The Definitive Eye Protection Thread

If you are new to the boards make sure you read this forum before posting.

Moderator: THE ARCHANGEL

Post Reply
User avatar
Erik
MAA Member
Posts: 4631
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2001 3:01 am
Location: Minneapolis, MN
Contact:

The Definitive Eye Protection Thread

Post by Erik » Mon Feb 07, 2011 12:50 pm

We seem to be getting a lot of questions about this, so I wanted to put it all in one spot that was easy to find.

GOGGLES:

Anyone of the field during active play must wear goggles. This includes roleplayers, refs, observers, spectators, players, everyone. There are no exceptions to this, for any reason, EVER!

Goggles must be on before entering the field, and may not be removed until you have exited the field.

All goggles must have a “full seal.” “Full seal”means that there are no gaps between your face and the goggles that a BB can get through.

All goggles must be rated ANSI impact standard z.87.1. ANSI rated lenses are typically marked or tagged. If the lenses are not marked or tagged, they may be approved if they pass a field test consisting of taking a sustained burst of fire from a stock AEG at a distance of 12” without damage. This test must be performed by the MAA Safety Officer or designee. The MAA assumes no liability for items damaged during testing.

All goggles must have an attached head strap. Safety glasses (even if they have full seal), “Croakies” or similar retaining bands are not allowed.

Full-Face Standards:

In addition to goggles, “Full Face” protection is required for players under 18 years of age. “Full Face” means a face mask which provides adequate coverage of the mouth, exposed facial skin, and ears.

A balaclava, hood, or scarf is not full face; the mask must be rigid and provide the coverage described above.

Mesh face masks may be allowed if they provide full coverage of the facial skin, mouth, and ears.

Masks may not be cut down or modified to provide lesser coverage.

Specifically Prohibited Items:

Mesh goggles are not allowed. Period, end of discussion, no appeal.

Modified lenses are not allowed. Specifically, lenses modified by having holes drilled in them, or otherwise weakened or rendered less safe.

US Military Sun, Wind, and Dust goggles are not allowed, regardless of what lenses are installed. The lens mounts are not secure and the lenses tend to pop out during play.

The MAA reserves the right to not allow any eye protection we believe may be unsafe, regardless of its manufacture, ANSI rating, or other factors. The Safety Officer or designee has the final word on this.

If you have any questions, feel free to ask.
110% PureBred Professional GunFighter
Team PALADIN
BATC Commandant
MAA Plank Owner
MAA Safety Officer 2001-2012
United States Army 1988-2000

User avatar
mau5
Extremely Regular
Posts: 331
Joined: Sun Dec 26, 2010 12:41 am
Location: St. Louis Park

Re: The Definitive Eye Protection Thread

Post by mau5 » Mon Feb 07, 2011 2:30 pm

Just to add to this, because these two facemasks are very popular and are on ASGI...
Save Phace does NOT (despite what ASGI may say or how SP themselves may try to mislead you) have an official ANSI z87.1 rating on their Tactical mask. However, they seem very confident in their lenses on the Tactical mask in being able to meet or exceed any ANSI z87.1 tests, due to "independent evaluation". This may mean that they can pass the aforementioned field test, but taking that risk is up to you. Aside from that, the Tactical masks tend to get either very good or terrible reviews, the terrible reviews for the most part coming from those who have used a high end paintball mask before.
Bravo / APS / Matrix Alien masks which are sold by ASGI and were sold by Evike show no sign of ANSI ratings or independent testing. Evike recalled a shipment of them in '08, because the production batch had different lenses than the sample batch that was tested. Directly from their recall, "If shot, the lense will crack instead of merely dimpling as it should." However, they promised to get a new batch of harder lenses. Evike has taken these masks off their site recently, and the batch that ASGI got was added to their site in October '10, which may or may not mean that ASGI got a better batch than Evike first had. Nonetheless, these masks have no official ANSI rating and have, so far, proven to be somewhat unreliable. They may or may not pass the field test, but again, that $45 gamble is up to you.
I don't mean to insult or offend anyone who has either of these masks and enjoys it, but I felt it would be nice for those thinking of buying one of these to know their history.

