Most of us choose a helmet for its style and/or practicality but there are a number of things that are worthy of note as we, in the UK, have now adopted a standard that is not based on one from our own British Standards Institute. The net result is that the only helmets that you can legally sell in the UK are those that conform to either BS 6658:1985 or ECE R22.05, but that's only part of the story ...

You can legally ride a motorcycle wearing a helmet that conforms to an aging BS Standard such as BS2001:1956 - which was first written down in 1956 - and a handful of other standards between that and the present day, but you can't legally wear a brand-new helmet that conforms to the current US safety standards, DOT 218, or the Nordic one which is different again, or even ECE R22.04. They're probably no less safe, but those standards don't include tests that are required by UK law, end of story.

Moreover, while it is strictly legal to wear a 2001:1956 you'd best check your insurance policy first because while plod won't turn a hair, you might find that your insurance company will wash their hands of you if you were to injure yourself while wearing it.

Why?

Because its protective qualities are open to question and head injuries are expensive to treat or cover for long term care. This will be the issue if the fight to repeal the helmet law succeeds, because insurance companies could easily make helmets a precondition of cover, or withhold certain aspects of cover in the event of a helmet not being worn, and as insurance is a precondition of being on the road, it would be legislation by proxy.

An old, formerly approved lid may be better than a cloth cap, but probably not by much if the condition of my own is anything to go by. My own old "piss-pot" was bought second or third hand from an emporium in York while I was still mis-spending my youth and conforms to 2001:1956. It looks great: weather-beaten, road scarred and righteous but I can't remember the last time I wore it except to a fancy dress party and I felt vulnerable walking in it. It also no longer fits properly - if it ever did - and is generally in a dreadful state. Thankfully, as helmets get old they become uncomfortable and you replace them with one that doesn't hurt to put on, take off, or wear … or all three in exceptional cases.

Generally speaking there are three types of helmet in production and common use: open face (Jet), full face and flip front (System). There are actually four and more, but while "Pudding Basin" helmets are still made and are still sold as "Not for Road Use", they do not, and cannot conform to current regulations because of the nature of the BSI tests. The same holds true of "novelty" helmets, and traders in such items can expect a knock on the door from the Trading Standards people.

I'm going to be all responsible now and say that you should always dress for the accident and not the ride, but will do so in a spirit of hypocrisy because I do not practice what I preach in all matters: we all draw our own line in the sand regarding how seriously we take safety. If we thought about every single thing that might happen, we'd never swing a leg over a motorcycle because they're bloody dangerous. I will invariably wear boots with plenty of ankle protection, leather jeans, jacket and gloves because they've all contributed towards saving my skin in the past. I wear a helmet chosen for material, fit and comfort in that order. Style must come into there but that, in my case, that means black with few or no stickers - so if it isn't available in black I'd probably never pick it up in the first place.

Regardless of your preferred choice of helmet, there are a few things to consider.

MATERIAL

Outer shell
This used to be fibreglass versus lightweight Polycarbonate, but materials have moved on since then.The advantage of fibreglass is that it survives for a long time and is a stable material that isn't structurally affected by paint, but it can be heavy for a full-face helmet, and is relatively expensive. It is still used, and remains a popular choice.

Polycarbonate on the other hand is a material that "goes off " with exposure to daylight's UV and a replacement every two years is recommended, but seldom considered even though they are cheap. It isn't only daylight that degrades it, you also have to be cautious with stickers and paint, although there are adhesives and paint substrates that can be used if you know where to look and are prepared to pay for an expensive paint job on so transient a material. Oh yes, and you should throw it away if you drop it, catch it on something solid while carrying it or fall of your bike while wearing it. They are generally easy to spot, as they are formed in two pieces and welded together, leaving a central ridge. If you have such a helmet, check it out - or is that chuck it out?

A whole host of new materials are coming through, including ABS, Carbon Fibre, Kevlar and a wide range of laminates: materials known for their intrinsic strength. While I don't propose to do a full round-up of them, I will just mention that all man made materials will react to different chemicals in different ways, and that if you are planning to use stickers, paint or whatever, choose your helmet carefully - if you're considering a pro paint job talk to your painter and seek their advice because they will know the chemistry of their art, otherwise find out everything you can about the helmet from its manufacturer and see what you can do, but more importantly what you must not do to it.

