Leatt test results

[billy]

So,
It's not the best results ever but it passed. 2700N was it's score for 0 degree 70G, I can't find any angular test.

The others are all around 900-1000N so they are better but if this is what you can afford then it's certainly safer than wearing nothing. Greg from Isaac had indicated that 1800N or better was as good as it could be. It may be better than competitors in other areas but they don't publish this amount of data. Maybe Greg can volunteer Isaac data for the same values.

I just wish they showed angular also.

http://www.leatt-brace.com/av/r_0_b.jpg

I don't know enough to comment on the various results but if Greg wants to step in and take a look, it'd be cool to get a better understanding. Neck tension is the one normally used/advertised.

[leggwork]

Hi Billy,
the angular results and those for open face helmets (who'd a thunk it?) are further down the scrolling window where you found the frontal results (why do sites make us scroll unnecessarily?)

I sent a message to Per at Grassroots Motorsports the other day suggesting that they do an unbiased article on H&NR's to help us all understand the results better, and whether we should even be worrying about the individual test results - should we just accept that it is 38.1 certified and then choose based on other factors (comfort, etc.). He seemed to think it was a good idea and is looking into it.
cheers,
bruce

http://www.leatt-brace.com/r_testing.asp
http://www.leatt-brace.com/av/r_30_b.jpg

[billy]

They arent bad. They aren't as a good as the others but they are half the price also. Good enough.

[JimLill]

Back view of Moto R

http://www.mmsport.com.au/_images/medium/image1535.jpg

[JimLill]

The actual 38.1 Spec

http://www.hmsmotorsport.com/docs/SFI_38.1_Head_Restraint_Specification.pdf

[jstecher]

Thanks for the SPEC Jim. I have linked that in on the N&NR page. :)

Billy or Leggwork please post the data for the Leatt in the Leatt specific page http://www.trackpedia.com/wiki/Leatt_Brace_Overview_and_testing_material

[jstecher]

I sent a message to Per at Grassroots Motorsports the other day suggesting that they do an unbiased article on H&NR's to help us all understand the results better, and whether we should even be worrying about the individual test results - should we just accept that it is 38.1 certified and then choose based on other factors (comfort, etc.). He seemed to think it was a good idea and is looking into it.
cheers,
bruce


I personally think that would be an EXCELLENT idea. In fact I wonder if we can somehow help influence them by offering to help in some manner. An unbiased test case with all the devices on the same sled and same dummy would be absolutely awesome and finally produce some comparable results.

[Warpedcow]

I personally think that would be an EXCELLENT idea. In fact I wonder if we can somehow help influence them by offering to help in some manner. An unbiased test case with all the devices on the same sled and same dummy would be absolutely awesome and finally produce some comparable results.

I agree that getting some "crash test" data on the various devices would be an excellent resource. I also think getting some "real world" data is just as invaluable. I say this because just looking at crash test data for street cars is almost useless these days, pretty much every car gets the top, or darn near the top rating. But if you look at say, deaths per passenger mile, a certain Swedish car company (ahem) comes out way ahead. Of course maybe certain cars attract safer drivers, so it's much harder to draw definite conclusions... in that case, I'm the exception that proves the rule lol :D

Is there any way to get some deaths (or severe injuries to neck/head) per race-mile for the various H&N devices?

[billy]

Statistics are always selective. I can't see any manufactuer giving you how many people died wearing their device.

[jstecher]

Yeah I think all you can go on is using the physical metrics in this case and showing which ones would perform better. The rest is really subjective. Physics doesn't lie. If in a test someone would be able to do 500 and another product do 250, its obvious who is the best.

[Warpedcow]

Yeah I think all you can go on is using the physical metrics in this case and showing which ones would perform better. The rest is really subjective. Physics doesn't lie. If in a test someone would be able to do 500 and another product do 250, its obvious who is the best.

But how do we know that the tests actually simulate (or at least are "close enough") to a real-world crash? This is the issue with street car crash tests and I would think there would be similar issues here... I mean how often does a crash result in one big G force to the neck, rather than a few big and small G forces, in varying directions in all three dimensions... etc....

[Rob.wisniewski]

But how do we know that the tests actually simulate (or at least are "close enough") to a real-world crash? This is the issue with street car crash tests and I would think there would be similar issues here... I mean how often does a crash result in one big G force to the neck, rather than a few big and small G forces, in varying directions in all three dimensions... etc....

But it's easier to answer the questions that you pose rather than the extremely subjective questions that are posed in a deaths per race mile statistic. Does that H&NR happen to be the only option in a very crash-heavy race series? Are certain cars deadlier than others in ways that the H&NR can't have any affect? Were the deaths specifically due to neck trauma in the first place? It's all a losing game though. Tough calls, but at least more focus is a good thing.

[Warpedcow]

Does that H&NR happen to be the only option in a very crash-heavy race series? Are certain cars deadlier than others in ways that the H&NR can't have any affect? Were the deaths specifically due to neck trauma in the first place? It's all a losing game though. Tough calls, but at least more focus is a good thing.

If you go by race mile, and look at a race series that allows more than one type of H&NR then you should be able to get data. A post-mortem easily answers your last question. I would think it's possible to assemble a useful dataset.

[leggwork]

but if 250 allows me to not have a sore neck and 500 means I have a sore neck that heals in a day, the choice wouldn't be as obvious - other factors may sway the decision then. There is also that part in the wiki about there not being much use achieving a neck tension result better than about 1860N (420lbs), because you will be dead for other reasons anyway (150G+ crash).
cheers,
bruce

Yeah I think all you can go on is using the physical metrics in this case and showing which ones would perform better. The rest is really subjective. Physics doesn't lie. If in a test someone would be able to do 500 and another product do 250, its obvious who is the best.

[leggwork]

I think you will find that good data is shrouded by the legal system. Lots of finger pointing going on after the race accidents. The NHTSA can mandate that police file accident reports but this doesn't extend to racing.
cheers,
bruce

If you go by race mile, and look at a race series that allows more than one type of H&NR then you should be able to get data. A post-mortem easily answers your last question. I would think it's possible to assemble a useful dataset.

[jstecher]

Agree with you here Leggwork I also think that a lot of causes of death in racing would be debated for years due to the possible legal impacts as well. I think this is actually one of the most common causes for data not being released in events that do not require public service intervention from law official, etc.

[JimLill]

about Leatt........

http://prweb.com/releases/2006/10/prweb453586.htm

http://www.playmaker.com.tw/