Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Posted: 1/21/2006 6:17:39 PM EDT
Can anyone point me to the best place to buy a new MICH Helmet? E-bay is full of used helmets, I need new MICH Helmet. Any thoughts?
Link Posted: 1/22/2006 9:44:18 AM EDT

Ebay is usually way high$$$

Airsofters keep driving the prices up.

Keep an eye on the mil spec/clothing and gear section of the EE here, there is usually one or two there.

Link Posted: 1/22/2006 12:15:42 PM EDT
Ebay is way to high! What do you think retail or wholesale is on these things? If you dont know, Ill tell you. Retail on an SDS high ballistic warrior helmet is $615, so subtact about 35% off and there is your wholesale/dealer cost.
If you plan on getting one for $100, Im sure you know where it came from, but please dont dilute yourself and say that something is too high when its almost 75% off of retail cost, since about 99% of the ones on Ebay fell off the back of a truck.
If thats the case either its still to rich for your blood and you dont really need one, or your more of a cheapscate than I am.
Link Posted: 1/22/2006 12:48:00 PM EDT

jayjay, what are you 12 years old? WTF is your problem? Airsofter I guess?

When I was looking for one, they were going for $600+ on ebay.

Angry little airsofters like you drive the prices up on ebay, making it harder for deploying troops to buy one. Buy a freaking knock-off for crying out loud!

I bought one for use in the Guard, as we still have K-pots. I also use it on SWAT for my civilian job.

I got it from a moderator on Lightfighter EE for $280 shipped. It was not "surplus."

You should be able to find one used for around $300.



Link Posted: 1/22/2006 1:13:12 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 1/22/2006 1:14:33 PM EDT by cpt_en_ca]
Diamondback has them for $449 with a wait if you qualify to buy one.

You may want to look at the Gemtex also.

If you are deploying, you stand a good chance of being issued one at RFI, even if you are guard.

I saw mail clerks getting them, go figure.

If you are still in a USMC unit, good luck getting a gunny to let you wear one.

Link Posted: 1/22/2006 1:26:50 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 1/22/2006 1:30:18 PM EDT by Scollins]
I've got a dealer price sheet from one distributor, and they list them at $409 dealer cost for a $499 retail. According to the GSA Advantage website, they can be had for $377 (qualified buyers only.) The best deal I've heard is $199 from a surplus shop right next to a major military installation....
Link Posted: 1/22/2006 3:10:56 PM EDT

Originally Posted By cpt_en_ca:
Diamondback has them for $449 with a wait if you qualify to buy one.

You may want to look at the Gemtex also.

If you are deploying, you stand a good chance of being issued one at RFI, even if you are guard.

I saw mail clerks getting them, go figure.

If you are still in a USMC unit, good luck getting a gunny to let you wear one.




The ACH is an alternate issue item that are in use by some Marines. However, getting a real Marpat cover for them is hard to do, so often the users take standard LW/PASGT cover and have it modified to fit.

The problem with the ACH is that although it may be a great gunfighting helmet, it provides about 11 percent less head coverage. Not a big deal when the primary threat is gun fire, but becomes a big deal when the primary threat is fragmentation weapons.
Link Posted: 1/22/2006 3:57:06 PM EDT
I am out of the USMC, I want this for home defense.
Link Posted: 1/22/2006 4:28:58 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 1/22/2006 4:29:39 PM EDT by NonConformist]

Originally Posted By cpt_en_ca:
Diamondback has them for $449 with a wait if you qualify to buy one.

You may want to look at the Gemtex also.

If you are deploying, you stand a good chance of being issued one at RFI, even if you are guard.

I saw mail clerks getting them, go figure.

If you are still in a USMC unit, good luck getting a gunny to let you wear one.





