Street Open Face Helmets By Bell

On the left, the Drifter DLX.  Featuring Bell’s innovative Speed Dial adjustable fit system for a perfect fit even with your gloves on. The system also drastically reduces the tendency for half shell helmets t lift off of the head. Low profile shell design while still passing DOT requirements. $99.95 (solid) to $109.95 (graphics) On the right, the Pit Boss. Ultra light TriMatrix construction keeps weight to a minimum while still passing through DOT standards. Also featuring the Speeed Dial adjustable fit system. Removavle neck curtain and drop down sunshield. From $119.85 (solid) to $129.95 (graphics) Street Bell Helmets.

27 Responses to “Street Open Face Helmets By Bell”

  1. 1 Kamikaze Nov 11th, 2012 at 1:16 pm

    My state obliges me to wear a helmet, have used many Bell helmets. Great quality, some great designs like these 2.

  2. 2 Kirk Perry Nov 11th, 2012 at 1:17 pm

    DOT helmets are dangerous. Too thick. Too much weight.

    Too much bobblehead action. Makes mine hurt just thinking about it.

    It’s a wonder someones head hasn’t been detached from their neck. A human head weighs how much? Add the weight of a bulky, wind break being hit with 65 mph-plus air mass….I’ll wear DOT when they replace the interior foam with a compressed gas membrane, and shrink the side-wall of the helmet down to 1/2″ thickness with a carbon fiber shell that can folded-up and put in your jacket pocket.
    Re-vamp DOT from the inside out.
    Try me with your 50 yr. old technology…. go sharpen your pencils.

  3. 3 Tom Nov 11th, 2012 at 1:33 pm

    How well will these stay on head with no windscreen? All my half helmets go to back of head and try to hang me.

  4. 4 Kirk Perry Nov 11th, 2012 at 1:58 pm

    There is a compound developed by NASA called aero-gel?
    Compressible, it’s lightest mass on earth than can be seen by the human eyeball – and it’s in a display case at the Smithsonian aero-space museum – resembles white translucent fog. Took a picture of it.
    I’ll post it later today under the Senate (hemp) Tour of D.C.
    Aero-Gel? What’s up with that? Some “thing” must be better than (one-head-impact-only and must discard) “foam” crash helmets. Come ‘awn. 🙂

  5. 5 Kirk Perry Nov 11th, 2012 at 2:01 pm
  6. 6 richard Nov 11th, 2012 at 5:48 pm

    DOT helmets are dangerous? Compared to what? Aero-gel? Is Aero-gel available? Is it a feasible substitute for present day helmets? If it were available, how much would one cost? ETC. ETC. ETC.

    I do not wear a helmet but I’m smart enough to understand that if I’m in a crash, I’d be much better off with one, than without one. Don’t sound that dangerous to me…

  7. 7 roscoe Nov 11th, 2012 at 8:06 pm

    The Drifter looks good, it would look better without that star on the side.
    I wouldn’t want to be mistake for Sgt. Schultz!

  8. 8 Bilbo Nov 12th, 2012 at 12:01 pm

    So Kirk, your plan is to have a NASA approved helmet, initial cost around $3,000 for the helmet. Maybe you can just add it to the final price of the bike when you finance your purchsase. You are required by law to wear a helmet and you choose a “Frenchy” helmet. Doesn’t make much sense but God you’ll never be accused of NOT lookibg good with a helmet on.

  9. 9 betty Nov 12th, 2012 at 12:24 pm

    haha … Bilbo made me giggle. What about guys who race at 200+ mph? They shouldn’t wear helmets because they are “too heavy?” I haven’t seen any heads attached from necks yet.

    Kirk is asking for something that’s already been done. It’s called a quality helmet that fits properly. Currently I’m wearing an AGV, and my head has not yet been close to being ripped off at 65 mph. Not even at 120 mph. In fact, my head and neck are totally fine. And my helmet is so light I barely know I’m wearing it.

