Eye pro for M1 style helmets

[kasaran]

Would like to go full on 'nam more often, but my prefered eyepro protudes too far from my face to fit (Bolle x800i).  My older set (ASG Strike Protective Tactical Dual Lens) fit, though arnt the best for fog control.

 

I'd rather something more in the style of the Bolle, but would need to be slim to fit under the lid.  any recommendations or experience with eyepro and this helmet?

 

[Guest Iguana tactical]

On 18/05/2023 at 09:51, kasaran said:

Would like to go full on 'nam more often, but my prefered eyepro protudes too far from my face to fit (Bolle x800i).  My older set (ASG Strike Protective Tactical Dual Lens) fit, though arnt the best for fog control.

 

I'd rather something more in the style of the Bolle, but would need to be slim to fit under the lid.  any recommendations or experience with eyepro and this helmet?

 

Though not very nam style mesh would be the best for preventing fog 

Which there’s a fair number of slim line options though they’re no good if you’re wearing glasses 

 

after looking at the goggles used in the time period I think these styles would be either closest or could fit well enough 

though they both say for airsoft neither state a bb rating so if you do decide to get one from the links I’d advise you giving them a test by shooting them at a decently close range with a your high fps replica (480 fps at 5 meters is what most mesh goggles are rated for)

 

Demeras Tactics Mesh Goggles Headband Googles Cabon Dteel Outdoor Goggles for Hunting Airsoft Protective Gear(Military Color) https://amzn.eu/d/95oYhmK

Airsoft Paintball Goggles, X800 Military Tactical Helmet Goggles UV-400 Eye Protective Motorbike Cycling Glasses with 3 Interchangeable Lens & Camo Case for Running Skiing Fishing Hunting Wargame https://amzn.eu/d/ej3glmA

 

 

Edited May 21, 2023 by Iguana tactical

[Rogerborg]

3 hours ago, Iguana tactical said:

480 fps at 5 meters is what most mesh goggles are rated for

 

[citation needed]

[Guest Iguana tactical]

4 hours ago, Rogerborg said:

 

[citation needed]

https://www.wiseworksafe.com/blog/view/understanding-en-166-personal-eye-protection-standard
 

this is explains the eye protection ratings 

And all the mesh goggles I have that are from nuprol are marked with EN 1731 F

 

·    EN 1731:2006: Personal eye protection – Mesh eye and face protectors

F is rated for a 0.89g 6mm bb shot at 45 m/s (about 147.64fps)

 

that’s what the ratings mean though the goggles came with instructions which stated that it was 480fps at 5 meters though did not indicate weight 

 

I’ve been using my dmr which shoots close to that velocity with 0.20 and the range I go to is happy with that rating system 

I fire 5 shot’s into the same lense around the same spot and then check for cracks or dents 

 

 

Edited May 21, 2023 by Iguana tactical

[Colin Allen]

1 hour ago, Iguana tactical said:

https://www.wiseworksafe.com/blog/view/understanding-en-166-personal-eye-protection-standard
 

this is explains the eye protection ratings 

And all the mesh goggles I have that are from nuprol are marked with EN 1731 F

 

·    EN 1731:2006: Personal eye protection – Mesh eye and face protectors

F is rated for a 0.89g 6mm bb shot at 45 m/s (about 147.64fps)

 

that’s what the ratings mean though the goggles came with instructions which stated that it was 480fps at 5 meters though did not indicate weight 

 

I’ve been using my dmr which shoots close to that velocity with 0.20 and the range I go to is happy with that rating system 

I fire 5 shot’s into the same lense around the same spot and then check for cracks or dents 

 

 

0.89g at 147.64fps = 0.90J, which is nowhere near 480fps at 5m with any BB you are going to use in airsoft.  0.20g at 480fps = 2.13J.  I would not trust anything printed in the instructions for Nuprol goggles.

Anyway, you still have not demonstrated that this comment is accurate: 480 fps at 5 meters is what most mesh goggles are rated for.


 

[Rogerborg]

3 hours ago, Iguana tactical said:

https://www.wiseworksafe.com/blog/view/understanding-en-166-personal-eye-protection-standard
 

this is explains the eye protection ratings 

 

Thanks, we're familiar with the quirks of EN 166.

 

 

3 hours ago, Iguana tactical said:

And all the mesh goggles I have that are from nuprol are marked with EN 1731 F

 

And that's not EN 166.

 

My Brave-fu isn't finding a "liberated" copy of EN 1731 F, so I have no idea what test projectiles or energies it claims to stop.  However, I can find forestry helmets with fine mesh that claims to meet EN 1731 F, and I wouldn't trust that for airsoft use.

 

It's reassuring that you have tested yours, but 2J of 0.2g isn't the same as 2J of 0.46g.  Don't get me wrong, I use mesh myself, and DIY at that, using 3.5mm hole / 4.5mm pitch 1mm thick stainless hex.  I'd be interested to hear how that (literally) measures up to the Nuprols.

