Which Helmet Standard Is the Best? SNELL, DOT, ECE, SHARP, or FIM? We Rate All 5

In the fast-paced world of motorcycling, where safety is paramount, the quest for the best helmet standard becomes an epic tale of choices: ECE, DOT, SNELL, SHARP, and FIM. Each acronym carries its weight in promises and specifications, leaving you in a maze of considerations and leading to the crucial question: what are the best safety standards for motorcycle helmets?

From my perspective, the leading helmet safety standards are:

• SNELL 
• ECE
• FIM
• SHARP
• DOT

And leveraging my extensive 50+ years of motorcycling experience and helmet expertise, allow me to embark on a journey to decipher the intricacies of these standards. While traveling in the motorcycle world, I’m often struck by the wild ideas people have about different standards. Some misconceptions are way off, and these debates can easily turn heated—people get seriously fired up when it comes to their favorite standards.

To give you some background, I’ve been an avid rider since 1972 and involved in the motorcycle helmet industry since 1976. Over the years, I’ve worked with top manufacturers, spending more than 25 years with AGV. My journey has also taken me to helmet technology labs across the US, Asia, and Europe, where I’ve consulted in over 25 countries worldwide, taking helmets from concept to production, with some even making their way to the prestigious MotoGP grid.

In short, I have a deep understanding of motorcycle helmets and the standards. My insights are backed by decades of hands-on experience, so I’m here to provide you with informed, expert answers to your every burning questions:

Which Helmet Standard Is Best for Motorcyclists? Comparing SNELL, ECE, FIM, SHARP, and DOT

Here’s a quick rundown of the standards:

DOT

The DOT helmet standard, formally known as Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 218 (FMVSS 218), was introduced by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA)—an agency within the U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) established through the Highway Safety Act of 1970—to reduce fatalities and injuries from motorcycle accidents.

FMVSS 218 was officially issued in 1974 and became effective in 1975, setting forth the minimum safety performance requirements for motorcycle helmets used on public roads and property in the United States. But the DOT does not “approve” helmets; instead, it mandates helmet manufacturers to certify that each model sold in the U.S. meets the DOT standard.

The enforcement falls under the jurisdiction of the NHTSA’s Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance. The office ensures compliance by obtaining random samples from helmet manufacturers for testing and can impose fines of up to $5,000 for each non-compliant helmet.

The current DOT standard, FMVSS 218, was last updated on May 13, 2011, introducing improvements in retention systems, penetration resistance, impact attenuation, and labeling requirements, all of which were implemented from May 13, 2013. For instance, DOT impact testing now features hemispheric and flat anvils, unlike ECE testing, which uses curbstone, flat, and sloping anvils under ECE 22.06. Snell testing includes edge, flat, and hemispheric anvils.

And to address the availability of novelty helmets and their poor performance in tests and crashes, the certification label will now include the manufacturer’s name, helmet model, and the words “DOT FMVSS No. 218 Certified.

NHTSA plans to further amend FMVSS No. 218 by defining “motorcycle helmet,” adding new dimensional and compression requirements, and introducing an optional compliance process for helmets that meet existing performance standards but not the new criteria. A list of helmets meeting this alternative compliance will be published for certification.

ECE

The Economic Commission for Europe (ECE) introduced the ECE standard in 1972 under the 1958 Agreement, establishing ECE 22 (also known Regulation No.22), which set the prerequisites for motorcycle helmets to be sold. And in 1982, the first ECE helmet certification, ECE 22.02 (with ‘.02’ marking the version), was implemented, and the Bell Star 120 proudly became the first helmet to meet the ECE standard. 

Over the decades, the ECE helmet standard has undergone several revisions to keep pace with advancements in technology and materials. The latest ECE certification is ECE 22.06, the 6th amendment, which was revised in June 2020 and has been in effect since January 2022. It replaced the 5th amendment, ECE 22.05, which had been in place since March 2005. Beginning January 1, 2024, production helmets are no longer evaluated under ECE 22.05.

Unlike ECE 22.05, the ECE 22.06 standard mandates rigorous impact tests at various speeds, angles, and helmet parts, ensuring a comprehensive evaluation that includes angled impacts and safety testing for accessories. Under ECE 22.05, 17 test helmets were required for the primary approval of a helmet model with two shell sizes; under ECE 22.06, 33 test helmets are now needed.

ECE helmet certifications use specific letters to denote configurations: J for helmets without a lower face cover (chin bar), P for helmets with a protective lower face cover, and NP for helmets with a lower face cover that does not provide adequate protection. As a result, helmet standards are labeled as ECE 22.06J, ECE 22.06P, ECE 22.06NP, or ECE 22.06P/J. The Schuberth C5 was the first P/J homologated helmet to meet the stricter ECE 22.06 standards.

The U.S. does not accept ECE as a substitute for DOT, nor will it pass UK or Australian inspections due to their specific standards (AS 1698:1988 or AS/NZS 1698:2006 in Australia and BSI 6658-85 in the UK). Likewise, DOT and SNELL helmets are not approved for road use in Australia.

In contrast, Canada is more flexible, accepting various certifications, including DOT, SNELL, and ECE, despite having its own CSA CAN3-D230-M85 standard. Some provinces even allow older certifications like SNELL M2005.

SNELL

The SNELL helmet standard was established in 1957 by the Snell Memorial Foundation, a private non-profit organization located near Sacramento, California following the tragic death of race car driver Pete Snell. Driven by a mission to enhance helmet safety, the foundation tirelessly works to protect riders’ heads from direct impacts during motorcycling accidents.

And although SNELL testing and certification are voluntary, some racing-sanctioning organizations, such as the Championship Cup Series (CCS) and WERA Motorcycle Roadracing, mandate SNELL-certified helmets for competition.

The current SNELL standard for motorcycle helmets is SNELL M2020, which took effect on October 1, 2019, following its introduction on May 3, 2019. But on November 1, 2023, Snell Memorial Foundation announced a new certification, SNELL M2025, which will replace the SNELL M2020 standard starting on October 1, 2024.

Continuing the tradition of dual ratings seen in M2020 (M2020D and M2020R), the M2025 standard also splits into M2025D and M2025R, along with the special application SA2020 helmet standard. The M2025D rating applies to helmets in North America and Japan, aligning with DOT FMVSS-218 and JIS T 8133:2000 regulations.

In contrast, the M2025R rating applies to helmets worldwide, meeting the ECE 22.06 and FIM FRHPhe-01 standards, which emphasize softer shells. The key difference between the two lies in the peak acceleration rating: M2025R allows for 257g/275g, while M2025D permits 243g/275g.

Meanwhile, the upcoming SA2025 revision of the Snell Special Applications Standard for Protective Headgear for Use in Competitive Automotive Sports, announced on April 1, 2024, and set to take effect on October 1, 2024, has been developed to align with the FIA 8859-2024 release. The impact velocities and acceleration limits for SA2025 have been designed to ensure compatibility, making them as stringent as or more rigorous than those in FIA 8859.

With the update from M2020 to M2025, SNELL introduced a new oblique impact test. The test positions the helmet face down to measure its impact on the inner head form, evaluating the helmet’s ability to attenuate rotational forces that can cause brain injuries. Still, SNELL M2025D and M2025R standards maintain the previous comprehensive linear impact tests on various surfaces and under different environmental conditions, ensuring they remain the toughest motorcycle helmet standards to meet today.

But before you kick your trusty SNELL M2020 lid to the curb, remember that its certification remains valid until 2033, with the production of M2020 labeled units ceasing on March 31, 2026. SNELL standards typically update every five years, with the last five date codes being 2025, 2020, 2015, 2010, and 2005.

FIM

Introduced in 2016 for professional motorcycle racing, the FIM standard, overseen by the Fédération Internationale De Motocyclisme (FIM), aims to create the safest helmets for professional motorcycle racing.

