Quoted:
Short answer is I would get the L3 Omni VIII tube as I feel L3 is making the better tube as of late. While ITT still makes a great tube I think L3 is beating them from the tubes I have seen. I have seen a good many.

If you don't need noggin protection I like the Nightcap. Stable and you can stuff it in your back pocket. I prefer the TW for bump helmets as it feels more comfortable. The Opscore is nice as well and this boils down to personal taste. Some have had issue with the Opscore molded in shroud style helmet. I prefer a helmet where I can supply the shroud of my choosing.

ETA: I would stay clear of a ballistic helmet unless you need that protection. They are hot, heavy and did I say they were heavy ?

Quoted:
I agree with the concept of sticking with "bump" versus "ballistic" unless you have a genuine need for the latter.  As far as the moulded in shrouds, it is my opinion that the VERY LIMITED report of failure by one particular guy has been grossly exaggerated and broadcast all over the intraweb without proper root cause analysis.  That said, the TW does provide a better fit, and the aluminum insert seems a better solution.  The exception is that if you want to run OTH comms headset or ear pro, they do not work at all well with TW, and OC is the better choice in that case because the headstrap can be run between the suspension and the shell.

As far as mounts, that is highly subjective and personal preference, and volumes have been previously written by several folks here including me.  Might I ask as to why you have selected the G24?  Not suggesting that it isn't the best mount for you, just curious what you like about it versus the other options.

Quoted:
I agree with the concept of sticking with "bump" versus "ballistic" unless you have a genuine need for the latter.  As far as the moulded in shrouds, it is my opinion that the VERY LIMITED report of failure by one particular guy has been grossly exaggerated and broadcast all over the intraweb without proper root cause analysis.  That said, the TW does provide a better fit, and the aluminum insert seems a better solution.  The exception is that if you want to run OTH comms headset or ear pro, they do not work at all well with TW, and OC is the better choice in that case because the headstrap can be run between the suspension and the shell.

As far as mounts, that is highly subjective and personal preference, and volumes have been previously written by several folks here including me.  Might I ask as to why you have selected the G24?  Not suggesting that it isn't the best mount for you, just curious what you like about it versus the other options.

Quoted:
The G-24 is a good mount. Wilcox makes great mounts and stand behind them. I just wish the pivot knob was a little bigger. Small bitch but the mount is solid and works great. I use a TATUM and AKA2 sometimes but mounts are personal and guys like different ones. There really is no terrible mount except I hated the original Rhino. The Rhino II is much improved and a great mount for someone on a budget.

I just prefer the screw type vertical adjustment and the larger knob for pivot adjustment. A lot of this is what you get used to using. The G-24 is a fine mount just not my cup of tea. Both Norotos and Wilcox make very nice mounts. I just got used to the Norotos style and like them. Norotos makes the TATM and AKA2 while Wilcox makes the G-24. Murderman has a thread on all the different mounts. I am sure he will link you to it so you can make your own choice. None are bad mounts per say. Just different features that some like and some don't.

Quoted:
Short answer is I would get the L3 Omni VIII tube as I feel L3 is making the better tube as of late. While ITT still makes a great tube I think L3 is beating them from the tubes I have seen. I have seen a good many.

Quoted:
This thread really covers a plethora of topics....

The tubes question seems to have been addressed by folks much more knowledgeable than me on that aspect.

Regarding helmets...  

It sound like you figured out that OTH stands for Over-The-Head versus BTH [Behind-The-Head] or rail-mounted swing-ups [no common acronym that I know of, but let's try RMSU for this thread].    

RMSU should work equally well [or poorly, depending on one's preference] with either the TW or OC by themselves.  The downsides are that they take up rail space, and don't seem to be particularly QD.  The advantage would seem to go to TW, since they also have a "sideburn" rail to which illuminators can be mounted in conjunction with muffs.

I prefer OTH for a few reasons:
-I don't use them all the time, so the weight can be eliminated for times when ear pro / comms is not needed such as hot summer nights at the range shooting only suppressed, or when using my helmet for non-noisy activities such as riding my quad or bicycle.
-RMSU doesn't seem to provide quite as good a seal on the ears, particularly if they are left in the stowed position for extended periods of time.
-My preferred devices are Tactical Command Industries Liberator II [TCI Lib II], and not only am I not inclined to "hack" them up for RMSU, but I also use them without the helmet such as in light aircraft, un-suppressed day ranges, etc.
-I every once in a while use my TCIs with my MICH that was designed for OTH.

In a nutshell, mounting the headset "pseudo-permanently" to the helmet just doesn't work well for me even though I have a couple of each, because I use them both independently.  Sure, I could setup one rig that way, but that would be $1k+ for the types that I use, unless I wanted to erode redundancy and flexibility.

