Independent comparisons. We may earn from shop links. More info

Best face shield

Updated: October 2026

The highest star line in this amazon.co.uk set is 4.7 from 12,284 reviews, on an Oregon browguard with muffs at £22.79. The clearest printed EN 166 line is a different product, the Portwest PW91 at £14.99. The lowest price is a third, a Generic mask at £8.99 with six reviews and no standard in the table. If you came for the best face shield, those three numbers pull apart. Best here means best for one job inside these eight listings, with a reason to skip the others. Scores and full rows are on the [face protection comparison](/hub/occupational-safety/face-protection). The order of checks is the [safety visor buying guide](/hub/occupational-safety/face-protection/sub/face-protection-buying-guide). Stones and hearing on a grass trimmer are [strimmer face shield](/hub/occupational-safety/face-protection/sub/face-protection-strimmer). We compared listing text and review notes from 20 October 2026. We did not run a lab test. A qualifying purchase can earn a commission at no extra cost to you.

The highest star line in this amazon.co.uk set is 4.7 from 12,284 reviews, on an Oregon browguard with muffs at £22.79. The clearest printed EN 166 line is a different product, the Portwest PW91 at £14.99.

Our top picks

Oregon Oregon Q515061 mesh and muffs

Best overall

Oregon Oregon Q515061 mesh and muffs
8.9/10about £22.79
View offer
Jackson Safety Jackson Safety 14200 Maxview

Alternative

Jackson Safety Jackson Safety 14200 Maxview
7.5/10about £39.12
View offer
Portwest Portwest PW91 clear browguard

Best value

Portwest Portwest PW91 clear browguard
8.4/10about £14.99
View offer
On this page
  1. 1.How this pick was chosen
  2. 2.Top pick for debris and noise
  3. 3.Best value clear visor
  4. 4.What to skip as a default

How this pick was chosen

We scored the eight listings from the star line, whether the page prints EN 166, EN 1731 or a hearing standard, what reviewers repeat, and whether the price matches that evidence. Deductions apply for a thin review file, no printed standard, a helmet or welding claim the page does not support, or a mesh-versus-clear clash. The highest score is the top pick. The best value is the marked clear visor at the lower shelf price. Neither score means a shield is the safest in Britain. Stars are not a standard. The Hestya two-pack is 4.5 from 219 reviews with no EN line, so it sits below the marked browguards. The Oregon without muffs is 4.6 from 5,041, and its title says steel mesh while two bullets say clear. That clash is why the top pick is neither the cheapest row nor the dearest.

Top pick for debris and noise

The top pick is the Oregon Q515061, mesh visor and ear defenders on one browguard, £22.79 and 500 g. The bullets print CE EN 1731 and CE EN 352.1, and they quote up to 25 decibels. That phrase is not an SNR. Across 12,284 reviews the line is 4.7. Reviewers describe a brow cover, not a hard hat. One would not use it for chainsawing. Others say they have. Neither comment turns it into the HSE chainsaw kit, which still wants a helmet and glasses as separate items. The bullets say goggles can be worn underneath. That matches STIHL's UK point that a visor alone does not adequately protect the eyes. Care is mild soap and water, air dry, and no machine wash. Compared with the Q515064 at £19.62 you pay a little more and you get muffs, without that clear-versus-mesh clash. Compared with the Jackson at £39.12 you give up a clear sheet and keep the hearing protection it does not include. Skip it if you are grinding and need a continuous sheet. Mesh is the wrong screen for fine dust and splash. Skip it if you need a hard hat, or if you already own muffs with a known SNR and only wanted a visor.
Oregon Oregon Q515061 mesh and muffs

Testsieger

Oregon Oregon Q515061 mesh and muffs
8.9/10about £22.79
View offer

Best value clear visor

The best value pick is the Portwest PW91, a 1 mm clear browguard at £14.99 and 290 g, with 4.4 from 1,034 reviews. The bullets say EN 166 1B and 3B, notified body 2797. Portwest's datasheet calls that medium-energy impact protection. The 3 is not molten metal. That model is the PW96, and it is not here. A blue or green film sits on both sides and has to be peeled. Reviewers say the visor is clear once it is off. The wheel ratchet tilts the screen, and the PW92 is sold separately when the visor chips. There are no muffs in the box. One reviewer who wears glasses finds it useful, which is a single report, not a fit for every frame. Rank 1 in Visors is popularity beside those 1,034 reviews, not a laboratory place. Compared with the Jackson you save about £24 and you lose the ANSI and CSA lines, the side and chin guard, and some review depth. Compared with the £8.99 mask you pay more and you get a printed EN 166 line, a named spare, and a file large enough to mention the film. Skip the Portwest if you wanted mesh airflow and have no muffs of your own, if the hazard is molten metal, or if you will leave the packing film on.

