Helmets

total game changer to me. Leatt has completely changed the helmet if you ask me.
as to why they are 50% off they are clearing out last years stock to make room for this years. they also were not in any retail locations that I know of so people had no chance to put their hands on one or head in one. I think they are now stocked at cycle gear. I was on the fence because of that. in the end I decided to give it a try and am glad I did.




ive also noticed fox has gone to magnetic visors to "break away" in a crash.

the very first leatt had that only they use plastic screws that break and are replaceable

Like I said, I've crash tested a lot of Shoeis, I have a shelf with about 5 of them on it, every one of those helmets saved my life at some point. Thats why I "push" Shoei.

When I went headfirst over the bars pinned in 4th on a 450 after my suspension packed up on a brutally rough track, my Shoei saved me.

When I got booted over the bars on a whooped out downhill, my Shoei Saved me.

When I got T-Boned on a start, and hit the ground head first, hard enough to fracture my T5, T6, and T7, my shoei, and my Leatt, saved me.

When my buddy decided he wasnt going to clear the little table he'd been hitting all race and I had to bail to avoid landing on him, my Shoei saved me.


It may not be the latest tech, but Shoei is still one of the absolute best helmets available, with the strictest quality control. Having said all that, why wouldn't I recommend a it to people, all those brutal crashes and not one concussion, I've had 5 concussions from moderate to severe, and had my bell rung more times than I can count, but ever since I started riding with Shoei, I've walked away from each and every crash with a clear head.

My $200 v3 with mps showed up today. I'm going to have this one painted. I think it's the mps, but it has that really huge feeling on my head like the 6d, but it's still light weight.

When I went to buy my last helmet I tried in everything I could, which was pretty much every top of the line helmet except the 6D. I also did as much research as I could and learned a lot about the Arai and why they are made the way they are, and also who makes them. The new Arai fits my head so well, that it kind of made the decision for me. The newest Arais face mask is also a little bit farther away from your face, some people complained that it was too close. Try an Arai on, you won't be disappointed.

I also recently shopped for a new helmet and went with the Troy Lee SE4 carbon. As far as safety, I have to believe it ranks up there with some of the best. Fortunately I haven't crash tested it yet myself. The helmet is very light weight and plenty comfortable. The carbon models are also pretty visually stunning. I ended up ordering the SE4 Twilight which I had not seen in person yet and was really impressed when it arrived. You can't really tell by most pics online, but most of the areas that look painted black on these helmets are actually clear-coated raw carbon. They're pricey but worth it IMO.

Do you have any experience with SUOMY helmets? I'm eyeing Mr. Jump, extremely leightweight from what I can tell. Not many reviews out there.

My post from another thread:

this thread has been beaten to death, please do a search.

Broadly speaking, there are 4 tiers of 'quality' helmets:

1) The latest and greatest safety features (but not necessarily the highest build quality):

-6D
-Bell moto 9 Flex
-Leatt
-TLD SE 4

2) The highest build quality (but not necessarily the latest safety features):

-Shoei
-Arai

3) 2nd tier safety features:

-MIPS helmets

4) Traditional:

Every other helmet from a respectable brand.

If you don't mind me asking, where did you get that for $200?

I had been wearing Fly carbon helmets for a while they fit well and are light plus I got them for a good deal, but I had a decent crash this past fall hit head first and it cracked the front part that kind of scared me in all my 30 years riding I have never had a helmet crack and have hit the ground way harder then that.

SO I got a Bell Moto 9 flex, the fit is awesome ( for me ) its light and vents well and the liner is awesome hopefully it hold up well for me.

Sweet, I have a 6d coming in the UPS truck today!

Dear Vital Readers,

My name is Robert Reisinger and I am the co-founder of 6D Helmets, along with my partner Bob Weber, and I’m the Director of Engineering. When Bob and I started out on the development of the 6D helmet, we had a simple and clear agenda, reduce the amount of energy that is transferred into the ‘headform’ (brain) during an impact event; thereby reducing the potential of injury to the brain. What we created was the 6D Omni- Directional Suspension (ODS) damper technology system.

Being an engineer, I was taught to distill problems down to the least common denominator and reduce the amount of variables (ideally to one item) to make the problem easier and more manageable to solve; so we did just that. We did not have a road map, or a clear understanding (nor did anybody else at the time) of how to do this, or what a 10%, 25%, or 50% reduction of energy transfer would mean to the human brain. However, logic told us that this was the correct direction and that our philosophy of “less is more” was the right path to take. So we focused on the reduction of energy transfer in both linear and angular accelerations at multiple velocities of impact; low, medium, and high. This is where the term “low-threshold energy” came from; testing criteria established by 6D of impacts below the high-velocity hits required by the various certification standards around the world.

