All MTB style helmets are designed to break apart and prevent skull fractures. Saying the Giro saved your life twice by performing like it is supposed to I don’t regard as brand but common BS standard design. Some MTB helmets are so large they increase the chances of striking your head on the ground. If I was wearing a smaller profile helmet, crashed, and didn’t strike the helmet, or not enough to have it break apart, then do I say the helmet failed to do its job?
I started motorbiking first, and there was one general rule, “Make sure the helmet fits.” A loose helmet is bad. At high speed it pushes up your nose. I a crash it rams up your nose causing a nose bleed, or even a broken nose, or worse, a neck break.
When it’s come to MTBing and the larger number of crashes, and imho different types to motorbike ones, I’ve add to that “…and presents a low profile”.
I’ve used a Met Crackerjack for ages. Inadequately vented tbh. Width wise my ears just stick out from the sides, but it looks a bit high. Still, being thrown on my side means the chances of impacting the ground are lessened, which means the “boxers injury” causing the brain to spin is lessened. I’ve cut my ears a few times though.
On trying the new Crackerjacks, they no longer size the same. They’ve changed them, they are smaller now. So I tried a Fox Transition (in a medium) and it just fits me with the small padding so I bought that. Width wise it is just wider and protects my ears I believe. Height wise it is less than the old Crackerjack.
I’ve tried a lot of helmets on in shops and they always seem so massive, and particular at the sides, which I feel is a real risk of the awkward “boxers” brain injury. Since I am already suffering a long term brain injury this sort of thing is always on my mind when sizing up helmets. I think that if you’re riding on two wheels long enough you eventually decide what is most important to you.