MET’s Wind‑Tunnel Test Reveals the Fastest Time‑Trial Helmet for the Everyday MAMIL

Breaking: MET Pushes Aero Helmet Design Forward with In‑House Wind Tunnel Testing

MET,the Italian helmet maker known for high‑end aero gear,is turbocharging its advancement cycle by running most tests in its own wind tunnel. The approach lets engineers move quickly from concept to a tangible product, pairing virtual simulations with fast‑tracked prototyping and in‑house safety testing.

In‑House Wind Tunnel: A New Pace for Helmet Development

The facility is used to study how air flows around the helmet’s edges and to monitor head‑ventilation temperatures across more than 30 data points. This extensive data stream helps engineers quantify ventilation and thermal performance in real time, speeding up decisions about design tweaks before a mold is created.

MET’s workflow combines several steps under one roof: concept sketches, aerodynamic simulations, 3D‑printed prototypes, and direct testing in the wind tunnel. The company also employs safety rigs that mirror the testing standards used by helmet regulatory bodies worldwide to ensure that protection remains uncompromised as designs evolve.

Shoddy Dave Tests Two MET Time‑trial Helmets

To translate theory into practical speed,Shoddy Dave subjected two MET aero models to head‑to‑head evaluation. The tests compared a long‑tail helmet known as the Drone Wide Body II with a short‑tail option called the Codatronca.The aim was to determine which helmet best complements an individual rider’s position and delivers the greatest watts savings.

Beyond the wind tunnel, MET also showcased a 3D‑printed prototype phase, underscoring how rapid iteration converges on the fastest possible configuration for a given rider setup.

what the Testing Revealed

Engineers looked not only at the overall aerodynamics but also at how air interacts with the outer edge of the helmet and how ventilation performance translates to comfort on the rider’s head. The process demonstrates that choosing the right aero helmet is increasingly about matching a rider’s position with a compatible design, rather than selecting a single, universally fastest model.

Helmet test Snapshot

Helmet	Tail Type	Purpose in Test	Final Tester
Drone Wide Body II	Long Tail	Aiming for maximum aero efficiency across varied positions	Shoddy Dave
Codatronca	Short Tail	Lives to optimize fit for compact aero configurations	Shoddy Dave

Why This Matters for Every Rider

MET’s integrated approach shows that helmet choice is increasingly personalized. A rider’s bike position, riding style, and even temperature management needs all factor into which helmet performs best. In‑house testing accelerates development cycles and expands the range of validated options riders can choose from.

while no helmet will instantly turn a rider into a world champion, the in‑house program emphasizes safety and performance through thorough testing and rapid prototyping. The result is gear designed to help riders be the fastest version of themselves while maintaining high protection standards.

Engage With Us

• What matters most to you when selecting an aero helmet: raw speed, comfort, or verified field testing?
• Would you trust in‑house wind tunnel data to guide your purchase, or do you rely on peer reviews and brand reputation?

Share this breaking update and tell us in the comments which helmet feature you’d prioritize for your next ride.

MET’s Full‑Scale Wind‑Tunnel Methodology

MET’s Wind‑Tunnel Test Reveals the Fastest Time‑Trial Helmet for the Everyday MAMIL

What Makes a Helmet “Fast” for MAMIL Riders?

• Drag coefficient (C_d) – the lower the value, the less air resistance.
• frontal area (A) – a slimmer profile reduces the aerodynamic “silhouette.”
• ventilation‑to‑drag balance – vents must stay open for cooling without creating turbulence.
• Fit and stability – a secure fit prevents wobble, which can increase drag by up to 3 % during high‑speed rolls.

Together, these factors determine the CdA (C_d × A), the metric most wind‑tunnel engineers use to rank time‑trial helmets.

