Quantcast

Full Face Suggestions

Dangerous E

Monkey
May 24, 2006
214
0
Coorstown, CO
So I need a new full face lid. Tried the Giro Remedy and it didn't fit my mishaped head. Running a Bell Bellistic right now. It's ok but not great. Trying to keep this under $200. Suggestions?
 

preppie

Monkey
Aug 30, 2002
379
0
Europe
So I need a new full face lid. Tried the Giro Remedy and it didn't fit my mishaped head. Running a Bell Bellistic right now. It's ok but not great. Trying to keep this under $200. Suggestions?
I really like my Fox Rampage.
My previous helmet was a MX helmet, but it was too hot and too heavy.
The Rampage feels just as good in the fit/safety area as the MX helmet,
but it's a lot lighter and better ventilated.
 

Dangerous E

Monkey
May 24, 2006
214
0
Coorstown, CO
Helmet needs to be tried on, so online doesn't work.

Whats wrong with the ballistic exactly?
Agreed that online does not work (unless you know exactly what you want and cant find it at your LBS). And I just want something a little burlier than the Bellistic, preferably w/ a removable liner so I can wash the stank out.
 
Jun 20, 2007
349
9
I am pretty sure my next helmet is going to be the new rockgardn full face. DOT approved, light, and an MSRP of $149. There is a review on sicklines.com.
 

ChrisKring

Turbo Monkey
Jan 30, 2002
2,399
6
Grand Haven, MI
consider the Rockgardn that is coming out within the next couple of weeks. It's DOT and ECE approved. Light weight too at under 3 pounds.

I strongly believe that you should be wearing a moto helmet for DH as you are going at MX speeds. I have seen MX helmets have the mouth guard get crushed when DH riders veer head on into a tree. Just imagine what would happen if it was a slim DH helmet.

Another downside of many DH helmets is that the strap anchor point is too far rearward. This allows the mouth guard to pivot up and expose your face. That is why it is important to try a helmet on for a secure fit. Don't by a helmet mail order if you can not return it if it doesn't fit (obviously you need to return it before you ride in it).
 

punkassean

Turbo Monkey
Feb 3, 2002
4,561
0
SC, CA
Chris,

Are you familiar with the ASTM 1952 standard? This is a new DH/FR bicycle-specific standard that was introduced about 2 years ago to address the additional demands of modern riding when compared to a typical CPSC certified "bicycle" helmet.

The primary difference between an ASTM 1952 certified helmet and a DOT helmet is that the ASTM 1952 helmet may not pass one criteria that the DOT helmet will. that one criteria is a scenario where a sharply pointed, 7lbs projectile is dropped vertically from 3 meters (IIRC) directly onto the helmet shell. The ASTM helmet will not pass because it will have larger vent openings. For the DOT helmet to pass it cannot have holes larger than about 3/8" which equates to poor ventilation and that's not really ideal for the bicycle application. larger vents are more appropriate for a bicycle as ventilation is required for comfort and there are far fewer sharp metal objects you might encounter at motorcycle-like velocities.

DOT testing does not have any requirements for chinbar strength whereas ASTM 1952 does. Wearing a DOT helmet does not give you any guarantee of facial protection! SNELL certification does have chinbar criteria but a SNELL shell is VERY stiff and non-compliant at speeds below 50 mph or thereabouts so your chacnes of sufferring a concussion are greater in SNELL helmet than in a DOT or ASTM 1952 (when riding a bicycle.) Bicycles travel at a relatively low rate of speed compared to motorcycles (even a DH rider wide-open is only going maybe 45mph whereas motorcycles often go that fast on any given trail and much faster at times.)

Another issue is weight, a sub-3lbs DOT helmet is relatively light however an ASTM 1952 helmet can be as much as 1/3 lighter (almost a full pound!) yet still offer as good or better protection, even for aggressive pro-level type DH/FR. Why run a heavier helmet than you need to be safe? Why run a hotter, more poorly ventilated helmet than you need to be safe?

There is A LOT more to it than this and I could go on for hours but the gist is that a DOT or SNELL helmet is NOT the correct helmet for DH/FR, an ASTM 1952 helmet is. Your best be is to get a helmet that is certified for the sport you are participating in and not any stronger than it needs to be. Every bit of additional strength you build into a helmet increases the high=speed protection and decreases the low speed protection so ideally you would run a lid very accurately designed for exactly what you'll be doing while wearing it.

