Specifications are collected from official manufacturer websites. Please verify the specifications before proceeding with your final purchase. If you notice any problem you can
report it here.
It provides absolute protection, however, it has poor construction. The first time I used it, the rubber band broke. It's not worth it for so much money.
Quality but with a major downside, when you speak, the mask rises up from under the chin, resulting in it not closing properly and constantly having to pull it down. I wouldn't buy it again
The best protection in ffp2, as expected, when the word 3M and Aura is on the mask. It is of course much better than many ffp3, due to the excellent fit and the effectiveness of the filter, which has been measured by independent tests to catch 99.92% and above. It is the model intended for healthcare professionals in surgical settings, providing the same protection as the 9320+ model used in the industry. There are many similarities and many minor differences between the two models. The main differences with the 9320+ are as follows:
- It has the additional certification EN14683 (type IIR) for surgical use, meaning the outer layer has increased resistance to splashes during procedures. For protection against viruses and other particles, it is equivalent to the 9320+.
- The straps on the 9320+ are now tighter, making it more stable, while on the 1862+ they remain (so far) as they were before.
- The aluminum on the nose is better on the 9320+, while on the 1862+ it remains excellent, but comes in second... in both cases, you can build an apartment building with such metal...
- The breathing resistance is slightly better on the 1862+.
- The two masks have the same dimensions, but the 'seams', meaning the ultrasonic welding or metaphorically the apparent 'holes', around the central surface, which end next to the metal staples, have a greater distance at the end of the 1862+. This small difference changes the dimension of the mask, resulting in the 1862+ feeling larger in shape and more comfortable. Thus, the 9320+ is tighter. The same exact thing happens between the ffp3 models 1863+ and 9330+. There is also a 9330+ model intended for healthcare professionals, which has the same 'seams' and 'dimensions' as the 1863+ and slightly better breathability than the 9330+ used in the industry. It is the one that has a black rectangular bar on the individual packaging. In short, in the industrial 3M masks, there are continuous improvements and minor changes in the same models.
- The 3M logo on the mask is larger on the 1862+ (so it doesn't surprise you).
I have a small head and I find it tight, it slightly closes my nose. I don't wear it for long periods of time. However, it covers well, glasses won't fog up. Also, it's not easy to put on and take off.
Excellent, you can breathe comfortably, you feel safe and protected, as it fits perfectly. I wear it every day in court and I highly recommend it. The only drawback is that it is slightly more difficult to put on and take off compared to regular masks
I bought 3 models of 3M masks to try (8810, 1862, 9320). As for the fit and comfort for speaking (I have classes, so I talk a lot), it is very good. My glasses do not fog up at all. The only negative is that the initial "unfolding" is noisy to apply it. It is not a mask that you can easily take off/put on, so I only use it in class.
Deals
Technology
Home & Garden
Fashion
Sports & Outdoors
Health - Beauty
Baby & Kid
Auto - Moto
Business - B2B
Books