Leatt Convertible Full Face Helmet - Crankworx Whistler 2016

Aug 19, 2016
by Richard Cunningham  

Leatt 2017 range


Leatt has a huge presence here at Whistler. Neck protection has become a signature accessory for park riders, and Leatt hopes to expand their presence among the sport's top athletes to include helmets and body armor. Today, the vanguard protection brand showed its most important products for 2017, including a range of well-engineered apparel, and a good looking convertible enduro helmet.


Enduro 3.0 Helmet: $239.99 USD

Enduro venues most often require racers to wear a full-face helmet for timed stages, but allow half-shell helmets to be used for transfer stages, which often are grueling climbs. Convertible full-face designs provide the option to climb the transfers in a lightweight, well ventilated half shell, without lugging a second full-face lid around the race course. Leatt's Enduro 3.0 helmet has a pair of quick-release latches that make it possible for the rider to remove or replace the chin bar without removing the helmet.

Details:
• 360° Armourgel® Turbine inserts: reduces up to 30% of head impact at concussion level, 40% of rotational acceleration to head and brain, improves multiple-impact protection
• Removable chin bar
• Ventilation: 18 vents, effective at very low speeds.
• PC outer shell is offered in three sizes, with 3D in-molded impact foam for better energy absorption.
• Fidlock® magnetic buckle closure.
• One-dial retention.
• Break-away visor and low-friction cheek pads for easier emergency removal and rotational energy reduction.
• Certified and tested to EN1078; CPSC 1203 - Chin bar certified and tested to pass ASTM1952 standards
• Weight: Weight: 700g +/-50g, without chin bar: 375g +/-50g
• Sizes: Small (51-55cm), medium (55-59cm), large (59-63cm)
• Contact: Leatt / @LeattUSA


Leatt's Enduro 3.0 helmet, in the half-shell configurations, is certified to EN1078 and CPSC 1203 standards, while the chin bar is certified to ASTM1952 standards, and it includes two important protection strategies: Leatt's 360-degree Armourgel Turbine technology to minimize rotational trauma, and a dual-layer foam liner with a V-shaped interface called 3D V-Foam. The EPS layer is in-molded with the helmet's plastic shell - a combination that, according to Leatt, allows them to make the helmet fit closer to the head. Leatt says that a smaller diameter helmet significantly reduces the consequences of rotational head trauma. Enduro 3.0 helmets are not certified to Downhill standards.

Leatt 2017 range
Flip a pair of over-center levers and the chin bar drops away from the half-shell.

Leatt 2017 range
The design of the chin bar is intended to minimize the profile of the half-shell when not in use.
"Turbine Technology" refers to a number of circular discs which are placed around the inside of the helmet liner. In an impact, the specially-shaped discs are the first line of defense between the skull and the helmet. The energy-absorbing Armourgel discs have radial vanes, designed to flex in any direction, which lets the helmet rotate around the skull slightly. Leatt has used this technology in its full-face mountain bike and motorcycle helmets for a number of years, but 2017 marks the first time they have extended their rotational protection to an enduro or all-mountain lid.

Leatt 2017 range

Leatt 2017 range
Ten "360-Degree Turbine" inserts are positioned around the liner to carress the skull.
Leatt 2017 range
Dual-density EPS foam is molded with interlocking triangles like Kali Protectives' system.


The latching mechanism, as mentioned, is an over-center latch that snaps down relatively flush with the surface of the helmet. Leatt was careful to chamfer the edges of the parts of the levers that do protrude above the surface so that they should not hang up in a crash. The levers stay with the chin bar and the receivers in the helmet are carefully hidden, so when the chin bar is removed, there is little or no evidence that the Enduro half-shell was ever a full face.

Leatt 2017 range
The latch sits in a recess of the chin bar and hooks against the helmet.

Leatt 2017 range
Two tabs on either side of the chin bar engage slots on the helmet.
Leatt 2017 range
Flip the levers and the chin bar unhooks and falls free from the helmet.

Leatt 2017 range
The slots are the only evidence of the chin bar

Leatt 2017


See more of Leatt's helmet range in the Crankworx gallery






121 Comments

  • + 25
 Although not DH certified , like the Giro one is , it probably isn't a massive deal as it is not targeted at DHers probably just people looking for more protection on sketchier trails who would otherwise just wear an open face (definitely not DH certified!)

