Most protective helmet

[DarkStar50 679]

I would be highly suspect of replacing the foam in your helmet.  The reason that harder foams are used is because they perform better in hard impacts.  Softer foams compress quite quickly under load and "bottom out".  Thus they transfer all of that impact energy directly to your head.  They may feel more comfy when wearing, but under impact you will be doing yourself a great bit of harm.  This is why manufacturer's use the EPP type foams in the outer portion, with a thin squishy foam or gel for comfort.

I don't buy that and I've never seen any documents that prove that the harder foams do anything to prevent concussions.

Chadd,

Just to play Devil's advocate: then why is every new helmet introduced with EPP foam and not the softer foams which previously dominated the helmet industry? There must be a sound reason only EPP is being used. Just connect the dots with what is in the marketplace currently. Also, all during the past NHL season I was surprised at how many former CCM HT2 helmets were never to be found on players. This was a very popular helmet before the lock-out. Now 2 years later, it is hardly worn in the NHL while EPP foams style helmets dominate? Sometimes we don't have to read any documentation to figure out what the industry is using and why. EPP must be superior for protection. No, I don't have any facts to back it up. I'm just looking around the whole wide world to figure it out.

[Chadd 916]

I would be highly suspect of replacing the foam in your helmet.  The reason that harder foams are used is because they perform better in hard impacts.  Softer foams compress quite quickly under load and "bottom out".  Thus they transfer all of that impact energy directly to your head.  They may feel more comfy when wearing, but under impact you will be doing yourself a great bit of harm.  This is why manufacturer's use the EPP type foams in the outer portion, with a thin squishy foam or gel for comfort.

I don't buy that and I've never seen any documents that prove that the harder foams do anything to prevent concussions.

Chadd,

Just to play Devil's advocate: then why is every new helmet introduced with EPP foam and not the softer foams which previously dominated the helmet industry? There must be a sound reason only EPP is being used. Just connect the dots with what is in the marketplace currently. Also, all during the past NHL season I was surprised at how many former CCM HT2 helmets were never to be found on players. This was a very popular helmet before the lock-out. Now 2 years later, it is hardly worn in the NHL while EPP foams style helmets dominate? Sometimes we don't have to read any documentation to figure out what the industry is using and why. EPP must be superior for protection. No, I don't have any facts to back it up. I'm just looking around the whole wide world to figure it out.

There is some logic behind your comments but some of the things I've been told conflict with those assumptions.

[hockeymom 2]

I would be highly suspect of replacing the foam in your helmet.  The reason that harder foams are used is because they perform better in hard impacts.  Softer foams compress quite quickly under load and "bottom out".  Thus they transfer all of that impact energy directly to your head.  They may feel more comfy when wearing, but under impact you will be doing yourself a great bit of harm.  This is why manufacturer's use the EPP type foams in the outer portion, with a thin squishy foam or gel for comfort.

I don't buy that and I've never seen any documents that prove that the harder foams do anything to prevent concussions.

Chadd,

Just to play Devil's advocate: then why is every new helmet introduced with EPP foam and not the softer foams which previously dominated the helmet industry? There must be a sound reason only EPP is being used. Just connect the dots with what is in the marketplace currently. Also, all during the past NHL season I was surprised at how many former CCM HT2 helmets were never to be found on players. This was a very popular helmet before the lock-out. Now 2 years later, it is hardly worn in the NHL while EPP foams style helmets dominate? Sometimes we don't have to read any documentation to figure out what the industry is using and why. EPP must be superior for protection. No, I don't have any facts to back it up. I'm just looking around the whole wide world to figure it out.

There is some logic behind your comments but some of the things I've been told conflict with those assumptions.

What things and by whom? Sorry, Chadd, I'm honestly not trying to be a jerk... I'm interested in knowing more.

[TBLfan 25]

adding to why I think that harder foam is better for absorbing high/hard impacts is because goalie masks are made with stiff foam. A goalie mask must be able to take the high impact of a puck and can take a stick to the head just as easily. Part of it is because of the mask flexing on impact, the other part IMO is due to the stiffer foam.

