Blog

Ballistic Shell Construction & Technology

Ballistic helmets

Feb 16, 2026

Beyond shape and material, how a helmet’s accessories are mounted to the shell can affect both performance and durability. Traditional helmets often require drilling holes through the shell to bolt on things like chin strap retention systems, side rails, and NVG shrouds. Each bolt that goes through the shell creates a potential weak point since that spot no longer has intact ballistic material and could allow a round or fragment to penetrate easier (approximately 1.5 inches (38 mm) around the hole).   To address this, Team Wendy Ceradyne developed “no-thru-hole” shell technology, which means no drilled holes go through the ballistic material but still allows for mechanical attachment ensuring a secure mounting. 

In a no-thru-hole helmet, the retention and accessory rails attach without penetrating the shell – for example, using molded-in inserts, surface mounts, adhesives, or clamping mechanisms rather than bolts. Many of Team Wendy’s helmets use this approach. For example, The EPIC® line and new RIFLETECH™ rifle-rated ballistic helmet feature boltless fixtures for retention, suspension, rails, and shroud to ensure consistent performance throughout the helmet.

 

A female police officer wearing an Team Wendy EPIC Responder helmet uses her radio.

Why does this matter? Because eliminating through-holes preserves the helmet’s full integrity. In ballistic testing, helmets with no-thru-hole designs show improved resistance with no weak spots from bolts. If you imagine a round striking right where a bolt hole would be – in a traditional helmet, that’s a vulnerable spot. In a seamless shell with no thru-holes, that spot is just as strong as the rest of the helmet. It’s an example of how advances in design are increasing helmet performance beyond just materials.

To illustrate the difference:

  Traditional Helmet (thru-holes) No-Thru-Hole Helmet
Attachment Method Drilled holes with bolts/screws for retention, rails, shroud. The shell is physically punctured in multiple places to mount hardware. No thru-hole penetration; uses surface mounts, bonded hardware, or proprietary means to attach components. Shell remains intact.
Ballistic Integrity

Compromised at bolt locations – those spots have less material, creating weak points. (Manufacturers can compensate with fillers, but it’s not seamless.)

Fully maintained across entire shell – no weak spots from attachments. Better uniform protection; tested to have higher V50 and consistency.

Examples Older ACH/MICH (4 bolts for straps, 1–3 for NVG mounts), many standard helmets from 2000s era. Team Wendy EPIC line and RIFLETECH™

From an end-user perspective, you might not immediately notice if a helmet has through-holes or not – but it’s worth asking or checking. Boltless designs (no-thru-hole) are generally superior for the reasons above, and many top-tier helmets now feature this construction.

Even so, not all boltless designs are created equal. Some use adhesives to attach the helmet rails and shroud which ends up being much less secure. Team Wendy’s latest ballistic helmets’ (EPIC Protector, EPIC Specialist, EPIC Responder, RIFLETECH) rails, shroud, and retention system are secured using a patented process to mechanically attach these items without going through the ballistic material keeping the full ballistic integrity intact throughout.

2 law enforcement officers wearing Ranger Green Team Wendy EXFIL Ballistic helmets patrol an area with their dog.
Shell construction plays a critical role in a helmet’s real‑world ballistic performance, not just its accessory compatibility. No‑thru‑hole designs represent a meaningful advancement by preserving the helmet’s full ballistic integrity while still allowing secure mounting of essential equipment. By eliminating potential weak points created by drilled holes, these designs deliver more consistent protection across the entire shell. When evaluating modern ballistic helmets, looking beyond materials to how accessories are integrated can make a measurable difference in survivability—proving that smarter engineering, not just stronger armor, is key to next‑generation head protection.