I reckon it looks better than the Giro especially without front guard attached.
  • + 13
 Isn't the ASTM F1952 already the downhill certification?
  • + 34
 The Giro without the front guard attached is sick
  • + 13
 @jmrmuc: Yes it does indeed mean it is certified as a full face downhill helmet.

Also stoked this one actually has a fully black version. Probably more comfy as the Met Parachute, safer than the Bell Super 2R and less hot than the Giro. Count me in!
  • - 33
flag fabdemaere (Aug 19, 2016 at 3:27) (Below Threshold)
 Guys, keep in mind that a fully certified DH helmet didn't prevent Matti Lehikoinen from requiring 56 screws and 13 plates to put his face back together.
People who truly care about their safety (let me rephrase: "mtbers who truly care about their safety")will go the bobblehead way and buy a MX helmet. Anything else, you're just compromising safety for comfort/price/looks/...
  • + 14
 @Mattin: that's incorrect, only the chinbar is ASTM 1952 certified. The helmet is not, as stated in the article- "Enduro 3.0 helmets are not certified to Downhill standards."
  • + 6
 @johnl2: yeah i agree im half tempered to buy it and bin the chin guard...
  • + 2
 @fabdemaere: He was wearing old THE helmet which while certefied was still a POS. Don't think same would've happened in a modern TLD or FOX.
  • + 9
 @fabdemaere: It also bears noting that the extra weight of an MX helmet could cause serious spinal trauma in a bad crash... I think I'll stick with an MIPS TLD D3 Carbon thanks!
  • + 5
 I just started getting into Dirt Jump tracks. I have a Bell Super 2 (It's beat to shit I need to get a new can), and Its nice because i do a lot of trail riding too. When I'm going to do be riding a lot of jumps I put the chin bar on but if I'm just doing some trail riding I take it off. That chin bar has saved me more than once.
  • + 4
 @fabdemaere: An MX helmet is for faster, higher energy impacts and has more mass meaning there is more trauma in lower speed impacts, i.e. your head plus heavier helmet weigh more therefore make a bigger dent in whatever you hit). Suitable DH helmets are OK in they are designed to compress/break/shatter and in doing so absorb the force that would be transmitted to your head, not to be bullet-proof like an MX helmet. Someone correct me if i am wrong?
  • + 4
 @d0wnhill-d: You're not wrong. The design of DH lids is aimed at absorbing the specific forces of mountain biking whereas MX lids are designed for forces specific to MX. They're different types of crashes encountered in both sports and while the helmets may look the same on the outside they're not the same.
  • + 2
 @MmmBones: @MmmBones: Which is weird because the chin bars are supposedly not tested if you read the ASTM testing description and methods, hence the open face fox DH certified helmets.
  • + 13
 @fabdemaere: People who truly care about their safety (including mtbers) can choose to do absolutely nothing in an effort to stay cozy and safe. Life carries risk. Everything. The best anyone can do is honestly evaluate themselves in the face of every decision and carefully consider the consequences for themselves and those around them and perhaps more importantly, take responsibility for the consequences.

Helmets and other protection can offer a degree of protection when stuff goes wrong, but when it comes down to it the difference between a MX helmet and a downhill one doesn't mean that everything will suddenly be okay, and we certainly can't pretend to know what the outcome would have been if Matti had a different helmet on.

TL;DR: Live life fully and wear a good helmet but don't rely on it to keep you safe...we all still have to use the brain we're trying to protect.
  • + 2
 @johnl2: I also like the Swithcblade without the guard, kinda puts me in mind of an old school moto helmet. Also I have a Montaro, and am Extremely pleased. Comfy, pretty decent venting, and it's already saved my bacon in a pretty bad crash. Giro FTW!
  • + 2
 @gdnorm: The ASTM 1952 DH standard requires the chin bar to be tested IF it is present.
  • + 5
 The Super 2R claimed that its chinbar met Bell's "internal standards," which they strongly implied meant that the helmet passed the chinbar part of the DH certification even though the it didn't pass in other ways (due to its vents, apparently). I understand Leatt to be saying the exact same thing here. Leatt's lawyers are just a little braver.