Once we got through the two year process of developing our technology and how to manufacture it, we knew that it was going to take a lot of time and effort to explain it to the market. It was complicated to explain, yet simple to understand in concept. It’s a lot like the suspension on your motorcycle, easy to understand in that it works to reduce the harshness of the terrain, but complicated to understand the valving and spring rates that make it work!

It has been interesting to observe, over time, how our efforts of educating the marketplace about our technology, has been received. Helping people understand the research, testing, and work that has gone in to improving the performance of our helmets has always been our goal. In addressing some of the more interesting comments within this thread, I’d like to offer up some facts to better clarify some general information about helmets derived from our past six years of helmet testing and development. So here goes.

Is 6D’s ODS technology a gimmick? Not according to the testing data we have received from the independent test labs that we use and the data that they have provided. In fact, when compared to a traditional EPS only helmet, without any other form of energy mitigating technology, it becomes very clear that EPS alone is extremely limited in its ability to manage oblique angle energy transfers. Medical research*has proven that a traditional helmet designed with EPS alone is nearly 100% ineffective in mitigating any rotational force at all. 6D’s ODS technology changed everything about how a helmet works today. It significantly reduces energy transfer to the brain over various impact velocities in both linear and angular acceleration.

Quality vs. Performance: Are all helmets alike? No. In a testing lab this becomes very clear that cost and brand name may have little to do with performance when evaluating for brain protection. But let’s start with the separation of the two entirely different subjects. Quality can be measured qualitatively or quantitatively and generally has nothing to do with a helmet’s protection performance. If the helmet meets specific design and testing criteria, it will pass a standard. We all have varying opinions of quality based on our views and general understanding of a quality product. Some may view something that is heavy to be solid and therefore high quality, and yet another person may see the heaviness as an oversight to performance and therefore see it as low quality.

There are plenty of helmets that are made by different factories around the world that produce products with high quality manufacturing methods. Some helmets are designed to fit into a certain low price category, which may drive some of the design features to a lower perceived value of quality by some people. However, in general, the only form of quality that affects the performance is the quantitative form needed to meet the testing requirements, not the qualitative form. The factory location is no longer as much of a concern as it once was many years in the past, as long as the proper factories are selected. How do I know this? Well, I am somewhat of an expert in manufacturing and have been traveling to other countries vetting factories for about 25 years now. In some ways, it would be a lot easier to make our products in the USA if we could, but then the helmet would have an MSRP of 2 to 3 times what they cost today.

In regards to quality and performance, during some of our very first testing back in 2011 we tested some low-priced helmets that some would perceive as low quality to compare this variable of price vs. performance. What we found during lab testing is that some of these low-priced helmets, much to our surprise, performed better than several of the top brand named helmets when it came to evaluating the energy management capability of the specific helmets as we looked beyond the established pass/fail criteria of the various test standards.

Today helmet performance has a new definition, or should I say, a new focus as the definition is being debated and developed by various groups around the world. The focus now is the protection of the brain, not just the human skull. Given that the current testing standards do not address rotational testing or low velocity testing at all, it has been left up to companies like 6D to hear the cries from the medical community and to do something about it. Nearly all other sporting industries are looking to produce better helmets than what the test standards of today require. Today, it is not only about a pass or fail grade for testing criteria, but it is about the lowest amount of energy transferred during any given impact at low, medium, or high velocities for both linear and angular forces. Consumers using helmets without some form of an advanced energy reduction system are taking unnecessary risk. To look away and poo-poo the new technologies and their advancements, for whatever reason, is short-sighted and irresponsible, at least to oneself.

Is there an “Ultimate Test” that all helmets can be compared too?[/b] Not yet, but the authorities around the world are working on it and are getting close. Just today I read a release that the NFL is close to including rotational testing for football helmet certification, and they will be setting some minimum rotational energy mitigation requirements for possibly 2018. The FIM is also working on the same for 2018 road-racing helmets. The EU and some US authorities are also getting closer to establishing some minimum rotational energy management testing requirements. You might ask “why is it taking so long?” And that is a good question. The answer is that once you leave the simpler, straight-on, linear impact testing and try to do rotational testing, things get very complicated. There are physical and theoretical arguments and problems that are not so easily evaluated and resolved. Take for example, how to induce a spinning force into all helmets the same way when they all have different shapes and physical shell features. Believe me, this is a lot harder than it appears! In biomechanical engineering and the study of neurology and brain damage mechanisms, it becomes debatable and theoretical as to what causes the damage and how to prevent, or mitigate it. The current standards were established before the medical community was completely aware of the trauma associated with lower threshold repetitive impacts to the brain and their long-lasting effects; and focused solely on linear impact testing.

