Don't have a Ballista, but I just wrote about the Cadence: http://www.slowtwitch.com/...Done_Right_6174.html

I'd be skeptical of any head-to-head testing. I'd wager they are both very good. Both companies know their stuff. You'd have to test both yourself in the tunnel, I'd bet, to pick one for yourself.

---

"Non est ad astra mollis e terris via." - Seneca | rappstar.com | FB - Rappstar Racing | IG - @jordanrapp

Your article is what triggered my question... because I have a Ballista, or course!

here's a test, but I don't know how well it was done: http://www.bikeradar.com/...d-road-tested-44719/

---

wovebike.com | Wove on instagram

My N=1, my Ballista does not compare favorably to my Scott Split (former go-to helmet) or my Giro Aerohead (my new go-to). I usually don't feel comfortable going beyond ordinal results from my field testing but I can comfortably estimate that *for me* the Ballista is >5w slower than my Aerohead.

The Ballista is super light and well ventilated though and I like the way it looks :)

My head is higher than Sebi's. I've always suspected that people with a "higher" torso/head see larger differences amongst helmets whereas people with a "lower" torso/head... like Sebi... are less sensitive to differences amongst helmets.

I like your comment in the article about helmet weight. I am no weight weenie by any stretch but I think there is something to be said about how heavy some of the aero TT helmets are and the fatigue it puts on your neck. In the long run like you said it could even effect your running form/time.

I have been intrigued by the ballista since it came out and am going to be in the market for a new race helmet soon. My form is now where near as good as Sebi or any pro for that matter so why not go with something that is going to be better all around and something I can double as a road helmet!

I wonder the difference between the Ballista and say Giro Advantage 2 or Rudy Wingspan

I still eyeball the POC Cerebral though and your review helped with that as well.

Very good point about the weight. The biggest beef I have with my Giro Aerohead is that it is HEAVY! Even for hour long rides you can feel the extra strain it puts on your neck.

An aero helmet poses tradeoffs if it:

A.) Means you hold worse position on the bike.
B.) Affects your power output on the bike due to heat.
C.) Affects your running form due to weight
D.) Affects your running form or pace due to heat
E.) Affects your sweat balance negatively.

These are usually considered minor, and that the aero tradeoff we make is worth it (in the way that we're willing to trade weight in components), but they're not inconsequential.

Based on Kienle's use and Rapp's review, I'm considering the Cadence as my new helmet for hot races.

---

'It never gets easier, you just get crazier.'

I wondered the same thing. I'm in market for new helmet and narrowed it down to mips versions of Ballista or specialized airnet. Liked both of them are on, ventilation and both fit. Was leaning towards Ballista and then so the info on the Scott which I was unfamiliar with.

Never tested either, but looking at Rapp's write-up it's pretty clear that those numbers are unique to Seb. My Split is >5w faster than an Aerohead, and were any road helmet even close, I'd be surprised. If you're not going to test, you may as will stick with what you have unless you just fancy a change.

Yes and no. A long tail on the Giro Adv2 almost acts like a counter weight and makes keeping my head back a little easier I think. I tend to notice less fatigue in a 5 hour IM bike split (despite frequent sighting in the 1 hour swim prior) than a 5 hour training ride with a road helmet. Although some of that might be due to taper. That's me.

---

TrainingBible Coaching
http://www.trainingbible.com

I know I'm reviving a slightly old thread...
Has anyone ever tested how good (or bad) an aero helmet performs when not in an aero position - as in, riding on the base bar instead of the extensions?
Watching some of the IM videos online, it is quite apparent that on hilly courses like IMMT, lots of age groupers are not holding aero tuck during a good portion of the climbs. I'm sure I don't either, at least not always.

Seems like everyone chooses a helmet assuming they are going to literally hold that awesome aero tuck they managed to hold in the wind tunnel for a few minutes. :)

Guessing if the MOP AG'er considered time out of aero during his/her 5-6 hour bike, the gap between full aero and 'aero road' helmet would narrow quite a bit??

It's an aero-road helmet, note the emphasis. The fact that these helmets have become popular with triathletes is a nice bonus for manufacturers, but this helmet was developed for use, or at least to be primarily marketed by use in the professional peloton. Riding on the base bar is a much more upright and road-like position which is exactly what this helmet was developed for.

Kienle on the other hand would be riding this helmet in a position that I would assume to be largely outside of the design parameters, note the head down position in Rapp's article. I think that is why it was important for him to do actual tunnel testing specific to his position, test head down airflow and/or the interface between his head and back.

Smoothing the airflow from your head across your back was the original purpose of traditional long tail aero helmets so rather than question if an aero-road helmet is good for a typical MOP triathlete I think you should be questioning what good wearing a traditional tailed helmet in that scenario would do. I'm not an aerodynamicist, but I I'm willing to wager that for a lot of people they are just long-tailed paperweights.

