Troy Lee SE4 vs Bell Moto 9 Flex Carbon

Canadad wrote:

I see the SE4 uses the MIPS technology for rotational protection. I own a 6D and a MIPS helmet and the MIPS technology seems very hoakey...

I see the SE4 uses the MIPS technology for rotational protection. I own a 6D and a MIPS helmet and the MIPS technology seems very hoakey compared to the Bell, 6D or Leatt technology. Strikes me as very strange that such bold statements are being made about a helmet with less than impressive rotational protection.

And no I am not an expert and no I have no data to support it, but I do have eyes and some degree of intelligence.

goonrider wrote:

Where exactly did you get your education on rotational protection do determine who's technology is more valid than someone elses? As Pingree said... the "test results"...

Where exactly did you get your education on rotational protection do determine who's technology is more valid than someone elses?

As Pingree said... the "test results" from an independent lab shows the SE4 outperforms the competition in all combined test standards.

You might have other brands out there claiming the trophy as the "best" but claiming to be the best in a 6mph crash really doesn't make you the best. Take the test results from all standards and there is only 1 champ...the SE4.

goonrider wrote:

Where exactly did you get your education on rotational protection do determine who's technology is more valid than someone elses? As Pingree said... the "test results"...

Where exactly did you get your education on rotational protection do determine who's technology is more valid than someone elses?

As Pingree said... the "test results" from an independent lab shows the SE4 outperforms the competition in all combined test standards.

You might have other brands out there claiming the trophy as the "best" but claiming to be the best in a 6mph crash really doesn't make you the best. Take the test results from all standards and there is only 1 champ...the SE4.

usafwx wrote:

[img]https://p.vitalmx.com/photos/forums/2016/08/24/148418/s1200_0ff0f8_197db2de0ff1587996e2b78a46287778.jpg[/img] [img]https://p.vitalmx.com/photos/forums/2016/08/24/148419/s1200_0ff0f8_fb8fd80888ec2447e3b1985293d20c89.jpg[/img]

yak651 wrote:

Unless it's just my laptop, there are no labels saying what any of the bars mean and what red/black/grey are?

usafwx wrote:

Sorry bout that fixed. [img]https://p.vitalmx.com/photos/forums/2016/08/24/148422/s1200_Aug_24_2016_09_57_32.jpg[/img] [img]https://p.vitalmx.com/photos/forums/2016/08/24/148423/s1200_Aug_24_2016_09_57_54.jpg[/img]

Sorry bout that fixed.

goonrider wrote:

Where exactly did you get your education on rotational protection do determine who's technology is more valid than someone elses? As Pingree said... the "test results"...

Where exactly did you get your education on rotational protection do determine who's technology is more valid than someone elses?

As Pingree said... the "test results" from an independent lab shows the SE4 outperforms the competition in all combined test standards.

You might have other brands out there claiming the trophy as the "best" but claiming to be the best in a 6mph crash really doesn't make you the best. Take the test results from all standards and there is only 1 champ...the SE4.

Canadad wrote:

[u]If you would take the time to read my post you will see that I have no formal education in rotational protection. What I do have...

[u]If you would take the time to read my post you will see that I have no formal education in rotational protection. What I do have is a MIPS helmet and if you at telling me that this yellow plastic insert is the pinnacle of rotational protection, I simply cannot believe it.

You have now upped the ante by saying that Pingree claims it outperforms the competition in all combined test standards.....at this point I am willing to eat my shorts.

No axe to grind here, if the helmet is what you say it is I will buy one. I almost lost a son to a head injury and will gladly pay for better protection but based on my research...and again I am just relying on my own research and intellect...I believe the MIPS technology to be far weaker than that of 6D, Bell or Leatt.

Show me the proof and I will be a believer, will buy one and will be your biggest evangelist.

usafwx wrote:

There's another thread where 6D actually posted their testing results with images, where is that for the SE4 besides whatever Ping said who might I add...

There's another thread where 6D actually posted their testing results with images, where is that for the SE4 besides whatever Ping said who might I add is a good long time friend of Troy, not that that's an issue, I'm sure its a great helmet but to claim it beats every helmet in testing and not show any testing stats, results, etc to back it up besides word of mouth and a promotion video about the new helmet is only speculation at best. Remember the Zach Bell Supercross crash, where everyone thought he was dead? Or the countless threads from other 6D users here showing the serious crashes, damage to helmet, but yet no concussion? (I was one of those and CT scan confirmed it) so yes 6D has proven its reputation, SE4 has not, what makes me skeptical is Bell bought MIPs then sold it, if it was so good why? LEATT also uses a different tech similar to 6D's Omni directional, and not mips, why? All I'm saying is when you buy a car you get to see crash test ratings, helmets should be no different. I love the look of the new TLD helmet and want to believe the hype but after seeing it in person I'm not convinced it provides the same amount of protection from concussions/rotational forces as the 6D. It was amazing light, beautifully painted, comfortable minus the top layer was thin and could feel it on the top of my head.

Moto520 wrote:

I hear ya on that. I'll try to explain better (actually I could take pictures but seems like a lot of work). The liner on the...

I hear ya on that. I'll try to explain better (actually I could take pictures but seems like a lot of work). The liner on the Bell is very thin and you can feel the hard foam through the soft foam especially on the top of the head. The plushness of the liner does not compare imo. The facemask part is also very close to your face on the Bell. So close that my nose is just about touching the chinbar. The SE4 is a bit farther away and just seems to be designed a little better. The Bell seems like a $300 helmet (like a Fox V3, V4, etc) while the SE4 has the fit and finish of the higher end helmets (Arai Pro4, Shoei). You ever put a helmet or piece of equipment on and just know that it feels safer?

usafwx wrote:

Agreed. The one graphic I can find for the SE4 is a graph with "other leading brand helmets" with lines way high in the bad and...