But today, FIM-certified helmets are also available for you and me. Just be ready to shell out around or upwards of $1,000 for one. Think of the new $999.95 Alpinestars Supertech R10 Carbon, $949.00 Arai RX-7V (EVO), or $1,599.95 AGV Pista GP RR Carbon, the first-ever FIM homologated helmet.

Phase one, FRHPhe-01, the current FIM standard, was introduced in June 2019 and became mandatory across all circuit racing disciplines by January 2020. But a new version, FRHPhe-02, was released in November 2022. Highly recommended from 2025 and mandatory from 2026, FRHPhe-02 also sets criteria for off-road racing helmets in cross-country, enduro, speedway, and motocross disciplines, encompassing the following tests to ensure thorough safety:

• Linear Impact: Assesses impact resistance at 9 to 13 helmet locations.
• Oblique Impact: A novel assessment to evaluate protection against rotational brain injuries.
• Quick Release: Ensures cheek pads have a quick release system, identified by a red strap.
• Penetration Resistance: Tests resistance to sharp objects.

Interestingly, to receive FIM homologation, helmets must already have ECE, SNELL, JIS, or DOT with SNELL certification—highlighting once again that DOT-only certification falls short. In addition, only full-face, non-modular motorcycle helmets with a D-ring closing system are approved by the federation.

It remains to be seen if the new FHPhe-02 Helmet phase 2 will eventually expand to include open-face and modular helmets, among other styles. FRHPhe stands for FIM Racing Homologation Programme for Helmets!

SHARP

Short for Safety Helmet Assessment and Rating Programme, SHARP is a helmet standard established by the United Kingdom government in 2007. Its objective is to enhance motorcycle safety on public roads in Britain by implementing a performance rating system for motorcycle helmets.
Helmets tested under the SHARP program are sourced directly from retail dealers to ensure they match those bought and used by the public.

The testing procedures comply with British Regulation BS: 6658 and meet or exceed UN R22 (ECE 22.06 and ECE 22.05) standards. In particular, SHARP tests involve a higher impact velocity (8.5 m/s) compared to the requirements of ECE 22.05 (7.5 m/s) and ECE 22.06 (8.2 m/s), ensuring improved energy absorption.

SHARP utilizes a 5-star rating system, where 5 represents the highest quality and 1 indicates the lowest. In the latest publications, the Shoei Neotec 3 earned a 5-star rating, Ruroc’s ATLAS 4.0 Carbon received 4 stars, and the AGV K6 S also achieved a 5-star rating.

To review and upgrade the current test and rating protocols of the SHARP scheme in light of new knowledge about motorcyclist injuries, particularly those related to rotational forces during impacts, the Department for Transport (DfT) has initiated the SHARP 2025 Project.

The project involves TRL (Transport Research Laboratory) collecting and evaluating scientific evidence, engaging with key stakeholders for feedback, and recommending updates to keep the SHARP scheme current. TRL will review literature on helmet safety, perform gap analysis, and consult with stakeholders to inform these updates.

Everything You Need to Know for Optimal Motorcycle Helmet Safety

Understanding motorcycle helmet certifications can be perplexing due to the various standards in common use. A helmet that meets one certification may fail the tests for another.  And in the process, you might find yourself wondering:

• Which of the several commonly used certification systems is the strictest?
• Does a helmet need to pass the hardest tests?
• Are the more lenient tests strict enough?
• Is it essential to buy a helmet produced by a reputable manufacturer with quality materials, or are all common materials good enough?

With these questions in mind, and drawing from my extensive experience as a lifelong motorcycle rider since the age of 13, as well as my role as a leader and consultant in the motorcycle helmet industry, I will provide a thorough overview of motorcycle helmets. Including their functionality and composition, the testing methodologies employed by safety standard organizations, and the specific criteria for each certification.

The more you know about helmets, the easier it is to make a good purchase, as wearing a quality helmet significantly reduces the risk of head, brain, and severe brain injury by 63%-88% for all ages in the event of a crash or a fall. But first;

My Top 10 Best Motorcycle Helmets for 2024

The current helmet standard certifications — SNELL M2025, DOT FMVSS-218, ECE 22.06, SHARP 5-Star Rating, and FIM FRHPhe-01 — are quite different. Yet, these disparities truly matter only if you know your riding style and helmet size.

The right certified helmet should fit snugly, feeling like a second skin; it shouldn’t burden you with excess noise or weight, nor should it add to your fatigue. Personally, I wouldn’t rate any model that goes below two shell sizes!

Helmet Model	Category	Why I Like It	Check & Shop Now
AGV K3 S	Best Overall	Multi-density EPS developed in 4 sizes	RevZilla | Amazon
Shoei RF-1400	Best Quiet	Advanced Noise Reduction System	RevZilla | Amazon
AGV K6 S	Best Sport-Touring	Lightest at 2.95 lbs. (1,338 grams)	RevZilla | Amazon
Icon Airflite	Most Versatile	Chin vent provides exceptional airflow and a Hannibal Lecter look	RevZilla | J&P Cycles
Schuberth C5	Best Touring	Aerodynamically tuned shell to mitigate fatigue	RevZilla | CycleGear
Arai Regent-X	Best Race/Sports	Facial Contour System (FCS) ensures a snug fit	RevZilla | Amazon
Scorpion EXO R420	Best Urban/Street	Ellip-Tec 2 face shield improves aerodynamics	RevZilla | Amazon
Bell MX-9 Mips	Best Dual-Sport	MIPS for better rotational impact protection	RevZilla | Amazon
HJC i10	Best Budget-Friendly	Advanced CAD technology reduces turbulence	RevZilla | Amazon
Sedici Strada 3 Parlare	Best Bluetooth-Ready	Sena DWO-7 Pro with Mesh Intercom 2.0 Technology	RevZilla | CycleGear

All my 10 helmet choices hold both DOT and ECE certifications, ensuring they comply with legal requirements. Selling helmets that fail DOT tests in the US or ECE tests in Europe is illegal. Plus, participating in FIM-related competitions requires helmets to be FIM homologated.

Impact of Motorcycle Helmet Usage: Lives Saved from 2010 to 2023

Year	Helmet Use	Lives Saved
2010	54.3%	1,556
2011	66.5%	1,622
2012	60.4%	1,699
2013	59.5%	1,640
2014	64.3%	1,673
2015	60.7%	1,800
2016	65.3%	1,885
2017	65.2%	1,872
2018	71.0%	1,945
2019	70.8%	1,987
2020	69.0%	1,994
2021	64.9%	2,013
2022	67.4%	2,070
2023	66.1%	2,055

The data illustrates a significant trend in helmet use among motorcyclists in the United States between 2010 and 2023, showing an overall increase of 11.8% in helmet usage rates. But there was a slight decline of 1.3% in helmet use from 2022 (67.4%) to 2023 (66.1%).

Despite this dip, helmets played a crucial role in reducing the prevalence of head injuries by 63.8% and the number of fatalities by 36.2% in 2021 for both riders and pillions. A reality that has heightened people’s awareness and willingness to invest in certified helmets, especially with 6,222 motorcyclists dying in crashes in 2022, the highest number ever recorded and a 23% increase since 2019.

The unpredictable nature of the road means you never know what might happen. Even if you are vigilant, drunk and distracted drivers often share the road. Avoid assuming that you could never make a serious mistake, and always remember that accidents can occur without any fault of your own due to others not paying adequate attention.

And so, always wear a helmet; dress for the slide, not the ride. Better yet, adhere to the golden rule I swear by: All The Gear, All The Time (ATTGAT)!

Good Helmets Are Visible

In particular, high-visibility (Hi-Viz) motorcycle helmets make a striking fashion statement and significantly enhance road visibility. A fact supported by a thorough 1981 NHTSA investigation at the University of Southern California Traffic Safety Center, which revealed that motorcycles involved in accidents had a median speed of 29.8 mph, with poor visibility cited as a contributing factor by other road users.