Link Posted: 1/22/2006 4:51:23 PM EDT
Sorry, but MIL should come before someone who just wants one for S&G.
Link Posted: 1/22/2006 6:01:34 PM EDT
$120.00 here on ebay.


http://cgi.ebay.com/SEAL-TEAM-MICH-TC-2004-TACTICAL-HELMET-Black-color_W0QQitemZ7213450612QQcategoryZ31688QQssPageNa­meZWDVWQQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem


TG
Link Posted: 1/22/2006 9:37:32 PM EDT
MP906, your guess is of course inaccurate, Im not an airsofter and far from 12yo. In fact, I visit the same forum where you bought your brain bucket from. Im also quite certain that I have a wee bit more operational exeriance than most on this board and Im actually going back to work in the shitbox in a few weeks(to a higher threat areana than most local boys get to play in) and make more than than enough to by as many MICH helmets I want at retail.

Now, I dont give a shit if some joe snuffy stuffs one in his kit bag when ETSing because its not in my line of work to stop that shrinkage from happening(that ball falls in your court from what I gather you do for a living), but what pisses me off is when I buy 15 at cost($375 x 15, you do the math on the investment) and now I have to compete with all the ones that fell off the back of a truck that are selling below dealer cost, thats where my point is.

If you think you needed to protect your brain housing group, then the $600 that is paid is far better than the alternative of being on life support due to some type of head trauma while using inferior equipment. So if it was still too expensive, it shouldnt have been bought, but please dont go crying about how something you need is too much and you have to dig into your wallet for it, those Ebayers obviously want or need it more than you did to pay for it. I can gurantee the moderator you bought it from is no dealer, but Im sure you will over look that because you got it at a cost below wholesale.
Link Posted: 1/24/2006 5:13:47 AM EDT
Do you mean ACH? Advanced Combat Helmet.

I thought MICH was the one with communications components. Modular Integrated Communications Helmet.
Link Posted: 1/24/2006 5:18:01 AM EDT
you can get them here>> http://www.diamondbacktactical.com/

lots of goodies there too
Link Posted: 1/24/2006 5:24:24 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Stickman:
Sorry, but MIL should come before someone who just wants one for S&G.



Are you suggesting someone who actually might get shot at needs one more than and internut commando?

THE HELL YOU SAY!!
Link Posted: 1/26/2006 7:40:09 AM EDT

Originally Posted By SUPERSPORT:
Do you mean ACH? Advanced Combat Helmet.

I thought MICH was the one with communications components. Modular Integrated Communications Helmet.



Same thing. The MICH became the ACH when it became the new general issue helmet for everyone in the Army.
Link Posted: 1/28/2006 6:35:50 AM EDT
specwargear.com has an ee that has some good stuff once in a while.
Link Posted: 1/28/2006 6:56:36 AM EDT
To use an ACH with a MICH headset you just take out the big center top pad and install two smaller ones that go on either side of the top strap of the headset.

Those MICH headsets are mostly a pain in the ass.
Link Posted: 1/29/2006 9:10:36 PM EDT

Originally Posted By STLRN:

Originally Posted By cpt_en_ca:
Diamondback has them for $449 with a wait if you qualify to buy one.

You may want to look at the Gemtex also.

If you are deploying, you stand a good chance of being issued one at RFI, even if you are guard.

I saw mail clerks getting them, go figure.

If you are still in a USMC unit, good luck getting a gunny to let you wear one.




The ACH is an alternate issue item that are in use by some Marines. However, getting a real Marpat cover for them is hard to do, so often the users take standard LW/PASGT cover and have it modified to fit.

The problem with the ACH is that although it may be a great gunfighting helmet, it provides about 11 percent less head coverage. Not a big deal when the primary threat is gun fire, but becomes a big deal when the primary threat is fragmentation weapons.



Exactly. The big Army is seeing the effects of that now as more soldiers are suffering head injuries since they have begun issuing the ACH to line units.
Link Posted: 1/30/2006 6:22:27 PM EDT

Originally Posted By SSeric02:

Originally Posted By STLRN:

Originally Posted By cpt_en_ca:
Diamondback has them for $449 with a wait if you qualify to buy one.

You may want to look at the Gemtex also.

If you are deploying, you stand a good chance of being issued one at RFI, even if you are guard.

I saw mail clerks getting them, go figure.

If you are still in a USMC unit, good luck getting a gunny to let you wear one.