Outer shells are made in a number of different sizes, which combine with the inner shell to provide the wider range of sizes required. The better quality manufacturers provide a larger number of shell sizes, and use each across two or three head sizes, which maintain a better proportion for the overall size of helmet, and limits the chance of overstuffing a bigger one with too much inner shell - best way to imagine it would be to think of the shell size required for an XXL and then imagine how much inner shell packing would be required to bridge the gap twixt that and an XXS head … and then think how a person with an XXS head would look with an XXL helmet on their shoulders.

Inner shell
Your head used to be held away from the inner surface of the outer shell by canvas webbing, which was adjusted, usually infrequently and badly, by a chord that passed through the top of the main webs. That was backed up with a piece of cork, a useful soft, cheap material in pre-polystyrene days.

That has long-since been replaced by a solid shell of polystyrene which fills the entire gap between your head and the outer shell. At best, this inner shell is shaped to be a perfect fit inside the shell, as in the case of the better manufacturers, but cheaper helmets can have a smaller inner shell that would rattle within the outer shell were it not for additional packing pieces, and the potential for slippage under duress would make for a poorer helmet.

It is easy to see polystyrene as a simple material but there are various grades and various densities measured in gram/litre. The more grams of material in a litre, the harder the polystyrene is, and bigger isn't better in this case, as the denser material could be less protective.

Lining
Polystyrene isn't a nice material to stick next to your head, as it's not renowned for its breathing qualities, so a "comfort material" is introduced between the two. This is very subjective and down to personal preference as much as anything - just make sure it is breathable so your head doesn't overheat.

Quite apart from the comfort angle, the lining material can be critical in the lifespan of the helmet as your head will secrete a range of unpleasant substances which will ultimately take their toll on the lining material. When you hear top-end manufacturers cite a two year period as the natural lifespan of their helmet, they are generally referring to the lining materials more than the shell. It goes without saying that removable linings are a good idea in full-face helmets.

Fastenings
We've settled down to a couple of favourites as helmets have evolved, selected either for our convenience, or the manufacturer's preference.

The traditional floating-bar buckle is the cheap and cheerful route but it has the advantage of being set tight every time your put your helmet on, relying on the friction of the strap material on itself, usually aided by a knurled floating metal bar as the means of keeping everything tight, but is a pain with gloves, especially cold wet gloves.

Then you've got a double "D" ring buckle which is on a bigger scale than a simple buckle and easier to use. It too makes sure the strap is tight every time you fasten it.

The most convenient method is actually the poorest one: a seatbelt-like clip release system that needs tensioning separately from the fastening. This gets slacker over time, and therefore needs frequent adjustment: do it.

SIZE
This is important. In fact it is more important than anything else really but no-one in their right mind would go into a shop and find the right helmet and then buy the wrong size … would they?

A helmet that is too small will give you a headache and distract you, it will precompress both your head and the polystyrene inner shell and could actually kill you in the event of an accident.

A helmet that is too big will rattle about at speed, be noisy and could kill you in the event of an accident, strangling you with its fastening strap or by coming off completely. There was a theory going around a few years ago that the head - and indeed the rest of the body - shrinks under duress, and enough to allow a poor fitting helmet to come off even when fastened correctly, but I can find no reference to it now so I'm either looking in the wrong places, or else I dreamed it.

In a wide range of circumstances, you are better off with a £50 helmet that is a perfect fit, than a £300 helmet that isn't. However tempting it might be to stick your kid's head in your wife's helmet, think very carefully first.

COMFORT
You will spend as many hours inside your helmet as you do on your bike. You will get hot in it, cold in it, and sadly, inevitably you will sneeze in it - although the latter will be less of an issue in a Jet helmet. It needs to be comfortable. This generally means don't buy it without first trying it on.

STYLE

Oddities.
As people started to see helmets as beneficial, and ultimately a legal requirement, a number of means of disguising them sprung up. Most will be aware of the strange leather-look, peaked hat that looked more like a polo helmet than a motorcycle one, but how about a deerstalker? Too "establishment"? How about an Everoak "Pilot" - after all, a milkman's hat had been popular since Brando's Wild One? If you can find one that has a 2001:1956 BSI stamp, you can wear it - but they will be few and far between.