Type of Helmet Matters

In addition to visibility, the type of helmet significantly impacts safety. Full-face helmets, which dominate the market with a 60.1% share, provide superior protection due to their face shield and chin bar. These features collectively offer a 65% protective effect for the upper, lower, and mid facial regions against injuries.

In contrast, open-face helmets, despite offering maximum airflow and a sense of freedom, leave the face exposed, accounting for a concerning 55% of severe chin blows during accidents.

It’s a trade-off between comfort and safety. Even so, wearing a half helmet is undoubtedly better than wearing no helmet at all!

Yes, full-face motorcycle helmets come in two distinct chin bar styles: rounded for road riding and elongated for off-road and dual-sport use.

The rounded shape reduces drag, minimizes negative air pockets inside the helmet, and enhances acceleration. Road helmets are optimized for head-on collisions and facilitate easier sliding on the pavement in case of a fall. On the other hand, the elongated design in off-road (dirt bike, motocross, supercross) and dual-sport (ADV, crossover, hybrid, enduro) helmets provides greater ground clearance and protects against jaw-twisting injuries during falls in challenging terrain.

Notice how helmets vary for different types of riding? Some offer better safety and quality. And understanding this helps in making the right choice.

Let’s delve into the next aspect: helmet construction.

The Shell – The First Line of Defense

The helmet’s shell plays a vital role as the outer structure protecting your head. Made from a variety of materials, each with distinct strengths and weaknesses, comprehending these aspects is essential for ensuring your safety.

Here is a comparison of common motorcycle helmet outer shell materials:

Shell Material	Strengths	Considerations
Carbon Fiber (Carbon Composite, Carbon-Kevlar etc.)	Incredibly strong, lightweight, excellent compression and tensile strength.	More expensive due to a complicated manufacturing process.
Fiberglass (Woven, Single Continuous Strand, Laminate, Random Weave, etc.)	Lightweight, durable, easy to mold and manufacture.	Less expensive than carbon fiber. More flexible, disperses impact force well.
Polycarbonates (Plastics)	Affordable, easy to form and manufacture.	Not as strong as fiberglass or carbon fiber. Heavier and may be less comfortable. Suitable for short rides or slower speeds.
Kevlar (Organic Fibers, Synthetics, etc.)	Strong, flexible, often used in combination with carbon fiber.	More expensive than fiberglass. Used to reinforce carbon fiber helmets.
Composites	Combination of materials (e.g., fiberglass, Kevlar, carbon fiber) with epoxy resin for strength.	Offers varying characteristics based on input materials. Cheaper than individual materials, stronger than some.

Carbon Fiber

Carbon fiber is hard to beat as a helmet shell material because of its extremely high tensile strength, up to 1,500,000 psi, at least 25 times stronger than fiberglass. Surprisingly, a full carbon fiber shell helmet still weighs roughly 12 ounces lighter than a standard fiberglass one of the same size.

And while this may seem marginal, the effect of a slight weight addition is amplified many times over when slicing through the air at 100 mph and with the wind keen on ripping your head off.

But that’s not all; the true magic of carbon fiber lies in its inherent ability to dissipate impacts by distributing the energy throughout the length of a single strand and onto the adjacent strand until the entire weave, by which time the force of a crash is mostly diluted.

Kevlar

Kevlar is an expensive para-aramid fiber that can reach tensile strengths of up to 500,000 psi and has very high cut and abrasion resistance, making it a wonderful addition to motorcycle jackets, jeans, gloves, and boots, as well as helmet shells. It is much stronger than fiberglass and can be used to reinforce fiberglass helmet shells.

Additionally, the material has high heat, abrasion, and cut resistance, offering better-sliding protection in a helmet. But it is never used as a standalone shell material because of its exorbitant cost.

Fiberglass

Fiberglass is a composite material containing glass fibers held together by a polymer matrix, typically epoxy or polyester. While not as strong (20,000 to 60,000 psi) as carbon fiber or Kevlar, it is more elastic than both, flexing to absorb impacts without breaking apart. Easier to process than carbon fiber and more protective than polycarbonates, it is the go-to material for affordable mid-priced helmets.

Polycarbonate

Polycarbonate, a high-tech thermoplastic, provides impressive impact resistance. While it guards against penetration, its shock-absorbing ability doesn’t match laminated shells, such as your head naturally does. Furthermore, it lacks the durability of fiberglass shells and can weaken over time when exposed to water.

Laminate Vs. More Rigid Thermoplastic Materials: Which Is Better?

Arguably, a more rigid material is not ideal for motorcycle helmets. While it offers high strength and penetration resistance, laminate materials excel at absorbing impact and shielding your head from shock after a collision.

The choice between the two depends on the specific type of accident and impact you experience, which ultimately comes down to your riding style:

• Sport Riding: Laminate materials like carbon fiber or Kevlar for superior impact absorption and lightweight properties.
• Touring: A mix of rigid and laminate materials, such as fiberglass composite, for a balance of comfort and protection.
• Commuting: Polycarbonate for cost-effective impact resistance suitable for lower-speed urban collisions.
• Off-Road Riding: Laminate materials like Kevlar for high impact absorption and durability in unpredictable conditions.

While the outer shell is pivotal, it’s the hidden hero inside your helmet that truly elevates your protection to the next level:

The EPS Foam Liner – The Second Line of Defense, And In Most Cases, The Most Important

A strong shell alone, without padding underneath, would not be enough to prevent serious injury.

Upon impact, the head continues to move until a force stops it. The Expanded Polystyrene (EPS) liner, typically placed between the outer shell and the inner comfort liner, decelerates this movement by collapsing, absorbing most of the energy, and minimizing the force transmitted to your head.

Not All EPS Foam Liners Are the Same

Motorcycle helmet EPS foam often varies in density, with some being denser and others less so. Denser foam isn’t necessarily superior. The new AGV K6 S, for example, features four sizes of outer shells (XS/S, MS, ML/L, XL/XXL), each constructed from five-density EPS, the most I’ve seen in a helmet.

Less dense foam collapses easily, quickly dissipating energy but may collapse too swiftly, offering insufficient protection. In low-impact scenarios, less dense foam absorbs more energy. For high-impact situations, denser foam resists rapid collapse, providing better protection but might not compress enough during low-speed crashes, resulting in a harder impact.

The ideal choice lies between the two extremes, but determining the exact density for optimal protection is challenging due to unpredictable accidents. That’s why premium helmets often combine denser foam with more collapsible foam, providing the best of both worlds in various impact scenarios.

Brands, like Bell, Icon and Sedici, have taken it a step further by incorporating MIPS technology in street riding helmets. In the dirt biking arena, 14 industry leaders — including Fox Racing, Alpinestars, KTM, Thor, Klim, Troy Lee, Bell, Moose Racing, MSR, Answer, 509, BILT, Arctiva, and Z1R — have also embraced MIPS for enhanced protection.

And here is how this revolutionary technology works:

Multi Directional Impact Protection System (MIPS)

When you hit the ground, rotational motion from angular acceleration and angular velocity causes sudden, slight movements of the head and brain, increasing the risk of Traumatic Brain Injury (TBI).

While EPS absorbs or disperses impact energy, the MIPS liner—a yellow, low-friction layer between the helmet’s shell and the EPS liner at the top of the head—allows the helmet to rotate slightly around your head during a crash. This small rotation, occurring within the first 10 milliseconds of a crash, significantly reduces the rotational forces transferred to your head and brain, transforming potentially severe torsional forces (kinetic energy) into dissipated heat.

You might think that simply wearing a larger helmet could achieve similar results, but that’s a dangerous misconception. The magic of MIPS lies in its precision. Even a few millimeters of additional movement can lead to more severe injuries. A snug helmet fit is essential for preventing injuries, so wearing a loosely fitting helmet (MIPS or not) is a bad idea. Please ensure your helmet fits properly!