Thankfully the ASTM 1952 standard exists (it was co-pioneered by Bell/Giro test lab engineers who like yourself felt that the CPSC "bicycle" std did not properly address today's riding). The only helmets on the market that I'm aware of that conform to this standard are the Giro Remedy and the Fox Rampage. The forthcoming new Bell DH also conforms but will not be available until after Intebike. It is an awesome new helmet so keep your eyes open at Crankworx for a pro rider debut.


consider the Rockgardn that is coming out within the next couple of weeks. It's DOT and ECE approved. Light weight too at under 3 pounds.

I strongly believe that you should be wearing a moto helmet for DH as you are going at MX speeds. I have seen MX helmets have the mouth guard get crushed when DH riders veer head on into a tree. Just imagine what would happen if it was a slim DH helmet.

Another downside of many DH helmets is that the strap anchor point is too far rearward. This allows the mouth guard to pivot up and expose your face. That is why it is important to try a helmet on for a secure fit. Don't by a helmet mail order if you can not return it if it doesn't fit (obviously you need to return it before you ride in it).
 

MinorThreat

Turbo Monkey
Nov 15, 2005
1,630
41
Nine Mile Falls, WA
661 Hurricane Flight if you want full moto-grade protection, but it won't be under $200. 661 Pro Bravo Carbon (super-lightweight) if you are satisfied with one constructed to bicycle-only standards. You have to ask yourself if $100 is going to hold you back from protecting your most valuable life-asset.
 

benjaminj

mr. amy
Mar 21, 2007
73
0
so. tahoe
661 Hurricane Flight if you want full moto-grade protection, but it won't be under $200. 661 Pro Bravo Carbon (super-lightweight) if you are satisfied with one constructed to bicycle-only standards. You have to ask yourself if $100 is going to hold you back from protecting your most valuable life-asset.
I agree w/ moto helmets- there's a bunch of old threads here about fullface helmets but I'll give my 2 cents to keep this one going...

I just bought a new helemt a couple months ago and went with the 661 Flight Icon - fits great but makes me look a little bit like a bobble head doll. But knowing people who have had nasty head injuries from being under protected made the switch worth it...

If you look around you can find a 2006 Flight for under 2 bones.
 

landcruiser

Monkey
May 9, 2002
186
40
San Jose, CA
ASTM 1952 has been out for quite some time now.

The only helmets on the market that I'm aware of that conform to this standard are the Giro Remedy and the Fox Rampage. The forthcoming new Bell DH also conforms but will not be available until after Intebike.
Specialized Deviant also meets the ASTM 1952 standard. And Troy Lee claims to meet the ASTM "DH" standard on their webpage, but the patch in my D2 only references F1446/F1447 standards.

the gist is that a DOT or SNELL helmet is NOT the correct helmet for DH/FR, an ASTM 1952 helmet is.
Snell has several different standards, some which are bicycle specific. Do you differentiate between those standards when you say that SNELL helmets are not the right helmets for DH?
 

Transcend

My Nuts Are Flat
Apr 18, 2002
18,040
3
Towing the party line.
do you know when this standard is coming out? Or what helmets have/will have it? Nothing on Giro's site says anything about it, nor 661, nor Bell's.

That sounds like the next helmet I buy...one way or the other.
It is out now, and only a few helmets meet the standard so far. I'll hopefully have a sample of Bell's new lid come Crankworx and you can expect a full write up on it.
 

Dartman

Old Bastard Mike
Feb 26, 2003
3,911
0
Richmond, VA
I've had Bell Bellistic and 661 helmets that just we're not strong enough. I saw too many jaw guards collapse into riders faces on impact.

I now have a Snell MX helmet (M2000) by HJC.

The jaw piece is extra strong and you take quite a shot to the melon when you land on it. It holds it shape an protects your teeth but I'm waiting for a concussion from it.

I'm very interested in the new standard. Sounds like a good compromise.
 

ChrisKring

Turbo Monkey
Jan 30, 2002
2,399
6
Grand Haven, MI
Punkassean

Thank you for the thorough and well thought out reply.