Pudding basins are the most minimal of headpieces and a number of the later ones did actually comply with 2001:1956 so you can wear them, and you can therefore get away with a Davida replica, but you're on your own in explaining your choice of lid to a well-informed member of the constabulary should they give you a tug. Oddly, the pudding basin - or the TT to give it its more proper name - was the competition helmet and built to a higher standard than the roadgoing Jet, being approved by the ACU for racing, which is why a lot of people still get away with wearing them. Davida is the only serious manufacturer of TT helmets these days.

The Jet is the traditional open faced helmet, and beloved of most lifestyle motorcyclists. Like the TT, they are great in the summer and at road legal speeds, but get increasingly unpleasant as the speed rises or the rain comes down. Their main advantage is the freedom they afford: you can talk and be heard, you can also see much more than you can in most full face helmets, and you are generally more aware of your surroundings. They are lighter than full-face helmets, but they don't offer the same level of protection, notably in the chin area. Weather can be kept at bay by a permanent or flip-up visor, or at least kept out of your eyes by a massive range of goggles, while a variety of face masks can keep your lower face covered, if not protected. Jet helmets look right on Harleys, and must be one of the primary reasons why they are so popular, but more sport-oriented riders stick with the full face. Jet helmets can be the cheapest on the market, but only get a cheap one if you've got a cheap head.

Full-face helmets are the ultimate in terms of safety and you will often hear people say they'd wear nothing else, but realistically the only safety advantage they have over a Jet is if you end up sliding down the road on your face, which can happen, and does happen, but not as often as you would expect from the doom merchants. They are generally harder to put on and take off, and rely on vents to keep their visors demisted and your head cool. Non-misting visors are available, but I've never found a sensible substitute for an anti-mist spray which needs reapplying frequently - more often in the winter, when the visor is more prone to misting. The testing and certification of full-face helmets has been the main reason why we've maintained our own regime in the UK, and as we adopt EU regs, we'll see an increased range of helmets becoming available.

System helmets are the new kids on the block, and are a combination of an open and full-face helmet, and used to be a legal problem. Schuberth in Germany started the ball rolling in association with BMW, and they were rapidly picked up on by the Police as ideal for their purposes. Flip the visor up to chat with miscreants, down for riding. Problem was, they weren't strictly legal with the front flipped up because the BSI stamp that was issued was for a full face helmet with its chin-piece tests etc, and while it was arguably as safe as an open face helmet with the front up, it wasn't tested as an open face and so therefore didn't have a BSI kitemark in that form. Same would be true of you unbolted the chinpiece and removed it, or even had it down but not latched, but a blind eye is turned and I've never heard of anyone being booked for it ... but there's always a first. System helmets used to be rare, but increasing numbers of manufacturers are recognising their flexibility and making at least one - including Harley-Davidson themselves, and Davida who have always previously stuck with their Jets and TTs.

Others. What else can there be? Novelty helmets, that's what. Usually American or far eastern in origin, these sometimes meet legal requirements in their home markets but sometimes are produced just for the sheer hell of it. They can be very cheap, and are almost invariably illegal in the UK but, again, are probably safer than an original 2001:1956 - and certainly safer than my own 2001:1956 Everoak.

Interpretations of the above: The most popular System helmet in the Harley market isn't strictly a System helmet. The Roof Boxer has a chinpiece that pivots all the way round to the back of the head leaving a fully open frontal area. The chinpiece is held in the closed position by a press stud, and so is seen more as an open face with an added chin-piece than a full face with moveable chin-piece. It sits alongside a Jet helmet, the Roadster, which has a polystyrene, elasticated facemask that is strapped across the wearer's chin and offers basic wind protection, but little from the road. Another System that isn't a System is the Lazer Revolution, which has a Jet conversion kit and facemask to allow the chin-piece to be removed fully, and the shell tidied up. It also has an internal movable tinted visor, which is an interesting way round the law.

Italian company, Momo Design, have produced a full-face with removable chinpiece that doubles as an open face - with a tidy-up kit - but which also has the advantage of a low chinpiece when in full face mode so you can easily talk without taking it off.

ECE R22.05

Now that the UN-derived, EU approved standards include a test for the chinpiece, the UK's adoption of the ECE 22.05 is complete, and it is a regulation that applies to all helmet types.

What? How can a Jet pass the chinpiece test?

