Are Arai and Shoei so much better than all the rest?

[Nordboy]

I had Arai since the mid 90s, bought an X-Lite (fancy Nolan) a few years ago, it felt fine for a couple of years, but then it went loose on my head and started moving about a little at speed, so I've gone back to Arai, nicer helmet, nicer inside, nicer finish, and, assuming it lasts as long as the other Arais I've had, it'll last more than twice as long as the X-Lite did, which justifies it costing twice as much.

In work we had Shoei for many years, some were allowed Shark helmets if they couldn't get on with the Shoei. The job then decided that the Shoeis were too expensive so went to x-lite modular helmets.

Within the year we were back to Shoei as the fit and quality of the x-lite was appalling. Mine was so bad, I went back to my much older Multitec, luckily I'd kept it in my locker.

[Mr Moofo]

General opinion seems to be a “yes”
But the pricing is getting ridiculous!

TBF they do seem to have outstripped inflation and the falling yen by a huge amount …

[Count Steer]

General opinion seems to be a “yes”
But the pricing is getting ridiculous!

TBF they do seem to have outstripped inflation and the falling yen by a huge amount …

General opinion may be weighted by (in)vested interest. See it all the time with Which? product studies. Most people that have spent money on premium priced products like to believe they've got extra for the extra cash. (Even if it's just a different paint job). I know I do (Don't ask me about t-shirts...or socks...or....).

[the_priest]

I've tried Nolan, Caberg, HJC (Current lid), and Shoei. Shoei is just so much more comfortable and "solid" in their fitting. Quieter, more stable at speeds and excellent long ride comfort. My HJC is okay, but for longer rides it is just too noisy and not quite a right fit. It suffices for local rides, but I'm going back to the expense of having a Shoei that just fits and works for me. I only get plain colours, not interested in fancy paint jobs, black or white does it for me.

[Mr Moofo]

And how to Schuberth compare?

[Count Steer]

And how to Schuberth compare?

Can't get a ciggie paper between them on the safety tests really. I think it comes down to fit, ease of visor changes and preferred fastening tbh. (Paint job comes a distant last in my purchases. They've always been black, white or yellow ).

I remember trying the Schuberth carbon lid on when it came out...nearly walked out the shop with it on....forgot it was there.

[fdb]

And how to Schuberth compare?

I don't have too much to compare, only a qwest, a C3 and a C4. Schuberths interiors resisted better than the Shoei.

[Bustaspoke]

Interesting video here.



As with most YT videos the comments are worth reading especially the one from the type approval engineer
Since the early 90's I've used either Shoei or Arai,I'm now getting curious about some of the 'lesser' helmet manufacturers.

[Nordboy]

I nearly bought an ADV style helmet in the sportsbike shop sale. But just never pressed buy.

Now I see that Shoei have a new ADV06 coming out in the Spring so I may well treat myself if I can save some pennies. I do like a Shoei helmet so seems rude not to.

[Mr Moofo]

I nearly bought an ADV style helmet in the sportsbike shop sale. But just never pressed buy.

Now I see that Shoei have a new ADV06 coming out in the Spring so I may well treat myself if I can save some pennies. I do like a Shoei helmet so seems rude not to.

I have just had delivered an Air GT 3 delivered. It was a bargain- but as i bought a Schuberth C5 about 6 months ago - and have a 7 year old pristine Arai (and a 9 year old pristine Arai) I am wrestling with my conscious as to whether I need it!

[Horse]

... especially the one from the type approval engineer

Guessing, that was for DfT's SHARP.

Basically, cost is no guarantee of protection from traumatic brain injury.

[Bustaspoke]

... especially the one from the type approval engineer

Guessing, that was for DfT's SHARP.

Basically, cost is no guarantee of protection from traumatic brain injury.

Here's the quote replying to the YT video up there ^^^

Hi Nathan, I worked as a type approval engineer for the Vehicle Certification Agency.

One of our roles was to test helmets on the UK market on behalf of the United Kingdom Department for Transport.

We would buy samples of helmets on the open market and test them to UNECE Reg 22.

Chinese helmets came out fine.

Expenditure had no effect on the helmets compliance.

Many low-cost helmets manufactured in China achieved very high scores. Also, as with motorcycles, many well-known brands have helmets manufactured in China, AGV, to name just one.

I've had my current Arai for 6 years & I'm looking for a new helmet this year.For the last 30 + years I've gone for Shoei or Arai,they've always had a price premium & I paid it,but I think they're taking the piss these days.. '

[Horse]

Yup, I'd read it and wouldn't disagree.

NB even a high-profile, trendy, British helmet company has them manufactured in China.

[Mr Moofo]

Yup, I'd read it and wouldn't disagree.

NB even a high-profile, trendy, British helmet company has them manufactured in China.

Hedon do - and hate it when you point it out on their FB site as they sell under the "British" branding
I have a Davida (are they still in business?) but at least they are made in Birkenhead

[Horse]

Yup, I'd read it and wouldn't disagree.

NB even a high-profile, trendy, British helmet company has them manufactured in China.

Hedon do - and hate it when you point it out on their FB site as they sell under the "British" branding
I have a Davida (are they still in business?) but at least they are made in Birkenhead

I met the owner of Davida at a show, yes, still making open face lids:
https://davida-helmets.com/

IIRC, RUROC are made in China too. Designed in the UK.