[Chadd 916]

adding to why I think that harder foam is better for absorbing high/hard impacts is because goalie masks are made with stiff foam. A goalie mask must be able to take the high impact of a puck and can take a stick to the head just as easily. Part of it is because of the mask flexing on impact, the other part IMO is due to the stiffer foam.

I don't recall seeing a goalie helmet with EPP.

What things and by whom?

Most of it is anecdotal but it fits with what I've seen, check your PM.

[JR Boucicaut 3789]

Itech has several EPP models.

[TBLfan 25]

I didn't say anything about EPP, because I have no idea what that is, lol. But I have two masks and have seen plenty and all have stiff to very stiff padding.

[Chadd 916]

Itech has several EPP models.

I just looked and could only find the 2500 listed with EPP. It's a decent helmet but it's not something I would use for anything above rec hockey.

[JR Boucicaut 3789]

Yeah, the 2500...there was another one that was lower, but yes, they are on mid-low pricepoint masks.

You know where I stand on the VN/EPP debate anyway.

[TBLfan 25]

Itech has several EPP models.

I just looked and could only find the 2500 listed with EPP. It's a decent helmet but it's not something I would use for anything above rec hockey.

ok, now I know what you're talking about. I have a 2500p that i never used*(because i have a better mask). Even in my other mask the foam is almost just as hard as the EPP.

* I'm actually selling it

P.S. The 2500p is a good helmet until you get to B leagues or higher.

[TBLfan 25]

Yeah, the 2500...there was another one that was lower, but yes, they are on mid-low pricepoint masks.

You know where I stand on the VN/EPP debate anyway.

the 1400 is the lower model, it's also known as the widowmaker lol.

[hockeymom 2]

The question actually is... protection from what?

Obviously, concussion... but what type of concussion? The 3 sports with the highest rates of concussion are Football, Hockey and Boxing (I think in that order).

Football tends to be direct impact - helmet to helmet or head to hard surface. In this case, it is NOT a brain bruise caused by hitting a hard surface; what actually causes the concussion is the sudden stopping of an accelerating brain.

Boxing is rotational - the head spins rapidly and causes the brain to shake.

Either way, the shaking cause the brain cells to become depolarized and fire all their neurotransmitters at once. Brain chemical overload results in parts of the brain shutting down - kinda like flooding the engine of your car; the pony won't go until everything settles down again.

Hockey has a bit of both types of concussions, but the MAJORITY of them are rotational - like the boxing concussion.

The question then is - the helmet is attached to the head and rotates with the head. So arguably it would have little affect on preventing the rotational type of concussion.

And although I have no answers at this point - only questions - would a softer padding have more effect on "cushioning" the brain in a rotational spin? Or no effect at all whether hard or soft.

The other issue of concussion is physics - "Force equals mass times acceleration. The larger the mass, the faster the acceleration, the greater the force. The greater the force, the greater the potential for injury. Unless you can decrease the force or absorb the force, chances are concussion injuries are going to go up"

A few years ago there were about 17 million different concussion studies launched. I did come across some discussion using car collision impact studies, and the NHL launched two studies: one comparing NHL and NFL concussions, as well as a videotape analysis of every single concussion to see what type of concussion is likely in hockey. (preliminary results showed the boxing or rotational concussion)

As well, I had started to track down safety study results through the CSA - but didn't finish it. Wanted to know if they just did pass/fail results - or actually published the results. Also wanted to know what the minimum standard was and which type of concussion it was designed to test for.

- I stopped researching helmets and concussions to wait for the results. As soon as I get a chance I'll wade through my files and check for updates on the studies.

Sorry so long (as usual - lol)

[A2rhino 62]

The question actually is... protection from what?

Obviously, concussion... but what type of concussion? The 3 sports with the highest rates of concussion are Football, Hockey and Boxing (I think in that order).

