Jump to content
Slate Blackcurrant Watermelon Strawberry Orange Banana Apple Emerald Chocolate Marble
Slate Blackcurrant Watermelon Strawberry Orange Banana Apple Emerald Chocolate Marble
marka

Bauer Re-Akt 200

Recommended Posts

Howdy,

Any of you seen the new Bauer Re-Akt 200 in person yet?

https://www.totalhockey.com//product/Bauer_RE-AKT_200_Helmet/itm/26737-2/

Looks like they developed it in partnership with VT, reading between the lines, and its the only helmet to get a "Very Good" rating on their scales.

http://www.beam.vt.edu/helmet/helmets_hockey.php

 

Assuming it fits, I expect I'll buy one immediately.  Nice to see Bauer working with the research instead of fighting it.

 

Mark

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, marka said:

Howdy,

Any of you seen the new Bauer Re-Akt 200 in person yet?

https://www.totalhockey.com//product/Bauer_RE-AKT_200_Helmet/itm/26737-2/

Looks like they developed it in partnership with VT, reading between the lines, and its the only helmet to get a "Very Good" rating on their scales.

http://www.beam.vt.edu/helmet/helmets_hockey.php

 

Assuming it fits, I expect I'll buy one immediately.  Nice to see Bauer working with the research instead of fighting it.

 

Mark

You'll buy it immediately?  Just because of the VT rating?  Despite the flawed research and questionable methodology?  Wow.  I gotta write a report and sell you something!  Maybe a bridge over the east river in Brooklyn!

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Howdy,

I don't agree that its flawed research.  I fully expect that the methodology could be improved.  Any methodology can be improved.

But its one hell of a lot better than "Its totally better, trust me!  And look at the cool graphics!"

YMMV.  I'm pretty happy that a company is taking concussion prevention seriously vs. sticking their head in the sand.

Mark

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, marka said:

Howdy,

I don't agree that its flawed research.  I fully expect that the methodology could be improved.  Any methodology can be improved.

But its one hell of a lot better than "Its totally better, trust me!  And look at the cool graphics!"

YMMV.  I'm pretty happy that a company is taking concussion prevention seriously vs. sticking their head in the sand.

Mark

The go buy it immediately thing is just plain silly. For many, many reasons.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Howdy,

Just now, dkmiller3356 said:

The go buy it immediately thing is just plain silly. For many, many reasons.

Companies follow the money.  I think this is both important in general as well as important to me personally.  I can afford to go buy it immediately if I want to.

A better question would be why _wouldn't_ I (or anyone that this matters to) want to support this?

Unlike the latest and greatest hockey stick, I may well use that helmet to the limits of its capabilities the next time I'm on the ice.

Mark

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The purpose of a helmet can only be, and should only be, limited to reduction of skull fractures and/or lacerations. If you feel your current helmet doesn't adequately protect from lacerations and skull fractures, then go for this $300 helmet. Personally, I think all approved helmets cover this intent well ( I can't ever remember a player wearing an approved helmet fracturing their skull). An expensive helmet really offers no concussion reduction benefits over lower priced helmets ( that's actually the one key point from VT study).  One can argue that these expensive helmets could actually increase the potential for concussion by: 1) giving the player a false sense of invulnerability, and 2) being heavier and more cumbersome, they negatively effect the players awareness of danger compared to lighter (less expensive) helmets. You will never see a marketer of these expensive helmets make a clear statement like " this helmet reduces concussion risk by xx%", because they don't.

It bothers me when companies market safety items like this, and tip toe around verbiage to give the customer a false sense of better safety.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, clarkiestooth said:

The purpose of a helmet can only be, and should only be, limited to reduction of skull fractures and/or lacerations. If you feel your current helmet doesn't adequately protect from lacerations and skull fractures, then go for this $300 helmet. Personally, I think all approved helmets cover this intent well ( I can't ever remember a player wearing an approved helmet fracturing their skull). An expensive helmet really offers no concussion reduction benefits over lower priced helmets ( that's actually the one key point from VT study).  One can argue that these expensive helmets could actually increase the potential for concussion by: 1) giving the player a false sense of invulnerability, and 2) being heavier and more cumbersome, they negatively effect the players awareness of danger compared to lighter (less expensive) helmets. You will never see a marketer of these expensive helmets make a clear statement like " this helmet reduces concussion risk by xx%", because they don't.

It bothers me when companies market safety items like this, and tip toe around verbiage to give the customer a false sense of better safety.

Bauer actually did have a helmet advertisement a few years ago saying a helmet (might have been the I.M.S. 11.0) could stop concussions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Howdy,

39 minutes ago, clarkiestooth said:

The purpose of a helmet can only be, and should only be, limited to reduction of skull fractures and/or lacerations.

I don't agree.

Look, let me try this another way.

"I totally love the new vent grills on the Bauer Re-Akt 200.  Has anyone seen these in person yet?  What did you think?"

I'm particularly curious if the fit and adjustment mechanisms are similar to the Re-Akt 100.

