#!markdown
Regarding the "AM" look vs. "AM" function, maybe your over-the-bars-XC-race-
loser-stereotype is going for maximum - dare I say equivalent - protection at
a minimum weight and maximum airflow?
Other than the possibility of a small pointy object penetrating through more
obvious (and better functioning) venting what extra protection is this helmet
really providing over a similarly high end XC lid?
Don't get me wrong. Helmets = Good. Whatever style/brand/colour/graphic of
helmet you want to wear (same goes for socks) = Good.
But, can anyone show one example of how having your helmet drop down a bit
lower in the back provides any extra real world protection? I've seen, what I
would call, A Lot of smooshed helmets that were wrecked MtBing. Most were
damaged on the front (front-top or front-sides), and a few on the top from
headers. I've yet to see a helmet (or even a photo of a helmet) with damage on
the back.
Aug. 18, 2015, 9:48 p.m. - DrewM
#!markdown Regarding the "AM" look vs. "AM" function, maybe your over-the-bars-XC-race- loser-stereotype is going for maximum - dare I say equivalent - protection at a minimum weight and maximum airflow? Other than the possibility of a small pointy object penetrating through more obvious (and better functioning) venting what extra protection is this helmet really providing over a similarly high end XC lid? Don't get me wrong. Helmets = Good. Whatever style/brand/colour/graphic of helmet you want to wear (same goes for socks) = Good. But, can anyone show one example of how having your helmet drop down a bit lower in the back provides any extra real world protection? I've seen, what I would call, A Lot of smooshed helmets that were wrecked MtBing. Most were damaged on the front (front-top or front-sides), and a few on the top from headers. I've yet to see a helmet (or even a photo of a helmet) with damage on the back.