Metacomet

Its a better and more protective mountain bike half shell that's more comfortable, offers more stability, and more coverage all around your head. It is not a replacement for a fullface or a ultra minimal XC helmet.

I've thought about that as well, and it would essentially be the same type of thing as a ski helmet with the chin guard bar for slalom racing so the gates dont smash out your teeth. This bar style chin guard won't work for MTB though, and I think it just comes down to the mechanics and speed of the impact applied to the chin bar. When a chin bar is struck, the whole of the helmet will push back and your face will contact the inside of the chin bar. This is dealt with on fullface mtb/moto helmets by placing the chin bar relatively close, and padding it. The strap will also catch some of that energy if it's tightened properly. In slalom racing, the chin bar is just there to protect your face from a gate pole and not the ground. In football/hockey, the helmet is held in place by a four button chin strap, so the face guard does not contact your face and your head stays at the back of the helmet. How the helmet is secured is the primary mechanical difference. If you could imagine the amount of leverage and instant acceleration a single bar could generate over your neck if the helmet was secured to your head via a chin strap... Just picture that force if the chin bar hit the ground, or a tree, or snagged something while crashing. Maybe its my imagination but I can picture a lot of snapped necks.

I Would Love the Drop Frame with a removable chin bar!

Go put on your standard half shell helmet, then place your hand on the side of the helmet (or anywhere around the rim) and apply a bit of pressure. Now imagine it with the force of a crash. See how the helmet just easily rotates out of the way and exposes the part of your head it was supposed to be covering? These drop-frame style helmets dont do that. I think that's a very realistic and common sense test that is never performed in lab experiments. IMO These make WAY more sense than a normal half shell for mountain biking, and should probably have been the norm from way early on because of the dynamic and random ways we crash. Instead, half shell helmets seem to be a byproduct of helmets designed first for road cycling and then that shape became the accepted norm. Normal half shells have honestly never made that much sense to me, in that they are really only effective in protecting you if you land on top of your head. Push anywhere around the rim of a half shell and you can get the thing to slip off your head quite a bit unless the chinstrap is absolutely choking the shit out of you. How many people (kids especially) have you seen in the woods and at the trail head with their half shell sat totally crooked, straps all a mess, tilted back, tilted forward, or just loose AF and hanging half off their heads? You can't really put these on wrong because of how deep your head sits into them and how stable they are, and most importantly your head Stays there.

These style helmets really are not noticeably or meaningfully hotter than a standard half shell. I've been running the previous generation of this helmet since it came out, and love the damn thing. The extra coverage stabilizes the helmet and really makes it disappear on your head, especially with the pad fit of the older gen. Hopeful that pad-fit comfort is still there with the new gen, as the boa dial and mechanism is integrated into the shell. If you are racing XC or that closely matches your riding style then this will not suit your needs, but if you are trail riding and leaning more towards the aggressive end of the spectrum and dont want to wear a fullface I would pick the extra coverage, stability and comfort any day. Even on the hottest days, I was almost always using my Dropframe over my normal half shell cause it is more comfortable and the extra protection is only a net positive. They also work better than a half shell for night riding since the helmet is more stabilized on your head and extra the weight of the light doesn't shake it around nearly as much. In my mind, these are not a replacement for a fullface (that much should be obvious), they are simply a better half shell.

@sfarnum: I have a Rootdown Ti as my “xc’ish” bike to compliment my GG MX MegaTrail. Much lighter and more appropriate feeling than my FS for mellow terrain, and I can still ride it aggressively which is how I enjoy riding a bike. It can obviously also go well into more gnarly terrain, and I think that actually makes the pairing make a lot of sense because they can back each other up as well as compliment each other more ideally for different terrain. A well sorted modern “aggressive” hardtail like the Rootdown is pretty damn timeless, especially in their current form. On paper, a true XC bike would maybe make more sense, but I don’t want to ride a real xc bike as I would have to really cater to the bikes functional limitations. If you’re racing, then you should obviously buy the bike/s for the discipline.

@ridedigrepeat: I included it in trail bike, but it’s not as clearly represented as it would be if they listed HT as an option, but then you’d probably have to put HT/FS in every category. My 160mm hardtail is not an xc bike by most standards, but it can pretend to be one with some xc tires.

@j-p-i: Came here to ask if #16 and #19 were still alive. Glad at least #16 made it! haha. Sounds like it was a race run to remember! #19 please report if you are alive!

I agree. I think that's most reasonably gonna cover the broadest range of riding, largely through having a variety of tire choices all the way from Gravel and XC through DH. This pretty well represents my two primary bikes as well. For myself, for the priority of being able to ride outside on trails throughout the winter, I would also have to add a fatbike to the mix.

This must be a sign that the bike industry is about to release its next big thing... another unnecessary new standard.