Mark

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Jamarquan said:

Bauer actually did have a helmet advertisement a few years ago saying a helmet (might have been the I.M.S. 11.0) could stop concussions.

It was the IMS 11, formally know as the Messier Project. I own one, nice helmet actually, very comfortable. I believe the verbiage was "can help reduce the risk of" but I could be wrong.

 I was concussed a few years ago and I never even hit my head, it was the whiplash effect that did it. No helmet can stop/reduce/eliminate that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Right from the Bauer site. Listed out under every helmet they sell.

Experts state that concussions are mainly due to acceleration or deceleration of the brain, and helmets may not prevent concussions caused by these forces.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, clarkiestooth said:

The purpose of a helmet can only be, and should only be, limited to reduction of skull fractures and/or lacerations. If you feel your current helmet doesn't adequately protect from lacerations and skull fractures, then go for this $300 helmet. Personally, I think all approved helmets cover this intent well ( I can't ever remember a player wearing an approved helmet fracturing their skull). 

Blake Geoffrion fractured his skull above his ear. 

http://m.thespec.com/sports-story/4122507-video-geoffrion-picking-up-pieces-after-horrible-head-injury

Zucarello and Richter also fractured their skulls after being struck by pucks.

Edited by johnyo
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, marka said:

Howdy,

I don't agree.

Look, let me try this another way.

"I totally love the new vent grills on the Bauer Re-Akt 200.  Has anyone seen these in person yet?  What did you think?"

I'm particularly curious if the fit and adjustment mechanisms are similar to the Re-Akt 100.

Mark

I think that's a much better reason to want to get this helmet, rather than the way they are trying to market this helmet. I work in the medical sector, so these false safety innuendos really strike a nerve. Didn't mean to come off as harsh. It's a nice looking helmet.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, stick9 said:

Right from the Bauer site. Listed out under every helmet they sell.

Experts state that concussions are mainly due to acceleration or deceleration of the brain, and helmets may not prevent concussions caused by these forces.

This, exactly.   I also for example remember as a kid hearing mouthguards reduced concussions, but a paper from BMJ Sports medicine states.  " The ability of mouthguards to protect against head and spinal injuries in sport falls into the realm of “neuromythology” rather than hard science.32 Reading the original studies cited as evidence for this effect reveals anecdotal claims that can best be described as bizarre rather than reflecting established medical principles. It is unlikely that a mouthguard would offer effective protection against brain or spinal cord injury, and the limited published data are not compelling in this regard nor does it accord with the known pathophysiology of such injuries.

http://bjsm.bmj.com/content/35/2/81


If it's a nice looking, comfortable helmet, great... but one helmet to the next is very unlikely to prevent a concussion. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, stick9 said:

It was the IMS 11, formally know as the Messier Project. I own one, nice helmet actually, very comfortable. I believe the verbiage was "can help reduce the risk of" but I could be wrong.

 I was concussed a few years ago and I never even hit my head, it was the whiplash effect that did it. No helmet can stop/reduce/eliminate that.

I also have an IMS helmet, the 7.0. Not good about sweat, that helmet.

I had a minor concussion about seven / eight months ago, my head just barely glanced off the boards. Helmets really can't do anything about that.

If I understand correctly, concussions are from the brain moving too quickly inside the skull, often hitting off the skull itself. What is any helmet going to be able to do to solve that?

27 minutes ago, ironslave said:

This, exactly.   I also for example remember as a kid hearing mouthguards reduced concussions, but a paper from BMJ Sports medicine states.  " The ability of mouthguards to protect against head and spinal injuries in sport falls into the realm of “neuromythology” rather than hard science.32 Reading the original studies cited as evidence for this effect reveals anecdotal claims that can best be described as bizarre rather than reflecting established medical principles. It is unlikely that a mouthguard would offer effective protection against brain or spinal cord injury, and the limited published data are not compelling in this regard nor does it accord with the known pathophysiology of such injuries.

http://bjsm.bmj.com/content/35/2/81


If it's a nice looking, comfortable helmet, great... but one helmet to the next is very unlikely to prevent a concussion. 

This gets thrown around way too much in youth sports - that mouthguards prevent concussions.

1 hour ago, johnyo said:

 

47 minutes ago, clarkiestooth said:

The article says the edge of a skate blade hit the player in the ear. That would have nothing to do with the protection of the helmet.

These sort of events are not similar to 99% of the impacts a player takes at any point during a game. And considering that he was hit in the ear according to the article, then that's a matter of wearing ear gurards.

 

3 hours ago, dkmiller3356 said:

You'll buy it immediately?  Just because of the VT rating?  Despite the flawed research and questionable methodology?  Wow.  I gotta write a report and sell you something!  Maybe a bridge over the east river in Brooklyn!

I wish the VT ratings would stop getting thrown around by both people who support and criticize them. The way VT rated the helmets is flawed. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Howdy,

24 minutes ago, Jamarquan said:

If I understand correctly, concussions are from the brain moving too quickly inside the skull, often hitting off the skull itself. What is any helmet going to be able to do to solve that?

