The Brief Life of a $750 6D ATR-1 Helmet and 6Ds Response

[OZ DRZ]

The "big deal" about these helmets is the way that they handle rotational forces. If you competitively race or practice, these helmets are becoming a "must have" and are priced near an Aria, so not sooo out of range. Even if you are a top speed trail rider, these helmets are worth looking at.

The "less expensive" option as of right now, is a MIPS helmet. There will be more helmets like this (MIPS, rubber dampening) soon enough.  That should drive prices down.

 

the absolute ideal is to drag all the international helmet standards kicking and screaming into the 21st century. we are way overdue to have mandatory variable or dual density liners (of the correct densities to actually work) to protect our heads in low to moderate impacts. 

 

once all helmets had to be designed this way, i bet it wouldn't add more than $10 to the cost of every helmet but would increase their safety dramatically.

 

two, the standards need to address rotational forces properly.MIPS didn't respond to my enquiries so i couldn't judge its effectiveness, but again a thoroughly tested design like that could become part of the standards and again would probably add less than $10 to the cost if it became mandatory. 

 

the third major point would be proper padding and test of the chinbars on all helmets too.

[NunChucka]

It looks like I'll be going with the Fox V3 with MIPS.

 

I think (hope) that the MIPS system will help with the rotational forces in an accident and the fact that in Aus the V3 is about $350 cheaper than the 6D at the moment it's hard to go past.

 

I know that you can't put a price on your head but participating in an expensive sport as we do and being a father of 3 kids that also love the sport I need to save every cent I can.

[BushPig]

It looks like I'll be going with the Fox V3 with MIPS.

 

I think (hope) that the MIPS system will help with the rotational forces in an accident and the fact that in Aus the V3 is about $350 cheaper than the 6D at the moment it's hard to go past.

 

I know that you can't put a price on your head but participating in an expensive sport as we do and being a father of 3 kids that also love the sport I need to save every cent I can.

 

Any feedback on how the V3 MIPS performs?

 

A 6d is $800.00 here.

[NunChucka]

Any feedback on how the V3 MIPS performs?

 

A 6d is $800.00 here.

 

Hopefully I'll get my new lid on the weekend. I'll let you know what I think. I'm not actually planning a crash test but you never know.

 

There are not a lot of reviews on the V3 MIPS but the ones that I found sound good. And for the price you can buy 2 fox helmets for the price of the 6D.

[OZ DRZ]

Any feedback on how the V3 MIPS performs?

 

A 6d is $800.00 here.

 

a year ago i contacted the manufacturers of technology aimed at reducing rotational forces - 6D, MIPS and Philips. 

 

6D were the only ones who eventually released their research findings for checking by aussie specialists and it all checked out. i'm hoping the others do as well but the specialists told me it's still a relatively new area and how the testing is done, measured and with what testing equipment is very important. at the very least i'd stay the MIPS looks good on paper, their research findings suggest it works but it would just be good to have it independently confirmed. 

 

fox has the dual density liner, if this is done with the correct densities of foam it becomes an important safety feature. main issue here again is trying to verify this. they (and this includes almost all helmet manufacturers) never say what densities they have used, and never reply when you email and ask.   again, it probably works but would be good to confirm they've got it right.

 

one issue with most dual or variable density liners is they taper them off the sides of the helmet, partly to reduce weight but also so the helmet looks good and isn't too wide. problem is this is where the majority of impacts occur so there's bugger all dual density liner where you need it. not sure with the fox, but the 6D and i think some of the top bells and arais stay thick on the side for this reason... the helmet is heavier, looks very wide and kind of bulbous, but has the dual density liner where it counts. 

[SilentAssassin II]

I'm not saying that less padding on sides is bad, kind of playing devil's advocate here and just bringing another point up.

When I race through the trees, I occasionally wack the side of my head on a tree, happened just last Sunday in a race. Every time it rings my bell pretty good, it is not pleasant. I think I probably barely miss them very often. A wider helmet would make me hit more trees and the ones that I'd hit anyway, I'd hit even harder with a wider helmet.

Just another consideration to weigh in.

[Dragon67]

IMO the basic design principle here is good but the price is far too much. Please dont get all excited. Of course my head is worth it BUT most of us will never shell out that much.