Bottom line is the chinbar is legit but overall the helmet is not suitable for DH. Its direct competition is Super 2R, not Switchblade.
  • + 6
 @d0wnhill-d: @fabdemaere: Guys, I believed Kali solved this argument back in 2014 with the Shiva:
kaliprotectives.com/helmets/full-face/shiva -- DOT moto *and* DH certified, MTB size & weight (1050g).

As for the Leatt convertible, I really like the direction they are going with this design, and wish it had been around as an option when I bought my Super 2R 18 months ago. The Super 2R is great in many regards, but I'm not thrilled w/ its clunky fit as a half-shell. With the Leatt, I can't help but be a little skeptical of the durability of those plastic tabs: they don't look like they'll fare well w/ frequent use, or for that matter when bearing the primary load on frontal impact w/ the chin bar. The 2R design relies on metal buckles to hold the chin bar to the shell on impact, and as a rider unfortunate enough to crash test them, I can say they do perform their job well.
  • + 3
 This one is way lighter than the Giro, it's also lighter than the Super 2R by the looks of it, same weight as my MET Parachute with the chin bar on and 375 without - pretty sure the 375 is also lighter than my Troy Lee A1! This helmet will be on my short list for next season.
  • + 2
 @MmmBones: the article is wrong then. The helmet with the chin bar installed is atsm 1952 cert.
  • - 1
 @johnl2: u mean it makes u sick because it looks horrible without the chin on it...

Funny that I have not yet found a picture of someone wearing the new leat without the chin bar??? Wink
  • + 1
 @HelmetGuy: Ahhhh. Thanks. I had never read that.
  • + 1
 @sb666: Afraid not. The eyes of excitement appear to have glossed a couple things.
1) These are *claimed* weights.
2) Even if Leatt hits their targets, it's 375 +/- 50g halfshell, 700g +/- 50g fullface.
Now in my 4th decade in the sport, I've never seen a helmet come in 50g below claimed weight, so expect a real world size Large Leatt to be 425g/750g-ish.
Actual weights for my Med. Super 2R Mips:
429g halfshell / 758g fullface = same ballpark.
  • + 1
 @fabdemaere: can someone explain why this gets so many negative props? Scratching my head here...
  • + 1
 @Mattin:

How is it safer than the super2R? Neither of them are DH certified.
  • + 1
 @gdnorm: If it has a chin bar it's tested.
  • + 1
 @Nahguavkire: yep. As an enthusiast of dh and enduro motorcycling, I sometimes consider using my dh helmet for riding woods singletrack on the motorbike. It would certainly be better for most crashes since the speeds and terrain are actually pretty comparable to dh...huh...I need to look into whether or not moto helmets are one discipline fits all...cause I don't think a helmet that's designed for high speed impacts and huge jumps would do me much good in the slow woods.

I guess helmets of the future will probably have a dynamic system that is adaptive to the conditions of the impact and be the ducks nuts for all crashes.
  • + 19
 Well there's a little two colour bar chart which clearly and undisputably claims to reduce the risk of concussion by a significant but non-specific quantative amount. SOLD! Those two little platic lugs either side do look incredibly flimsy. In fact the whole thing looks like a clip on after-thought.
  • + 3
 I noticed that too. Seems like the kind of advertising that would get a company in trouble in some markets.
  • + 3
 Must say I don't like the way the front part clips on. Those things look as if they could come unclipped during a crash. That said the convertible helmet idea appeals. I think the Giro is the best to date however, that and maybe the Met Paracgute, I think it is.
  • + 3
 @headshot: yeah the idea in concept is a good one, but the executions all seem a bit flimsy. I had an old Giro Switchblade and looking back now I'm glad I never tested it in anger as a full face helmet because it was as flimsy as these modern offerings look.
  • + 2
 I agree, those little plastic tabs holding the chin bar on? No thanks, pass...
  • + 2
 @headshot: I have the Super 2R and really love that thing. I read without the chin bar for the climb and then descend with it on, when doing black or higher runs anyway. I have definitely been saved by it a few times.
  • + 1
 @veero: Bell Super 2R chin guard appears much, much sturdier than the old Switchblade when you see it in person. It also seems like if it did break, it'd break towards the back, unlike the old Switchblade.
  • + 3
 @headshot: The current Parachute has a *fixed* chin bar. It's in the same weight class as the 2R, but the tradeoff is you gain DH certification at the cost of convertibility. The Switchblade lets you have both convertibility & the DH cert, but it's a full half-pound more than the Parachute or 2R. Pick your poison.
  • + 16
 I am a bit "meh I don't know" about those MIPSy systems. It makes sense to me but I'd love to see some research papers. Can Leatt please provide some info on how did they come up with this graph showing risk of concussion? I'm not trolling or calling people for a stupid word challenge, I am genuinely interested in the subject and if the answer is not sure I take that as an intelligent reply, not a reason to say you are full of crap.
  • + 2
 My main concern is the location of the buckles attaching the chin guard. It seems that their position could allow them to very easily open on impact thus loosening or detaching the chin guard mid crash. A crash where the helmet would be moving forward with the side of the helmet/chin guard impacting the ground could catch a buckle and cause it to open. I would think having the buckles tucked behind the back of the helmet would decrease that risk a fare amount.
  • + 2
 www.bhsi.org/mips.htm