Going back to the Cadence Plus, I can't comment on that exact helmet but I have the related (but less aero / more ventilated) Centric Plus helmet instead and it's the best overall helmet I've ever owned. I got the Centric rather than the Cadence because I'm primarily racing MTB and road hill climb events where ventilation and weight trump aero. If I were going to be getting a road-specific helmet or racing tri again I'd get the Cadence Plus over any other current offering in a heartbeat.

Not sure on aero, but went over my handlebars landing on my head wearing the Ballista. Helmet did its job and I didn't even have a headache.

I've always wondered why someone hasn't intentionally designed a helmet with some weight in the rear to act like a counter-weight.

Yeah the Rapp article really ruined it for me.
I was ready to pull the trigger and buy the Bontrager Ballista, when suddenly i hear of the Scott Cadence Plus. Both seems like really awesome helmets though.
The Scott cadence plus is sadly too new to be part of the bike radar article (which has also had a lot of critisism).

I would love to see an aero comparison between these two helmets!

I wouldn't trust articles like the BikeRadar test. Their heart is in the right place but their methodology is horribly flawed. I'd look to the averages of wind tunnel and velodrome tests from individuals (e.g. the Giro Advantage 2 is pretty good most of the time) or you can always field test yourself using the Chung VE method.

Agreed, it seems flawed. But i think my selftesting would be just as flawed, and i dont want to buy both to test. At the end of the day, fit might very well also be an important benchmark.


But to revive the thread, has anyone in the mean time tested these 2 helmets or either of them?

OP has asked for aero data, not overall thoughts on the helmet, which is what this thread seems to have evolved to.
Yes, all the remarks here are very reasonable, but any intelligent person; like yourselves, gents; can come up with them after reading mentioned Rapp's review and/or other articles on aero-road helmets.

While I agree, that any aero data and testing methodology must be treated with an extra dose of scrutiny,
still, any data is better than no data.

Regarding the mentioned 'scrutiny', a great read:
Alphamantis take on road-aero helments benchmarking

Take-away from the article: "What’s aero for one athlete might not be aero for another".
However, they share some CdA data of popular helmets, coming from multiple riders, so some conclusions can be made.
My personal conclusion is that LG Course might not be as fast as "tested" by Bikeradar (as you have mentioned, the test receives a lot of criticism), let alone claimed by manufacturer.
Hence, I'd be extremely wary of marketing BS and claims "our innovative helmet is the fastest on the market" blah blah blah.

More interestingly, LG Course and Scott Cadence are similar in the way, that they both
try to combine aerodynamic gains (or at least claim to) with non-compromised ventilation,
which has always been an issue for traditional aero-road designs with scarce vents.

Bumping this thread because I'm between one of these two for my fiance's first aero helmet. I can get either of them brand new for $125 but I'm having trouble giving one the edge. Any new thoughts on them?

---

Benjamin Deal - Professional - Instagram - TriRig - Lodi Cyclery
Deals on Wheels - Results, schedule, videos, sponsors

I was on the fence between these two helmets myself for road applications (draft legal racing, and some crits)... I ultimately went the Scott route, solely because I had gift certificates that I got as a prize at a race that were approaching expiry, and the shop happened to be a Scott dealer with the cadence plus in stock in my size... It's easily the most comfortable helmet that I have worn (compared to a number of Giro models and some LAS models as well). I did race it at a draft-legal race late in the season in miserable conditions (rain and near freezing temps) so I opted to put 3 of the plugs in for the additional warmth, and it was a help (a couple others were racing that helmet, and some of them plugged all of the vents)... It felt fast, certainly compared to a traditional road helmet. It is very light and comfortable and it's quite well ventilated for an aero road helmet if you leave the plugs out...

I like my Ballista..... that said, my next helmet will have better ventilation. I was in an Sworks Prevail and there is a noticeable difference in how much sweat pours from my brow between the two helmets during the heat of summer. Heck, may reserve the Ballista for fall and spring riding! I like it, but when it breaks 85 degrees with high humidity, I need ventilation!

---

wovebike.com | Wove on instagram

Oh dang. Okay that has me leaning back towards the Cadence. We live in the southwest and she'd be using this is a training helmet as well so the ventilation might be key.

---

Benjamin Deal - Professional - Instagram - TriRig - Lodi Cyclery
Deals on Wheels - Results, schedule, videos, sponsors

As has been noted, the Scott is very well ventilated for an aero road helmet. So if much of the riding will be in hot temperatures or on long climbs in hot temperatures, that would probably decide it. If that's not a factor, then I'd go with the one your fiance likes the looks of best.

Let me clarify: this isn’t just the Ballista, all aero road helmets have issues in high humidity areas with ventilation. When I go out west where humidity is low, I don’t have an issue. It’s not that I get hot in the Ballista here in the East coast, I just need more air passing over sweat to evaporate it. I’m dry climates, that’s not an issue and the Ballista is plenty ventilated and the aero advantage is noticeable, and Bontrager’s 1 year crash policy is hard to beat.

---

wovebike.com | Wove on instagram

Bontrager has tested as aero but an old model helmet now. Thing I like about the cadence is the plugs that you can put in the vents if you want more aero or great for cold weather riding.