SparX helmet

I recently purchased a SparX helmet from HelmetHarbor.com. My wife and I were on vacation in Phoenix, AZ during Christmas and I got a chance to visit their store. I tried on several helmets and initially really liked the Scorpion EX-400. After viewing the online helmet reviews on HelmetHarbor.com I decided to give the less expensive and better rated SparX helmet a chance. I did not want to spend as much as I did on the Arai. I like it but really can't justify spending 5 times as much for the Arai as a Scorpion or SparX. My Arai Quantum-f is nearly 5 years old and has 55,000 kms on it. Because it is still Winter here in Windsor, ON, Canada I have only taken it out on one short ride. It is really light and quite comfortable but beware that it fogs up very easily. To solve that problem I have ordered a Fog City insert for my visor. Once I receive, install, and ride with it I will report back with an update on this inexpensive helmet. I purchased it for $119.95 shipping included within the US.

Yeah, webbikeworld did a review on the Sparx helmet not too long ago, and they said that in some ways the quality of the Sparx helmets was actually better than KBC's other helmets.

Oh, btw, in case HelmetHarbor didn't mention it, Sparx helmets have a crash replacement program. You crash in it, you send it along with the police/accident report in, and they send you a new one.

you know, some of those non-DOT beanie half helmet manufacturers have the same program.

strangely, they don't get a lot of takers...

Yeah, I don't think I'd take them up on it either, especially since you said "non-DOT".

BTW, I mentioned the comparison with KBC because Sparx is owned by KBC.

Speaking of which, Gravy Leg, have you run into that nut around town who rides with a freaking baseball cap that he wrote DOT on and claims it is legal?

lmao, no I haven't. what a fruit. pretty funny though.

didn't you say something about DOT standards don't have to proven (tested) in order to be advertised on a helmet?

(oh, and i meant that they don't get takers because those who crash in beanie helmets can't ask for replacements because they're incompacitated. but you knew what i was trying to say..)

Originally Posted by Ol' Gravy Leg

lmao, no I haven't. what a fruit. pretty funny though.

Yeah, I've only met one of them, but he says there's another guy just like him.

Originally Posted by Ol' Gravy Leg

didn't you say something about DOT standards don't have to proven (tested) in order to be advertised on a helmet?

Yeah, actually, that's the point that dude is trying to make. Basically he "manufactures" his own helmet, marks it as DOT-compliant, and says it therefore is legal. Apparently it has to do with a very long-running legal case saying that the DOT standard needs to be a lot more specific and/or they need to specify which helmets are DOT-compliant. Technically his "helmet" IS legal. One of those cases of sticking to the letter of the law rather than the intent. Even so, I think it's just stupid.

Originally Posted by Ol' Gravy Leg

(oh, and i meant that they don't get takers because those who crash in beanie helmets can't ask for replacements because they're incompacitated. but you knew what i was trying to say..)

Actually, you got me on that one. I totally missed your point. Went way over my head. Come to think of it, I think I did hear a "whoosh" sound...

Here's an article I downloaded from Parts Unlimited's "Nuts & Notes" section. It's the Motorcyclist magazine article from a few years back, along with Snell's response to it.

Just thought it might make for some interesting reading since helmet debates happen from time to time here. Everyone can draw their own conclusions from it.


Now if I can just get this link to work...

Blowing The Lid Off - Use this link to access virtual drive