The ACH is an alternate issue item that are in use by some Marines. However, getting a real Marpat cover for them is hard to do, so often the users take standard LW/PASGT cover and have it modified to fit.

The problem with the ACH is that although it may be a great gunfighting helmet, it provides about 11 percent less head coverage. Not a big deal when the primary threat is gun fire, but becomes a big deal when the primary threat is fragmentation weapons.



Exactly. The big Army is seeing the effects of that now as more soldiers are suffering head injuries since they have begun issuing the ACH to line units.



Source? Documentation? Proof? From CALL or where?
Link Posted: 1/30/2006 6:39:24 PM EDT
Actually it was all over the early bird last year.

Here is just a quick google

"An Army Surgeon Says New Helmet Doesn’t Fit Iraq
By James Joyner

An Army Surgeon Says New Helmet Doesn't Fit Iraq (WSJ - $)

Earlier this year, with the insurgency in Iraq building and U.S. casualties mounting, Lt. Col. Jeff Poffenbarger, the Army's senior neurosurgeon here, became convinced the Army was making a mistake that could lead to American deaths. The Army had begun issuing a new helmet, dubbed the Advanced Combat Helmet. Made of a new type of Kevlar, the helmet is stronger and lighter than its predecessor. But the new helmet has a critical flaw, Col. Poffenbarger contends: It is about 8% smaller than the old helmet, offering less protection on the back and side of the head.

In past wars, this might not have been a big problem. In infantry-style combat, soldiers typically are struck in the front of the head as they charge toward the enemy. But in Iraq, where the deadliest threat is remote-detonated roadside bombs, many soldiers are getting blasted on the sides and back of the head, says Col. Poffenbarger. In other words, they are getting hit in areas where the new helmet offers less coverage. "I've become convinced that for this type of guerrilla fight, we are giving away coverage that we need to save lives," says Col. Poffenbarger, a 42-year-old former Green Beret. This summer, he briefed Gen. George Casey, the top American general in Iraq, as well as a senior Army official in the Pentagon about his concerns regarding the helmet. Gen. Casey declined to comment on the matter. However, a senior defense official said the colonel's observations are raising questions about whether the Army should move forward with a helmet that may not be suited for the kind of hit-and-run insurgency it is fighting in Iraq. The Marine Corps has already decided not to issue the helmet to the vast majority of its forces.

The questions surrounding the new helmet reflect the broader struggle facing the Army as it tries to transform from a force built to fight traditional armies into one capable of waging guerrilla warfare. Already, the Army is retraining more than 100,000 troops, in specialties such as artillery and air defense, to work as military police, engineers and civil-affairs troops, concentrating on reconstruction. All are considered more effective in battling insurgencies.
Col. Poffenbarger isn't the only one with doubts about use of the new Army helmet. The Marines have developed their own new helmet, made of the same stronger Kevlar as the Army's. The Marines decided not to alter the shape, so their new helmet will continue to cover portions of the side and back of the head. The Marines say their helmet provides protection against mortars, remote-detonated roadside bombs and rocket-propelled grenades -- three of the biggest killers of U.S. troops in Iraq. "We felt like the extra coverage was needed to protect against those indirect fire threats," says Lt. Col. Gabe Patricio, the Marine Corps' project manager for infantry equipment.

Col. Poffenbarger's observations are by no means a comprehensive study. His research is based on about 160 head-trauma patients who have passed through the 31st Combat Support Hospital in Baghdad, where he works. Because the hospital houses the only American neurosurgeons in Iraq, virtually every serious head-trauma patient is treated by him or his partner. "If you get shot in the head in Iraq, I see you," he says. He has gone through the records of all the hospital's head-trauma patients, documenting the exact entry point at which the shrapnel or bullet entered the brain and the type of helmet the soldier or Marine was wearing. Extrapolating from this, Col. Poffenbarger estimates the new helmet might result in a 30% increase in serious head traumas if distributed throughout the entire force in Iraq. Because of his research, some senior commanders of new units arriving in Iraq have been given the choice of keeping their old helmets or using the new ones, one defense official says. Tens of thousands of soldiers are already wearing the new helmet in Iraq and Afghanistan.