The reason why the OC works better for OTH is because the suspension can be quickly disconnected / re-connected from the shell at the front via the keyhole slots, thus allowing the headband to be placed between the suspension and the shell.  In such case, the side pads are removed, and the top pads are located for appropriate clearance.

With the TW, the suspension and shell require tools to separate.  I am not sure there is even enough clearance between the suspension and the shell, since I have never actually tried it.  Some folks might suggest simply wearing the helmet over the headset, but that would entirely destroy the enhanced comfort and stability of the TW.

I have seen pics of folks running BTH between the suspension and the head, but I and two other members here tried that concept, and the "headband" going across the back interferes with the nape strap, again eroding both comfort and stability.  BTH also does not provide the same level of ear seal for some head shapes as OTH.

In a nutshell, if you want to run muffs with TW, they will need to be RMSU, but if you want to run them with an OC, they can be either RMSU or OTH.   Now do you see why I "introduced" that new acronym for this thread?  

One other thing about the TW Carbon Fiber [CF]...  It looks like the top of the suspension is some form of polymer, but I am not sure because I have never tried one.  If that is the case, it would seem like that could get pretty warm on the top of the noggin, even with all of the perforations....I live in SE TX, and the OP lives in FL.  If someone could confirm, that would be most appreciated.

I need to take a break just now, but will compile some consolidated thoughts on mounts in another post.

Quoted:
I have about 6-7 helmets sitting in front of me just now, and just as many mounts, from the past several years of experimenting with ergonomics.  Fortunately, there are some really good options available today versus the DIY requirements of the past.  I am just trying to help folks understand the pros/cons of the various models/combinations, and am by no means endorsing one brand/model or another.  They are all a little different, and some subtle differences might be of particular importance to a given individual's application.

If you think that helmets are a daunting choice to make, the mounts are even more complicated due to the myriad of options and features!  I am updating some tables, and will post them up in the next day or so.

The most important thing to consider is not the helmet, nor the mount, not the headset, nor the NOD, but MOST IMPORTANTLY how they ALL work together as a system.

Quoted:
Short answer is I would get the L3 Omni VIII tube as I feel L3 is making the better tube as of late. While ITT still makes a great tube I think L3 is beating them from the tubes I have seen. I have seen a good many.

If you don't need noggin protection I like the Nightcap. Stable and you can stuff it in your back pocket. I prefer the TW for bump helmets as it feels more comfortable. The Opscore is nice as well and this boils down to personal taste. Some have had issue with the Opscore molded in shroud style helmet. I prefer a helmet where I can supply the shroud of my choosing.

ETA: I would stay clear of a ballistic helmet unless you need that protection. They are hot, heavy and did I say they were heavy ?

Quoted:

...snip

I'm going to do a search for your old thread on mounts that was mentioned a little earlier.  Maybe help me rule out some options.  

Quoted:
I just got two L3 omni VIII and the G24.  Like them both and the L3 is awsome.   I like the G24.   Hooked it to a modarmory mount for dual setup.   If you think you are going dual later, get a setup for dual now.  Will save you money.    I could use the modarmory mount with a mono.   Good luck.   Team Wendy helmet is plenty enough

I didn't like the INVG for duel setup and sent it back.   Great for a mono

Quoted:
Well, after reading that thread, doing a few comparisons, and looking at a couple of reviews, I'm really starting to like how the Norotos INVG looks more so than the L4 G24.

Force to overcome and the ability to rotate while stowed seem like worthwhile features over the Wilcox.  Unsure as to the placement of adjustment knobs, but as you guys have said, I'm going to assume control location is highly subjective.  

Now, with the INVG, will that mount to a standard OC or TW helmet with the molded in shroud, or will I need an adapter of some sort?  I only ask, because the description on TNVC for the INVG refers to some sort of screw in adapter.

Just to add a little bit to this - the "premium" mounts are all... well, premium mounts, they're all, IMHO, vast improvements over the legacy Rhino - and all will offer more adjustability than the legacy mount, and probably feel a lot more sturdy, as well. As for which one to choose - in a lot of ways, it's the question of which features you're looking for and/or which ones are most important to you that will really make the difference between them - to me, the "secondary considerations" that murderman is talking about can help guide your decision.

The biggest and most obvious difference is push button versus force-to-overcome.

Force-to-overcome is exactly what it sounds like, and what the legacy mount uses - you just push up on it with enough force to overcome the locking mechanism, and it moves and locks into place at the other end of its travel - this has several advantages in terms of preventing breakage, simplicity of controls, and manual of "arms." That being said, personally, I prefer push-button stowage and deployment, which tends to be more rigid when deployed, and doesn't require much force at all to move as long as the button control is depressed.

The Legacy Rhino, RHNO II, INVG, and G11 are all FTO, while the TATM, AKA2, and G24 are all push button mounts.