The establishment of all helmets needing to meet some minimal rotational energy mitigation requirements will not be the holy-grail for comparison testing. That stated, in general it will bring all helmets without existing rotational systems to a better performance level, with better brain protection for the user. This is obviously a good thing. This will not however, set the ‘bar’ of protection equal for all helmets any more than the DOT, ECE, or Snell standards did in the past. These new proposed standards will be based on a pass/fail criteria as well, and nothing at this time (that I am aware of anyway), will be requiring lower-velocity impact testing in addition, or gradient performance rating. It will take time, most likely years, for each phase of the new understandings of better brain protection to be implemented into the required test standards internationally. So the responsibility of real significate innovation will remain solely upon independent helmet manufacturers like 6D to do the work, to push the performance level of helmet protection up to the next levels.

[b]Should my helmet fit tightly? In the test lab there is a term called “second-slap” that refers to the headform hitting the inside of the inner liner if the helmet is too loose. That slap can show up on the test plots of acceleration and is generally considered not good and can cause increases of head acceleration, which we are trying to avoid.
On the other hand, if a helmet fits onto you head like a football helmet does, tight and very snug actually grabbing your head, many other competing technologies cannot work as they were designed to. They require your head to be allowed to move inside of the helmet to perform, and too tight a fit can bind the system, or preload the technology system sacrificing performance. This is one of the reasons why so many football players get concussed. It is due, in part, to the direct connection of the outer part of the helmet to the player’s head, allowing each impact event an efficient transfer path of rotational energy on to the brain. This is exactly what we are working so hard to mitigate; the transfer of angular acceleration! The 6D ODS technology, with its split liner design, does not suffer from this limitation of a tight fitting helmet. This is one of the key differences between the various technologies available and the ODS technology; defining where the motion of energy absorption is taking place.

The newly proposed FIM rotational test standard surprisingly requires that the chinstrap be tightened with enough slack to provide a finger-sized gap to the chin. This is required by the proposed standard so the helmet can shift on your head to some degree, which is essential for these other technologies to work as designed. We all know that a too-loose fitting helmet is bad for a lot of reasons and one that is too tight does not feel very good after any extended period of time in use. Our company policy recommends that customer’s helmets fit sung, but not uncomfortably tight. With this proper fit, the helmet should not experience any unwanted movement during use, and cannot come off of your head during an accident. Our recommendation is to keep the chin strap as snug as possible all of the time.

Do pro-riders hit the ground harder than a local expert rider? I’ll have some fun here… the last time I checked, gravity treated us all equal. Ok, fun over! Most of the population tends to assign more value to horizontal velocity opposed to gravity during a crash, and this is understandable given the typical exposure to crash events we see.

In the test lab at the high speed drop velocity of 7.75 m/s, (equal to 17.33 mph) the test helmet hits a steel anvil bolted to the ground coming to an absolute complete stop in less than 10 milliseconds! It’s like hitting a tree, a big bolder, or the water truck at the track. It’s an immovable object that will stop the motion of your head in literally a fraction of a second. In this scenario, at that velocity or greater, you are most likely dead from the impact. It is most likely a non-survivable impact for a human. This 7.75 m/s is the high speed drop test velocity for Snell helmets testing. The 7.50 m/s (16.77 mph) ECE test is only a little less velocity. So think about it, at a velocity slightly less than 20 mph and hitting an immoveable object like the water truck, a tree, or the track bulldozer with your helmeted head, you are most likely going to die. That’s not very fast as horizontal velocities go. Just keep that in mind as you read on!

If the pro-rider flies higher, he will most certainly hit the ground harder than a rider that does not fly as high, due to gravity. Gravity, combined with speed, is generally the greater influence during the more prevalent types of off-road/MX crashes one might have. Ask yourself, how does a road racer survives a 100 mph+ crash, get up and chase his bike down, pick it back up and rejoin the race? Then think about the MX crash at 10 to 20 mph that knocked you out? The difference is Gravity! The road racer is usually on a track that allows him to slide and scrub-off speed and energy in the horizontal vector, so his big injuries will come from flipping up in the air and gravity pulling him down to hit the ground over and over as he tumbles down the track. But yes, if he hits a hard immovable object then the horizontal velocity becomes way more important in the equation, but this has a big variable to it where gravity does not. Gravity is constant for all things.

Now, think back to Ken Roczen’s crash at Las Vegas Monster Cup last October. He had big air and high speed combined as he went over the bars just missing the top of the face of the next jump. He got his feet back out in front of him and he slid down the back-side allowing him to walk away without injury. Both gravity and horizontal speed were migrated as he came into contact with the ground on the down-slopping surface of the back side of the jump. The same with Chad Reed on the infamous “Chad-a-pult” a few years back. Chad landed from a high altitude at a high speed onto a down-slopping side of the jump. Both of these crashes gave the riders a lot more time to absorb the decelerations and thereby mitigating the impact force and injuries to their bodies.