Interestingly, some major helmet manufacturers like AGV, Arai, Shoei, HJC, Shark, and Schuberth opt out of using MIPS. But they are not ignoring the dangers of rotational impacts. Take Arai, for instance—they design helmets with a robust, rounded, egg-shaped shell and breakaway air vents. A design that allows the helmet to glance off objects, reducing the risk of the helmet catching and twisting your head.

Thor Racing and Klim, both MIPS partners, have also adopted Koroyd technology. Koroyd replaces traditional EPS with a welded-tube lattice structure, resulting in a helmet that is both lighter and more effective at dispersing impact energy.

And if you want the best of both worlds, 6D Helmets combine MIPS with the Elastomeric Isolation Damping (EID) system, ensuring that each component can operate independently between the shell and the EPS liner.

The Chin Strap Matters and Must Fit Properly

In about 8% of motorcycle accidents, helmets dislodge from riders’ heads due to a weak or improperly fitted retention mechanism, particularly the chin strap. Ensuring your helmet stays secure in a crash is critical for safety, and the right retention mechanism plays a key role.

There are two common types: the Double D-ring and the micrometric:

• Double D-Ring: Uses two metal rings on the strap, offering high security and precise adjustment. Though it may require some practice to fasten quickly, its reliability is unmatched.
• Micrometric (Ratchet): Features a plastic ratchet and a metal catch on the strap, is user-friendly and quick to adjust, making it convenient for everyday use. But it’s considered slightly less secure than the Double D-ring system, which is considered the safest for high-impact situations due to its high tensile strength.

Safety standards reflect this preference for security. The FIM (Fédération Internationale de Motocyclisme) mandates that helmets must not only be full-face and certified by ECE 22.06, Snell, or JIS (Japanese Industrial Standards) but also feature the D-ring closure for enhanced retention.

Above all, never ride with the chin strap open. Not only is it unsafe, but it’s also illegal. Properly fastening your helmet could be the difference between life and death in an accident. So, always ensure your helmet is securely fastened before you hit the road.

A Proper Fitting Motorcycle Helmet Is Necessary for Maximum Protection and Comfort

Wearing a helmet that is too tight or too loose compromises both safety and comfort. Here’s why getting the right fit is essential:

Risks of a Tight Helmet

A helmet that is too tight can lead to various issues:

• Discomfort and Pressure Points: Excessive tightness can cause pain and create pressure points on the scalp.
• Headaches: Prolonged pressure can result in headaches, distracting the rider.
• Restricted Blood Flow: This can lead to numbness or tingling, further distracting the rider and potentially impairing their ability to react quickly to road conditions.

Risks of a Loose Helmet

A loose helmet presents even greater dangers:

• Reduced Protective Effectiveness: A helmet that can shift or come off during an impact offers little to no protection.
• Increased Rotational Forces: During a crash, a loose helmet can increase rotational forces on the head and neck, raising the risk of traumatic brain injury.
• Wind and Noise Distractions: More wind and noise can enter a loose helmet, making it harder to hear important sounds like traffic or emergency sirens and potentially causing permanent ear damage.
• Obstructed Vision: A helmet that moves around can obscure the rider’s vision, making it difficult to see the road and potential hazards.

To ensure maximum protection and comfort, refer to my detailed helmet size guide to help you find the perfect fit while riding.

A Quality Face Shield Is Necessary

A quality face shield protects the rider from wind, rain, insects, rocks, and road debris, ensuring that these hazards don’t interfere with your ride. And in the event of a crash, it becomes even more critical as the front of the helmet often takes the brunt of the impact.

When it comes to materials, polycarbonate is a superior choice over acrylic. While acrylic can shield your face effectively, it often distorts your vision and scratches easily. Polycarbonate, on the other hand, excels with its better clarity, durability, and scratch resistance, ensuring a clear, unobstructed view and longer-lasting performance.

Both polycarbonate and acrylic helmet face shields are strong enough to protect your face, with some models even offering UV protection.

Regardless of the material type, not all visors are the same:

• Clear Visor: Common and offer great visibility, especially at night; sunglasses needed for daytime.
• Smoked/Tinted Visor: Ideal for daytime with various tints but reduces visibility at night.
• Iridium Visor: Reflective and stylish, suited for daytime only.
• Yellow Tint Visors: Enhance visibility in bright conditions but less effective at night.
• Photochromic Visor: Adjust tint automatically based on light conditions.

Each visor type follows the European DIN EN 166 Standard, from Optical Class 1 (highest) to Class 3 (lowest). Beyond this, visors are rigorously tested to helmet standards like ECE 22.06, which evaluates their resistance to scratches, minimal distortion, fogging, and even the ultimate challenge: withstanding a 6mm steel bullet shot at a blistering 180 mph without shattering.

Motorcycle Helmet Standards: A Comparative Analysis of DOT, ECE, SNELL, FIM, and SHARP Ratings

Helmet Standard	Previous Standard Rating	Current Standard Rating (and Future)	Key Tests
DOT	FMVSS-218	FMVSS-218	Impact attenuation, penetration, retention mechanism, peripheral vision
ECE	ECE 22.05	ECE 22.06	Impact, angled impacts, accessories, visor, chinbar
SNELL	M2020: M2020D/M2020R	M2025: M2025D/M2025R	Impact, continuous water spray, penetration, visor ballistics, random angle impact.
FIM	FRHPhe-01	FRHPhe-01 (FRHPhe-02 from 2026)	Higher-speed impact, rigorous oblique collision impact
SHARP	5-Star Rating	5-Star Rating	Impact on flat and inclined surfaces, oblique impact, evaluations based on real-world injury statistics.

Safety standards can indeed be confusing due to the multitude of certifying bodies for motorcycle helmets worldwide. And while they may share similarities, there are significant differences. For example, a helmet meeting the new Snell’s M2025 criteria might not satisfy the current United Nations Economic Commission for Europe (UN ECE) standard ECE 22.06 and vice versa.

In this exploration, I examine the specifics of each test criteria to help you grasp their distinctiveness and understand their protective qualities for motorcyclists.

Department of Transportation Certification (DOT FMVSS-218)

The FMVSS-218 certification, better known as DOT certification, is the minimum legal standard that helmets must pass in the United States.

While it’s technically illegal to sell helmets that don’t meet DOT standards, some manufacturers skirt this rule by marketing their products as novelty helmets, which are not classified as genuine motorcycle helmets.

These are often sold as “motorcycle novelty helmets” and are frequently targeted at on-road riders. But they come with disclaimers stating that the helmets do not meet Standard No. 218, are not protective devices, or are not intended for highway use.

In states with universal helmet laws requiring helmets to meet Standard No. 218, some riders attach counterfeit certification labels to these novelty helmets to appear compliant. This makes it challenging for law enforcement to enforce helmet use laws effectively.

Despite these loopholes, the existing regulations do help prevent some substandard helmets from reaching the market. But it might be time for the DOT to reconsider and tighten these regulations to ensure greater rider safety!

The DOT Self Certification Caveat

The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), which enforces FMVSS-218, does not test helmets before they are labeled as DOT-certified. Instead, an honor system is in place where manufacturers are expected to test their helmets and ensure compliance before selling them.

The NHTSA then independently purchases helmets from retail shelves and tests them to verify compliance. If a helmet fails these tests, manufacturers face fines of up to $5,000 per faulty helmet.

The DOT Test Criteria

To assist law enforcers and riders in identifying non-DOT compliant helmets, the most recent update as of May 13, 2013, requires helmets to display a certification decal that includes the phrase “FMVSS No. 218,” the helmet manufacturer or brand name, and the word “CERTIFIED.”

The certification label should also be positioned on the outside of the helmet, between 1 and 3 inches (2.5 to 7.6 cm) from the bottom edge at the back, and the helmet size must be indicated using numerical values.

Previously, a simple label with the letters “DOT” in a specific size was sufficient.