Agreed. The one graphic I can find for the SE4 is a graph with "other leading brand helmets" with lines way high in the bad and then the SE4 lower. From my understanding they achieve the safety through MIPS which I still find hokey, you can test it yourself and see its not very assuring as a rotational force mechanism and the different types of EPS they incorporated through the helmet in certain areas. Just find it hard to believe this alone achieved the best helmet safety wise capability. Im not picking on the SE4, I really like the helmet and almost bought one, besides the top padding feeling thinner than my 6D, just would like to know why everyone says its the best helmet and something to back it up besides marketing.

Moto520 wrote:

I hear ya on that. I'll try to explain better (actually I could take pictures but seems like a lot of work). The liner on the...

I hear ya on that. I'll try to explain better (actually I could take pictures but seems like a lot of work). The liner on the Bell is very thin and you can feel the hard foam through the soft foam especially on the top of the head. The plushness of the liner does not compare imo. The facemask part is also very close to your face on the Bell. So close that my nose is just about touching the chinbar. The SE4 is a bit farther away and just seems to be designed a little better. The Bell seems like a $300 helmet (like a Fox V3, V4, etc) while the SE4 has the fit and finish of the higher end helmets (Arai Pro4, Shoei). You ever put a helmet or piece of equipment on and just know that it feels safer?

wideopen198 wrote:

Well, I have a Bell and I don't have any problems with the chinbar. It's actually safer to have a shorter chinbar because it will not...

Well, I have a Bell and I don't have any problems with the chinbar. It's actually safer to have a shorter chinbar because it will not catch in the dirt but will get your head rolling. That's the reason Arai also has a very short chinbar.
I can't believe you even dare to compare the Bell with a Fox helmet. Those Fox helmets are shit. If you ask me you can easily put Bell in the same sentence with Shoei and Arai.

usafwx wrote:

Agreed. The one graphic I can find for the SE4 is a graph with "other leading brand helmets" with lines way high in the bad and...

Agreed. The one graphic I can find for the SE4 is a graph with "other leading brand helmets" with lines way high in the bad and then the SE4 lower. From my understanding they achieve the safety through MIPS which I still find hokey, you can test it yourself and see its not very assuring as a rotational force mechanism and the different types of EPS they incorporated through the helmet in certain areas. Just find it hard to believe this alone achieved the best helmet safety wise capability. Im not picking on the SE4, I really like the helmet and almost bought one, besides the top padding feeling thinner than my 6D, just would like to know why everyone says its the best helmet and something to back it up besides marketing.

goonrider wrote:

The SE4 achieves its claimed accolades via it's design and not solely on the MIPS system. The SE4 has 13% more EPS than the nearest competitor...

The SE4 achieves its claimed accolades via it's design and not solely on the MIPS system. The SE4 has 13% more EPS than the nearest competitor brand in the "headband" area where TLD's research shows most impacts occur. This EPS design and various EPS densities combined with their proprietary shell construction, MIPS, and headliner design all combined make it successful in their testing. You can not attribute helmet safety to just rotational haves or have nots. It's a combination of all things put together.

TeamGreen wrote:

[i]"From my understanding they achieve the safety through MIPS which I still find hokey, you can test it yourself and see its not very assuring as...

"From my understanding they achieve the safety through MIPS which I still find hokey, you can test it yourself and see its not very assuring as a rotational force mechanism and the different types of EPS they incorporated through the helmet in certain areas. Just find it hard to believe this alone achieved the best helmet safety wise capability."


This...ALONE...?
Dude...read...it's ONE...just -1- of SEVERAL NEW FEATURES...

For those of us that still don't understand the role that MIPS plays in helmet design...from the web-site www.se4helmet.com

"MIPS stands for Multi-directional Impact Protection System, it is a revolutionary technology that lets the helmet slide relative to the head, adding more protection against rotational violence to the brain caused by angled impacts."

As for impact protection...

MAXIMUM EPS
13% more than closest competitor in frontal headband area and 8% EPS increase to top and rear parietal zones
TRIPLE DENSITY EPS
Three separate EPS inserts with varying low and high speed impact-specific densities.
LOWER PROTECTION
Expanded polypropylene chin bar liner for multi-impact performance, with 3D quick release cheekpads.
LIGHTWEIGHT CARBON FIBER
Technologically advanced Carbon/Kevlar composite shell construction.
REINFORCED CHINBAR
Expanded polypropylene, or EPP, chin bar liner for multi-impact performance
DURABLE HEADLINER
Removable snap-in, washable Comfort Liner with Cool Max and Dri-lex moisture wicking materials
ULTRA LIGHT WEIGHT
AS/DOT/Snell model 1325 grams/ 2.9lbs (+-50grams) ECE model 1100 grams/2.4 lbs (+-50grams)


Ya know what I find "hokey"?

The in-ability to do real homework before posting an uninformed opinion; but, that's just me. After 32 years in aerospace composites and materials research and development...I should be over it...it's still annoying, tho.

Bell, 6D, Fly, TLD and more...like Kali...

They've all taken a good hard look at the new data and they've all created their own approach to a New Safer Helmet.

In the case of MIPS being utilized in the TLD SE4...it's only ONE SMALL PART OF THE NEW DESIGN.

rotorhead wrote:

Hijack alert... Just wanted to hear if anyone is between sizes, I'm right at the end of medium or beginning of large... The way I read...

Hijack alert...
Just wanted to hear if anyone is between sizes, I'm right at the end of medium or beginning of large...
The way I read it the eps size is the same between the two and the difference should be padding?
Squeeze on a medium or happy in large ?
Thanks and sorry for the hijack and the language...being a bloody foreigner