instant dark helmet specs

[big bubba]

"Everyone likes to think that Snap-on ect are the best" randybell
snap on= snap off, a more appropriate name?.... use what works, nothing in today's market is sacred in price alone. as far as auto lenses, i really can't say...could be there are many safe products out there, not for me to say... i am not in the welding trade, so i just use my fixed, old school #10 lens nod hood when i need it, same as i used at hobart welding school many yrs ago. almost purchased HF auto lens hood, but.....well, didn't. i like this forum for the many opinions discussed here. at the end of the day, we all make our choices.

 

[roadhunter]

So because they don't say the one from 2010, you assume that it means that they are not compliant with it? That is conjecture on your part, as my Miller helmet doesn't say that it meets it and it works fine. It's also 4 years old, so I guess you are saying that it's unsafe?

Nope. Didn't say any of that at all. You completely made it up. I passed along what I found on the internet. I am no expert on these helmets but I do believe there is a difference or you would see more professionals using HF type helmets to protect their eyes.

The same discussion takes place every day on many Chiwan products. There is an entire thread about which Harbor Freight tools "don't suck" so that should be a pretty good indicator of the overall quality of their products. But some still swear that it's the same quality but for much less $. Very rarely can you buy the same quality items for less than 1/10 the price of a name brand top of the line helmet. I think people want to believe they got a bargain so bad they convince themselves that they did.

I tried contacting Miller about why some helmets have the 2010 and some have the 2003 rating but they never responded. Strangely a couple of days later they asked me to take a survey about my experience asking a question.

 

[ThomasH]

Nope. Didn't say any of that at all. You completely made it up. I passed along what I found on the internet. I am no expert on these helmets but I do believe there is a difference or you would see more professionals using HF type helmets to protect their eyes.

The same discussion takes place every day on many Chiwan products. There is an entire thread about which Harbor Freight tools "don't suck" so that should be a pretty good indicator of the overall quality of their products. But some still swear that it's the same quality but for much less $. Very rarely can you buy the same quality items for less than 1/10 the price of a name brand top of the line helmet. I think people want to believe they got a bargain so bad they convince themselves that they did.

I tried contacting Miller about why some helmets have the 2010 and some have the 2003 rating but they never responded. Strangely a couple of days later they asked me to take a survey about my experience asking a question.

What a bizarre response. I didn't make up anything, I asked a question about what you were saying. Wow, sorry to ask such an obvious question.

 

[roadhunter]

What a bizarre response. I didn't make up anything, I asked a question about what you were saying. Wow, sorry to ask such an obvious question.

You did. I never said anything about your Miller helmet being unsafe. Nothing. That is what you completely made up. Here is the exact quote you made up. You" my Miller helmet doesn't say that it meets it and it works fine. It's also 4 years old, so I guess you are saying that it's unsafe?". I never said anything about our Miller helmet being unsafe. I also have a Miller helmet, much older than yours. I don't question it's ability to protect my eyes in any way shape or form. The only thing bizarre you is you claiming that I don't believe Miller helmets are unsafe.

Just so you don't confuse what I am saying here it is again. I question if a $35 Harbor Freight auto shade welding helmet can protect your eyes just as good as those made by established companies who have a proven track record of safety and quality products such as Miller, Lincoln, Hobart. As I said earlier I think the burden of proof lies on Harbor Freight claiming their helmet offers the same protection for your eyes as helmets that cost 2x as much or 10x as much.

I am not questioning the safety aspect of any Miller, Lincoln, or Hobart products. Hopefully we are 100% clear on that at this point. I am questioning the safety aspect of the extremely inexpensive helmets claims of giving your eyes the same protection for your eyes. I could be 100% wrong and they might be made with the same quality parts in the same factory and one is $35 and another is $350 just because of the stickers. From my experience when something costs 1/10 as another there is probably some pretty big differences in quality. But like I said I could be wrong.

I don't know the answer. I actually asked the question to Miller asking what the difference is as they have current model helmets with both ratings. They never responded. I would think that is a pretty basic question as it's listed on the specifications so people can see there is a difference.

Do you know the difference?

 

[aczlan]

Here is a side by side comparison of the 2003 vs the 2010 specs, see pages 11-14 for welding specific sections: http://www.ussafety.com/media_vault/documents/1317838741.pdf
If I am reading the document correctly, they broke out IR, UV and visible light on the specs, but the specs for how much light can pass through at each shade level and how fast it responds is unchanged.
From that document:

Spectral transmittance categories/requirements expanded to allow matching and selection of filters for radiation hazards in greater specificity than previous edition. Such is noted by the prefix markings for individual filters as noted below

See also: http://www.uvexrx.com/documents/UvexRx_ANSI_2010_AdvisoryBulletin_Standard.pdf and http://multimedia.3m.com/mws/media/675643O/ansi-z87-1-2010-brochure.pdf?fn=ANSI Brochure.pdf

Aaron Z

 

[roadhunter]

Good info ^^^.

After looking at quite a few helmets there appears to be few that meet the 2010 standard so since the HF and most of the Miller helmets all meet the same specification for 2003 I don't think that proves one is better than the other.

Anybody ever see a welding helmet review in a welding magazine or safety magazine that gets into actual comparative testing between different brands?

 

[Big Barn]

A comfortable fit is important but equally important to me is the helmets with a larger viewing area. Terry

 

[yomax4]

Most people buy the Miller Helmet because it says Miller on it. Miller buys these over seas and re-sells them. They are an ok hood, Just don't kid yourself with the fancy graphics. Lincoln same way. I would vote Hornell Speed Glass as superior to most, now owned by 3M. Jackson 2nd and then any that use batteries 3rd and the solar hoods are all about the same. When Miller started selling hoods they all failed in a few days. They ended up sourcing up in cost to get where they are today. I know a little about AD hoods after selling 3 different brands over the years as a rep and dozens at a LWS. The Swiss and Taiwan had the best solar units for years until Korea and China caught up. Sadly, You wont know if an AD hood is protecting you until you use it for 10 yrs.

 

[Soundguy]

Thanks for posting. Kinda what I thought, they changed the garnish, but the meat and potatoes are the same. I see this sort of re)write in other engineering specs too. Re write a spec and use a new word that means the same as the old word but sounds better.

Energy disipator instead of rip rap. Etc..

Here is a side by side comparison of the 2003 vs the 2010 specs, see pages 11-14 for welding specific sections: http://www.ussafety.com/media_vault/documents/1317838741.pdf
If I am reading the document correctly, they broke out IR, UV and visible light on the specs, but the specs for how much light can pass through at each shade level and how fast it responds is unchanged.
From that document:

See also: http://www.uvexrx.com/documents/UvexRx_ANSI_2010_AdvisoryBulletin_Standard.pdf and http://multimedia.3m.com/mws/media/675643O/ansi-z87-1-2010-brochure.pdf?fn=ANSI Brochure.pdf

Aaron Z