Helmet Manufacture Date	Certification Label Requirements
On or after May 13, 2013	Mfr. Name and/or Brand Model Designation, FMVSS No. 218 CERTIFIED
On or after May 13, 2013	DOT

The amendment also enhanced the four DOT FMVSS No. 218 tests:

1. Impact attenuation
2. Penetration
3. Retention system
4. Peripheral vision

While these tests are challenging to pass, the standards are more lenient compared to the requirements for ECE 22.06, SNELL M2025, FIM FRHPhe-01, and SHARP 5-Star Rating motorcycle helmet certifications.

1. Impact Attenuation Test

The impact test evaluates how well a helmet can withstand a crash by striking it against both a flat anvil and a rounded anvil.

To pass, the helmet must not only resist impacts and absorb shocks in ideal conditions but also perform effectively under four adverse environments: humidity, low/medium/high temperatures, and water immersion.

At least four impact sites are selected above the test line, with each site being struck twice. The impact attenuation requirement limits headform acceleration, measured in gravitational acceleration (g). FMVSS No. 218 caps maximum acceleration at 400g. Accelerations over 200g must not exceed 2.0 milliseconds cumulatively, and those over 150g must not exceed 4.0 milliseconds cumulatively.

These rigorous tests ensure the helmet’s effectiveness in various conditions.

2. Penetration Test

The penetration test is equally demanding. It involves a six-pound, 10-ounce pointed metal object dropping from a height of 118.1 inches (3 meters or approximately 9.7 feet) in a guided free fall onto a stationary helmet mounted on a headform. To pass, the helmet must prevent the striker from contacting the surface of the headform.

In addition, the helmet must successfully complete the penetration test under all four operating environments: humidity, low/medium/high temperatures, and water immersion.

3. Retention System

The retention system test evaluates the helmet’s chin strap and related components by applying a quasi-static load.

To pass, the helmet’s retention system must not break under the applied load, and the adjustable portion of the system must not shift more than 1 inch (2.5 centimeters) during the test.

4. Peripheral Vision

Finally, a helmet must not obstruct the wearer’s vision to pass. It should provide at least 105 degrees of peripheral vision from the centerline, extending as far as possible to the right and left.

A motorcycle helmet must pass all the above test criteria to earn DOT FMVSS No. 218 certification and be sold in American and Canadian stores. If it fails, manufacturers are required to recall their products and may face substantial fines.

SNELL Memorial Foundation Certification (SNELL M2025)

Snell tests are more rigorous than DOT tests, involving a more extensive series of evaluations.
Although Snell certifications do not affect the legal requirements for helmet sales in the United States, the SNELL M2025 certification indicates that a helmet exceeds standard expectations, offering superior protection.

And having reviewed the transition from the outgoing SNELL M2020 to the new SNELL M2025 rating, which takes effect on October 1, 2024, I can confirm that the updates are minimal. The primary change is the addition of a new oblique impact test, alongside the previous requirements, creating two distinct categories of impact tests: the guided fall test and the oblique impact test.

Guided Fall Test

In the guided fall test, the helmet and headform are dropped vertically, ensuring their motion is strictly up and down with little to no rotation. They impact the anvil directly below and then rebound straight up.

The test measures how well the helmet shell and liner absorb and dissipate the kinetic energy from the fall.

Oblique Impact Test

The oblique impact tests match the protocols in FIM FRHPhe-01 and ECE R22-06. For instance, technicians coat the test headforms with the same silicone treatment specified in FIM FRHPhe-01. The impact surface is also flat, tilted at 45°, and covered with 80-grit sandpaper.

During testing, two helmets are subjected to up to three impacts each under lab ambient conditions, with a drop velocity of 8.0 m/sec. The headform’s Z axis is oriented straight down, and the technician chooses the orientation around this axis for each impact.

The rotational acceleration must not exceed 10,000 radians per second-squared, an increase from the earlier proposed limit of 9,000 radians per second-squared. Furthermore, the Brain Injury Criterion (BrIC) must remain below 0.78.

The new oblique impact test evaluates the helmet’s ability to limit rotational motion transferred to the headform from glancing impacts. This simulates a rider falling to the pavement while still moving at cruising speed.

Roll-Off Test

Also known as the positional stability test, the roll-off test determines if a helmet will remain on a rider’s head during a crash. It uses lifelike human head forms, which ensures high accuracy in the results.

During the test, the helmet is placed upside down at a 135-degree angle with a headform inside. The SNELL M2025 uses a mechanism with weights and a wire rope to flip the helmet over. While some movement of the helmet is permissible, it must remain securely on the head form to pass the test.

Dynamic Retention Test

The rigorous test evaluates the chin strap, assessing its ability to hold a weight for an extended period without breaking or stretching significantly.

Initially, the strap must support a 23-kilogram weight for 30 seconds, followed by withstanding a falling 38-kilogram weight. If the strap stretches more than three centimeters, it does not pass the test.

Chin Bar Impact Test

The SNELL helmet standard mandates a robust and shock-absorbent chin bar capable of withstanding the impact of a dropped weight.

And the new SNELL M2025 tests involve dropping a five-kilogram weight on the chin bar, which must resist deflection within specified limits; otherwise, the helmet fails the test.

Two Separate Penetration Tests

Helmets must undergo two distinct penetration tests: one for the shell and one for the face shield.

• For the shell penetration test, similar to the DOT test, a three-kilogram striker is dropped onto the helmet. SNELL also tests helmets in extreme temperatures from -20°C to 25°C above room temperature and sprays them with water for four hours. Finally, they drop the helmets on various shaped anvils.
• The face shield test involves firing a lead pellet from an air rifle at the shield to assess its resistance. The shield must stop a pellet traveling at 500 kilometers per hour.

A helmet that passes both tests demonstrates a higher level of reliability. But if it hits its certification threshold of 275 G but exceeds it, it fails. SNELL often requests a different helmet from the manufacturer to retest and verify the results.

Did SNELL Continue to Create A Double Standard: M2025D and M2025R?

SNELL split its standards to address the European market, causing manufacturers to choose between their stringent penetration tests and the softer shells required by SHARP and ECE for better energy absorption.

As a result, SNELL has faced ongoing criticism for dividing their latest M2025 rating, similar to their approach with the M2020 in 2020, into two distinct parts:

• M2025D, which follows the traditional double-drop test for the DOT American and Canadian markets.
• M2025R, which aligns with the softer shell requirements of ECE and FIM standards.

Meeting both factions’ requirements was once deemed impossible, but latest helmets like the Shoei X-Fifteen have achieved this feat, marking a notable advancement in helmet safety standards.

Economic Commission for Europe Certification (ECE 22.06)

European ECE motorcycle helmet standards are like American DOT standards and do not involve as many different tests as the Snell Foundation uses. An advantage of the ECE test is that they test for more real-life environmental factors than the DOT test.

Unlike the DOT, the ECE tests to see if the helmet works despite exposure to ultraviolet light. The ECE also exposes helmets to solvents that may weaken the helmet and make it fail its tests. As helmets come in varied sizes, the ECE always tests the size of each helmet that is most likely to fail.

The ECE also tests more than one helmet in each production run. This is to make sure that the helmets’ quality remains the same instead of decreasing after the first batch. The ECE is thorough enough that even safety stickers are tested to see if they reflect enough light.

The ECE penetration test is rigorous as the ECE tests many different parts of the helmet to see how well it stands up to impact in different places on the shell. The chin guard is tested against impact as part of the penetration tests.

The ECE tests also involve testing the chin strap by using a testing machine to jerk the helmet backward, with the helmet passing if the strap does not break or fall off. The ECE also tests the face shield for durability and whether it interferes with vision.

The ECE 22.06 Standard Is Here

You might have heard about the relatively new ECE 22.06 standard, implemented since January 2022, and wondered what it means for you. Do you replace your ECE 22.05 Bell Carbon race helmet with a $90 polycarbonate shell helmet just because of the updated sticker? Probably not!

