>>48920623It's perfectly serviceable, but there are five problems with it.
(1) The helmet shell is made in China. QC is supposedly done in the USA, but some people don't want to support China on principle, so be aware.
(2) The rails are troublesome. They use the M-Lok system, but it's almost impossible to remove the rail from the shell, so you can imagine how frustrating it is to get heavy accessories to mount securely. M-Lok rails only really work when you can detach the rail and install your accessories off-shell, when necessary.
(3) Some people have reported trouble with the shroud. Not that it's unstable, but that the body of the shroud cracks under extreme conditions of use or upon impact.
(4) There are a lot of bolt-holes in the shell.
(5) The shell is on the heavy side. It's aramid, rather than UHMWPE.
Having said all of that, there are a few points in its favor.
(1) It's very cheap for what you get.
(2) There are a lot of accessories available for the HHV helmet platform, including a high-performance rifle appliqué plate, and just about anything that mounts natively to M-Lok.
(3) Most people like the pads, and the HHV helmet's blunt impact (drop) performance is excellent.
(4) A lot of people have tested HHV helmets, including HHV's critics, and its ballistic performance has been consistently good.
(5) Aramid is more durable and thermally stable than UHMWPE, so you won't need to worry about leaving your helmet in a hot car on a summer day.
All in all, I think that it's a pretty solid C-Tier helmet. If you don't mind the shell's weight and the rails, it'll serve you well enough. It's not an OpsCore FAST helmet, but you're not paying OpsCore prices, either.
Pic unrelated.