[Supermofo]

Same as all the union flags on Minis and Triumphs.

[The Spin Doctor]

IIRC, RUROC are made in China too. Designed in the UK.

Went bust, shafted their suppliers.

Founded in 2007, Ruroc Limited is a British Gloucester-based manufacturer of distinctive full-face ski and motorcycle helmets. Backed by Ruroc Global Holdings Limited, the company pursued rapid growth by cultivating a loyal following among extreme sports enthusiasts and selling directly to consumers online.

But it seems that ambitious expansion has left the business exposed to cash flow pressures. Tightening consumer spending, rising input costs, and lingering post-pandemic supply chain challenges have contributed to the financial strain that forced Ruroc into self-imposed administration.

Here's the chronology of events

On September 4 this year, a new entity, Tytan PG Limited, is incorporated as a wholly owned subsidiary of Ruroc Global Holdings Limited, Ruroc Limited's ultimate parent company.

Just over a week later, on September 12, Ruroc Limited appoints insolvency firm PricewaterhouseCoopers (PwC) as administrators.

The administrators then execute the "pre-pack" deal, selling most of Ruroc Limited's assets and business to Tytan PG Limited. The website updates its copyright, and all employees are transferred to the new company. This process is known as a "pre-pack" administration because the sale of the business is arranged with a buyer before the administrator is formally appointed. It creates a distinct separation between the new, debt-free entity and the old entity's unpaid creditors.This allows the business to transition quickly with minimal disruption to operations.

The key effects of this transaction are to shift the valuable assets, like the brand and inventory, to the new company (Tytan PG) allowing the Ruroc brand to continue trading without a significant interruption. The old company (Ruroc Limited), is left behind in the administration process, along with its debts. Post-sale, Ruroc's operations will continue under Tytan PG Limited.

This is - much to my surprise - a legal way of offloading the debt. The creditors of the original company - which would include anyone who pre-ordered a helmet - are now categorized as "unsecured creditors", which means that when the administrators work out how much cash there is left in the old company, there is no guarantee they will be paid in full - under UK law, unsecured creditors are at the bottom of the repayment hierarchy.

However, while it may be a legal way to save the core business, it can have significant long-term repercussions including damaged relations with creditors, who are likely to feel "burned" and may be unwilling to work with the business in the future. Moreover, the company is likely to find it more difficult and expensive to obtain future credit.

[Mr Moofo]

IIRC, RUROC are made in China too. Designed in the UK.

Went bust, shafted their suppliers.

Founded in 2007, Ruroc Limited is a British Gloucester-based manufacturer of distinctive full-face ski and motorcycle helmets. Backed by Ruroc Global Holdings Limited, the company pursued rapid growth by cultivating a loyal following among extreme sports enthusiasts and selling directly to consumers online.

But it seems that ambitious expansion has left the business exposed to cash flow pressures. Tightening consumer spending, rising input costs, and lingering post-pandemic supply chain challenges have contributed to the financial strain that forced Ruroc into self-imposed administration.

Here's the chronology of events

On September 4 this year, a new entity, Tytan PG Limited, is incorporated as a wholly owned subsidiary of Ruroc Global Holdings Limited, Ruroc Limited's ultimate parent company.

Just over a week later, on September 12, Ruroc Limited appoints insolvency firm PricewaterhouseCoopers (PwC) as administrators.

The administrators then execute the "pre-pack" deal, selling most of Ruroc Limited's assets and business to Tytan PG Limited. The website updates its copyright, and all employees are transferred to the new company. This process is known as a "pre-pack" administration because the sale of the business is arranged with a buyer before the administrator is formally appointed. It creates a distinct separation between the new, debt-free entity and the old entity's unpaid creditors.This allows the business to transition quickly with minimal disruption to operations.

The key effects of this transaction are to shift the valuable assets, like the brand and inventory, to the new company (Tytan PG) allowing the Ruroc brand to continue trading without a significant interruption. The old company (Ruroc Limited), is left behind in the administration process, along with its debts. Post-sale, Ruroc's operations will continue under Tytan PG Limited.

This is - much to my surprise - a legal way of offloading the debt. The creditors of the original company - which would include anyone who pre-ordered a helmet - are now categorized as "unsecured creditors", which means that when the administrators work out how much cash there is left in the old company, there is no guarantee they will be paid in full - under UK law, unsecured creditors are at the bottom of the repayment hierarchy.

However, while it may be a legal way to save the core business, it can have significant long-term repercussions including damaged relations with creditors, who are likely to feel "burned" and may be unwilling to work with the business in the future. Moreover, the company is likely to find it more difficult and expensive to obtain future credit.

The food industry is littered with these sort of practices - companies going bust, off loading debt, stiffing suppliers - only to start trading a few weeks later.
I am stunned, even to that day, that it is legal

[iansoady]

It's a common way for people to evade their responsibilities and it's usually us - the taxpayer - who loses the most as HMRC debt is often one of the biggest losses. It is also of course similar to the technique Mr Trump uses as a "businessman" to fleece his creditors and amass piles of unearned wealth. He calls it the art of the deal. I call it blatant fraud.