 

My problem is this. I suspect we could get 90% or better this performance from a throw away Styrofoam liner molded to crush properly at impact. the rest is just fluff. The super trick carbon shells etc are nice but they are not necessary. I would be willing to bet we can design a helmet for under 200$ with a disposable cheap total loss liner that will have very close to the impact absorption of the more complex designs. In fact if the liner is a total loss design it may even surpass the performance of these more complex designs.

 

I would love to see an underdog manufacture overcome some of the incredibly pricey stuff on the market with new visions in design.

 

I agree with your last point, though I think 6D came in as an underdog.  They took a huge risk.  

 

As for throw away styrofoam liners, that is exactly what we have.  No liner rebounds from an impact.  Pinch a styrofoam cup with your fingers.  That's what happens to any EPS liner.  It stays compacted where it absorbed energy.  Every helmet should be replaced after a crash**.  From a practical perspective, I am sure most of us don't do that.

 

The other issue with your hypothesis is minimum testing standards.  DOT, Snell, ECE all require energy transfer testing to be done at very high helmet-to-ground velocities, which are barely survivable anyway.  Not passing DOT in the USA means the helmet can't be sold.  So, the EPS liner in your standard helmet is exactly the same for all of them.  To your point, the shell makes no difference.  It has been argued (and shown) that a softer shell will allow greater energy absorption throughout the structure, but that is not the selling point of those who advertise advanced carbon fiber lids.  

 

It would be possible to develop a helmet with a single EPS liner to reduce G forces in low speed (typical) crashes, like the 6D does, while maintaining protection for life threatening crashes, like 6D does, but the size of the helmet would be impractical.  That's why it hasn't been done.

 

** one of the best features of the 6D lid is 6D will evaluate it after a crash for free.  No having to guess if you need to replace it.  The other benefit I have found (other than the obvious) is that the elastomer dampers preserve the EPS layers in lighter crashes.  Unlike EPS, the dampers do rebound.  Seems to me that means less chance of having to replace the helmet.  They also rebuild helmets with intact shells for a much lower price.  Another great feature.  

 

Hope that helped!

[BushPig]

a year ago i contacted the manufacturers of technology aimed at reducing rotational forces - 6D, MIPS and Philips. 

 

6D were the only ones who eventually released their research findings for checking by aussie specialists and it all checked out. i'm hoping the others do as well but the specialists told me it's still a relatively new area and how the testing is done, measured and with what testing equipment is very important. at the very least i'd stay the MIPS looks good on paper, their research findings suggest it works but it would just be good to have it independently confirmed. 

 

fox has the dual density liner, if this is done with the correct densities of foam it becomes an important safety feature. main issue here again is trying to verify this. they (and this includes almost all helmet manufacturers) never say what densities they have used, and never reply when you email and ask.   again, it probably works but would be good to confirm they've got it right.

 

one issue with most dual or variable density liners is they taper them off the sides of the helmet, partly to reduce weight but also so the helmet looks good and isn't too wide. problem is this is where the majority of impacts occur so there's bugger all dual density liner where you need it. not sure with the fox, but the 6D and i think some of the top bells and arais stay thick on the side for this reason... the helmet is heavier, looks very wide and kind of bulbous, but has the dual density liner where it counts. 

 

The fact that 6D came to the party and allowed everyone to verify their claims makes me want to go for a 6D.

 

Until fox does the same with their MIPS helmet I guess I'll keep saving.

[6 Riders]

Until fox does the same with their MIPS helmet I guess I'll keep saving.

MIPS is a separate company from Fox. So Mips would be the ones to do what you want. They actually have a large following in down hill mountain biking (where they started)..

[BushPig]

MIPS is a separate company from Fox. So Mips would be the ones to do what you want. They actually have a large following in down hill mountain biking (where they started)..

 

Yes, I know that Fox is using MIPS under licence. 

 

But until they are proven like 6D they are still an unknown, to me.

[ToadalyCrazyCanadian]

I don't care what brand or design goes on my head, but there should be much stricter standards. I want to know that any helmet I grab off the shelf meets the same standards even if I don't research it. A few extra $ a helmet won't stop any rational human from buying one.

[OZ DRZ]

Yes, I know that Fox is using MIPS under licence. 