Another issue is the pitch adjustment - namely - and this will be a personal preference issue for the most part - which side would you prefer to have it on, i.e. which hand would you use to adjust the pitch if you had your choice? This might depend on whether you're left or right handed and/or if you would prefer to adjust with your support hand or strong hand. Personally, being a righty, I prefer a right side adjustment so that I can adjust with my strong hand, and get a more precise adjustment - it's also one of the adjustments I find myself using most frequently "in the field" compared to the other adjustments, as the proper pitch can vary depending on position - more so, IMHO, than elevation or eye relief.

The TATM, AKA2, and G24 all have right side pitch adjustment, while the Legacy Rhino, RHNO II, INVG, and G11 have them on the left.

Another minor note about the pitch adjustments - Norotos tends to use nice, big, wide, flat paddles for their pitch adjustments, versus the much smaller "wingnut" of the Wilcox versions.

Those are the two real big ones to me because they're the ones I tend to use most often - but there are also a couple of other considerations in terms of human engineering -

Elevation Adjustment - the two major types are what I like to call "on the fly" and the Norotos-style screw adjustment - in the case of the "on the fly" elevation adjustment, a big lever is used to release the mount, and the mount can be slid up and down to set the desired elevation, while the TATM, INVG, and AKA2 feature a screw that can be used to precisely dial in the desired elevation, but cannot be adjusted quite as quickly.

Eye Relief Adjustment - infinite adjustment versus notches, and adjustment method - once again, personal preference, but the RHNO II and AKA2 allow for "infinite" adjustment along their track, while all the rest feature a set number of notches placed at intervals where the eye relief can be set to. The Legacy Rhino, TATM, and INVG feature a spring loaded lever that is depressed to move the device, while the AKA2 and RHNO II use a rotating lever, and both Wilcox mounts need to be "pinched" from both sides.

Mount and Device Release - the Wilcox mounts use a crossbar release - and at least the earlier G24s were depressed on the same side as the push button stow/deploy (left) to release the mount - a point which murderman has been vociferous in his objections to,  but I understand that newer production ones have reversed this. Not sure about the G11. On the Norotos mounts a spring loaded bar moving from right to left (assuming you're using the AKA2 shroud interface with the TATM). The device release is slightly different on each mount as well.

Finally - some of the mounts each have their own "special features" and different profiles when stowed - the INVG, as has been mentioned, has the swivel, the AKA2 has an intermediate locked position, while the G24 has a breakaway feature.

In the end, it's all personal preference, but there are some things you can think about when trying to select which "premium" mount to spend the not insignificant amount of money on. The ideal solution, of course, would be to try them all out and take them out for a couple nights and run 'em through their paces, but it's not always feasible to do.

Quoted:
When I placed my order a couple weeks ago (hasn't shipped yet), TNVC recommended the G11 mount. I'm seriously considering calling and replacing the G11 with a G24, but what J arm are yall using with the G24, for the dovetail interface?

Quoted:
IMHO, the Wilcox G11 was the best possible option...that could have come out of the limitations placed on it by the Army's request.

Something to think about WRT using the standard USGI J-Arm in conjunction with really any mount though, is that the instability is not only introduced at the bayonet interface, but also the rotating arm itself, which is not fixed by the G11 or RHNO II.

The fact that the Norotos DDA eliminates this issue entirely is among one of its major advantages in my opinion.  

Personally, I'm not a huge fan of force-to-overcome mounts for any purpose, and don't find them particularly faster or easy to use - but for Nightcap use, just based on others' feedback, I would definitely not want to have an FTO mount.  

~Augee

Quoted:
Agreed,
The only FTO mount I've ever used is the USGI mount. But I always felt it contributed to excessive movement of the helmet. Everytime you flip it up it moves the helmet so you have to readjust the whole thing when you flip it back down.

My push-button AKA2 always returns to the same spot. Unfortunately it seems you nearly double the price if you want a push-button mount instead of FTO.

I'll add I'm starting to like the idea of the new Norotos Lo-Pro. I'd like something a little more compact than the AKA2.

Quoted:
Kinda sounds like N-Vision's NVPR
http://soldiersystems.net/2012/05/23/sofic-n-vision-optics/
http://soldiersystems.net/blog1/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/20120523-115723.jpg

Quoted:
IMHO, the Wilcox G11 was the best possible option...that could have come out of the limitations placed on it by the Army's request.

Something to think about WRT using the standard USGI J-Arm in conjunction with really any mount though, is that the instability is not only introduced at the bayonet interface, but also the rotating arm itself, which is not fixed by the G11 or RHNO II.

The fact that the Norotos DDA eliminates this issue entirely is among one of its major advantages in my opinion.  

Personally, I'm not a huge fan of force-to-overcome mounts for any purpose, and don't find them particularly faster or easy to use - but for Nightcap use, just based on others' feedback, I would definitely not want to have an FTO mount.  

~Augee