Current state of MIPS.
  • + 2
 You're right about the lack of data, but that's an industry-wide problem. I see this as a very, very promising concussion-reduction design -- conehead foam, what looks like a more advanced liner, and the turbine do-dads that might help with absorbing direct and rotational forces. And I think they're dead-on with focusing on a smaller, lighter helmet as part of the concussion-reduction strategy (a concern with the otherwise-promising 6D ATB-1T design).

Do we have the data to really prove this helmet (or any other helmet) is safer? No. But this helmet has everything I've been looking for. The option of using chinbar for face protection is just a bonus.
  • + 0
 @Phillyenduro: You are absolutely wrong. Did you read the link? It's basis physics. Thinner and smaller helmets will increase concussion rates. Small rubber points are inferior to compressible foam. Vents make things worse. If you really want to improve concussion rates you need thicker/single use deform-able and smoother helmets.
  • + 4
 @gdnorm: Many times, thanks. Did you read this, from the same source?: "Most importantly, in a crash the leverage this [way-thicker-foam] helmet would exert on your head and neck would be increased dramatically by that thicker foam, upping the dreaded rotational energy to the head and perhaps making it not an anti-concussion helmet at all." www.bhsi.org/concussionhelmet.htm

You're absolutely wrong that I'm absolutely wrong. But I'll concede that it's not as simple as my first post suggested. I stand by my view that, at least on paper, this is a very promising concussion-reducing design.
  • + 3
 Completely agree here... There's so much money being made by these companies, with $6.2 BILLION dollars in sales in just the U.S. alone last year. And that's just the bike makers, that doesn't include helmet makers.

I feel like someone in there (NOT helmet makers) should be able to scrounge up a half million dollars and perform some proper, rigorous scientific study as to how well (if any better at all) this new helmet tech works.

I'll still buy MIPS because it's a small price to pay just in case it does work better. But would definitely like to see some actually scientific method applied here. But I guess I just proved exactly why they don't feel the need to prove it works, because I'm still gullible enough to buy it, so why would they spend the extra money?
  • + 7
 @MasterSlater: All of the top helmet makers use scientific testing to evaluate direct and rotational impacts, The misssing link, and I believe that this is what your complaint refers to, is that the industry has yet to settle on a single, comprehensive standard for testing rotational forces. That will take some time to sort out, because that technology is still in the discovery and development phase. Everyone wants a standardized test, but it would be short sighted for the industry to push for standardized test protocols now, and then discover shortly after that new information negated those standards. My guess is that we will be there in one, maybe two years, but in the meantime, reducing helmet widths, supporting the head with shear devices and providing a sliding surface between the head and helmet are three methods that are proven to be effective in reducing rotational trauma, so riders have at least three options to protect themselves until the professors catch up with the technology.
  • + 2
 @RichardCunningham: RC, the fact that the companies do internal scientific testing doesn't help consumers make informed choices between different designs. MasterSlater's point was that we need testing that is independent, and I agree. And there's no sound reason that testing should be postponed until the industry agrees on a new standard. Of course, the problem is no one wants to pay for it, so we all just fumble in the dark as best we can.
  • + 3
 @RichardCunningham: the missing links are a few: A. Mips co-founded the research for anti-rotational forces at Karolinska University in Stockholm. B. There is no explanation in their graphs showing green damage free brain area in mips helmet vs red areas without mips. This may as well be 7/10 green and 9/10 red with 10 being a fatal brain trauma, while the graph insinuates respectively 2/10 and 9/10. C.My neighbor just bought a shtty helmet for his son with Mips. I'd rather give my daughter a serious helmet without it, than this contraption. D. I have never ever had a crash in open face helmet where it would not slide all over my head so I'd love to see some data on friction.

