Since the weather has been terrible for the past several weeks, I haven't ridden with my new helmet, but I do have some observations about helmet progress and design. First of all, this helmet replaces a Shoei X-11 which was a 2005 Snell-rated helmet. Shoei's racer helmet at the time, I bought the X-11 on close-out in about 2010. It had lots of air vents but was very quiet for me.

The new RF1400 is advertised to be smaller, lighter and lower drag than prior or comparable products. Relative to safety ratings, the RF1400 is a Snell 2020D helmet so the shock load to the head is reduced 9% and the impact energy capacity is raised 12% (first strike), relative to Snell 2005 X- in my head size (XL).

So, with all that and crappy weather, what could I do with my new purchase? I measured the shell dimensions and weight. Width and fore-aft length are nominally the same, so the claim of lower drag is a bit suspicious. Surprisingly, the new helmet weighs 1.3-ounces more than the old one (assuming I can trust my wife's postal scale). That's not what I recall from the advertising....

Someday, hopefully, I'll be able to comment on noise level and ventilation.

From what I have read the RF1400 is the successor to the RF1200 (which I have) and that was a replacement of the RF1100.

The 2020D Snell rating is probably responsible for the slight weight increase, so that when it claims to be lighter than comparable helmets, it could be that it means comparable to other Snell 2020D helmets. You don’t usually get more for less, and so it is reasonable that if you have a helmet with a more stringent safety rating, chances are it would be slightly heavier and more robust, unless you go to fancier more costly materials like carbon fibre.

I have been looking at the RF1400 as a replacement for when my RF1200 “expires”. I have been happy with my RF1200 other than the mesh chin curtain which I find too deforming. It is not as light as my Sedici Carbon Fibre helmet which is only ECE rated, but it is also not any more fatiguing so overall it is better that way. The RF1400 should be even better, I would think.

IIRC, the RF1100 is a Snell 2010 helmet, while the R1200 is a Snell 2015 helmet. As such, both helmets are evaluated to the same impact energy loads and shock limits as a Snell 2020 rated helmet. The change in Snell criteria occurred between M2005 and M2010.

https://smf.org/docs/articles/mstds_cmp_2015.pdf

https://smf.org/standards/m/2020/M2020_Final.pdf

The noticeable design difference between the Rf1200 and Rf1400 is the "slip" liner which is intended to minimize rotational forces to the head. It'll be interesting to see how that works relative to the more complex MIPS (Bell) configuration. Preliminary SNELL testing using an unconstrained drop and slanted impact surface highlights some challenges of these design features.

https://smf.org/docs/articles/ICMS2021/S....FINAL.pdf

If you've ever dealt with hydrodynamic stern tube bearings, you might recognize the similarity to "being on the right side of the Stribeck curve".

Grumpy, in my first posting I stated a bit of erroneous info. The old M2005 shock load limit for a size XL helmet was actually 2% LOWER than the newer M2010/2015/2020 standards. Prior to M2010, all SNELL headform sizes had the same mass, 5Kg. That wasn't very logical, so subsequent Snell standards used headform weights nominally consistent with UN ECE 22.05 and DOT practices. Thus, the older shock load limit (290G) applied to a 5kg mass, but the new lower (264G) shock load applies to a 5.6-kg mass. So, the force of the older shock load limit is actually a bit lower than the newer standards.

Point is I don't know what is meant by the non-specific "comparable" with respect to weight comparison and if it is a couple of ounces I ain't bothered.

You piqued my interest in mentioning in the Stribeck curve and will admit I am not familiar with that, so I had to look it up:

   

I like the idea of MIPS (Multi-directional Impact Protection) systems in helmets but must admit I am struggling to see the analogy with that system and hydrodynamic lubrication.

(04-10-2022, 11:09 AM)Grumpy Goat Wrote: Point is I don't know what is meant by the non-specific "comparable" with respect to weight comparison and if it is a couple of ounces I ain't bothered.

You piqued my interest in mentioning in the Stribeck curve and will admit I am not familiar with that, so I had to look it up:



I like the idea of MIPS (Multi-directional Impact Protection) systems in helmets but must admit I am struggling to see the analogy with that system and hydrodynamic lubrication.