ECE is gradually moving towards the latest rating standard, aiming to have only ECE 22.06-certified helmets in European motorcycle gear shops by 2024. So, there’s no need to feel pressured to change your helmet before its due date based on a specific calendar deadline.

What’s New With ECE 22.06?

Several detailed improvements make the new ECE 22.06 standard more comprehensive than its predecessor, ECE 22.05:

• Increased Number of Test Helmets: Under ECE 22.06, the required number of test helmets has doubled from 17 to 33 for models available in two shell sizes. This change ensures a more thorough evaluation, meeting stringent safety standards effectively.
• Expanded Chin Coverage: The ECE 22.06 standard has broadened its scope to include open-face, modular, and flip-up helmets with rimmed chin components. This extension ensures safety even when the chinbar is open, a feature not previously assessed in ECE 22.05. Unlike its predecessor, which focused solely on a closed chinbar, this updated standard comprehensively evaluates both scenarios—when the chinbar is open and closed.
• Sun Visor Accuracy: Emphasizes sun visor quality, ensuring precise color accuracy and independent movement from the face shield. This enhances visibility, simplifies recognition of traffic light colors, and offers better protection from debris. The standard enforces strict requirements: visors must withstand impact from a steel test bullet at 60 m/s without bursting, ensuring enhanced durability and safety for riders.
• Accessories Testing: Any OEM accessories intended for use with the helmet must now be provided with the test helmets. This includes sun visors and even Bluetooth communication systems.
• Enhanced Fit: Improved retention system for a snug fit; helmets must “sit” better on the wearer.
• Resilience in Harsh Conditions: Helmets must prove durability in extreme weather, with testing conducted at temperatures as low as -20 degrees Celsius. This requirement guarantees helmets remain effective regardless of challenging weather circumstances.
• Angled Impact Testing: Recognizing the importance of protecting against angled impacts, helmets undergo rotational acceleration testing at a 45-degree angle. This step addresses the risk of severe brain injuries due to twisting, even with low-impact velocity. For certain tests, the new ECE 22.06 standard specifies test points such as lateral right, rear, lateral left, and rear lateral right, etc.
• Improved Impact Testing Technique: Freefall style testing from a height of 15 feet, 5 feet higher than ECE 22.05. Varying impact speeds and angles tested to cover different collision scenarios on different parts of the helmet.
• New Rigidity Test: Damaged helmets are not evaluated for residual mechanical characteristics by adding a constraint.

ECE 22.06 Labeling Requirements

The ECE 22.06 standard outlines the necessary labels and stickers for helmets, including cautions about substances like solvents or stickers that shouldn’t be applied to the helmet shell.

An uppercase “E” in a circle followed by a number indicates the country where the helmet was approved. For instance:

• E1: Germany
• E2: France
• E4: Netherlands
• E11: United Kingdom

The digits next to the “E” mark include the type approval (06), helmet approval number, and the type of protection offered:

• /J for jet or open-face helmets
• /P for full-face helmets with a protective chin bar
• /NP for helmets with a lower face cover that doesn’t provide sufficient protection (e.g., ECE 22.06NP, ECE 22.06P, or ECE 22.06J)

Following this, a hyphen and the manufacturing serial number are included.

For example, a label reading E1 06 123456 /P-78910 indicates a helmet approved in Germany under the ECE 22.06 standard, offering full-face protection, along with its specific approval and serial numbers.

Safety Helmet Assessment and Rating Program (5-Star Rating)

Prior to undergoing SHARP tests, a motorcycle helmet must have already cleared the European ECE tests. The SHARP tests are funded by the UK government, covering additional tests that surpass the standards set by the ECE.

The notable advantage of SHARP tests lies in their comprehensive rating system, ranging from 1 to 5 stars, as opposed to a mere pass or fail status. This nuanced approach allows customers to distinguish between the best helmets and those that merely meet basic standards. While SHARP tests are specific to helmets sold in the UK, individuals worldwide can access SHARP ratings online to compare helmets.

SHARP impact tests are conducted at three different speeds and involve both pointed and flat surfaces. Additionally, rotational tests assess the amount of rotational energy transmitted to a rider’s head during a crash.

Due to the thoroughness of these tests and the detailed star rating system, the SHARP system stands out. It provides consumers with more information than a simple pass/fail grade, enabling them to differentiate between two helmets that both meet other testing criteria.

Decoding SHARP’s Helmet Safety Ratings

SHARP uses a six-color-coded system alongside 1 to 5-star ratings to indicate the impact resistance of helmet components based on different brain acceleration values. The colors represent the following levels of impact resistance:

• Green: Peak acceleration up to 275g, meeting the ECE 22.05 test limit at 7.5 m/s.
• Yellow: Peak acceleration up to 300g, corresponding to the British Standard 6658:1985 test limit at 7.5 m/s, the maximum for a 5-star rating.
• Orange: Peak acceleration up to 400g.
• Brown: Peak acceleration up to 420g.
• Red: Peak acceleration up to 500g.
• Black: Peak acceleration exceeding 500g.
  

Focusing on side impact protection is crucial because the head’s lateral area is particularly vulnerable. To ensure optimal safety, it’s best to choose a helmet with high star ratings across all zones.

Note that American-made helmets typically do not have SHARP ratings. Instead, they often carry British standards, ECE 22.06 labels, and possibly DOT and SNELL certifications. The absence of SHARP ratings in the U.S. market is due to differing regulatory standards.

Controversy exists over testing methodologies. SHARP emphasizes overall impact absorption, while SNELL and DOT include penetration tests. Helmets designed for SNELL and DOT tests may have more rigid shells, which can lead to differing performance results when evaluated by SHARP.

FIM Racing Homologation Program (FRHPhe-01 and FRHPhe-02)

FIM sets the highest standards for motorcycle racing helmet safety, requiring approval for world championship races. These standards ensure that all racers receive uniform protection, regardless of their gear sponsors, and are more stringent than the usual ECE and SNELL tests.

In fact, for a helmet to receive FRHPhe-01 Homologation, it must already meet the following requirements:

• USA: DOT FMVSS 218 with SNELL M2015, M2020R, M2020D, M2025R, and M2025D
• Europe: ECE 22-05 type P (valid until December 31, 2023 and not valid for FRHPhe02) and ECE 22-06 type P (valid for FRHPhe02)
• Japan: JIS T 8133 2015 Type 2 Full Face

Additionally, FIM only approves full-face, non-modular motorcycle helmets with a D-ring closing system, prioritizing their ability to resist rotational forces, which are often the cause of most injuries.

Despite SNELL’s stricter standards, its certification is optional and not as thorough as its European counterpart. The ECE merges DOT and SNELL standards, adding its own criteria, making it the strictest standard, especially with the upgrade to ECE 22.06. But there are still gaps in safety evaluation.

To address these gaps, the International Motorcycling Federation (FIM) established the FRHPhe-01 certification in 2019, ensuring uniform protection for all its racers regardless of gear sponsors. Consequently, FIM-certified helmets are now mandatory for teams under the federation’s management.

FRHPhe-02 Update

Standard	Usage Period	Disciplines	Use Case
FRHPhe-01	Until December 2025	Road Racing only	Competition use
FRHPhe-02	As of January 2026	All disciplines	Competition use

The first phase of the FIM homologation program, FRHPhe-01, currently sets the standard, but a new release is on the horizon: FRHPhe-02. This updated standard will expand to include off-road racing helmets used in cross-country, enduro, speedway, and motocross disciplines. It introduces rigorous testing for rotational, penetration, and impact scenarios, offering a more comprehensive approach to safety.

Scheduled for implementation in 2026, FRHPhe-02 will become FIM’s focus that year. Presently, FIM “strongly encourages” helmet usage in trials, racing events, pedelecs, SSV, and LSWR competitions.