For now, the Army is committed to issuing the helmet to all 840,000 soldiers in the force by 2007, says Col. John Norwood, the Army's project manager for soldier equipment. There's a good reason that the new helmet is slightly smaller, Col. Norwood says. For years, soldiers have complained that when they are lying on their stomachs firing rifles, their body armor rides up -- tipping their helmet over their eyes. The new helmet was designed to address that problem. "We think it is a good trade-off or we wouldn't be fielding it," he says.

The new helmets -- which cost $300 each, compared with about $100 for the old ones -- are made to the Army's specifications by MSA Corp., based in Pittsburgh; Specialty Defense Systems of Dunmore, Pa.; and Gentex Corp., of Carbondale, Pa. Like the Army, the manufacturers say the new helmet allows soldiers to see and hear better than its predecessor. A spokesman for MSA says soldiers are likely to wear the new helmet longer because it is more comfortable. The Marine Corps has bought about 40,000 of its new helmet, which is larger than the Army's and is also made by Gentex. The Marines plan to buy about 140,000 more over the next two years, at a cost of about $200 each. The Marines also plan on purchasing about 1,000 of the new Army helmets for Force Reconnaissance soldiers, who typically charge out in front of the larger Marine force and are less exposed to shrapnel from artillery and mortars.

Col. Poffenbarger, whose father was an Army physician in Vietnam and whose mother was a geneticist, says that for infantrymen charging into conventional battle, a smaller helmet makes sense. "The best way to be safe in combat is to be more lethal than the enemy," he says. The new helmet, which allows soldiers to see better while lying on their stomach shooting, should make them more effective in that situation, he says. But for the majority of soldiers in Iraq, who aren't aiming at the enemy head-on, he contends the new helmet will lead to more injuries and deaths.

The doctor concedes his research has at least two shortcomings. If a soldier is shot or struck by fragment in the head -- but is protected by the helmet and avoids serious injury -- Col. Poffenbarger is unlikely to see him. "My conclusions could be slightly slanted to the negative because I don't see the success stories," he says. He also hasn't been able to get data on soldiers who are struck in the head and die before reaching the hospital. Col. Poffenbarger estimates there have been 300 such cases since the war began. He has asked the military morgue at Dover Air Force base in Delaware for copies of those autopsy reports but says that so far, officials there have denied his requests to e-mail him the data. A senior defense official said Col. Poffenbarger could review the autopsy data when he returns from Iraq. This official said the request to e-mail data was denied because of concerns the information could circulate and compromise patients' rights to privacy. "There has been no attempt to keep him from doing research. In fact, we welcome it," this official said."
Link Posted: 1/31/2006 5:34:07 AM EDT
anybody try RBR? 7 different types of IIIA helmet including a mich style.
Link Posted: 1/31/2006 8:37:46 AM EDT

Everything is a trade-off.

There are many accounts of the ACH stopping glancing rifle rounds, etc.

I'd still take the stronger, lighter, and more ergonomical ACH over the Kevlar any day.

Link Posted: 1/31/2006 2:47:40 PM EDT
tag
Link Posted: 1/31/2006 4:34:24 PM EDT
It was a lot easier to get Joe to wear his ACH. Some guys had them, some still had the kevlar. The guys in the kevlars were always trying to take it off.

I am not talking about discipline, or the lack thereof, the ACH is just that much more comfortable in my opinion.

Another problem we found was the lack of replacement parts in theatre for the kevlar. When units with the ACH are running the supply system, they don't order replacement parts for items they don't have in inventory.

Link Posted: 2/1/2006 7:35:21 AM EDT
STLRN,
Thanks. It gets annoying sometimes when assertions are made and people don't back them up. It's sort of funny that one of the reasons that the ACH is smaller in the back is from the number of complaints and requests by the troops. I always hated the way the older PASGT would hit the collar of a flak vest and get pushed forward. The trimmer profile of the ACH would stop that (and also prevent it in the few people wearing their neck collars on their IBA's).