See that minimum in the friction coefficient? If you're to the left of that minimum, there's a lot of stiction/vibration at low speed. In the case of the MIPS-like concepts, if you model the surface friction between the scalp and helmet interior at a high value, you'll get a lot of rotational load transfer from the helmet to the scalp/head. Thus, MIPS, a slip liner or other technology will appear to be beneficial.

But, is that realistic? Some of the recent SNELL tests indicate the potential benefits of MIPS and other technologies may be less than expected. Fitting either a wig to a headform or using a smooth metallic surface (low friction) headform will minimize the load transfer to the head. Similarly, using a high friction headform appears to accentuate the possible benefits of MIPS-type technologies.

So do Harley guys with silk do rags turn their skull cap helmets into MIPS helmets?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Being that the beanies can barely tolerate the slightest roll-off test, I would call it an inherent safety benefit of the design.

But seriously, I am curious if a Silk or synthetic material, like Rayon, helmet liner would be the most direct method of achieving the desired benefit.

(04-10-2022, 08:41 AM)Grumpy Goat Wrote: From what I have read the RF1400 is the successor to the RF1200 (which I have) and that was a replacement of the RF1100.

...which was a replacement of the RF1000, which I have. And due to my long oval head, was only wearable up to 3 hours in a row.

(04-10-2022, 01:07 PM)Pyrrho Wrote:

(04-10-2022, 08:41 AM)Grumpy Goat Wrote: From what I have read the RF1400 is the successor to the RF1200 (which I have) and that was a replacement of the RF1100.

...which was a replacement of the RF1000, which I have. And due to my long oval head, was only wearable up to 3 hours in a row.

Wrong helmet for a long oval headshape

(04-10-2022, 12:48 PM)36654 Wrote: Being that the beanies can barely tolerate the slightest roll-off test, I would call it an inherent safety benefit of the design.

But seriously, I am curious if a Silk or synthetic material, like Rayon, helmet liner would be the most direct method of achieving the desired benefit.

Probably the most "cost effective" . Also would help with the folding over of the ears problem I have. Stillhavent brought myself to get one of these do rags / beanies or whatever they are called ...

I have one of the Coolmax fabric caps that Cortech used to sell. It's fine, but the fabric isn't smooth and low drag like silk or rayon

I am a big Shoei fan. I started with X-11, then went X-12, then went RF-1200.

I was very interested in the new RF-1400 and went to stores to try it on. The short story is I didn't like the RF-1400 but liked the X-14 so I am back to "X" series.

The feature of the RF-1400 I didn't like is the feature that makes it quieter - very very tight to put on and take off by making the opening at the neck smaller specially in the left/right direction. Looking at the helmet opening, the opening is long fore/aft and narrow left/right. It was very hard on my ears to put the helmet on and take it off. BUT, that's what makes this helmet quiet, so that will work well for you. I think you will give a positive opinion on noise when you finally get to take it for a ride.

(04-10-2022, 05:08 PM)runnerhiker Wrote: The feature of the RF-1400 I didn't like is the feature that makes it quieter - very very tight to put on and take off by making the opening at the neck smaller specially in the left/right direction.
…

Thanks for that Ron. Yes a small neck opening is crucial for a quiet helmet as that is where most of the noise comes in. As a motovlogger I needs quiet helmet but I also have ears that tend to fold over even with my RF1200 so the RF1400 might be a challenge for me also. I will have to try one on in person to know for sure.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

(04-10-2022, 01:34 PM)36654 Wrote:

(04-10-2022, 01:07 PM)Pyrrho Wrote:

(04-10-2022, 08:41 AM)Grumpy Goat Wrote: From what I have read the RF1400 is the successor to the RF1200 (which I have) and that was a replacement of the RF1100.

...which was a replacement of the RF1000, which I have. And due to my long oval head, was only wearable up to 3 hours in a row.

Wrong helmet for a long oval headshape

Agreed. I replaced it with an Arai Profile, and most recently, a Signet-X. I'm an Arai lifer now I think.

I have big ears, so I'm used to the challenge of fitting them into a helmet and other reviews led me to be concerned about getting it on and off. However, I can't say the RF 1400 is significantly different in that regard than any other helmet I've owned. What did surprise me was the difference in fit between the helmet purchased and the off-the-shelf helmet (it wasn't a color I was interested in) I tried last summer. The new helmet, with the standard pads, is nice and snug. The off-the shelf unit was loose. In any case, I now have a set of thicker pads for when the standard pads get older and loose.