    If you have a ten dollar head, wear a ten dollar helmet. If you have a $500 head, wear a $500 helmet. But really, lets not turn this into a debate about whether or not you should wear a helmet and what kind. I just want to be clear that I think most people are not interested in getting helmet advice from someone who only wears one because he’s “forced” to. Fine if you feel comfortable riding without one, but there are plenty of great helmets to choose from if you do the research.

  10. 10 Blue Strada Nov 12th, 2012 at 1:22 pm

    As one of my riding buddies just said yesterday… ” If I hadn’t been wearing a full face helmet yesterday when I hit that patch of gravel… you wouldn’t be able to see my face today” It’s always going to happen to someone else… and usually when they least expect it. A helmet isn’t anywhere near as heavy as the burden on others when a head injury results in a vegetable state..

    VP Bell Helmets 1980-1985

  11. 11 Defendant From Hell Nov 12th, 2012 at 3:07 pm

    If I were a big race fan I’d be able to remember the name of the guy who died about a year ago (Marco something). Deaths of helmet wearing riders are covered up as well as the answers to the Bengazi Ambassador story.
    All you need to do is look for honest answers without trying to find answers that fit your pre-conceived beliefs.

    Shaken Baby Syndrome. Physics apply regardless of your age.

    Most bikers should be less concerned with convincing someone to wear or not wear a helmet, as facing the fact that government is forcing more of us to violate conscience at a faster rate as each month passes.

    The legal fact is in helmet law states, constitutional lines are being crossed by government, and most riders don’t know and/or don’t care. Fact is your Rights are worth far more than your $500 head. Why worry so much about your head when your whole body and psyche is a slave. Propaganda works, unfortunately. Proof? Most riders think you can’t make your own helmet and be “legal.” Ignorance must be bliss.

  12. 12 Blackmax Nov 12th, 2012 at 3:19 pm

    I’m a believer in the Bell system that they use on both of these half helmets.
    So much so that after I saw a demo at the Indianapolis Dealer Show
    I tried to get a demo one for a test article for about 8 months with no luck.
    So, I finally bought one, rode with it one in Canada & it’s a GREAT find.
    Better that average fit & it DOES stay on your head with very little wobble.
    As I live in a group of states that lets riders make their own choices,
    I usually choose NOT to wear one…..
    But when I have to wear one Bell Flamed Pit Boss is on my head

  13. 13 Mac Nov 12th, 2012 at 3:19 pm

    Besides style and comfort, what are the additional safety features between a DOT Certified $10 helmet and a DOT Certified $500 helmet?

  14. 14 Kirk Perry Nov 12th, 2012 at 3:20 pm

    “Doesn’t make much sense, but God, you’ll never be accused of NOT looking good with a helmet on.”
    I thought that’s why we’re all here. 🙂

    What NASA paid for aerogel is not what the public will pay. Aerogel just another fragment of the “comet trail” that NASA leaves behind, as they invent multiple items for space, that weren’t made for earth, but found a way to be utilized anyway (i.e; hang gliders [NASA’s Delta Wing].
    Look at it this way. 10 years ago it costs about 50K to have a helmet prototype tested by DOT. Right? The DOT mandates that the foam thickness be no less than one inch or 1-1/4, because why?………………. because the DOT is married to foam.
    Get out of the foam box. Think. Wonder. Test. There has to be a better, and re-useable impact substance, than one-crash and throw the helmet away foam.

  15. 15 ValueTeck Enterprises LLC Nov 12th, 2012 at 3:23 pm

    Looks like a nice helmet. I may have to check them out.
    I won’t get into the debate. My state requires it so it might as well be comfortable.
    I like the adjustment capability.

  16. 16 Olive Oil Nov 12th, 2012 at 3:24 pm

    Would not be here today if it weren’t for my $400 carbon fibre helmet saving me in 2009.

  17. 17 Defendant From Hell Nov 12th, 2012 at 5:21 pm

    Uh, Kirk Perry,
    You said, “The DOT mandates that the foam thickness be no less than one inch or 1-1/4, because why?………………. because the DOT is married to foam.”
    After scouring Title 49, all of Code of Federal Regulation relating to vehicle equipment, including chapter 301, and FMVSS 218, I wonder, where do you get this fiction?