Quite frankly it seems like non GMO sticker - you buy iy and you are a moral human being.
  • + 0
 @Phillyenduro: You can't be serious. The quote you are misusing is referring to that mocked up foam monster.

MIPS doesn't replace compressible foam and definitely should not be considered as a way to slow deceleration. It's role in changing moment of inertia also seems to be bogus "on paper". It's not promising technology.
  • + 3
 @RichardCunningham:

To clarify, what I meant was I wish there were some more rigorous, peer reviewed, controlled, methodical testing.

I've seen the videos and I do believe that these companies are making good faith efforts at making better helmets. But when you have Leatt's "turbines", MIPS, Kali's "composite fusion plus" AND Scott's Koroyd... It's getting a little Wild West with the "this is what's REALLY gonna save you're brain".

Yes, you could argue that all this just means better helmets, and each company's competing technology is only furthering that goal, which benefits all of us.

What I'd really like to see is all these things tested against one standard, which is what you've also said.

Again, I'm gonna keep ponying up for the added safety feature whether it's a millimeter thin slippery bit of plastic, or a bunch of soda straws glued together. Because I like my brain the way it is. But it wouldn't hurt seeing some hard, unbiased data when I'm parting with that extra cash.
  • + 1
 @Gdnorm - I gave it a thought and there has to be some benefit to vented helmets vs pisspots in direct impacts. I get the argument of a round, slick helmet sliding on the ground vs vents acting like knobs on a DH tyre prividing unwanted grip. It mast bu a big one with rotational forces But with direct hits, a vented helmet with ribbed structure will offer better disappation of the impact energy due to the fact that it will deform more (crack as well) and offer a better crumple zone than a solid shell. That's why Bell Super seems awesome. Perhaps a pisspot with more ribbed EPS structure would be best.

Nevertheless what is vital here is the timing. As your head hits the object, your skull may or may not compress the EPS before your brain smacks into the inside of the skull. If this would be the case, all this divagation is pointless and we could all ride thinner helmets. No matter how thick is the shell of a nut, the inside will bounce on it's walls. But I don't know, we get no info on that, just fancy tech words and graphs.

Finally it may be that the answer is something like airbag system that Hövding offers. However that would mean that even a tiny crash ends your competition.
  • + 1
 @RichardCunningham: you're too smart for the PB comments section.... go away...
  • + 10
 there are so many comparisons to dh helmets on here trying to slate this helmet as unsafe. It seems obvious to me that this is designed as a safer alternative to a half shell and not a shit dh helmet.... people are idiots
  • + 9
 Am I missing something, or are the two plastic clips in the second to last picture the only thing keeping the chin bar from smashing into your face? I think Matti Lehikoinen would have a thing or two to say about that design..