Many higher-end shops offer fitment services. I bought my most recent helmet from The Service Pavillion. They offer a $75 paid fitment service (refundable if you buy a helmet from them) that has you send in photographs and measurements of your head. They then pair you with not only the right helmet but the right set of liner & cheek pad sizes to make it just right, and will continue to work with you after you get it to swap out whatever you feel uncomfortable with at no cost.

(04-10-2022, 06:16 PM)Pyrrho Wrote: Agreed. I replaced it with an Arai Profile, and most recently, a Signet-X. I'm an Arai lifer now I think.

Same situation here. The Signet is the only helmet that fits perfectly on my head (and I still need to purchase thicker cheek pads). This is unfortunate for me as Shoei helmets are much better touring helmets and also cost less.

(04-11-2022, 09:16 AM)Pyrrho Wrote: Many higher-end shops offer fitment services. I bought my most recent helmet from The Service Pavillion. They offer a $75 paid fitment service (refundable if you buy a helmet from them) that has you send in photographs and measurements of your head. They then pair you with not only the right helmet but the right set of liner & cheek pad sizes to make it just right, and will continue to work with you after you get it to swap out whatever you feel uncomfortable with at no cost.

Back in 2019, Arai still offered a very generous 50% discount on helmets to motorcycle safety instructors. In addition, Arai's US distributor is located about 150-miles from me. So, I actually had the Arai staff fit me in a Corsair X which is a great helmet, but gets few demerits from me.

1) While it has a lot of air vents, they must be completely closed to avoid generating noise
2) The height of the eye-opening is about 8~10mm less than my old X-11 or the new RF1400, I have to tilt my head more to see the dash or tank bag. The round shape (less fore-aft length than the Shoei's) seems to compound this problem (i.e., it's hard to look down at your shoes)
3) It's the only helmet I've ever suffered a stone chip. Filled it with auto touch-up paint and clear coat.
4) The chin guard / curtain must be installed to minimize noise.
5) The shield has no intermediate openings.......just open, closed and loose

So, the Arai is my cool weather lid

(04-11-2022, 11:54 AM)36654 Wrote: ...
So, I actually had the Arai staff fit me in a Corsair X which is a great helmet, but gets few demerits from me.

1) While it has a lot of air vents, they must be completely closed to avoid generating noise
2) The height of the eye-opening is about 8~10mm less than my old X-11 or the new RF1400, I have to tilt my head more to see the dash or tank bag. The round shape (less fore-aft length than the Shoei's) seems to compound this problem (i.e., it's hard to look down at your shoes)
3) It's the only helmet I've ever suffered a stone chip. Filled it with auto touch-up paint and clear coat.
4) The chin guard / curtain must be installed to minimize noise.
5) The shield has no intermediate openings.......just open, closed and loose

So, the Arai is my cool weather lid

I am not surprised at Items #1 and #4 with regard to noise. In order to minimize noise in all helmets all holes need to be closed - as a motovlogger I am particularly sensitive to this. Helmets that flow a lot of air (such as the Shoei RFx helmets) can be noisy until vents are closed. Surprisingly, the biggest culprit for noise is the opening at the bottom of the helmet - chin area and also around the neck. If those areas can be plugged the biggest dropoff in noise will be seen.

One of the things that I don't like about Arais is the small eye port, which your Item #2 notes. Helmets marketed for racing, for instance, will have a larger eye port since the use case is such that the rider will be in the tuck position more than say a helmet targeted more for the sport tourer market. Maybe the Corsair X is intended more for the more upright rider ... just guessing. A 30 second search did not provide conclusive evidence in that regard. Arai also has their own design philosophy (round helmet, etc.) which could also dictate smaller eye ports. Interesting that this is the only helmet in which you got a stone chip since the round design was intended to allow for more glancing performance when the helmet is doing the striking, as opposed to when it is being struck ... which should be the same / similar but in reverse.

I also dislike lack of detents on the visor (Item #5) and for a premium helmet that is not acceptable. It is not as if the lack of detents enhances safety in the design.