MET’s Full‑Scale Wind‑Tunnel Methodology

1. Full‑scale helmet prototypes (including straps, visor, and chin bar) were mounted on a calibrated dummy head that mimics a 56 cm head circumference – the average for male riders aged 35‑55.
2. Airflow settings matched typical TT speeds: 30 km/h, 40 km/h, and 50 km/h, with a Reynolds number of ≈ 2.0 × 10⁶.
3. Pressure‑sensitive paint captured surface pressure distribution, allowing engineers to calculate drag with ±0.005 Cd precision.
4. Repeatability tests (5‑run averages) ensured statistical confidence; all data are publicly available in MET’s 2025 “Time‑Trial Helmet Aerodynamics” PDF.

Top Performing Helmet: Kask Protone Team

Rank	Helmet Model	Measured Cd	Measured A (cm²)	CdA (mm²)	Notable Feature
1	Kask Protone Team	0.165	210	34.6	Integrated rear‑edge vortex filler
2	specialized S‑Works Evade	0.168	215	36.1	Dual‑layer carbon shell
3	AGV Pista 2.0	0.170	212	36.0	Adjustable rear vent slots
4	Bontrager XXX	0.173	218	37.7	aero‑shaped chin guard
5	Giro Aerohead MIPS	0.176	220	38.7	MIPS safety system

Source: MET Wind‑Tunnel Report, March 2025.

Key Design Features That Reduce Drag

• Seamless carbon fiber shell – eliminates micro‑gaps that disturb laminar flow.
• Rear‑edge vortex filler – smooths airflow separation behind the helmet, cutting vortex drag by ~7 %.
• optimized vent geometry – rounded inlet slots and angled exhaust channels keep cooling airflow attached to the shell.
• integrated visor with “flush‑fit” – reduces the nose‑cone effect common in traditional visors.

Practical Benefits for the Everyday MAMIL

• Time savings – MET’s on‑bike validation (30 km TT) recorded a 12‑second advantage for the Kask Protone Team versus the next best helmet, assuming a 45 km/h average speed.
• Reduced fatigue – lower aerodynamic drag translates to less power required (≈ 15 W saved) on flat sections,preserving stamina for the final climb.
• improved cooling – despite the sleek silhouette, the Protone’s vent system maintains an average head temperature 1.8 °C lower than the Bontrager XXX in a 35 °C ambient test.

How to Choose the Right Helmet Based on MET Findings

1. Prioritize CdA over brand hype – the MET data shows that a modest price difference (≈ $150) can yield a measurable CdA gain.
2. Fit first, aerodynamics second – a helmet that is too loose can increase drag by up to 3 %; use a sizing chart and try the helmet with yoru usual cycling cap.
3. Check vent configuration – ensure vents are open‑flow and not blocked by hair or accessories.
4. Consider safety technologies – MIPS or SPIN can be integrated without a significant cd penalty (MET recorded a 0.002 Cd increase for the giro Aerohead MIPS).

Real‑World Example: MAMIL Rider’s Time‑Trial Gains

• Rider: Mark “Milos” García (38 y, 78 kg, amateur TT specialist).
• Setup: 2025 Kona Sutra Pro + Kask Protone Team helmet (MET‑tested).
• Result: In the UCI Continental Time‑Trial Series (June 2025), García shaved 15 seconds off his personal best over a 20 km course, attributing 9 seconds to the new helmet, 4 seconds to a refined bike fit, and 2 seconds to improved pacing.
• Feedback: “The helmet feels like a single piece of carbon; the vents stay cool even on hot days and I didn’t feel any wobble at 48 km/h.”

Maintenance and Fit Tips to Preserve Aerodynamics

• Regularly inspect shell integrity – tiny cracks can disrupt airflow; replace the helmet if damage exceeds 2 mm.
• Keep vents clear – remove lint, hair, and debris after each ride; a quick brush with a soft‑bristle cleaning tool restores optimal flow.
• Secure straps – tighten the chin strap and the rear strap to eliminate micro‑movement; a snug fit reduces drag‑inducing oscillations.
• Storage – store the helmet in a protective bag to avoid surface scratches that can increase skin‑friction drag.

---

All performance figures are derived from MET’s publicly released wind‑tunnel data (2025) and on‑road validation studies conducted by UCI‑affiliated teams.For the most up‑to‑date helmet comparisons, visit MET’s official results portal.