Look, a full face helmet has no use if it isn't DH worthy. The reason we wear full face helmets is because we ride pretty much DH tracks on bikes that give us less room for error than DH bikes, while going as fast as possible. I ride a lot of sketchy stuff in my open face helmet, but I always keep an extra margin compared to when I'm in my full face, and I think there is a high chance that you'll be lulled into a false sense of security with something like this. This is the original switchblade/parachute all over again...
  • + 23
 You're over complicating things. Some people dont want their teeth knocked out in a crash. You dont have to be hucking it at high speeds to crash...
  • - 18
flag sernevi (Aug 19, 2016 at 3:08) (Below Threshold)
 Yeah, sorry, I forgot that things named "Enduro" often aren't actually aimed at people who, say, race enduro. I guess I'm not part of the target group of 40-somethings with more money than skill riding 8 grand 160 mm enduro bikes on glorified XC trails wearing back protection and almost-but-not-quite full face helmets..
  • - 16
flag sernevi (Aug 19, 2016 at 3:21) (Below Threshold)
 I guess they really should have named it the Leatt Dentist 3.0.
On that matter actually, what is the deal with "3.0", did we miss the first 2? Isn't this Leatts first open face/semi whatever offering?
  • - 2
 @sernevi: I fkd my face off that stupid slow rock drop on Episka. I knew I had a crappy day, it was beginning of the year, muscle memory was still not there. Little sleep, stress at work. Now everytime I feel not too sharp I take chin piece to my Super 2R. Actually a few weeks ago I did feel like sht and took the chin and here you go, I landed on my face on a fkng flat bit, on Cliff Hanger in Delsjön, bouncing it slightly on a rock. and well, people riding that sht in the bike park or on Enduro comp on a proper mountain? wha'eva. This is as naive as trusting certficates. Some people are naive and some of them never take consequences of that. Oddy or Ilmo riding in a cut out Urge on Stumpy on Rollercoaster ekhe kheee. I haven't seen any company endorsing such helmets for "shreddin the gnar", especially that they all make DH and even moto helmets, so no business loss for them.
  • - 6
flag sernevi (Aug 19, 2016 at 3:45) (Below Threshold)
 @WAKIdesigns: Wait, did my architect friend who rides an (awesome) full carbon long travel bike with a convertible helmet get offended by what I wrote? Sorry.....

Jokes aside though, I'm a strong advocate of knowing ones limits. If I'm not feeling up to it, I'd rather swallow my pride and walk around. A crash can still be painful as fvck, flimsy chin guard or not.
And when the PR material states that it's designed to replace proper FF helmets on enduro stages, I'd say that's endorsing it.. Sure, a lot of top riders would probably race in an OF helmet if they were allowed to, but I don't see them being the main risk group here.
  • + 2
 @sernevi: I share your exact same thoughts regarding mx helmets and enduro branding. My good friend has the giro full face xc helmet thingy and its so poorly fitting, the only thing holding it to your head is the ratchet mechanism, a helmets shell has to fit snuggly with your skull so you don't have room to twist or accelerate into the helmet shell, but so many riders, including pros have helmets that don't fit properly, you see it on the supercross start grid and even the bmx olympics - if u can easily whip ur helmet off effortlessly with one hand and move it up and down heaps when grabbing the chin bar... Its too damn big and wont do its job Ina severe impact regardless!
  • + 16
 I think that people are missing the point of this helmet. A proper full face is significantly more protective than this or any other convertible helmet, but also hotter to wear. This is a trail helmet that is a bit more protective. Outside of winter, wearing a full face isn't really an option even in a temperate country like the UK IMHO, so if you are out for 2hrs or more trail riding on your bike these seem ok. If you are (regularly) using it for downhill then there may be better options unless the ventilation thing is more important than protection...

Don't get me wrong - I've not gone the convertible route and have a seperate half shell and full face so it's not for me, but to write these off immediately is a bit silly. I know plenty of people who have gone down this route, are happy that they have, and are better protected than had they worn their half shells... Most of them wouldn't ever dream of purchasing a full face anyway!

Look on the bright side in that the more protection people wear, the more the severity of any accidents is reduced and the less likely it is that some chump determined to sue your local trail group causes your trails to be dumbed down.
  • - 4
flag WAKIdesigns (Aug 19, 2016 at 4:32) (Below Threshold)
 @sernevi: ah sht I read that endorsement now. No hard feelings with me, ever Wink
  • + 1
 @slimboyjim: Don't get me wrong, I am all for the improved protection, but I question the marketing of it where they literally label it "Enduro" and state that it replaces a proper FF helmet for timed stages.
  • + 1
 Dissipating some of the energy before impact will likely lead to a better result than no protection at all in the event that it does break.
  • + 1
 @sernevi: I know what you're getting at, but I don't disagree with the 'enduro' marketing. At the end of the day nobody will lug/wear a proper full face around for the duration of an 'enduro' ride either, so this is a better option than a half shell when you talk protection. If they had marketed it as a Dh lid though, then that would be another story...

