't have a visor unless you're in an open wheel car

When you put a full face next to a shield-less hybrid, the construction is almost the exactly the same.  Unless we have air fed coolers and are wearing our visors down, I can't see how there will be any difference in safety.  The only difference between the two is the lack of indentation for the shield to close into and the visor ilo the shield.

I wear a regular full face helmet, so this doesn't affect me, but from a crash safety standpoint, I cannot see why they would be any different.

The larger issue here is not helmet construction but the exact wording of our insurance agreement. It simply says "full face helmet." We don't want to have a situation where someone gets hurt and it comes out that "well, it's not a full-face helmet, it's more of a hybrid...." and our insurance coverage gets jeopardized as a result. Without our insurance agreement, we wouldn't be racing--so it's in everyone's best interests to not probe the limits of that agreement.

A semi-shameless plug--I took a quick look and it seems like the hybrid helmets run about $200. The full-face Pyrotect unit through the Lemons Yahoo store is $250. While I've always cringed at the rich-guy racing adage "if you've got a $200 head, get a $200 helmet" (after all, if you had any sense at all, you wouldn't be racing in the first place), it's definitely not worth pushing things into the gray area for a mere $50.

What are the chances of asking the insurance company?  I understand the mere $50 arguement if I was buying a new helmet anyway, but since I already own this helmet and don't need to replace it till the end of next year for any other motorsports I do, it becomes a bigger deal than $50.

What's a "closed" helmet? If the helmet is full face, approved, but doesn't have a visor, how is it any less safe than a "full face" with the visor locked up or removed? I think the problem here is terminology; by "hybrid" I think of an MX helmet with a separate attached chin guard...if the construction of the SA helmet matches the "full face" then it ought to be OK in a closed car. These are purpose built one-piece helmets, not a modification of an open face design... I'll bet if G-Force called it a visorless full-face helmet there wouldn't be an issue. I'll also bet that if it had "Bell" or "Simpson" on the label we wouldn't be having this dialog either. This is about getting the wording right to avoid insurance issues. Let's get everybody who owns one of these to get together and get a statement from the manufacturer about construction and safety relative to the same company's "full face" designs and get it to Jay so he can pass it to the insurance carrier. Then everybody can sleep...

Sure, but we're not talking about claims here...this is about the wording that excludes helmets that are not "full face". The intent of the wording is to keep open face helmets out, sensibly. If the helmet manufacturer can certify that this particular "hybrid" is in fact a full face helmet and the insurer agrees, it's fine. Seems to me that G-Force would have an interest in doing this

But there's no suggestion that the insurance company excludes this model of helmet...G-Force may market it as "hybrid", whatever that means in this context, but if it's full face, and the maker proves the construction is the same as their approved visored helmets, there shouldn't be an issue either way....the idea is to protect both the insurer and Lemons with a clear understanding of what the helmet is, which G-Force can (should) provide...nobody is asking the insurer to change the policy

For what it's worth, here's ChumpCar's rule wording:

3.9. Driver's Helmet: Undamaged, full-face, Type SA helmet, Snell SA2000 or better, is mandatory. FIA 8860-2000 certification is acceptable. No open-face helmets allowed. (Note: A closed or full-face helmet is defined as a helmet having an integrated chin or jaw protection piece. Visor use is recommended but
optional.) Type M (motorcycle helmets) or other non-SA helmets are not allowed.

Wonder if they use the same insurer....

What's the final word on this?  I already have one WITH the sticker on it from the previous Houston race.  I would prefer not to have to buy another helmet.