I keep on reading that this is a thing, but have found absolutely no testing or scientific evidence that there is any reason for this. I am familiar with helmet company rationale of adhesives breaking down, uv / heat / vibration degradation, better protective technologies over a 5 year period, etc, etc, but I cannot find any fact based evidence to support this. Snell, who supports the manufacturers' stance, also seems to do so blindly, as their support is based on a "what they say makes sense" attitude rather than testing. I would think that some organization would have taken a 5 year old helmet and compared it to a NOS, but I can't find anything. Has anyone found anything credible on this, or is it really fear mongering so we buy more buckets? My Arai is pushing 5 years, and I'm having a hard time justifying replacement with nothing to go on but speculation.