User avatar
Shock&Awe
Extremely Regular
Posts: 363
Joined: Sun Jun 14, 2009 8:35 pm

Re: The Definitive Eye Protection Thread

Post by Shock&Awe » Mon Feb 07, 2011 4:53 pm

Invest your money in something high-quality and that is an excellent make, like ESS. I have their Profile NVG fit, and it works perfectly, rarely fogs, and is ANSI z87.1 rated. These are the goggles used by the U.S. Armed Forces, and they're used there for a reason. I highly recommend these goggles.

http://www.esseyepro.com/Profile-Series ... etail.html

Note you must be 18 or older to use goggles at MAA games and most other fields. Otherwise, full face paintball masks.
Former Airborne Infantryman 2011-2015

Molon Labe

User avatar
ihackedthis1
Somewhat Regular
Posts: 70
Joined: Sat Feb 05, 2011 6:59 pm
Location: Blaine, MN

Re: The Definitive Eye Protection Thread

Post by ihackedthis1 » Mon Feb 07, 2011 10:22 pm

Thanks a bunch, this is really helpful. Any opinions on Arena Flakjak goggles or the cheap Scott paintball mask? This might not be the thread for it, but I'd appreciate some feedback.
"The hottest places in hell are reserved for those who, in times of great moral crisis, maintain their neutrality." - Dante

User avatar
Erik
MAA Member
Posts: 4631
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2001 3:01 am
Location: Minneapolis, MN
Contact:

Re: The Definitive Eye Protection Thread

Post by Erik » Mon Feb 07, 2011 10:43 pm

ihackedthis1 wrote:Thanks a bunch, this is really helpful. Any opinions on Arena Flakjak goggles or the cheap Scott paintball mask? This might not be the thread for it, but I'd appreciate some feedback.
I have both of these, they work just fine. I found the Flakjaks a bit cumbersome, but they work just fine.
110% PureBred Professional GunFighter
Team PALADIN
BATC Commandant
MAA Plank Owner
MAA Safety Officer 2001-2012
United States Army 1988-2000

User avatar
Bunny
MAA Member
Posts: 3013
Joined: Sun Jun 04, 2006 4:09 pm
Location: Burnsville, MN
Contact:

Re: The Definitive Eye Protection Thread

Post by Bunny » Fri Feb 11, 2011 2:13 pm

To definitively clarify ANSI requirements, since questions regarding this also come up:

The American National Standards Institute (ANSI) Z87.1-2010 safety regulations lays out testing and certification criteria for protective eye wear grouped by a number of "hazards." These hazards include:
  • impact
  • optical radiation
  • droplet and splash
  • dust
  • fine dust particles
Eye wear with an "ANSI rating" may meet the certification requirements for protection from any one or more of the above hazards. The one we are specifically concerned about in airsoft is the Impact rating, the MAA does not require that protective eye wear meet any ANSI requirements other than the impact one.

To receive an impact rating under the ANSI Z87.1-2010 requirements a lens, while mounted in its goggle frame, must survive an impact from a 1/4" steel ball traveling at 250 Ft./Sec. without splintering or spalling and the frames must retain rigidity.

Lenses that pass this test are ANSI Z87 rated for impact, and are marked as such on the lens itself, and commonly on the frames as well. Any lens that passes the impact rating will be marked with a "Z87+" or, alternatively, a manufacturer's mark followed by "+" such as "ESS+" or "3M+" These markings are generally along the side of a lens, and frequently cannot be seen without removing the lens from it's frame. If the lenses are prescription, they will be marked as "Z87-2+" or similar.

Examples of ANSI markings on an ESS lens:
Image
(Note that ESS uses a "Z87+" in addition to an "ESS" mark, the "CE" mark is a European safety/import certification)

ESS also marks the frames of the goggle:
Image

Many manufacturers will also document their products' ratings in a user manual or literature that comes with it, but these lens markings are the definitive proof of ANSI Z87 Impact rating.