Which makes me wonder why there are so many complaints about the lessened protection of the ACH, but not the IBA. Shouldn't wear of the collar be mandatory for all then, and have the collar made part of the IBA instead of an add on? This isn't something that will cause the wearer a lot of pain (the groin protector bouncing on your crotch while running) or add weight and lessen mobility (the proposed side and bigger plates).
Link Posted: 2/1/2006 6:55:03 PM EDT
I am from the 'steel pot' generation of Infantrymen. If getting troops to wear their helmets means having 8% less coverage, I am all for it. The steel pot was a comfortable as a bag of rocks on ones head. I surely will not miss it.

A helmet, no matter the type/construction/coverage can only do so much. An IED made of 155mm artillery shells is going to smash you up good, no matter how much coverage a helmet provides.

As in all things in life, there are trade-offs and compromises.

Lastly, eBay is a good source for relatively inexpensive MICH helmets. A new one (w/ a NVD mounting plate already installed) went for less than $350 just in the last week. You have to be vigilant and keep an eye out for them.
Link Posted: 2/2/2006 11:29:38 AM EDT
ya have to be careful when using fed gear. the NIJ puts out standards for protection that military gear do not need to subscribe to.

for example:

military issue vests and helmets do not need to be nij certified (which is required to stop multiple impacts of 44 and 9mm) because the military is not concerned about smaller caliber when going up against 7.62 and higher however, nij certified iiia is inherently a better frag system than the military currently issues because it is a higher grade armor system with more stringent testing requirements. (ask our cops who are up against 9mm, 357 and 44 everyday... they know and can only buy certified armor.)

us issue will always go to the cheapest bidder and if they do not need to buy the high-end because environmentally, they are not against direct small arms then they will save the buck and buy frag armor instead...
Link Posted: 2/2/2006 12:15:16 PM EDT

Originally Posted By SSGGRUNT:
anybody try RBR? 7 different types of IIIA helmet including a mich style.


When I went thru RFI in Doha, They didnt have any of the ACH helmets. I tried to order one but I was deemed by the dealer to be An "unqualified User". I elected to purchase and use an RBR combat helmet. I personally find it more comfortable then the pad system in the new Ach helmet. And It saved my Noggin when I was Involved in a Vbied Attack. Prior to my deployment I had personally purchased the kevlar helmet upgrade from Ranger Joes, which made all the difference in the world. Anyway If anyone decides they want get a helmet from RBR Ask for Lou "Gunny" Hall
www.rbrtactical.com/mach4sf.php He'll take care of Ya'..
Neez
Link Posted: 2/2/2006 7:48:31 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 2/2/2006 7:56:27 PM EDT by SSeric02]

Originally Posted By SSGGRUNT:
ya have to be careful when using fed gear. the NIJ puts out standards for protection that military gear do not need to subscribe to.

for example:

military issue vests and helmets do not need to be nij certified (which is required to stop multiple impacts of 44 and 9mm) because the military is not concerned about smaller caliber when going up against 7.62 and higher however, nij certified iiia is inherently a better frag system than the military currently issues because it is a higher grade armor system with more stringent testing requirements. (ask our cops who are up against 9mm, 357 and 44 everyday... they know and can only buy certified armor.)



While on it's face, this seems logical, it not exactly correct. Protection from fragmentation slivers and protection from bullets, while related, are NOT the same thing. Just because a vest is NIJ Level IIIA (protects against high velocity 9mm and .44 mag) does not necessarily mean it will protect against frag from a mortar, hand grenade, or RPG. Remember, there are factors involved in fragmentation that are not present with firearms projectiles such as extreme heat (think red-hot), odd sliver-like shapes, etc.

While there is certainly some overlap in protection, the military fragmentation protection performance standards (V.50 performance, MIL STD 662E) and the NIJ Certifications are oriented towards different threat factor. Keep in mind also that the IBA for instance DOES meet and exceed NIJ Level IIIA protection as well as offer fragmentation protection against multiple weight frag slivers. More to the point of this thread, the MSA Gallet MICH Helmet (TC2000) provides Level IIIA protection per NIJ Standard NIJ0106.01.

