- Joined
- Jun 17, 2016
- Messages
- 348
I would venture to say that is not accurate. Here is why I feel this way....
At the moment there are only three ratings in the 4 categories for welding helmets. 1,2,3. Obviously 1 being the best. The problem is that with this rating system, it does not allow for "expansion" for the rating system the way it is currently configured. Sure getting "down" to that "1" rating surely helps, but once that rating is met, there is no way to "tell" if there is something better, other than trying it.
Think of it like this paralleled system:
Pretend all street-legal passenger motor vehicles are rated in a category for top-speed.
3= vehicle can safely obtain 100mph top speed
2= vehicle can safely obtain 120mph top speed.
1=vehicle can safely obtain 130mph top speed.
In this hypothetical scheme, 2 is better than 3, and 1 is better than 2. (remember this is hypothetical considering only this one category, for simplicity and to get my point across)
The problem is #1. By whatever criteria the governing body has chosen to implement, a vehicle could potentially "just barely" make the cut for #1 to get that rating. Think of it being the "1" rating for welding helmets. So any vehicle that can safely obtain a top-speed of 130mph would receive that same 1 rating. So what does than mean for say a vehicle than safely obtain 150mph? 180mph? 200mph? 220mph? By the rating system currently in place, a high-speed Ferrari, Lamborghini,Bugatti would all get a #1, just the same as a vehicle that can just barely make the cut (say a modern $50K sports car than most anyone can go out and buy from a regular dealership).
But clearly those hypercars are much superior machines for top-speed (the hypothetical category that is being rated). Yet by the rating system the $50k sports car might be (and IMO is) incorrectly assumed to be 'just as good' as the hypercars that scored the same in that same category. Why? well it too scored a 1 didn't it? So my $50k sports car is just as good as a $300k Lamborghini Aventador. Awesome I'll save $250k and get the same top-speed performance.
If you an follow my logic, then you can see why it is my opinion that the rating system is flawed in the sense that ultra-high performance helmets might be incorrectly rated the same as other lesser helmets that, while still great, just barely made the cut, and the ultra-high performance helmets are well ahead of the game, but are not rated as such because such a rating perhaps doesn't exist.
Just something to think about.