Football tends to be direct impact - helmet to helmet or head to hard surface. In this case, it is NOT a brain bruise caused by hitting a hard surface; what actually causes the concussion is the sudden stopping of an accelerating brain.

Boxing is rotational - the head spins rapidly and causes the brain to shake.

Either way, the shaking cause the brain cells to become depolarized and fire all their neurotransmitters at once. Brain chemical overload results in parts of the brain shutting down - kinda like flooding the engine of your car; the pony won't go until everything settles down again.

Hockey has a bit of both types of concussions, but the MAJORITY of them are rotational - like the boxing concussion.

The question then is - the helmet is attached to the head and rotates with the head. So arguably it would have little affect on preventing the rotational type of concussion.

And although I have no answers at this point - only questions - would a softer padding have more effect on "cushioning" the brain in a rotational spin? Or no effect at all whether hard or soft.

The other issue of concussion is physics - "Force equals mass times acceleration. The larger the mass, the faster the acceleration, the greater the force. The greater the force, the greater the potential for injury. Unless you can decrease the force or absorb the force, chances are concussion injuries are going to go up"

A few years ago there were about 17 million different concussion studies launched. I did come across some discussion using car collision impact studies, and the NHL launched two studies: one comparing NHL and NFL concussions, as well as a videotape analysis of every single concussion to see what type of concussion is likely in hockey. (preliminary results showed the boxing or rotational concussion)

As well, I had started to track down safety study results through the CSA - but didn't finish it. Wanted to know if they just did pass/fail results - or actually published the results. Also wanted to know what the minimum standard was and which type of concussion it was designed to test for.

- I stopped researching helmets and concussions to wait for the results. As soon as I get a chance I'll wade through my files and check for updates on the studies.

Sorry so long (as usual - lol)

When I opened this thread I should have stated what I needed the protection from other than the obvious. I take blood thinners and need a helmet that will protect my head from possible hemeraging and internal bleeding.

[ecjp11 0]

NHL players don't wear EPP foam. They wear skid lids with very little protection, but they skate with their head up and generally play safe and most of the time care far more about looks.

EPP is a better quality foam for high impact (like a slap shot in the bucket), but the concussion comes inside the helmet. Simply having a properly fit helmet and wearing a mouthguard has been proven in many, many case studies to reduce the chance of concussion. Do a search on highschool football leagues that have made them mandatory to find the stats.

[ecjp11 0]

The question actually is... protection from what?

Obviously, concussion... but what type of concussion?  The 3 sports with the highest rates of concussion are Football, Hockey and Boxing (I think in that order).

Football tends to be direct impact - helmet to helmet or head to hard surface.  In this case, it is NOT a brain bruise caused by hitting a hard surface; what actually causes the concussion is the sudden stopping of an accelerating brain.

Boxing is rotational - the head spins rapidly and causes the brain to shake.

Either way, the shaking cause the brain cells to become depolarized and fire all their neurotransmitters at once.  Brain chemical overload results in parts of the brain shutting down - kinda like flooding the engine of your car; the pony won't go until everything settles down again.

Hockey has a bit of both types of concussions, but the MAJORITY of them are rotational - like the boxing concussion.

The question then is - the helmet is attached to the head and rotates with the head.  So arguably it would have little affect on preventing the rotational type of concussion.

And although I have no answers at this point - only questions - would a softer padding have more effect on "cushioning" the brain in a rotational spin?  Or no effect at all whether hard or soft.

The other issue of concussion is physics - "Force equals mass times acceleration.  The larger the mass, the faster the acceleration, the greater the force. The greater the force, the greater the potential for injury. Unless you can decrease the force or absorb the force, chances are concussion injuries are going to go up"

A few years ago there were about 17 million different concussion studies launched. I did come across some discussion using car collision impact studies, and the NHL launched two studies: one comparing NHL and NFL concussions, as well as a videotape analysis of every single concussion to see what type of concussion is likely in hockey. (preliminary results showed the boxing or rotational concussion)

As well, I had started to track down safety study results through the CSA - but didn't finish it.  Wanted to know if they just did pass/fail results - or actually published the results.  Also wanted to know what the minimum standard was and which type of concussion it was designed to test for.

