Jump to content

Hilarious - Beware of Sparx helmets


Recommended Posts

Hello All,

Well, I have been charged with the task of having to address this smear campaign against our helmets. Without going into too much detail here, we have been in contact with Transworld and Quad (same publisher) and they have since come to the table to talk about their review along with a potential apology/retraction.

Aside from the fact that our helmets surpassed DOT, ECE and QAS testing through in house, 3rd party and official certifying bodies, the argument they make in their review is ludicrous. First, you can break ANY chin bar on an MX helmet if you put enough pressure on it. In fact, it is easier to break an expensive Fiberglass chin bar due to the material. It is no basis for determining the "safety" of a MX helmet since a stiff chin bar that doesn't "give" poses its own set of safety issues. That being said, we went ahead and did in-house testing to see if our helmets would pass SNELL chin bar testing (in addition to ECE chin bar testing) since it was the main concern of the review and due to the fact that we added an additional chin EPS to the MX helmet (many helmets don't) it passed that as well.

I can go on and explain why every point of their article was grounded in some unknown bias, but consider this. We made a LOT of brands unhappy when we launched this level of helmet at this price point. AS SOON as this article was released (even before it hit the stands), certain brands were circulating memos to dealerships to discredit the helmet and our brand. All other reviews have been positive and the brand is well recieved in the industry. It does not matter to these people if the review is completely wrong since the damage it will cause can't be stopped and some people will buy into it. But I am hoping that the readers will be able to see through this mis-direction and accept these reviews for what they are. You don't see these sorts of organized memos on other low end no-name brands, but they are not a threat to take market share away from the big players.

We wanted to make a quality MX helmet that had multiple safety standards and keep it at a reasonable price. We are riders ourselves and experts in making helmets. We know you don't have to pay $400+ to get a well made, certified helmet. Through my conversations with the writer of one of the articles and the statement that was made in the Quad review, they feel if you can't afford a high-end or SNELL approved helmet, you should find a cheaper sport. We think that is elitist and absurd. To get a better understanding of helmet safety, I urge you to read the article in the February issue of Motorcyclist Magazine (on stands now) about helmet safety and the their own testing they conducted on "Cheap" helmets through "High-End" Snell helmets. You will find the results interesting.

We stand behind our product all the way. I know these reviews from one publisher may seem damning, but I think if you look a little closer, you will see that they are totally off base and motivated by something other than objective criticism. I welcome your thoughts and concerns and will do what I can to be up front and answer you directly. Thanks.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hello All,

Well, I have been charged with the task of having to address this smear campaign against our helmets. Without going into too much detail here, we have been in contact with Transworld and Quad (same publisher) and they have since come to the table to talk about their review along with a potential apology/retraction.

Aside from the fact that our helmets surpassed DOT, ECE and QAS testing through in house, 3rd party and official certifying bodies, the argument they make in their review is ludicrous. First, you can break ANY chin bar on an MX helmet if you put enough pressure on it. In fact, it is easier to break an expensive Fiberglass chin bar due to the material. It is no basis for determining the "safety" of a MX helmet since a stiff chin bar that doesn't "give" poses its own set of safety issues. That being said, we went ahead and did in-house testing to see if our helmets would pass SNELL chin bar testing (in addition to ECE chin bar testing) since it was the main concern of the review and due to the fact that we added an additional chin EPS to the MX helmet (many helmets don't) it passed that as well.

I can go on and explain why every point of their article was grounded in some unknown bias, but consider this. We made a LOT of brands unhappy when we launched this level of helmet at this price point. AS SOON as this article was released (even before it hit the stands), certain brands were circulating memos to dealerships to discredit the helmet and our brand. All other reviews have been positive and the brand is well recieved in the industry. It does not matter to these people if the review is completely wrong since the damage it will cause can't be stopped and some people will buy into it. But I am hoping that the readers will be able to see through this mis-direction and accept these reviews for what they are. You don't see these sorts of organized memos on other low end no-name brands, but they are not a threat to take market share away from the big players.

We wanted to make a quality MX helmet that had multiple safety standards and keep it at a reasonable price. We are riders ourselves and experts in making helmets. We know you don't have to pay $400+ to get a well made, certified helmet. Through my conversations with the writer of one of the articles and the statement that was made in the Quad review, they feel if you can't afford a high-end or SNELL approved helmet, you should find a cheaper sport. We think that is elitist and absurd. To get a better understanding of helmet safety, I urge you to read the article in the February issue of Motorcyclist Magazine (on stands now) about helmet safety and the their own testing they conducted on "Cheap" helmets through "High-End" Snell helmets. You will find the results interesting.

We stand behind our product all the way. I know these reviews from one publisher may seem damning, but I think if you look a little closer, you will see that they are totally off base and motivated by something other than objective criticism. I welcome your thoughts and concerns and will do what I can to be up front and answer you directly. Thanks.

Well that clears is up nicely, but if I understand what they did correctly, I sure can't do that with my helmet. It wasn't expensive either, only $130, but its comfy and snell 2005/dot approved.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

RichieB,

I can't do it with our helmet either. Believe me, after this flap, I've gone through our helmets with a vengeance. They flex, but it is REALLY difficult to break a chin bar on a plastic helmet. The glue on the chin EPS will crack if you flex it hard enough giving a cracking sound, but I have yet to break our plastic helmet with my hands. I did however flex a fiberglass helmet chin bar and cracked it. I won't mention the name of the brand, but it certainly cost more than our helmet.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm no helmet expert, but I do have common sense. I don't care how many "tests" it passed, I'm not going to wear a helmet that I can rip apart with my bare hands (or stomach)!! The comment that it is "easier to break an expensive fiberglass chin bar" than the Sparx chin bar sounds like bull*hit. I think I could beat myself to death with my helmet and probably not even scratch it!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So what is their motivation then? Are you accusing the magazines of being bought off by advertisers? If so, which ones?

I'll answer for you: "Due to pending litigation we cannot disclose that".

There.

Their comment about wearing at least a SNELL helmet is indeed absurd but by the same token they make your helmet look like a piece of sh*t.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

lmao. i feel bad for the guy who buys one of those helmets

I agree. I want to see the helmet after he takes a spill too. If these helmets did pass any tests, I would also like to see videos. From what the magazine reviews say, it doesn't even sound like they can endure packaging and shipping.:busted:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The only thing I see wrong with the artilce is the use of the term "POS" I think its just unprofessional in journalism. I think the picture speaks for itself. I had never heard of Sparx until now, it does make me think twice though. And BTW I could not break my helmet either.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i have a cheap helmet as a loaner and i as well as everyone else stood up and slammed th living sh!t out of it and it did look like it was flexing but not popping and i'll tell ya that ad scares the crap out of me as far as getting future gear for my kids who will be getting their first bikes soon,sorry sparxs either your gear is crap or somebody has it in for ya from something in your past either way you sound shady to me and i doubt your gonna ge any brownie points on this site.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Reply with:

×
×
  • Create New...