Yes, I am aware that the Snell standard requires an extremely stiff outer shell and targeted at road motorcycles. There is widespread debate within the motocross comunity as to "softening" the helmets. Most sanctioned MX races in the US require Snell certification. As you know, the Snell requirement is tough since it requires two hits to the same location and therefore drives the stiffer shell. That condition is unlikely and avoidable if a helmet is replaced after a hard hit. The ECE standard for MX helmets results in a softer shell helmet that is more compliant. Hopefully, this will get sorted out.

The key with the Snell and the ECE standard is to keep the head acceleration under 300g. The duration of the impact is also important. A 100g acceleration can also do damage if the duration is long enough. That said, it is roughly the squared difference. Refer to the HIC(d) formulas within the FMVSS 201 standard. It's been a while since I reviewed the actual equation for determining the HIC(d) number that the FMVSS uses for head impacts within cars. I am not sure if Bell worked with the FMVSS, however they should have since they have a ton of data on this.

The reason I suggest MX helmets is that I find that they fit better with less movement resulting in a more secure attachment to the head when compared to most bicycle helmets. Less movement results in a quicker reaction force within the helmet and thus a reduction in peak G load.

In addition, I would err to the side of protecting at high speed rather than the extreme low speed of the old standard. That said, I agree that the Snell standard is probably too stiff. Hopefully, the new standard drives helmets that protect people better.

My personal experience is getting knocked silly too many times in Full Bravo helmets at what I consider low speed impacts. One occasion was a 5mph OTB fall off a 5 foot drop to hard ground. The helmet just didn't have enough foam thickness to absorb it. Moto helmets are typically bigger and it is always easier to manage energy if you have more thickness.

Ventalation is way down the priority list for me. I would put safety at the top followed by visabilty and fit. Weight is a concern, however most people will adapt quickly to the slightly heavier helmet. We all have to make the trade off decision for ourselves.

I think we agree though that the old bicycle standard is not adequite. It is poor that some of these companies have gotten away with selling helmets for the purpose of DH that will not protect you in a DH environment. You will see that I suggested the Rockgardn helmet. It does not conform the Snell standard and rather to the ECE standard for the above reasons.

Chris

Chris,

Are you familiar with the ASTM 1952 standard? This is a new DH/FR bicycle-specific standard that was introduced about 2 years ago to address the additional demands of modern riding when compared to a typical CPSC certified "bicycle" helmet.

The primary difference between an ASTM 1952 certified helmet and a DOT helmet is that the ASTM 1952 helmet may not pass one criteria that the DOT helmet will. that one criteria is a scenario where a sharply pointed, 7lbs projectile is dropped vertically from 3 meters (IIRC) directly onto the helmet shell. The ASTM helmet will not pass because it will have larger vent openings. For the DOT helmet to pass it cannot have holes larger than about 3/8" which equates to poor ventilation and that's not really ideal for the bicycle application. larger vents are more appropriate for a bicycle as ventilation is required for comfort and there are far fewer sharp metal objects you might encounter at motorcycle-like velocities.

DOT testing does not have any requirements for chinbar strength whereas ASTM 1952 does. Wearing a DOT helmet does not give you any guarantee of facial protection! SNELL certification does have chinbar criteria but a SNELL shell is VERY stiff and non-compliant at speeds below 50 mph or thereabouts so your chacnes of sufferring a concussion are greater in SNELL helmet than in a DOT or ASTM 1952 (when riding a bicycle.) Bicycles travel at a relatively low rate of speed compared to motorcycles (even a DH rider wide-open is only going maybe 45mph whereas motorcycles often go that fast on any given trail and much faster at times.)

Another issue is weight, a sub-3lbs DOT helmet is relatively light however an ASTM 1952 helmet can be as much as 1/3 lighter (almost a full pound!) yet still offer as good or better protection, even for aggressive pro-level type DH/FR. Why run a heavier helmet than you need to be safe? Why run a hotter, more poorly ventilated helmet than you need to be safe?

There is A LOT more to it than this and I could go on for hours but the gist is that a DOT or SNELL helmet is NOT the correct helmet for DH/FR, an ASTM 1952 helmet is. Your best be is to get a helmet that is certified for the sport you are participating in and not any stronger than it needs to be. Every bit of additional strength you build into a helmet increases the high=speed protection and decreases the low speed protection so ideally you would run a lid very accurately designed for exactly what you'll be doing while wearing it.