What to skip as a default

The Jackson 14200 is the dear clear option, not a skip for everyone. At £39.12 and 794 g it has 4.6 from 4,589 reviews, and the bullets name EN166, ANSI Z87.1 and CSA Z94.3. Reviewers say it swings up, and that film covers both sides. One says full ear defenders will not fit. Another could not find a replacement lens. Buy it when a clear shield that lifts is worth more than the Portwest and you already have hearing protection. Do not buy it as the default strimmer visor when the Oregon with muffs costs less and matches the noise. Do not start with the unmarked straps. The Gaomumu at £9.97 weighs 160 g, claims anti-fog, and prints no standard. The title mentions welding and the page has no shade number. The Generic mask at £8.99 splits into goggles and a mouth guard, the warranty field says NO, and six reviews cannot show a fault rate. The Hestya four-pack at £23.89 offers two mesh and two clear visors, at 3.5 from 12 ratings. Three UK reviews call it flimsy, and one says the picture looks like a hard hat the product is not. The Hestya two-pack at £18.99 has 4.5 from 219 reviews and the same gap: no EN line, helmet wording, and fit comments above about 60 cm. If screen type is the whole argument, use mesh visor or clear visor first.

Common questions

Which face shield is the top pick here, and for whom?
The Oregon Q515061 at £22.79, mesh and ear defenders together. It is for debris and noise, typically strimming or hedge cutting, with safety glasses still underneath. It is not for a clear grinding visor, a hard hat, or an SNR printed as an SNR.
Which is the best value?
The Portwest PW91 at £14.99. The bullets print EN 166 1B and 3B, there are 1,034 reviews, and the PW92 spare is named. It is the best value clear visor here, not the best value if you needed muffs in the box or mesh for airflow.
Why not the £8.99 mask?
It has 4.2 from six reviews, no standard in the table, and a warranty field that says NO. The bullets exclude a welding helmet. Six reviews cannot show how the strap behaves on a trimmer. The low price is real. The evidence is not.
Is the Jackson worth £39.12?
It can be, if you want a clear shield with a side and chin guard, a ratchet reviewers say swings up, and 4,589 reviews behind EN166, ANSI Z87.1 and CSA Z94.3. It is a poor spend if you needed muffs included or a named spare lens. One reviewer could not find a replacement, and one said full muffs would not fit.
Should I buy the Oregon with muffs or without?
Buy the Q515061 when the machine is loud and you do not already own defenders. Buy the Q515064 only if you will check a listing that says steel mesh in the title and clear polycarbonate in two bullets. The cheaper Oregon has no muffs, and reviewers say the visor often will not stay up.
Why is the Hestya four-pack a weak pick?
The spares are unmarked, the line is 3.5 from 12, and UK comments call it flimsy. A spare helps after a screen you trust is scratched. It does not replace a printed mark. The Portwest already names a separate spare, the PW92, for a visor that prints EN 166.
Does rank 1 in Visors mean the Portwest was tested?
No. That rank is Amazon's list for the browse node in this capture. The PW91 also has 1,034 reviews at 4.4, and an EN 166 line in the bullets. Neither is a test we ran, and the rank is not a British Standard result.

Related pages

Dust goggles

Face protection

Safety visor buying guide: hazard first, then the mark

How to wear a face shield: film, chin and cleaning

Mesh visor or clear visor for chips, dust or splash

A strimmer face shield for stones, glasses and noise

Sources

Public UK sources listed below, last checked on 20 October 2026. Shelf prices and star lines are the amazon.co.uk figures for these eight listings. The price bands are this set, not a market average.

  1. HSE: using the right type of PPE (retrieved 20 October 2026)
  2. HSE: chainsaw PPE (retrieved 20 October 2026)
  3. HSE: PPE product supply (retrieved 20 October 2026)
  4. PPE at Work Regulations 1992, regulation 4 (retrieved 20 October 2026)
  5. BSI: BS EN 1731:2006 mesh eye and face protectors (retrieved 20 October 2026)
  6. DBT notice 0142/26, 15 October 2026 (retrieved 20 October 2026)
  7. BSI eyewear transition webinar, EN 166 date (retrieved 20 October 2026)
  8. Portwest PW91CLR datasheet (retrieved 20 October 2026)
  9. STIHL UK: grass-trimmer PPE (retrieved 20 October 2026)