    The DOT mandates no such thing. The closest to a mandate is the average police officer who might say that, but neglects to realize officers are supposed to enforce THE LAW, not their imagination, or old wives tales. If the CFR or any regulation required a strap or styrofoam, you’d be able to tell me what chapter and what page in the CFR. A “retention system” does not need to be nylon strap, or the words “nylon strap” would appear in the CFR. Many cops have told me styrofoam is required, but they can’t find where it is required. So it is not.

    An honest and accurate discussion or requirements, regulations and law will only work if those interested would stop promoting false information. As long as there are cops enforcing false information no one is protected from false arrest, and that means the cops will not be protected from False Arrest charges in federal court.

    If someone wants to show me the source in federal regulation they base these ideas on, I would like to read. Until then, I will continue to state that “We are a Nation of laws, not of men.” Nothing can be implied in law. Everything in law must be written word for word into the law so men of common intelligence can read and understand it.

    Where is the requirement to buy a helmet, and for that matter, one that has styrofoam in it?

  18. 18 Kirk Perry Nov 12th, 2012 at 7:25 pm

    “Many cops have told me styrofoam is required”
    Yep, and they heard it from some one we would suppose. One time, I went on a carbon fiber helmet bender and I had to know why helmets had to be so thick to do the job. That led me to the DOT and somewhere on my journey, I head about the 50K testing fee along with the 1″ or more of “foam that has no memory. I have a carbon fiber DOT (for emergencies if needed) and the instructions say that once the helmet has been involved in an accident, it is no longer DOT approved for wear-safety. Well my friends, thick foam was state-of-the-art in the 80’s, but there must be better. A non-disposable helmet after impact.
    Bell® is no stranger to NASA. Foam or aerogel? Anything but a hair dryer.

  19. 19 Defendant From Hell Nov 12th, 2012 at 9:00 pm

    No reputable manufacturer will label a helmet with any verbiage having anything to do with “DOT Approved.”
    The DOT/NHTSA states “[T]he term has no basis in either fact or law.”
    (see Department of Transportation generated correspomdence to Washington State Patrol June 2000) easily found here:
    At you can read it and 16 other letters written by the attorneys at the DOT.
    They are at links in white that look like this:
    Letter 1
    Letter 2
    Letter 3…

    We have spent countless hours weeks and months gathering information from the law itself (so you wont be fooled by a cop that heard something somewhere, or is making it up, or from a 17 year old kid selling helmets behind a counter).

    Come to find out – not just for helmets and unicorns – with all aspects of reality and life, the actual source that can be verified is the best – no, ONLY – place to find what is required of you. BTW, just as there are no unicorns in reality, there are also no DOT approved helmets. There are no such things as DOT approved tires, no DOT approved seatbelts, no DOT approved vehicle equipment of any kind whatsoever.

    When there is no requirement from the government to meet a certain aspect of behavior, we ought to learn and preach that over and over. This is not a country, and bikers are historically not the type, that take kindly to being forced to do what the government demands, let alone pretending the government is demanding even more than it actually is – and accepting it. Where are the real Bikers anymore?!
    Read and teach. Repeat.

  20. 20 Defendant From Hell Nov 13th, 2012 at 1:21 am

    Sorry, first link, in post above, should be

  21. 21 Chris Nov 13th, 2012 at 11:07 am

    @Defendant from Hell, very interesting “No Basis in Fact or Law” link. How many have been harassed and ticketed for not complying with standards that presumably don’t exist. Very intriguing.

  22. 22 Chris Nov 13th, 2012 at 11:07 am

    @Defendant from Hell, very interesting “No Basis in Fact or Law” link. How many have been harassed and ticketed for not complying with standards that presumably don’t exist? Very intriguing.