Thankfully the ASTM 1952 standard exists (it was co-pioneered by Bell/Giro test lab engineers who like yourself felt that the CPSC "bicycle" std did not properly address today's riding). The only helmets on the market that I'm aware of that conform to this standard are the Giro Remedy and the Fox Rampage. The forthcoming new Bell DH also conforms but will not be available until after Intebike. It is an awesome new helmet so keep your eyes open at Crankworx for a pro rider debut.
 

Transcend

My Nuts Are Flat
Apr 18, 2002
18,040
3
Towing the party line.
I agree . . . the weight issue is completely overblown. If a helmet is not too heavy to wear for the rigors of a 30-minute moto, why would it be too heavy for a 5-minute DH run?
I don't think a race run is the question. Many more riders spend a day freeriding on the slopes doing non stop runs than simply do a single race run.

I don't want a huge, bobble head, badly vented moto helmet on my head in 100 deg , 50% humidity all day at Bromont, for example.
 

Sandwich

Pig my fish!
Staff member
May 23, 2002
21,031
5,921
borcester rhymes
I wear a moto, and I wear glasses, and I take my helmet off on the lift. A lighter helmet would make me more comfortable on the bike, and a more ventilated helmet would allow me to hear better and focus more on riding. That might sound dumb, but take away all the distractions and you'll get faster. A moto isn't bad if you take your time and ride in cooler climates, but it gets crazy hot at diablo and such, and I sweat my sack off.

I love the moto for its protection and it's comfortable fit. I just imagine that I'd enjoy riding more if I could slough off a little weight.
 

MinorThreat

Turbo Monkey
Nov 15, 2005
1,630
41
Nine Mile Falls, WA
I don't think a race run is the question. Many more riders spend a day freeriding on the slopes doing non stop runs than simply do a single race run.

I don't want a huge, bobble head, badly vented moto helmet on my head in 100 deg , 50% humidity all day at Bromont, for example.
I'll spot you that heat/ventilation is an (albeit minor) issue; but it's a small trade-off for the extra protection. And spending even a whole day on the slopes doing more extended runs I'm sure still leaves many opportunities for doffing the lid and taking a breather.

I did more than a few 100-mile desert races (a half-day or more affair on a 100cc trailbike) wearing one of the original Bell Star helmets and never gave a thought to its weight.
 

Dangerous E

Monkey
May 24, 2006
214
0
Coorstown, CO
So the question is, if companies like Giro, Specialized, Fox and RockGardn are making helmets that meet this new/higher standard, why don't they publicize it more? Or have they and I just missed it? It seems like such a huge selling point as people keep pushing the limits of what can be done on a bike. This is some great discourse by the way and thanks for all the feedback so far.
 

bdamschen

Turbo Monkey
Nov 28, 2005
3,377
156
Spreckels, CA
I'll spot you that heat/ventilation is an (albeit minor) issue; but it's a small trade-off for the extra protection. And spending even a whole day on the slopes doing more extended runs I'm sure still leaves many opportunities for doffing the lid and taking a breather.

I did more than a few 100-mile desert races (a half-day or more affair on a 100cc trailbike) wearing one of the original Bell Star helmets and never gave a thought to its weight.
I think ventilation is a huge issue. It was said earlier in the thread that motos are cruising on trails at ~ 45 mph, whereas that's the same speed that a dh rider would be pinning it. A moto helmet ventilates just fine when you have a 45 mph wind blowing in your face, and slower dh speeds (especially in tech sections), I prefer something with more vents (even then I'll ride an open face helmet to stay cooler unless I really have to).
 

punkassean

Turbo Monkey
Feb 3, 2002
4,561
0
SC, CA
I agree . . . the weight issue is completely overblown. If a helmet is not too heavy to wear for the rigors of a 30-minute moto, why would it be too heavy for a 5-minute DH run?
Although weight may not be the end-all-be-all, why would you choose to wear a helmet that is as much as a full pound heavier than it needs to be in order to adequately protect you? I ride a fairly heavy bike for XC (34lbs) because I like the rigidity and overall ride of the bike but if I could make the bike lighter w/o sacrificing anything I would. Same goes for a helmet or any other piece of equipment I run.