I do think that they've been pretty fair here though, specifically saying the helmet isn't suitable for downhill use.
  • + 9
 Just buy a met parachuute. With these removable ones, the time you accidentally faceplant will be the time the chin bar is in your backpack.
  • + 5
 Face planted with the parachute and it works, only con is a low chinbar deflects impact into the eyebox... My goggles did the job protecting my eyes.
  • + 6
 @mcozzy
I 100% agree with you..After having my Met Parachute for 6 months now, I wonder why the manufacturers are focusing so much on the removable chinbars instead of just making a lighter / well ventilated fullface???

I have wore my Met on some incredibly HOT and HUMID days and I have yet to even notice any difference compared to my TLD A1...ok maybe a LITTLE difference...but the differerence is almost nothing and the security of having the fullface makes it a no brainer..

I have a D3 when riding my big bike and I know the feeling of ripping it off my head on hot days just to breath..I never had that feeling with my Met Parachute even after some decent size climbs..
  • + 2
 Exactly. I ride wearing my met parachute for 6 hour enduros including climbs and it's fine. I don't get why convertibles are sought after when the met parachute is light and we'll vented
  • + 1
 @redman733: Because it's selling. If it's selling everyone wants a piece.

But I'm with you. I personally like the lightweight DH certified full face concept.
  • + 3
 It's great to see other alternatives in helmets and push for a decrease in concussive forces. I don't ride DH trails so all I'm trying to do is not to have my teeth knocked out or my jaw broken at an enduro race or technical trails. I'm glad this is being offered in three sizes instead of a S/M or L/XL like the Met or Urge. I do have to wonder for easy it is to change and wash the liner pads since It's not clear from the pictures if the "turbine" things are part of the pad, clip on to the helmet, or if the liner has holes.
  • + 3
 I'm really happy to see more companies offering dual density EPS foam. I think this makes three now, Leatt, Kali, and Fox. Helmets have been traditionally designed to prevent catastrophic head injury and did not offer much protection against concussions. Dual density foam seems like a good way to protect against both scenarios. I''d much rather have a helmet with dual density EPS than MIPS. I'm not convinced MIPS does much, especially on half shell helmets that are not worn tightly by most riders.
  • + 6
 How do you have a helmet review/ first look and never show it on someones head?
  • + 2
 Magic.
  • + 6
 ASTM1952 standard means it's certified for "downhill mountain bicycle racing"
www.astm.org/Standards/F1952.htm
  • + 3
 I'm pretty sure that if it was certified for DH use, they would say so. The way I read the text is that the helmet and chin bar is certified, but NOT the helmet WITH chin guard, most likely because the interface isn't strong enough. But this is exactly the sort of arguments I foresee being followed by a trip to the dentist and/or plastic surgeon from having it collapse on impact as people expect it to be a proper full face lid, which it is not.
  • + 3
 that's only for the chinbar.
"Enduro 3.0 helmets are not certified to Downhill standards."
  • + 2
 @sernevi: ok you don't like it, then don't buy it.
  • + 3
 Hurray. I have been waiting for this, as I find the Bell Super 2r to not fit well. I have had a 6d open face on order since March (size XL seems to be vaporware) and have been told it will possible come in November. This gets me a reduced concussion design, with Kali's patented molding, and a facebar for places like downville for the same price. I will be getting two, one for me and one for my son.
  • + 2
 I have the GPX 5.5 Leatt helmet for moto and i have to say it is the most comfortable, breathable helmet i have ever owned, i have become a believer of their products as well as looked at the intense testing that they helmets endure before coming to market. I typically ride DH so i wont be getting one of these for that, plus i could just use my GPX which is something like 20% smaller then a standard helmet and 3lbs with moto safety. Once i get a trail bike again this could be the ticket.
  • + 1
 I think it looks good with or without the chinbar, very nice integration. If I was in the market for a convertible helmet I'd be torn between the Giro and this one. However,as someone mentioned earlier,if there was a fixed full face helmet ,light and breathable enough to wear all day,there would be no need for convertibles.
  • + 1
 A met parachute is just that. I wear mine no problem for 6 hours including climbs.
  • + 1
 I've seen these in the flesh, it looks like a great quality piece of kit and on par with the best out there. The latches may look like they could possibly open - but based on the fact that these guys make top motocross and MotoGP neck braces that gets held on with latches - I would guess they know a thing or two about those and when they would fail. When they put their name on a product you can assume that they've done exhaustive testing and qc on every component-of and on the whole item.
  • + 4
 Those two little plastic tabs should be taking the load of a face crash? Is this some kind of joke?
  • + 2
 Depends, is it better for your face to take the load of a crash on it's own instead? Or for some semblance of protection for when riding on something a little gnarlier than normal that doesn't necessitate a full on dh lid?
  • + 4
 I'd have the Leatt DBX FF helmet but not this. the half shell doesn't look bad though, much better than the recent Giro one
  • + 1
 It's cool to see stuff that was designed in the'90's back.... Troy Lee had a convertible helmet a long time ago... Straight pull spokes too, done in the '90's... But for whatever reason they didn't really last... But now they're back and alot cooler!!!
  • + 4
 2nd picture reminds me of the time I dislocated my jaw
  • - 9
flag YungSketchy (Aug 19, 2016 at 1:00) (Below Threshold)
 2nd picture reminds me of your mom !!
  • + 3
 Hopefully it's bigger than the Bell Super. Would have bought one already but it's just too small for my head
  • + 3
 Had the same problem, medium doesn't even go on my head at all but the large rattles around like a bucket. If they sort out their sizing they may get more sales! Strange cause I have a medium stoker which fits like a glove and a large full 9 which also fits like a glove.
  • + 1
 Same here...I ended up with a large, but I added extra padding to give it a snug fit.
  • + 2
 All this for 240$.
There is a lot of teck going into the making of this helmet.
  • + 3
 The risk of cuncussion graph made me laugh
  • + 1
 I know, RIGHT? like an actual LOL for a change
  • + 2
 So... I need to get those turbine things attached to my brain? Can't make things any worse I guess.
  • + 4
 Burn it with fire
  • + 1
 Just here waiting to see if the next attempt looks any better. So far the answer has been no
  • + 1
 In the photo of all 4 colors, 2 are labelled V1, two are V2. Anyone know the difference?
  • + 0
 V1 one didn't pass the testing so don't buy that unless you really, really need those colors to match your kit. Actually, it looks like V1 is recyclable...has those triangles on the top and visor. V2 only the chin bar is recyclable.
  • + 2
 @pinkbike any news on this helmet?