- I stopped researching helmets and concussions to wait for the results.  As soon as I get a chance I'll wade through my files and check for updates on the studies.

Sorry so long (as usual - lol)

When I opened this thread I should have stated what I needed the protection from other than the obvious. I take blood thinners and need a helmet that will protect my head from possible hemeraging and internal bleeding.

nothing is gonna be as safe as you need it to be.

Try a motorcycle helmet!

[kovalchuk71 212]

Thatd be a sight for soar eyes

[DarkStar50 679]

Just to play Devil's advocate: then why is every new helmet introduced with EPP foam and not the softer foams which previously dominated the helmet industry? There must be a sound reason only EPP is being used. Just connect the dots with what is in the marketplace currently. Also, all during the past NHL season I was surprised at how many former CCM HT2 helmets were never to be found on players. This was a very popular helmet before the lock-out. Now 2 years later, it is hardly worn in the NHL while EPP foams style helmets dominate? Sometimes we don't have to read any documentation to figure out what the industry is using and why. EPP must be superior for protection. No, I don't have any facts to back it up. I'm just looking around the whole wide world to figure it out.

On the 6 NHL teams that I cover, VERY few, if any helmets, have EPP in them. They are all "pro models" with thin Rubatex.

I forgot nobody said NHLers were smart! Then I'll go back to my question: if they just put the rubatex foam liners in a shell designed for EPP(at retail), why didn't the majority who wore CCM HT2 and Bauer 4000 stick with those models? How much money could anybody get for wearing a particular(Mission/RBK-the 2 dominant "new" 2005-2006 models) bucket? For myself I took an ass over teakettle spill a few weeks back and landed on my elbows followed by smashing the back of my head on the ice. My helmet was the CCM HT2. When I got back to the bench I knew I scrambled a few eggs in my head. I had concussion symptoms(very tired, headaches, and nausea) for 5 days. Of course, since I sell equipment, I don't always bother to take care of my own needs! Well, that horse had left the barn and now it was time to protect myself better. The NBH 8500 fit well but felt heavy. The Mission Intake fit well without the weight. I bought the Intake and I could care less whether anybody thinks it "looks" good or not. It is a significant improvement on the rubatex foam CCM HT2. One other thing: Pick up a RBK 8K and squish it front to back. The helmet will collapse! How safe is this? More importantly: How did this helmet pass certification when they drop the weight on it from 5'?

[JR Boucicaut 3789]

How much money could anybody get for wearing a particular(Mission/RBK-the 2 dominant "new" 2005-2006 models) bucket?

Oh, you'll be surprised.

But notice, a lot of those Intakes/RBKs are VN versions.

[sabre09923 0]

Just to play Devil's advocate: then why is every new helmet introduced with EPP foam and not the softer foams which previously dominated the helmet industry? There must be a sound reason only EPP is being used. Just connect the dots with what is in the marketplace currently. Also, all during the past NHL season I was surprised at how many former CCM HT2 helmets were never to be found on players. This was a very popular helmet before the lock-out. Now 2 years later, it is hardly worn in the NHL while EPP foams style helmets dominate? Sometimes we don't have to read any documentation to figure out what the industry is using and why. EPP must be superior for protection. No, I don't have any facts to back it up. I'm just looking around the whole wide world to figure it out.

On the 6 NHL teams that I cover, VERY few, if any helmets, have EPP in them. They are all "pro models" with thin Rubatex.