Moto guys wear moto helmets because they're riding moto and that's how heavy/hot the helmet has to be in order to provide proper protection. Moto guys don't run automotive racing helmets because they're "safer" than moto helmets. Why would you not run a helmet designed very specifically for the activity your participating in? Why would you think that a helmet designed for something very different than what you do is better than something that is?....

Sure, when there was no such DH/FR specific std, I could see choosing to run a DOT lid over say a Bellistic, TLD Daytona or similar for safety's sake, but now there is a PERFECTLY developed std in place for EXACTLY how we ride. When you consider all aspects, the ASTM 1952 std is the safest you can get for DH or aggressive freeriding. A moto specific helmet is VERY safe indeed but it's not the best all-around solution for aggressive bicycle riding. The additional weight and heat could contribute to a rider crashing in the first place due to exhaustion, also the previously mentioned fact of the helmet being too rigid to attenuate lower G-force impacts which can contribute to concussions that could have otherwise been avoided by a softer shelled helmet. And lastly the chinbar issues, DOT testing has no stipulation for chinbar impacts and ASTM 1952 does. Many less-expensive DOT helmets have a simple fiberglass chinbar that will explode in a frontal impact.

Did any of you stop by the Giro booth at Interbike last year and take a look at Carlin Dunne's Remedy CF that he was wearing when he lawn darted over a HUGE table top at mach speed in Saalbach Austria last summer? It was a crash very reminiscent of Johnny Wadell's at Mt Ste Anne. People who witnessed Carlin's crash though for sure he should have died, all he suffered was a broken nose, mild concussion and dislocated shoulder. The chinbar was splintered and cracked but intact and completely did it's job. The Remedy CF is an ASTM 1952 certified helmet.
 

punkassean

Turbo Monkey
Feb 3, 2002
4,561
0
SC, CA
Punkassean

Thank you for the thorough and well thought out reply.

Yes, I am aware that the Snell standard requires an extremely stiff outer shell and targeted at road motorcycles. There is widespread debate within the motocross comunity as to "softening" the helmets. Most sanctioned MX races in the US require Snell certification. As you know, the Snell requirement is tough since it requires two hits to the same location and therefore drives the stiffer shell. That condition is unlikely and avoidable if a helmet is replaced after a hard hit. The ECE standard for MX helmets results in a softer shell helmet that is more compliant. Hopefully, this will get sorted out.

The key with the Snell and the ECE standard is to keep the head acceleration under 300g. The duration of the impact is also important. A 100g acceleration can also do damage if the duration is long enough. That said, it is roughly the squared difference. Refer to the HIC(d) formulas within the FMVSS 201 standard. It's been a while since I reviewed the actual equation for determining the HIC(d) number that the FMVSS uses for head impacts within cars. I am not sure if Bell worked with the FMVSS, however they should have since they have a ton of data on this.

The reason I suggest MX helmets is that I find that they fit better with less movement resulting in a more secure attachment to the head when compared to most bicycle helmets. Less movement results in a quicker reaction force within the helmet and thus a reduction in peak G load.

In addition, I would err to the side of protecting at high speed rather than the extreme low speed of the old standard. That said, I agree that the Snell standard is probably too stiff. Hopefully, the new standard drives helmets that protect people better.

My personal experience is getting knocked silly too many times in Full Bravo helmets at what I consider low speed impacts. One occasion was a 5mph OTB fall off a 5 foot drop to hard ground. The helmet just didn't have enough foam thickness to absorb it. Moto helmets are typically bigger and it is always easier to manage energy if you have more thickness.

Ventalation is way down the priority list for me. I would put safety at the top followed by visabilty and fit. Weight is a concern, however most people will adapt quickly to the slightly heavier helmet. We all have to make the trade off decision for ourselves.

I think we agree though that the old bicycle standard is not adequite. It is poor that some of these companies have gotten away with selling helmets for the purpose of DH that will not protect you in a DH environment. You will see that I suggested the Rockgardn helmet. It does not conform the Snell standard and rather to the ECE standard for the above reasons.