 

The helmet padding increases the time it takes for your head to assume the new velocity imparted to the helmet in an impact.  Or stated another way, it reduces the acceleration of your head.  Your brain is floating around inside your head, but its damped by fluid / tissue / whatever.  Kinda like a shock absorber.  If you reduce the G's the head experiences, you give that fluid/tissue/whatever more of a chance to slow the brain down (relative to the skull) before it impacts the skull.  Everything I've seen (and contrary to what this may sound like I don't spend all day every day reading up on this stuff) agrees with your statement above that its the brain's motion relative to the skull that causes concussions, with faster relative motion being worse.  I'm not sure if its the motion itself that is the issue or the impact with the skull, but in either case, decreasing the acceleration the head experiences helps.

 

Look, let's recap the argument here:

* "No helmet can prevent concussions completely"  -- Yes.  Totally true, no argument whatsoever by anyone even remotely serious.

* "A helmet can't help with concussions caused by whiplash rather than impacts."  -- Sure.  Again, obviously the case and nobody serious disagrees.

* "The VT helmet study methodology is flawed / doesn't exactly represent all helmet interactions in hockey".  -- Also fine.  I don't think anyone has ever suggested that the VT methodology accounts for every type of interaction a hockey player's head might have with something.

* "The VT study should not be the only factor in choosing a helmet"  Again, nobody disagrees.  Everyone recognizes that fit matters too and that related factors (like helmet weight) that might produce a good STAR score may actually make other safety (like whiplash) worse.

 

But it DOES NOT FOLLOW that "therefore, the study is meaningless".  Actual impacts to the head do occur.  When those impacts occur, a force necessarily gets transmitted to the head and when that happens, something that reduces the acceleration the head experiences DOES provide a better chance at not sustaining a concussion.  You can argue that the impacts the VT study use are so far off the actual impacts to the head that occur in hockey that they are meaningless, but given that there are literally no other published studies or procedures, and that the impacts they use seem reasonable to me, I'm going to continue to trust the VT study until something better comes along.

So, when Bauer actually works with VT to design a helmet that scores significantly better on their tests, I'm going to pay attention.  And if that helmet fits me and doesn't weigh 900 lbs or restrict my mobility or vision or whatever, I'm going to buy it.

But don't be distracted from what I'm really after.  Really I like the cool new vents.  :-)

The actual question remains... Has anyone seen these in person yet?  Tried them on?  Can compare fit to the Re-Akt 100 (or another helmet)?  Can compare weight?  Etc.

 

Mark

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Key word being risk.

 

A total of 38 hockey helmets that have been evaluated using the STAR evaluation system are included in the Virginia Tech Helmet Ratings.  Helmets with more stars provide a reduction in concussion risk compared to helmets with less stars.  Group ratings are differentiated by pre-determined thresholds

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bauer IMS 11, Bauer RE-ATK, CCM Fitlite, CCM Fitlite 3DD and CCM Resistance all rates lower than an Easton 300 & Rebook 4K.

Thats when I started calling BS.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If I need to spend $300 US for the best protection (more for us Canadians and even more with a cage), I'd rather take my chances with another helmet that didn't score too well in this already questionable study. It will be interesting though to see how the lesser-tiered helmets  in this line scored.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Virginia Tech hasn't worked with any of the manufacturers.  

They don't even tell the manufacturers how to get a better rating.  They buy the helmets, test them, and then publish the results.  

Every brand has been trying to figure out the right recipe to get a higher score.  CCM believes they will have a 4-star helmet as well.

The RE-AKT 200 was on display at Winterfest, in December.

9 hours ago, marka said:

Howdy,

Any of you seen the new Bauer Re-Akt 200 in person yet?

https://www.totalhockey.com//product/Bauer_RE-AKT_200_Helmet/itm/26737-2/

Looks like they developed it in partnership with VT, reading between the lines, and its the only helmet to get a "Very Good" rating on their scales.

http://www.beam.vt.edu/helmet/helmets_hockey.php

 

Assuming it fits, I expect I'll buy one immediately.  Nice to see Bauer working with the research instead of fighting it.

 

Mark

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Jamarquan said:

Bauer actually did have a helmet advertisement a few years ago saying a helmet (might have been the I.M.S. 11.0) could stop concussions.

No - Cascade made the claim.  Bauer subsequently sued them, and the end result was them acquiring them.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, JR Boucicaut said:

No - Cascade made the claim.  Bauer subsequently sued them, and the end result was them acquiring them.

Whoops.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Howdy,

2 hours ago, JR Boucicaut said:

Virginia Tech hasn't worked with any of the manufacturers.  

They don't even tell the manufacturers how to get a better rating.  They buy the helmets, test them, and then publish the results.  

Every brand has been trying to figure out the right recipe to get a higher score.  CCM believes they will have a 4-star helmet as well.

The RE-AKT 200 was on display at Winterfest, in December.

 

 

Thanks JR.  Do you know who Bauer worked with?  Or is that just marketing speak in the product description?

I missed the helmet at Winterfest.  :-(  Too much time talking to True and Warrior reps I guess.  :-)

Mark

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×