Personally, I’ll never fly as high as many riders do. I still love to ride and race, but in my mid-50’s now, I have come to appreciate gravity more than I did in my youth. I’ll hit 40 to 50 MPH on the Glen Helen start line heading into the Talladega turn because I know gravity cannot hurt me as much, but I’m not going to try and jump the big gap over Bud’s Creek like the pros! My point is, we all have the potential to get hurt, pro or novice. Gravity does not care.

Where are 6D and other helmets made? I can’t think of a single brand of motorsports helmets that are made in the US. Unfortunately, it is just too costly with American labor costs and regulation. The entire process is labor intensive and many regulated materials and processes are used during production. Most are manufactured in Asia, with some production in southern Europe. Yes, it’s true that 6D, TLD, FOX, Bell, Fly, AGV and some other brands helmets are made by the same factory in China, by a Taiwanese owned company. That is for two specific reasons; quality and ability. Only the top brands are made at this factory because this factory is the best in China. Only the high-end helmets from these other brands are made there, while their lower-end helmets are made at other factories. And no, our factory is not KBC. It is a company that makes parts for Boeing Aircraft, General Electric, Prince, Wilson, and many of the highest quality carbon fiber mountain and road bicycle frames from some of the top bike brands! They know composites.

Is 6D working with the NFL? Yes, we have been working on advanced energy absorbing materials and systems for the past year under a grant program contest by the NFL called “Head Health Challenge III”. We hope to win the contest which comes with a nice financial reward and certainly some excellent PR. More important however, is the value of knowledge we have gained within this test program that will benefit future products from 6D and ultimately the consumers out there riding and racing bikes and motorcycles. And maybe even football!
To the founder of this thread, GPNewhouse, thanks for the opportunity for us to share some of our knowledge of head and brain protection, and thank you for choosing 6D Helmets for your head. We work hard at providing better brain protection for our motorcycle and bicycle athletes in hopes to keep the love for our sports growing stronger. Anyone looking for more information can visit the 6D website at 6DHelmets.com, or feel free to call us anytime or catch us at the track to ask questions
.
Regards to all,

Robert R.
6D Helmets Engineering

* Experiments conducted by David C. Viano, PhD. M.D. and the Bioengineering Center at Wayne State University confirmed that a helmeted head sustained the same degree of angular acceleration as the un-helmeted head when subjected to identical impacts.

Robert Reisinger,
Great post, and well written.
You need to start exporting your helmets here (Japan).
I haven't seen one in any stores here.

Wow.......thanks for all, that info Robert. I have called 6D a couple times and the customer service is incredible. I crashed in my 6D and sent it in for inspection. Took about a week and I got it back. Great customer service.

Wow Robert, GREAT post! Very interesting to read that low-priced helmets sometimes performed better than high-end helmets in the lab, makes you wonder what you really pay for when you buy a top of the line product.

Off ebay, if you search v3 you might be able to find some of the old designs for cheap.

You shouldn't give up the brand because the helmet shell broke on an impact. It means it did the job, absorbed as much impact energy as possible and then gave up. Thats what a helmet should do. Imagine a car, that would be practically untouched after a crash. I'm pretty sure all the passengers inside would be dead. The shell is meant to absorb the energy, not to be unbreakable.

When he took the liner out, what did he say he was looking for and what did he see that made him say it was a piece of crap? Which helmet(s) (if you've gotten that far yet) on the market get the closest to having the characteristics that the Scorpion didn't ? Sounds like a good way to decide on a helmet.

How hard do you actually need to hit the ground for the helmet to be replaced? I am worried that my helmet is not at its 100% after my crash in octoober last year. All i can say is that it was a small section with three doubles. I slid out on the face of the first double and landed completely sideways into the landing, and then got thrown off head first into the second jump. I did break my collarbone, but i have heard that the collarbone breaks very easily. I am also not sure if my neck brace broke my collarbone because i landed kind of crooked. I used a TLD SE3. I did feel it pretty good in my head right after the crash, but the pain was gone when i got into the ambulance, which was just 5-10 minutes after the crash.

If someone could help me figure out out of those stats if it needs to be replaced that would be great.
Thanks.

Though I've worn Arai and Shoei I've still managed to knock myself out too many times in the last 30 years. Figured I needed the best helmet available regardless of price. After a good amount of research and trying on every top of the line helmet I went with a 6D. Very happy with the fit and feel and unless another company comes out with a better proven design, I see myself buying another 6D when the time comes.

anyone tried the bell mx-9 seven edition ? it has mips wich is suprising to me because its only cost 200€ here. is it a good helmet?