Nick
I totally agree that the newer standards for crashworthiness are a good thing - hence my comment that it was thanks to Sikorsky raising the bar that EC developed the crashworthy floor and seats for the 225. When the helicopter is built that is totally crashworthy and has a fantastic MMI and autopilot, I will be the first in the queue (to get our company to purchase - I am not that rich!). But that helicopter does not exist so it comes down to a choice between a heli that meets the latest crashworthy regs but has a poor MMI, vibrates etc, versus a really slick one that doesn't fully meet the latest regs in a few areas. I choose the latter, I guess you would choose the former.
As an aside, FAR/CS 29 is all very well but the whole certification process is a long way from perfect - for example the S92 will brag about its fault tolerant design, FAR29.561 fatigue evaluation etc but the reality is that its the S92 that has suffered fatigue cracking of the main transmission resulting in major loss of lubricant, not the EC225.
I prefer the actions to the words. Safety is of critical importance but you have to get the big picture. Fixating on a few details that happen to be in FAR29 latest version does not make for a safe helicopter.
HC