Exactly what I thought. I have seen a few cases where the ball crashed through the gap and believe me, it is not pretty. You should be able to get used to the smaller gap without much difficulty.
As with all of his threads this is an interesting one
@FattusCattus I'm with
@Ayrtek in that should you get hit with the ball in that area the deformation to the peak probably means that you don't want that gap to be any less than what it is now. If you want to use that helmet then a more neutral grill might be better.
i guess the other way of looking at it is.... It sounds to me you haven't used a helmet up until now. Like many of us you have decided to give it a go. On the balance of probability widening the gap will still make you less likely to get injured as a result of a ball hitting you in the face and head area. it just leaves you open to a proportion of the risk you previously had.
Having said that, i see pictures of people banged up because the ball has gone through the grill but less pictures of the result of a face smash not wearing a helmet... i guess they are just less un expected.
Obviously i prefer to wear a helmet and would not want the risk of the ball going through but it does seem that the grill and peak sort of "collect the ball" and its basically go no where to go and gets channelled into the face. Maybe the same ball wouldn't cause the same damage if no helmet was being worn... it would have more chance to "glance off"
On balance i appreciate a helmet will be safer and i will always be wearing one from now on but it does go to show how important it is to keep developing the technology. A helmet is better than no helmet but there is always risk.. its just to what level you are happy with or more often the difference between how safe you think you are v how good / bad the design really is at keeping you safe.