March,15 2017
  • + 2
 Rivets on chin bar look fudged....
  • + 2
 Nice, but prefer look of new Giro Switchblade Smile
  • + 3
 price :o
  • + 1
 If price will be right and it'll fit my head I'm going to buy brushed version.
  • + 1
 well, the chinbar mounts looks quite weak and no red color? WTF??! I would like Red/grey variant Smile
  • + 1
 when are they going to release it to the market?
  • + 0
 Oh look, another non-DH certified wanna be full face that has questionable aesthetics. No thank you.
  • + 3
 you just don't get who this helmet is targeted too do you

"another non-DH certified "

it passes the ASTM-1952 test that TLD D3 does dumb ass
  • + 8
 @poah: 'Questionable aesthetics'. I'd rather look like a munter on the trail than have a broken nose and missing teeth. Who cares how it looks if its safe
  • - 2
 @poah: Only the Chinbar passes ASTM-1952. The whole entire D3 passes ya jackass... "Enduro 3.0 helmets are not certified to Downhill standards." I know exactly who this helmet is "targeted too", idiots like you!
  • + 11
 I think @MmmBones and @poah had better suck each other off to restore peace before this gets out of hand!
  • - 8
flag MmmBones (Aug 19, 2016 at 3:13) (Below Threshold)
 @murfio: no one asked about your homoerotic fantasies.
  • + 4
 @Joebro1995: Quoting the wrong person in your quest to rant.
  • - 2
 @MmmBones: Shocker, someone gets offended over the mere suggestion of something homosexual said jokingly.
  • + 5
 @mgolder: he he, you said "shocker"
  • + 1
 If I needed to buy a new helmet based on looks alone... This would be it.
  • + 1
 This doesn't make me regret ordering the Giro one...
  • + 1
 Who needs a face guard anyway if you've got elbows
  • - 3
 Another piece of shit I'll add to the list of helmets to never buy.

Get a proper full face or get f*cked. These half way jobbies are a joke aimed at the 'more money than brains' 40+ dentist crew.
Below threshold threads are hidden

Post a Comment



Copyright © 2000 - 2018. Pinkbike.com. All rights reserved.
dv65 0.079595
Mobile Version of Website