 

But until they are proven like 6D they are still an unknown, to me.

 

i just had a look on the MIPS site and they have now released details of their testing on their website here if you go to the R&D papers section.

 

only one of the research papers is actually about MIPS, the rest are just establishing that rotational forces are important, and need to be tested more thoroughly than the basic test in the european helmet standard provides for (ECE22).

 

i've just had a look through the research paper that is about MIPS, it's called hallin2001. it concludes that MIPS can reduce rotational forces by up to 30%. however, the lead author, A. Halldin, is one of the guys who helped invent MIPS.

 

this doesn't necessarily mean you can't trust the results... but usually you would want to see the paper published in a peer-reviewed journal e.g. a journal where impact specialists would all go through the details to see if all the testing procedures were correct and done properly. far as i can see it hasn't been published anywhere yet. 

 

i'll shoot this over to the australian specialists and get them to have a look at it, if they can verify it looks good i'll report back. be good to have another verified option for managing rotational forces.

[BushPig]

i just had a look on the MIPS site and they have now released details of their testing on their website here if you go to the R&D papers section.

 

only one of the research papers is actually about MIPS, the rest are just establishing that rotational forces are important, and need to be tested more thoroughly than the basic test in the european helmet standard provides for (ECE22).

 

i've just had a look through the research paper that is about MIPS, it's called hallin2001. it concludes that MIPS can reduce rotational forces by up to 30%. however, the lead author, A. Halldin, is one of the guys who helped invent MIPS.

 

this doesn't necessarily mean you can't trust the results... but usually you would want to see the paper published in a peer-reviewed journal e.g. a journal where impact specialists would all go through the details to see if all the testing procedures were correct and done properly. far as i can see it hasn't been published anywhere yet. 

 

i'll shoot this over to the australian specialists and get them to have a look at it, if they can verify it looks good i'll report back. be good to have another verified option for managing rotational forces.

 

Thanks, it is appreciated.

 

Mark.

[NunChucka]

Any feedback on how the V3 MIPS performs?

 

A 6d is $800.00 here.

 

I got my new lid on the weekend. I got the 2015 model Fox V4 with MIPS for $399! at Suttos in NSW the RRP was $599 (the 2016 models have just been released so there's big discounts to be had)

I've only done a couple of hours with it so far but it feels great.

The vents work great, it's the first helmet I've owned that I could feel the vents working by cooling the sweat that had accumulated while I was stopped.

It feels light and looks great too!

I haven't had a stack yet (touch wood) but if I do I'll let you know how I go.

[BushPig]

I got my new lid on the weekend. I got the 2015 model Fox V4 with MIPS for $399! at Suttos in NSW the RRP was $599 (the 2016 models have just been released so there's big discounts to be had)

I've only done a couple of hours with it so far but it feels great.

The vents work great, it's the first helmet I've owned that I could feel the vents working by cooling the sweat that had accumulated while I was stopped.

It feels light and looks great too!

I haven't had a stack yet (touch wood) but if I do I'll let you know how I go.

 

Cheerz Nunchucka, I've got a Fox helmet currently.

 

Its lovely to wear but eventually it will need replacing, and when it comes time for that, well, no point protecting ya brain with last century's technology AKA helmet makers selling the same old stuff for more than they should.

[NunChucka]

Cheerz Nunchucka, I've got a Fox helmet currently.

 

Its lovely to wear but eventually it will need replacing, and when it comes time for that, well, no point protecting ya brain with last century's technology AKA helmet makers selling the same old stuff for more than they should.

 

Yeah I couldn't agree more about using last centurys technology. I was keen on having additional safety features but theres no way I could streach the budget to $700 - $800 for the 6D.

[lowmass]

liners could be throw away. The present liners are far too stiff as molded styro. If that styro was molded as a honeycomb style it would have significantly more energy absorbtion and still be very cheap. Once you crush it just throw it away. Replacment should be 20 bucks or less.

 

As well I think moto helmets are far more than nessasary. They could be more open and vented than they are. Bycycle helmets come to mind.

 

Im sure there are mfgs that have thought the same BUT the risk is the lawsuits that will result as people take advantage of the system. 

 

Light cheap helmets are an engineering possability.