While you don’t need to dwell on these changes unless you’re a professional racer, it’s important that I keep you informed about the latest developments:

• Anvil Types: The testing now includes hemispherical and oblique anvils (at 45 degrees) in addition to the traditional flat steel anvil for impact testing.
• Number of Test Helmets: The new standard mandates testing with only 6 helmets, a reduction from the previous requirement of 10, despite the increase in test variations.
• Skull Fracture Criterion (SFC): The acceptance criteria now use the Skull Fracture Criterion (SFC) instead of the Head Injury Criterion (HIC), with the condition that SFC should be less than 212 for a helmet to pass.
• Reduction of Peak Resultant Acceleration: The allowable peak rotational acceleration in oblique/rotational impact rotation (PRA) has been reduced from 10400 to a more survivable 10000 [rad/s2].

Notably, Peak Linear Acceleration (PLA< 275G) and Brain Injury Criterion (BrIC<0.78) have remained the same for the new round of testing.

What Sets FIM Apart from ECE, SNELL, and SHARP?

The FIM standard distinguishes itself from ECE, SNELL, and SHARP in two key ways:

1. Speed: FIM-certified helmets undergo greater speed impact testing to ensure maximum head protection for racers. While most riders won’t reach MotoGP speeds, having a helmet that exceeds standard performance is beneficial.
2. Oblique Collisions Impact Testing: The FIM tests how helmets perform in oblique collisions, where impact force is unevenly distributed. This includes a new 45° impact test, faster testing, more impact locations, and increased impact absorption. The tests also adjust impact zones to reflect asphalt’s friction and use silicone-covered head forms to simulate human skin thickness. Since not all collisions are equal or occur at the same angle, FIM tests provide superior assessment and protection.

With $1,000–$2,000, you and I can now get a helmet on the civilian market with the prestigious FIM holographic tag, including the first FIM FRHPhe-02 Off-Road homologated helmet, LS2 X-FORCE, and the first FIM FRHPhe-02 Racing homologated helmet, ARAI RX-7V.

Other Noteworthy World Motorcycle Helmet Standards

• British Standard Institute (BSI) Tests: The BSI 6658-85 is a critical British certification, though less well-known. It is comparable to SNELL and ECE standards, utilizing similar minimum requirements for helmet approval.
• Australian Standards: The main standards are AS 1698-1988 and AS/NZS 1698:2006. These specify that only manufacturer-recommended attachments should be used. Once a helmet has a sewn-in label, the outer Australian Standards sticker can be removed.
• ACU GOLD Standard: The Auto-Cycle Union (ACU) sets a more rigorous standard for motorcycle racing in the U.K., surpassing the ECE 22.06 requirements. Only helmets with an ACU Gold sticker are allowed in competitions or track days on paved surfaces. Many U.K. riders prefer these helmets for everyday use due to their enhanced safety.
• TUV SUD PSB Standard: In Singapore, helmets must meet the TUV SUD PSB certification and pass batch testing to receive the “PSB TEST SS 9:1992” safety label. Look for the blue sticker on the back of your helmet to confirm compliance.
• S.G. or JIS T 8133:2000 Standards: In Japan, helmets must comply with the Road Traffic Law and display the “P.S. (C),” “S,” or “JIS” logo. Helmets with the JIS mark automatically include one of these logos.
• CSA CAN3-D230-M85: Canadian helmets must adhere to a national standard, which recognizes DOT helmets as compliant. Since 2012, Ontario also accepts ECE-certified helmets. Some areas, such as Quebec and B.C., may impose DOT requirements. The CSA standard, however, hasn’t been updated in 37 years and is often seen as outdated.
• Other Standards: Include Thailand’s TIS, Brazil’s NBR 7471, Taiwan’s CNS, Korea’s KS G 7001, and Singapore’s SIRIM (Malaysia).

Uniform, reliable standards for helmet certification are crucial. We should be able to trust that certified helmets provide adequate protection, ensuring safety without any doubt.

Michael’s Summary and Conclusion

When comparing motorcycle helmet standards, people often focus on factors like the force of the impact, the number of impacts, dwell times, the location of impact, and many other technical details. These standards are based on theories, and there is ongoing debate among various standards organizations about which is superior.

From my extensive experience in the motorcycle helmet industry and working with many manufacturers, I believe that the numbers alone are not the most critical factor for consumers.

Even scientists and technicians can’t agree on the exact figures.

Regardless of which numbers are correct, one of the strongest aspects of the SNELL Memorial Foundation’s certification is their practice of purchasing helmets from the marketplace and testing them in their own laboratory. This process is entirely independent of the helmet manufacturers, unlike many other motorcycle standards.

Most motorcyclists are unaware that the Department of Transportation (DOT) does not directly approve or certify helmets to the DOT’s FMVSS 218 standard. Even if the standard were the best in the world, the government relies on manufacturers to self-certify that their helmets meet the standard, conducting very little random testing, sometimes almost none.

Having worked with AGV helmets for over 25 years, and later with Vemar, KBC, Suomy, and others, I’ve observed that European Union (ECE) tests involve much more manufacturer participation compared to SNELL.

Ultimately, if a rider chooses a helmet model from a reputable company with any current safety standard, they will have made a good safety decision. The crucial factors are ensuring that the helmet fits securely and that the retention strap is very snug when worn.

By following these guidelines, riders can do much better than trying to dissect the technical details of different motorcycle helmet standards as outlined below:

Tests	SNELL M2025	ECE 22.06	SHARP 5-Star Rating	FIM FRHPhe-01	DOT FMVSS 218
Effective Date	October 1, 2024	January 1, 2022	July 1, 2007 (Revision in Progress)	June 1, 2020	May 13, 2013 (Last Revision)
Certification Requirement	Requires third-party pre-market testing	Requires third-party pre-market testing	Requires third-party pre-market testing	Requires third-party pre-market testing	Self-certification, no pre-market testing
Minimum Sample Size	M2025D: 7-9 samples, follow-up; M2025R: 7-9 samples, follow-up	Up to 50 samples, 8-26 based on batch size	Up to 7 samples	10 samples	No pre-market testing; post-market by NHTSA contractor
Peak Linear Acceleration (G)	M2025R: 257g/275g; M2025D: 243g/275g	High energy ≤275g; Low energy ≤180g	≤275g or ≤170g, test mode dependent; ≤275g at chin bar	≤275g or ≤170g, test mode dependent; ≤275g at chin bar	≤400g
Peak Rotational Acceleration (PRA)	10,000 rad/sec²	10,400 rad/sec²	8,750 rad/sec²	10,000 rad/sec²	Not tested
Additional Safety Criteria	HIC	HIC	HIC, PLA, SFC, BrIC, PRA	PLA, SFC, BrIC, PRA	None
Stability Against Roll-Off	Tested	Not tested	Not tested	Not tested	Not tested
Shell Penetration	Must not touch headform	Not tested	Must not touch headform	Must not touch headform	Must not touch headform
Face Shield Tests	Yes; excludes half and ¾ helmets with shields	Light transmittance, diffusion, impact, scratch resistance, color fidelity	As per ECE standards	As per ECE standards	Not tested
Shell Rigidity	Tested	Tested	Not tested	Tested	Not tested
Retention System Test	Static and dynamic	Static and dynamic	Static and dynamic	Static and dynamic	Static and dynamic
Peripheral Vision	≥105° from midline	Not required	Not required	Quick removal cheek pads	Not required
≥105° from midline	No	Yes	No	N/A	No
≥105° from midline	Inside or outside	Inside chin strap	Rear exterior	Inside chin strap	Rear exterior
Quick-Release Buckle Test	No inadvertent release allowed	No inadvertent release, durability	No; Double D-ring required	No; Double D-ring required	Not tested
Youth/Kids Helmet Sizes	Available for sizes down to 50cm	Available for sizes down to 48cm	Not specified	Not specified	Not specified
Surface Projection	Projections must break away if >7mm	Projections must break away if >2mm	Projections must break away if >5mm	Projections must break away if >2mm	Max 5mm
Emergency Removal	Required	Not required	Not required	Quick removal cheek pads	Not required
Accessories Test	No	Yes	No	N/A	No
Official Labeling	Inside or outside	Inside chin strap	Rear exterior	Inside chin strap	Rear exterior

Key:

• g = gravity constant
• m/s² = meters per second squared
• rad/sec² = radians per second squared
• HIC = Head Injury Criteria
• PLA = Peak Linear Acceleration
• SFC = Skull Fracture Criteria
• BrIC = Brain Injury Criteria
• PRA = Peak Rotational Acceleration

You can watch more on our videos on our YouTube Channel:

FAQs — I Have the Answers!