Simple, it can't and nor can System helmets in visor-up mode so there are three subcategories for 22.05. First up is the flagship standard, "P", as in Protection; then there is the NP or No Protection, which will cover all those helmets that look like full-face helmets but cannot offer the same protection - and it is to be safely assumed that all System helmets that get P approval will only be covered with the chinpiece down and locked - and finally there is the "J" for Jet.

You can spot your 22.05 approval, and where it was granted by looking for a label permanently sewn into the fabric of the helmet's strap - where it is accessible. It wasn't the case for earlier standards, and you can go looking all round the damn thing.

First off you should see an E in a circle, followed by the approving country: E1 is Germany, E3 is Italy and E11 is England etc. Then you're looking for a serial number: this should start 05 if it's ECE R22.05 compliant. If it starts 04, emigrate to Europe. I'll see you there, my Shoei System's starts 03.

VISORS AND EYE PROTECTION

It is reported that it is still legal to ride in a pair of swinging-trunks and flip-flops as long as you're wearing a helmet with a clear visor, but should you have the temerity to tint your visor, you're likely to feel a hand on your collar.

Pillion?

It matters not. If you are sitting on a motorcycle saddle you are deemed to be riding that motorcycle and the same rules apply - even if you can't ride, have your eyes closed or probably even blindfolded, although that would attract attention. At least, that's what the law says. My wife rides pillion, hasn't got any form of licence and has a tinted visor on her Roof Roadster and I'm almost looking forward to the day when we are stopped.

The law is to protect the terminally stupid from wearing a black visor at night but makes no account of bright sunlight when a black visor is incredibly useful. Reading through the approved précis of the 22.05 regulations, however, it suggests that there is a potential to mark a visor as being for "Daytime Use Only" within the remit of the standard, and the UK has signed up for that. There are murderous paragraphs qualifying what is said, but theimplication is that you can have a tinted visor if it's marked "Daytime Use Only" and it complies with R22.05. It would seem also that you can slap a 22.05 visor onto a BS helmet - which is just as well because that's what Roof do - which could, and arguably should open the door to legal tinted visors.

In the spirit of investigation, I checked the visor in my Shoei system helmet to discover that it isn't BS or ECE R22 certified, but it does bear the words "if tinted, only suitable for daytime use". I looked further and found that my helmet isn't stamped BS either, nor ECE R22.05 but is a 22.03 and therefore illegal, despite being only a couple of years old, and purchased from a reputable shop.

There are other important things to note regarding the legal requirements of visors, notably their scratchproofness. This has been a BS requirement for a decade or so, so there should be little chance of finding an old visor around. If it is marked up as XA, YA or ZA, it will be scratch resistant and okay. If your scratch resistent visor is badly scratched - and over time that will be inevitable - bin it.

Goggles are also subject to approval, and should be stamped up with a CE mark because it's a piece easier than writing "89/686/EEC amended by 93/68/EEC and 96/58/EEC" - although BS EN 1938 is the UK national version of the same.

Sunglasses? Normal glasses? Erm. Seems that no-one's really thought that one through. Shatterproof glasses do exist but there is no legislation that I am aware of to say you should only wear them.

Final Analysis

I apologise for the minefield of gobbledegook thus far, especially as most of it applies to stuff that is only the truth as can be agreed upon by a panel of experts and has limited benefit in the real world. Safety regulations are determined to protect the people who need it most - the people who would ride at night in blacked-out visors - and are applied to the rest of us because it's easier to do that than to test each of us for our sense of self-preservation.

At the end of the day, as long as you are aware of the limitations of your safety gear, and for as long as it continues to be impossible to police you have got the freedom, by default, to do what you want. But don't do so in ignorance.

If you're not wearing a jacket, you know you're not wearing one and you can choose to account for it or not. If you're riding without a helmet on holiday or on an anti-helmet demo, you can account for that too. But if you reckon your head is safe and it isn't, you might just take a chance you wouldn't ordinarily take, and while arms and legs mend reasonably well, heads are a lot more complex.

Cheap head, cheap hat. It's the easiest way to put it. And if you must make a style statement with your choice of headgear, do so in the knowledge of its shortcomings. If the helmet you fancy is new but is not approved, ask yourself why? Is it because it the standard it passed isn't recognised where you live, or because it hasn't passed any, anywhere.

Oh yes, Nanny also wanted me to tell you that you also shouldn't look straight into the sun, and not to run with scissors.