[Lozart]

On 21/05/2023 at 15:46, Guest Iguana tactical said:

https://www.wiseworksafe.com/blog/view/understanding-en-166-personal-eye-protection-standard
 

this is explains the eye protection ratings 

And all the mesh goggles I have that are from nuprol are marked with EN 1731 F

 

 

On 21/05/2023 at 19:38, Rogerborg said:

 

Thanks, we're familiar with the quirks of EN 166.

 

 

 

And that's not EN 166.

 

My Brave-fu isn't finding a "liberated" copy of EN 1731 F, so I have no idea what test projectiles or energies it claims to stop.  However, I can find forestry helmets with fine mesh that claims to meet EN 1731 F, and I wouldn't trust that for airsoft use.

 

It's reassuring that you have tested yours, but 2J of 0.2g isn't the same as 2J of 0.46g.  Don't get me wrong, I use mesh myself, and DIY at that, using 3.5mm hole / 4.5mm pitch 1mm thick stainless hex.  I'd be interested to hear how that (literally) measures up to the Nuprols.

 

 

EN 1731 has been withdrawn as a standard and replaced by EN ISO 16321. eLibrary copies can be read for a day for a bout a fiver https://standards.iteh.ai/catalog/standards/cen/0558b211-7e30-44c2-a924-480c91d5dea4/en-iso-16321-3-2022

Worth mentioning that this standard specifically excludes mesh face protectors or goggles for sports use.

[Rogerborg]

1 hour ago, Lozart said:

EN 1731 has been withdrawn as a standard and replaced by EN ISO 16321.

 

Any luck on finding a liberated copy of EN 1731? That's what Nuprol are claiming for their mesh.

 

 

1 hour ago, Lozart said:

eLibrary copies can be read for a day for a bout a fiver

 

Which is still £5 more than I'm prepared to pay for a document created using tax money.

[Lozart]

1 minute ago, Rogerborg said:

 

Any luck on finding a liberated copy of EN 1731? That's what Nuprol are claiming for their mesh.

 

 

Nope. Probably because it's been withdrawn.

[Rogerborg]

1 hour ago, Lozart said:

Nope. Probably because it's been withdrawn.

 

That's kind of why I was hoping that it would have leaked to us peasants by now.

[Tommikka]

21 hours ago, Rogerborg said:

 

That's kind of why I was hoping that it would have leaked to us peasants by now.

There is a copy of the EN1731:2006 here, which with a rough scan of the ‘latest’ withdrawn copy on British Standards looks to match up (other than the odd foreign language header pages and being marked EN1731 rather than BS EN1731)

 

https://zakon.isu.net.ua/sites/default/files/normdocs/3036af055d884208ad411a4bdbf3111f.pdf

 

 

[Rogerborg]

56 minutes ago, Tommikka said:

There is a copy of the EN1731:2006 here, which with a rough scan of the ‘latest’ withdrawn copy on British Standards looks to match up (other than the odd foreign language header pages and being marked EN1731 rather than BS EN1731)

 

https://zakon.isu.net.ua/sites/default/files/normdocs/3036af055d884208ad411a4bdbf3111f.pdf

 

Nice one!

 

Oh... "[Robustness] testing shall be done in accordance with 3.2 of EN 168:2001."  Gaa, I'm out.

[Tommikka]

1 hour ago, Rogerborg said:

 

Nice one!

 

Oh... "[Robustness] testing shall be done in accordance with 3.2 of EN 168:2001."  Gaa, I'm out.

I can access it! (Status is ‘under review’)

 

Though my access is to BS EN168:2002 which also has pages marked EN168:2001 …… and of course the impact testing paragraphs 3 & 9 refer to EN166 …..

 

 

Just in case a copy of  EN168 is out there somewhere it’s a 36 page document 

[Rogerborg]

44 minutes ago, Tommikka said:

and of course the impact testing paragraphs 3 & 9 refer to EN166

 

Bwahahahah. Oh, wow.

[kasaran]

this derailed... I'd still like an on topic answer.  Though I should add that im not a fan of mesh goggles or shooting glasses. 

 

Does no one know of any full seal eye pro that isnt mesh that would work with an M1 style helmet?

[Lozart]

1 hour ago, kasaran said:

this derailed... I'd still like an on topic answer.  Though I should add that im not a fan of mesh goggles or shooting glasses. 

 

Does no one know of any full seal eye pro that isnt mesh that would work with an M1 style helmet?

 

I'd say try the Namsoft pages on FB, they will probably have more direct experience. There aren't going to be any goggles from Bolle, ESS, Revision etc that are designed to work with an M1 because that's just not a thing. Maybe a set of ESS Advancers (based on being similar shapewise to the ASG ones you mentioned. Otherwise, what about a FogEx blower attached somewhere inconspicuous?