I forgot nobody said NHLers were smart! Then I'll go back to my question: if they just put the rubatex foam liners in a shell designed for EPP(at retail), why didn't the majority who wore CCM HT2 and Bauer 4000 stick with those models? How much money could anybody get for wearing a particular(Mission/RBK-the 2 dominant "new" 2005-2006 models) bucket? For myself I took an ass over teakettle spill a few weeks back and landed on my elbows followed by smashing the back of my head on the ice. My helmet was the CCM HT2. When I got back to the bench I knew I scrambled a few eggs in my head. I had concussion symptoms(very tired, headaches, and nausea) for 5 days. Of course, since I sell equipment, I don't always bother to take care of my own needs! Well, that horse had left the barn and now it was time to protect myself better. The NBH 8500 fit well but felt heavy. The Mission Intake fit well without the weight. I bought the Intake and I could care less whether anybody thinks it "looks" good or not. It is a significant improvement on the rubatex foam CCM HT2. One other thing: Pick up a RBK 8K and squish it front to back. The helmet will collapse! How safe is this? More importantly: How did this helmet pass certification when they drop the weight on it from 5'?

With that said-I wonder how many NHL players could've avoided concussion by wearing a helmet with foams that have better protection, and, even though none of the NHL'ers wear them (since they don't have to), if they wore a mouthguard. And on the 8K issue-I'd try to prove you wrong, but I don't want to shell out ~$130 on a helmet that supposedly will collapse. If you could ship me one for free that would be appreciated ;)

[gman 0]

When I opened this thread I should have stated what I needed the protection from other than the obvious. I take blood thinners and need a helmet that will protect my head from possible hemeraging and internal bleeding.

It sounds to me like you need to do some major neck exercises so you can keep your melon under control when hitting the boards or the deck. It is no secret that boxers and MMA fighters and wrestlers spend a tremendous amount of time training their necks. If you fall and are strong enough to keep your head from hitting the ground you may save yourself a trip to the ER.

It does sound like you have a very serious concern with your blood thinners. Seemingly any helmet you wear will put in danger of the same deep tissue trauma. The only completely safe thing is to get yourself strong enough to avoid hitting a solid object with your head.

Good luck with this.

Edit: I forgot to mention American Football players. Pretty thick necks on that bunch..

[sogaduch 0]

One other thing: Pick up a RBK 8K and squish it front to back. The helmet will collapse! How safe is this? More importantly: How did this helmet pass certification when they drop the weight on it from 5'?

actually the helmet passed csa certification above the 8500 somehow. I know its suprising but we had a Mission/Itech PK and they had the CSA results on there laptop since the Mission factory has CSA testing Lab so RBK/CCM,NBH send there helmets there for certification. I know it doesnt look safe but it actually is much safer in comparison to the 8500

[gman 0]

One other thing: Pick up a RBK 8K and squish it front to back. The helmet will collapse! How safe is this? More importantly: How did this helmet pass certification when they drop the weight on it from 5'?

actually the helmet passed csa certification above the 8500 somehow. I know its suprising but we had a Mission/Itech PK and they had the CSA results on there laptop since the Mission factory has CSA testing Lab so RBK/CCM,NBH send there helmets there for certification. I know it doesnt look safe but it actually is much safer in comparison to the 8500

Did you happen to see what is the "most safe"??????

[Chadd 916]

One other thing: Pick up a RBK 8K and squish it front to back. The helmet will collapse! How safe is this? More importantly: How did this helmet pass certification when they drop the weight on it from 5'?

actually the helmet passed csa certification above the 8500 somehow. I know its suprising but we had a Mission/Itech PK and they had the CSA results on there laptop since the Mission factory has CSA testing Lab so RBK/CCM,NBH send there helmets there for certification. I know it doesnt look safe but it actually is much safer in comparison to the 8500

Did you happen to see what is the "most safe"??????

Intake

[KYHockey3 0]

the most protective helmet imo is the bauer 8000.

i have had some close calls in the back of the head with a puck where the lower back part of the helmet has greatly helped.

[DarkStar50 679]

And on the 8K issue-I'd try to prove you wrong, but I don't want to shell out ~$130 on a helmet that supposedly will collapse. If you could ship me one for free that would be appreciated  ;)

Just ask a shop guy to do it for you. You'll probably blow his mind when the plastic collapses like cheap cardboard. Thats if the RBK EPP doesn't crack first. Just sent 4 back for replacement today due to that problem.