Q: Which Is the Best Helmet Standard?

Snell is widely regarded as the best helmet standard today due to its rigorous testing procedures, particularly with its latest M2025 double standards: M2025D and M2025R. Both now include new oblique impact tests.

M2025D follows their traditional double-drop test, while M2025R aligns with the softer shell requirements of ECE and FIM standards.

Q: What Is the Latest Helmet Standard?

The latest helmet standard is SNELL M2025, introduced on November 1, 2023, and set to take effect on October 1, 2024. It will replace the SNELL M2020 standard, which has been in place since October 1, 2019, running for five years.

Meanwhile, the ECE 22.06 standard is the newest regulation from the ECE. It was introduced in June 2020 and took effect on January 1, 2022, superseding the previous 5th amendment ECE 22.05 standard that had been in place since March 2005.

FIM also unveiled its second rating version, FRHPhe-02, in November 2022. Although not yet mandatory, it’s highly recommended from 2025 and becomes compulsory from 2026, replacing the current FRHPhe-01 rating.

At the time of writing, SHARP is in the process of improving and updating its testing and criteria through the SHARP 2025 Project to align with the motorcycle industry’s efforts to improve helmet safety standards.

But DOT/FMVSS 218 is outdated and needs a revamp in its testing methods. It would be much better if DOT actually tested helmets instead of allowing manufacturers to self-certify.

Q: What Is the New Helmet Safety Standard?

The new helmet safety standard is SNELL M2025, introduced on November 1, 2023, and set to take effect on October 1, 2024. It will replace the SNELL M2020 standard, which has been in use since October 1, 2019, for the past five years.

Q: Which Is Better: ECE or Snell?

Snell certification involves more rigorous and extensive testing, suggesting it is a superior motorcycle helmet standard compared to ECE, which is one of the most recent and globally recognized standards, particularly in Europe.

The Snell standard demands multiple impact resistance in the same location, a requirement some organizations find excessive as it doesn’t reflect real-world situations. They argue that during a crash, it’s unlikely for a motorcyclist to experience multiple impacts in the exact same location on the helmet.

Q: Which Is Better: DOT or ECE?

ECE is generally considered better than DOT due to its comprehensive testing standards, including impact, penetration, chinstrap, and chinbar, as well as accessories, and its international recognition in over 50 countries.

In contrast, DOT is limited to the United States and Canada and relies on self-certification by manufacturers.

Q: Which Is Better: DOT or ISI?

While both DOT and ISI ratings involve impact and penetration tests, labeling, and user information, the DOT standard is better than ISI. ISI certifications are granted even without a chin bar or comfort padding, whereas DOT mandates testing for essential components like the EPS liner, protective visor, and ventilation.

Both certifications are country-specific: ISI for India and DOT for the United States, similar to ECE certification in Europe.

Q: Who Tests Helmets for DOT Certification?

DOT does not test or approve helmets directly; instead, it sets standards that helmet manufacturers must meet. Manufacturers self-certify their helmets to ensure they comply with FMVSS 218 standards and append a DOT sticker

The NHTSA’s Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance then conducts random checks to ensure helmets meet required standards. Manufacturers found violating specifications face heavy fines, and their products are withdrawn from the market.

Q: Which Certification Systems Cover the Most Helmets?

In the United States, helmets commonly feature DOT stickers, while in Europe, ECE stickers are more prevalent.

Although SNELL, BSM, and FIM certifications offer advantages, they cover fewer helmets compared to DOT and ECE tests. These certifications represent optional, higher-end testing standards. In the United States, SNELL certification is preferred for high-end and racing helmets. For most helmets sold to the public, standard testing includes DOT or ECE certification.

Most helmet manufacturers also produce slightly different helmets for the European and North American markets to meet diverse testing standards. Helmets often require adjustments to comply with these varied standards, which are not interchangeable. For instance, it is not legal to sell a helmet in the United States that is certified by the ECE but not by the DOT.

Q: Are Different Standards Better for Different Situations?

Since riders cannot be expected to wear absurdly thick and bulky or unreasonably expensive helmets, stricter standards are not always better. The FIM has much stricter requirements for racing than DOT or ECE does for street motorcycle use. The typical rider would not be willing to pay the price of an FIM-certified helmet.

One could argue that the standard American DOT standards are too lenient and should be made stricter. Before the FIM looks at a helmet, it must have already passed ECE, Japanese JIS, or Snell certification. The FIM will not test a helmet that has only passed DOT, implying that DOT is too lenient.

A significant flaw in the DOT certification is that manufacturers can test their own helmets themselves and state they meet the standard. This is not true for Snell Foundation tests, which are never done by manufacturers. Manufacturers being allowed to test their own helmets could create the risk of less than objective results.

On another level, it is not necessarily true that DOT standards are too lenient. If a company tests their helmets honestly, a bad helmet will fail a DOT test.

Q: ECE vs. SNELL vs. DOT Helmets. Do You Care?

While both ECE and DOT standards are recognized and respected, SNELL certification stands out due to its more extensive and rigorous testing. ECE testing is stringent, yet SNELL goes a step further, covering resistance to multiple impacts in the same location. In contrast, DOT primarily focuses on general helmet robustness and performance areas.

Therefore, while all three standards have their merits, SNELL’s detailed testing procedures make it the preferred choice for many seeking the highest level of motorcycle helmet safety.

Q: Is a Motorcycle Helmet That Is Certified to the DOT Standard Enough?

For the average motorcyclist, a helmet meeting DOT standards should provide adequate protection for typical crashes.

But safety goes beyond just meeting these standards. Proper fit and coverage are crucial factors in ensuring helmet safety. Generally, full-face or full-coverage helmets offer greater protection compared to open-face “jet/¾” style helmets, with ½ helmets providing the least protection.

Q: How Hard Is It to Survive a Motorcycle Crash?

Motorcycles are inherently more dangerous than cars, with riders facing a risk of fatal accidents that is 30 times higher than that of automobile crashes. While helmets significantly reduce this risk, they can’t guarantee safety; they can, however, turn a potentially fatal injury into a less severe one.

An impact of 200 to 250 g’s to the head may cause serious injury but is less likely to be fatal. Impacts of 250 to 300 g’s are more likely to result in critical injuries that might be life-threatening. Even seemingly minor impacts can lead to lasting brain injuries, given the complexity of brain trauma.

Head injuries from motorcycle accidents can vary:

• Concussion: Usually recoverable, but not always.
• Contusion: Internal bleeding and bruising, often recoverable.
• Diffuse Axonal Injury: Occurs when the brain shifts more rapidly than the head during an impact, causing nerve tears and further damage from chemical release.

These injuries can lead to permanent disability, but many people recover partially or adapt to their conditions. Penetration injuries, where an object penetrates the skull and brain, are less common but can be severe. Blunt force injuries are more typical in motorcycle crashes, which is why helmet certification tests place a strong emphasis on impact resistance.

Information for this article was partially sourced and researched from the following authoritative government, educational, corporate, and non-profit organizations:

• NHTSA | National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
• GOV.UK
• National Archives: Federal Register
• United Nations Economic Commission For Europe (ECE)
• SNELL Memorial Foundation
• FIM Racing Homologation Programme
• SHARP

M/A