Conversely, some LE vests (like the one I was issued in my current employment) are NOT V.50 rated for frag protection. But, they most certainly offer better protection against frag than nothing though. Anyone got an extra Interceptor in size large?
Link Posted: 2/3/2006 7:39:07 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 2/3/2006 7:45:16 AM EDT by Unicorn]

Originally Posted By SSGGRUNT:
ya have to be careful when using fed gear. the NIJ puts out standards for protection that military gear do not need to subscribe to.

for example:

military issue vests and helmets do not need to be nij certified (which is required to stop multiple impacts of 44 and 9mm) because the military is not concerned about smaller caliber when going up against 7.62 and higher however, nij certified iiia is inherently a better frag system than the military currently issues because it is a higher grade armor system with more stringent testing requirements. (ask our cops who are up against 9mm, 357 and 44 everyday... they know and can only buy certified armor.)

us issue will always go to the cheapest bidder and if they do not need to buy the high-end because environmentally, they are not against direct small arms then they will save the buck and buy frag armor instead...



Not wholly accurate. First, only hard plates (like steel or ceramic) can stop rifle rounds. Pistol rounds up to a submachine gun can be stopped with soft armor, and the IBA has been stated to provide protection from submachine guns. The 9mm 124 grain ball round at a velocity it would be in a submachine gun is what level 3A is rated to stop. Actually, most NIJ ratings are based on US military rounds for some reason. Also, you do know that 9mm is a larger caliber than 7.62mm right? At first I was thinking you meant smaller calibers as in smaller bullets. Like the problem with early armor makers saying their vests would stop a .44 magnum, but were woven so loosely that a .22 could pass between the fibers.
The military uses the V50 rating IIRC. The velocity at which 50% of a test projectile will penetrate. It's also the standard used by some other countries. Instead of saying that a vest will stop 5 9mm rounds at 1240 feet per second when fired in a pattern and not more than 4 inches apart, it says that the test projectile will require a velocity of 1700 fps to penetrate through half the time. The higher the number the better. Those are just made up numbers btw.

You are correct that you have to be careul what you are buying since usually the ratings are harder to find, but it's pretty safe to say that the current IBA is the same as NIJ level 3A, and the ACH is about a level 2. The older PASGT vest was less than a level 2, but higher than a level 1, and the helmet was probably the same as a level 2.
Link Posted: 2/6/2006 10:18:01 PM EDT

Originally Posted By cpt_en_ca:
It was a lot easier to get Joe to wear his ACH. Some guys had them, some still had the kevlar. The guys in the kevlars were always trying to take it off.

I am not talking about discipline, or the lack thereof, the ACH is just that much more comfortable in my opinion.

Another problem we found was the lack of replacement parts in theatre for the kevlar. When units with the ACH are running the supply system, they don't order replacement parts for items they don't have in inventory.




The ACH is alot more comfortable. I have no problems wearing the thing. I did have problems trying to keep on the old kevlars due to the way they sat on my head. I'd get a donut shaped cowlick out of it. Now I get cowlicks all over my head.
Link Posted: 2/7/2006 10:21:14 PM EDT

Originally Posted By RacerXFD:

Originally Posted By cpt_en_ca:
It was a lot easier to get Joe to wear his ACH. Some guys had them, some still had the kevlar. The guys in the kevlars were always trying to take it off.

I am not talking about discipline, or the lack thereof, the ACH is just that much more comfortable in my opinion.

Another problem we found was the lack of replacement parts in theatre for the kevlar. When units with the ACH are running the supply system, they don't order replacement parts for items they don't have in inventory.




The ACH is alot more comfortable. I have no problems wearing the thing. I did have problems trying to keep on the old kevlars due to the way they sat on my head. I'd get a donut shaped cowlick out of it. Now I get cowlicks all over my head.



The ACH is more conformable as a function of the pads used, you can get the OA conversion kit, as allot of Marines do, for either the PASGT or LW and will find it is just as comfortable and has a greater area of coverage.
Link Posted: 2/12/2006 9:03:33 AM EDT
The ACH is great. I love them, compared to the old K-pots. I'd like to get one later just in case I end up somewhere next that doesn't issue them.
Top Top