Thanks for the info.
The helmet is old ( about 8 years I think ) but it is practically brand new
so I figured if it was at least a Snell 90 it still had some life left in it.
I will try contacting Simpson and see what they say.
Jim Wilson
At 01:02 AM 1/9/02 -0600, Rocky Entriken wrote:
>Simpson Bandit should be rated. My current and previous helmets are Bandits.
>Look inside, in the back, pull down the flap, the sticker should be there
>(that's where it is on both of mine).
>
>Possibly it was lost. Possibly it did not get put on by mistake. Without it,
>the helmet is not legal. BUT ... if the sticker is not there, you can
>probably send it back to Simpson and have them re-certify it.
>
>I understand that if you have an older Simpson, you could send it back and
>have it re-stickered to the current standard ... IF, of course, it meets the
>current standard (some do, some don't; and they'll examine it first). That
>may be true of Bell and other brands also. I'd call them and ask first
>before sending a helmet back
>
>--Rocky Entriken.
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Jim Wilson <jim@jamesdwilson.com>
>To: autox@autox.team.net <autox@autox.team.net>
>Date: Monday, January 08, 2001 9:50 PM
>Subject: Re: Helmets - how to figure Snell rating
>
>
>>Just curious as to how I would know or how
>>could I find out what the Snell rating on a helmet
>>was if it had no sticker on it. I have a Simpson
>>Bandit that for the life of me I cannot find a Snell
>>sticker on anywhere. I know I did not take the sticker
>>off either since the helmet was only used a few times
>>years ago and is in practically new condition - if I had
>>original purchase invoice with a date on it would that
>>give some indication as to the Snell rating?
>>
>>
>>
>>At 08:06 PM 1/8/01 -0600, John Lieberman wrote:
>>>There has been no change in the rule. It still reads "current or two
>>>immediately preceding Snell Foundation standards." See 4.3.1 on page
>>>60 of the 2000 rule book.
>>>
>>>Here is a direct quote from Howard contained in an October 26th email
>>>to all Solo Field Staff and published in the November issue of the
>>>Safety Belt:
>>>
>>>>I called Snell today and found out that the 2000 standard (stickers) were
>>>issued on October 1 and that helmets should be on the shelves very soon,
>if
>>>they aren't already.
>>>
>>>As per Section 4.3.1 of the Solo II rules, that means that the minimum
>>>acceptable Snell rating for 2001 will be a Snell 90.<
>>>
>>>Hope that helps answer your question.
>>>
>>>John (Old Fartz & TLS #37) Lieberman
>>>
>>>
>>>"Pylon.CC" wrote:
>>>>
>>>> I am copying this two the St. Louis list and Team.net to try to clarify
>the
>>>> helmet issue, or seek a resolve to it. The St. Louis region is under
>the
>>>> assumption from the Mid Div convention this fall that for some reason
>>>> helmets must be Snell 95 or newer for the 2001 season. I know that by
>going
>>>> with previous rules Snell 90 should be ok, but something I believe was
>>>> mentioned at the convention that the people there took to mean
>otherwise.
>>>> Does anyone know about this ruling? Can anyone email Howard to find out
>if
>>>> this is true?
>>>>
>>>> -CJ
>>>>
>>>> pylon.cc
|