Chris
My understanding of the forthcoming SNELL 2010 std is actually that they are increasing the G's to 400 or thereabouts IIRC. I too believed the G's were to be lowered but I don't believe that to be the case after speaking with our test lab technicians who sat in at the SNELL meeting in the Indy tradeshow last february.

I think the Rockgardn helmet is awesome, and being a DOT but not SNELL helmet it will probably make a very suitable DH helmet. Especially for those who also ride moto and only want to spend money on one helmet. But realistically it's not the perfect helmet for either sport. One would be better off with a SNELL moto (or at least one that was well engineered to exceed DOT cert and have adequate chinbar protection) lid and an ASTM 1952 DH lid.

Now the moto helmet fit issue is a very good point. There are more sizes available than there are on bike lids and therefore most likely a better fit and a good fit is very important to safety. For what it's worth, we will be offering cheek pads for the Remedy in various thicknesses for '08. Both thicker and thinner than stock in an attempt to fit more people better. The same is true for the new Bell DH, it will have various cheek pads available.
 

punkassean

Turbo Monkey
Feb 3, 2002
4,561
0
SC, CA
So the question is, if companies like Giro, Specialized, Fox and RockGardn are making helmets that meet this new/higher standard, why don't they publicize it more? Or have they and I just missed it? It seems like such a huge selling point as people keep pushing the limits of what can be done on a bike. This is some great discourse by the way and thanks for all the feedback so far.
Have you seen the new Remedy ad that just started running in major mags? Check it out....
 

punkassean

Turbo Monkey
Feb 3, 2002
4,561
0
SC, CA
ASTM 1952 has been out for quite some time now.



Specialized Deviant also meets the ASTM 1952 standard. And Troy Lee claims to meet the ASTM "DH" standard on their webpage, but the patch in my D2 only references F1446/F1447 standards.



Snell has several different standards, some which are bicycle specific. Do you differentiate between those standards when you say that SNELL helmets are not the right helmets for DH?
Yes, I was referring to the SNELL motorcycle std. I should have been more clear. :)

Perhaps the D2 happens to pass the ASTM 1952 criteria but your helmet is slightly older and does not reflect that on the sticker? I'm not sure about that one....
 

MinorThreat

Turbo Monkey
Nov 15, 2005
1,630
41
Nine Mile Falls, WA
Why would you not run a helmet designed very specifically for the activity your participating in? Why would you think that a helmet designed for something very different than what you do is better than something that is?....

Sure, when there was no such DH/FR specific std, I could see choosing to run a DOT lid over say a. . . .
Honest, I'm going to let go of this and take an "agree to disagree" stance (;)); but I feel compelled to respond one more time.

First, it's my contention that DH is little or no different from motocross or enduro racing in its potential for the same kind of high-energy crash; so a moto helmet is perfectly suited to DH. Average speeds on a motocross track are in the 30-35mph range and a significant number of crashes occur in lower-speed situations (congested turns, etc.).

New DH-specific standards are an improvement but by no means the final word in the "ideal" DH helmet - - they are a compromise between protection and conventional consumer perceptions of what is 'acceptable' for weight and ventilation.

Secondly, I am not about to step out on a limb and defend any DOT-only helmet. DOT standards allow polycarbonate-only shells which, in my mind, are an abomination. When I referred to moto helmets, I meant Snell-approved ones.
 
Nov 27, 2006
90
0
CA, San Jose
i just checked the TLD manual that came with my D2 lid(composite) and sure enough its certified by astm 1952-downhill, and astm 2032-BMX, BUT, and i emphasize BUT, the carbon fiber model does not meet astm 1952, only the casual biking 1446/1447
 

freakrock

Monkey
Aug 19, 2005
431
0
Santiago de Chile
i just checked the TLD manual that came with my D2 lid(composite) and sure enough its certified by astm 1952-downhill, and astm 2032-BMX, BUT, and i emphasize BUT, the carbon fiber model does not meet astm 1952, only the casual biking 1446/1447
does that have something to do with the carbon fiber shell flexing more during an impact and therefore dissipating it's forces within a smaller area?
 

Jin

Chimp
Oct 19, 2006
21
0
get a tld. you can get that myth one for 200 on pricepoint or jensen can't remember which. if you don't like the color u can always get it painted ;) D2's are the best helmets ever