Historical note:
As you might have guessed, Z87.1-2010 was formalized in 2010 and is a relatively new standard. The old standard, Z87.1-2003, divided eye wear up into two impact ratings, "high impact" and "basic impact." The high impact rating is the same as the 2010 impact rating described above and is marked the same way. Basic impact rated lenses only needed to survive a 1" steel ball dropped from 50 inches, and were marked simply with a "Z87" without a "+" at the end. The 2010 revision eliminated the "basic impact" standard altogether. Even though goggles rated under the basic impact standards of Z87.1-2003 may be suitable for airsoft, I would highly discourage anyone from using any goggle simply marked "Z87" for airsoft.

It should also be noted that many paintball masks are not ANSI Z87+ rated. Paintball mask manufacturers tend to follow the ASTM F1776-99a standard, which specifically applies to paintball. Though it is not defined as such in the MAA charter, in my opinion any masks meeting ASTM F1776-99a are also suitable for airsoft (this is just an opinion, the MAA charter is silent on the matter and I do not have access to ASTM standards to compare them to ANSI Z87).

Clark
MAA Member 70. BATC Grad 05-10. Chicago Swordplay Guild Member - Ferrum non Verbum.
Morris Team - The Bearded One

User avatar
Erik
MAA Member
Posts: 4631
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2001 3:01 am
Location: Minneapolis, MN
Contact:

Re: The Definitive Eye Protection Thread

Post by Erik » Fri Feb 11, 2011 2:35 pm

Thanks for the clarification Bunny. To recpap:

1. Goggles must meet the ANSI z.87 impact standard to be allowed at MAA games.

2. Any mask/goggle rated for paintball is generally going to be allowed.
110% PureBred Professional GunFighter
Team PALADIN
BATC Commandant
MAA Plank Owner
MAA Safety Officer 2001-2012
United States Army 1988-2000

User avatar
THE ARCHANGEL
MAA President/CEO
Posts: 7825
Joined: Thu Jul 12, 2001 3:01 am
Location: Minneapolis, Minnesota
Contact:

Re: The Definitive Eye Protection Thread

Post by THE ARCHANGEL » Fri Feb 11, 2011 2:54 pm

Bunny, that is a good thing to bring up as an addition to the Charter at the Member's Meeting.
MAA Founder, President, & CEO
MAA Member Number: 1
Team PALADIN Founder
BATC Senior Instructor
BATC Graduate 08-02
ATAC Award for Service

User avatar
Moose
A Regular
Posts: 110
Joined: Sun Aug 16, 2009 4:23 pm

Re: The Definitive Eye Protection Thread

Post by Moose » Sat Feb 12, 2011 1:48 am

Bunny,
My understanding is that some manufacturers have approved impact ratings on lenses but their frames do not pass the impact rating.
This is probably of a lesser concern for airsoft, and a greater concern for other applications.
With respect,
moose
There is room for all of God's creatures ... right next to the mashed potatoes.

User avatar
Bunny
MAA Member
Posts: 3013
Joined: Sun Jun 04, 2006 4:09 pm
Location: Burnsville, MN
Contact:

Re: The Definitive Eye Protection Thread

Post by Bunny » Sat Feb 12, 2011 11:28 am

Moose wrote:My understanding is that some manufacturers have approved impact ratings on lenses but their frames do not pass the impact rating.
Depends on what revision they are using. OSHA allows compliance with any of the last three ANSI standard revisions, so for OSHA compliance a company needs to supply eye protection that meets Z87.1-2010, Z87.1-2003 or Z87.1-1989. How the frames are tested differs in each revision. The 1989 revision does not require the frames to be tested at all, which lead to what was called the "sample lens" loophole where a manufacturer would place just the lens in a testing machine and then mount them in shoddy frames. The 2003 revision requires any lens meeting the high impact standard to be mounted in frames that also passed, separably, a high impact test. The 2010 revision finally requires both lenses and frames to be tested together as a complete system.