  23. 23 burnout Nov 13th, 2012 at 12:21 pm

    The only part of our helmet law (AL) that is in clear language is the changing of the strap and d-rings to a quick-clip. That renders ANY helmet illegal here. The rest of the law is vague such as “The Director of Public Safety will issue a list of approved helmets.” I have never seen this list. AND I am happy with my Bell Bandito. peace

  24. 24 TigerLily Nov 13th, 2012 at 4:43 pm

    I hate wearing helmets and I rarely ride in states with helmet bondage. Helmet laws ARE NOT about saving lives – they are all about domination and control over we the motorcycle-riding sheeple.

  25. 25 betty Nov 14th, 2012 at 1:23 pm

    @Defendant From Hell … Marco Simoncelli’s injuries were caused by being run over, not from crashing.

    If he hadn’t been run over, likely he would have walked away as usual. I understand his helmet was ripped off during the incident, but you must understand this is a direct result of coming in contact with a tire at race speeds–a highly uncommon thing to happen. He was run over by two MotoGP bikes at race speeds: something that has been the demise of several racers who would have otherwise survived their crashes (possibly without any injury). If you followed his career (or almost any other motorcycle racer), you would know that he crashed A LOT, especially his rookie season (as most do), without sustaining major injuries. But there are some things that gear cannot protect you from. The Marco Simoncelli argument is a moot point here.

    Motorcycling is dangerous, but we do it because the pros outweigh the cons, right?

  26. 26 Defendant From Hell Nov 14th, 2012 at 1:37 pm

    I wonder how many people would be discussing how pretty their seatbelt is, or how comfortable it is, or how many lives they supposedly save IF:

    Seatbelt ticket were issued the way helmet tickets are –

    1. Almost all tickets for “no seatbelt” were issued to people wearing their seatbelt.
    2. Basis for cop writing the ticket is the belt didn’t look as strong as some other belt they saw.
    3. Basis for cop writing the ticket is the belt didn’t look like the same kind the cop wears.
    4. You can prove your seatbelt is not illegal, but the cop thinks it looks like one another cop ticketed last week.
    5. State Appellate Courts and federal Courts have ruled that the cop must stop writing tickets without specific proof the seatbelt has been recalled by the manufacturer, but cops continue to write tickets using #2, #3, and #4 above.
    6. Court ruled that #5 above is a violation of your 4th Amendment Right, but since most people just pay the ticket, why not collect the money from the uninformed citizen. The government needs the money.
    7. Most drivers still talked about DOT approved seatbelts, even though it’s like talking about Easter Bunnies and Unicorns; in 5 minutes you could find out from the DOT that the DOT doesn’t approve anything.

    Luckily, none of the above really happens, unless you are talking about riders and helmets. When it comes to riders and helmets alot of us still want to talk about how comfortable and stylish our slave chains are. But I guess it’s ok, since we are such an insignificant percentage of the population, a few hundred thousand Rights violations don’t really seem serious.

    Can you sense a little sarcasm?

  27. 27 Defendant From Hell Nov 14th, 2012 at 1:58 pm

    You said, “his helmet was ripped off during the incident, but you must understand this is a direct result of coming in contact with a tire at race speeds.”

    Is this an excuse, justification, or whitewash? Was an injury caused by the helmet being ripped off his head?

    It doesn’t make the Marco argument a moot point, it raises the point that the scope of the helmet safety placebo, as perceived by many riders is more like a religion – a belief. The question of safety is clearly a separate discussion than the legality discussion.

    I don’t accept that motorcycling is dangerous, unless you crash. Helmets don’t prevent crashes, and that is the eventual outcome of any safety discussion I ever hope to have.

    On a site like this, helmet ads tout “DOT Approved” verbiage and riders discuss how cool they look or how comfortable they are. To those who grew up around racing, it’s almost as if you could ‘Dis’ their mother, but don’t ever imply that helmets are less than wonderful.

    In America, we are supposedly “innocent until PROVEN guilty.”
    Cops can’t PROVE your helmet is illegal
    (except in Alabama, as burnout suggested their Director of Public Safety can do — there’s that word “safety” again) but without proof of guilt, riders take the phoney “Word” of the cop and pay the ticket, then buy a shiny, new helmet that the officer’s eyes approve of.

    Really? This is still America, right?

Comments are currently closed.
Cyril Huze