The Z87.1-2010 revision went into effect in March of 2010, anything manufactured after that will meet the new standard. Likewise anything manufactured after 2003 should have rated frames as well as lenses.

Clark
MAA Member 70. BATC Grad 05-10. Chicago Swordplay Guild Member - Ferrum non Verbum.
Morris Team - The Bearded One

User avatar
Moose
A Regular
Posts: 110
Joined: Sun Aug 16, 2009 4:23 pm

Re: The Definitive Eye Protection Thread

Post by Moose » Sat Feb 12, 2011 9:56 pm

Bunny,
Thanks for the clarification.
Great information sir as always, from you and MAA.
With respect,
moose
There is room for all of God's creatures ... right next to the mashed potatoes.

User avatar
Ammoth
Newbie
Posts: 11
Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2011 10:50 pm
Location: Plymouth, MN

Re: The Definitive Eye Protection Thread

Post by Ammoth » Sat Jun 04, 2011 9:14 pm

Could a face mask like this be used?

http://www.airsoftgi.com/product_info.p ... ts_id=7454

I havent looked up any information on this mask, but let's pretend the lense has an ANSI rating of Z87+. Could i use it then?
Or does it have to be a full face mask that was actually designed and tested for paintball?
Or would it just be worth it to not even waste my time and just go buy a paintball mask?
I'm Asian. so im automatically a ninja. Deal with it.

User avatar
Sharpshot
MAA Member
Posts: 1791
Joined: Wed Jan 30, 2008 11:41 pm
Location: Lino Lakes, Minnesota

Re: The Definitive Eye Protection Thread

Post by Sharpshot » Sat Jun 04, 2011 10:01 pm

Ammoth wrote:Could a face mask like this be used?

http://www.airsoftgi.com/product_info.p ... ts_id=7454

I havent looked up any information on this mask, but let's pretend the lense has an ANSI rating of Z87+. Could i use it then?
Or does it have to be a full face mask that was actually designed and tested for paintball?
Or would it just be worth it to not even waste my time and just go buy a paintball mask?
One, don't double post. It really annoys people. Two, That is a paintball style mask I believe, so it should be allowed as long as the ballistic rating is correct

BATC Grad Class 05/10
Gunfighter Level 1
MAA Member # 101
One of the First Airsofters to have Skydived into an airsoft event

User avatar
McClane
MAA Event Officer
Posts: 443
Joined: Thu Jun 23, 2005 4:39 pm
Location: Golden Valley, MN

Re: The Definitive Eye Protection Thread

Post by McClane » Tue Jul 09, 2013 1:07 pm

Is this type of retention strap allowed?
http://www.airsoftgi.com/product_info.p ... s_id=13216
Team DOLPH
YIPPIE-KI-YAY MUTHAF*CKER

User avatar
THE ARCHANGEL
MAA President/CEO
Posts: 7825
Joined: Thu Jul 12, 2001 3:01 am
Location: Minneapolis, Minnesota
Contact:

Re: The Definitive Eye Protection Thread

Post by THE ARCHANGEL » Tue Jul 09, 2013 4:24 pm

I'd say conditionally yes. There is no slack so it should be a tighter fit and that's good but it's also very light and flimsy looking. I'd want to see how they fit and held. When these questions come up it's either a clear yes or no....or more often a "you'll need to buy it and let us see it first" kind of thing. So many goggle systems out there now.
MAA Founder, President, & CEO
MAA Member Number: 1
Team PALADIN Founder
BATC Senior Instructor
BATC Graduate 08-02
ATAC Award for Service

User avatar
McClane
MAA Event Officer
Posts: 443
Joined: Thu Jun 23, 2005 4:39 pm
Location: Golden Valley, MN

Re: The Definitive Eye Protection Thread

Post by McClane » Tue Jul 09, 2013 8:52 pm

I've got two versions of them now.
Going to test them out this weekend.
Team DOLPH
YIPPIE-KI-YAY MUTHAF*CKER

Post Reply

Return to “Newbie info - Archive - FAQ”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest