M11 Helmet

[akravetz 29]

Looking to get a new helmet for my son, 6, as well as for myself (him first and then me). Really quick. we have looked at the M11 which he loves because, well, they are cool looking. The wife and I are looking at them because of the so-called concussion protection. My son suffered a concussion a few months ago during a practice. He wasn't looking and collided with another kid (bigger than him) and hit his head on the ice. He was in full gear but was dazed, turned down snack after practice (a huge sign) and threw up twice. I took him to the ER and he was fine as soon as they put Spongebob on the TV. Anyway, he was off the ice for two weeks, no recess for the first week and has shown no symptoms since that first night. However, as parents, we are worried as most would be.

I know nothing can prevent a concussion if you hit your head hard enough. He was in a Bauer 1500 or 2100, I think. It's the one with no clear ear pieces and sold with the cage. The one a lot of kids have. It was about $55 with the combo two years ago if that helps. I don't know the number and that's the only reason I put the price. Helmet is in fine shape and my son is skating great this year. But we are looking for next season when he starts at a higher level of mites. More contact though no legal checking and the kids are much bigger so collisions might hurt more. Thoughts on if the M11 is worth the hype for a six-year-old. I mentioned myself as I am rockin' an old CCM that I don't even know the model anymore. It's kinda old but appears in good shape. I am sure the certification is long since expired but I don't really know if that matters if you aren't playing in a high level league. I am in a beer league (C level) if that helps.

Thoughts from you guys as you seem to be able to cut through the chaff and get to the heart of the matter. i have asked questions in the past and so far, gotten good information so I appreciate and await any and all comments.

Andy

[goblue9280 33]

1. The M11 (Messier Project) is made by Cascade, not by Mission. There's a good thread on the helmet that should answer a lot of questions for you. Lots of hype with that helmet, and lots of people love it... but like every helmet, there just isn't a lot of science to back of any concussion claims. Still, I'd much rather err on the side of caution, and put my kid in a top of the line helmet, than a Bauer 2100.

http://www.modsquadhockey.com/forums/index.php?/topic/48186-the-messier-project/

2. Fit is most important. I know when my son was 6 he was still using a youth sized helmet because the Mission Intake small I got him was still too loose. The last thing you want is a helmet that slides and moves around.

3. If you're still interested in the M11 and it fits your kid, take note that new models are coming soon.

[cooperalls 4]

The Cascade Messier M11 was initially (and inaccurately) touted as "concussion-proof". As you know, this is not the case. I'm not a physician, and I don't have hard test data for hockey helmets, but my advice is that the most protective helmet is the one that fits the best. The M11 is a good helmet if it fits the head it's on. It should be snug enough not to move when they shake their head around (like nodding "yes" or shaking "no") but not so tight as to cause discomfort or pressure points. The chin cup of the cage/mask should fit close to the chin, and the "J" clips should prevent it from being pushed into their chin/jaw.

Many parents want to buy a size up so they can "grow into it". Your head grows at a lot slower rate than most other parts of your body. That's why some kids (and adults for that matter) wear a L helmet and some wear a S. It's more likely they will wear it out before they will outgrow it. Also, it's arguably the most important piece of safety equipment, the fit should dictate what is the best helmet. It's up to you to decide what fits your budget. Most are able to find a model/size that is protective, and comfortable, and affordable.

As for your own helmet, if it's more than 5 or 6 years old, if the shell is cracked and/or the foam has gotten hard from absorbing sweat and is dried out, it's time to replace it. It doesn't matter what level you play, you should wear a protective, well fitting helmet. Better to "rock" what will protect you than get rocked.

[akravetz 29]

You are right and I usually buy new. My other hobby is whitewater kayaking so I know Cascade from that life. And Sorry I got the name wrong. My son's helmet was new, fits snug and is designed to fit here and now. Again, my kayaking days... I have been in insane rapids where my lid saved me more than once.

We are going to go and look over the summer as his helmet still fits, is in good shape and the season is winding down. Btw, we tend to make him wear it all the time when he is on the ice, even at public skate So it's gotten a lot of use in the pas two years. My daughter, 3, is going to get a new one when she starts playing this fall.

As for me, the plastic is not cracked but the foam is hard. I was looking at it last night after I posted. I guess it is time to get a new one. Figure the two things you need to put money into are helmets and skates and in that order. Got only one head. Thanks and I'll look at that other thread to see. I knew it wasn't concussion proof but I wanted to hear a bit more from people in the biz, so to speak, on the hype.

Andy

[andysly 1]

Does anyone know when the M11 Pro will be available? I've heard this month but cannot find an actual date.

[jsykes 35]

According to Cascade they will be available to ship May 1.

[andysly 1]

Thanks....I thought it was February. But if it's May I don't think I'm going to wait.

[Rockingsquat 4]

The way the padding inside is attached/hold together is incredibly flimsy, surprisingly it hasn't fall apart yet on mine.

[ahbroody 1]

My son is 6 and wears the M11 right now. He has been wearing it since early summer last year when he started practicing with Mite kids and we realized he would be playing up this year. He is playing Mite inhouse and was on a Mite tournament team this year also. I bought the helmet because I bought into the hype. We were concearned because last summer at 5 he was practicing with 8 year olds and the size difference was a concern. He got ran over a few times so we figured we should do our best to help protect him. He was still 5 until late October so the size difference has and still is a bit of a concern for us.

He likes the helmet. It is very comfortable. He was sent head first into the boards by a trip from a pissed off 8 year old. He has also had a few solid collisions, the kind that make parents go ewwwwwwww and has not been hurt. I dont know if the helmet has helped or not, but I dont think it has hurt. I will say he rocls some serious flow and with low ventilation the helmet is a heat factory. Its also heavy. We have debated moving him to a bauer 9900 or the new E700, but I am waiting to see the new M11 pro. As people say so often proper fit is so important with helmets. The nice thing about the M11 is they come in extra small and are adjustable so you can really get a snug fit. I would focus most on the best fitting helmet.

As a dad with four kids I would be very worried if my son had already sustained a concusion at 6. Some people are physically more predisposed to concussions. The theory it appears is that also after getting oneits easier to get another. Was he wearing a mouthguard at the time?

[SolarWind 23]

there was a number of good threads about M1, and opinions clearly vary...

when I was looking for a new helmet for my 9 year old son we looked at all top helmets including M1, and in my opinion it clearly ranks the lowest mainly due to its flimsy construction - you can compress the helmet by almost 50% just by applying light pressure. To me personally irrespective what they put inside of the helmet I can't see how it could help.

plus there's been several reports of people getting cuts with M1, and the helmet wearing extra hot.

because of that (plus the fit of course which was the major factor) we went with 11K - lighter, and intuitively feels substantially more protective.

just this weekend my boy got checked from behind and went head first into the boards with pretty good velocity (9 years olds are quite a bit bigger and faster then 6es ;)) and just shook his head and jumped back into play. to me that's a pretty good.

[hockeymass 11]

there was a number of good threads about M1, and opinions clearly vary...

when I was looking for a new helmet for my 9 year old son we looked at all top helmets including M1, and in my opinion it clearly ranks the lowest mainly due to its flimsy construction - you can compress the helmet by almost 50% just by applying light pressure. To me personally irrespective what they put inside of the helmet I can't see how it could help.

plus there's been several reports of people getting cuts with M1, and the helmet wearing extra hot.

because of that (plus the fit of course which was the major factor) we went with 11K - lighter, and intuitively feels substantially more protective.

just this weekend my boy got checked from behind and went head first into the boards with pretty good velocity (9 years olds are quite a bit bigger and faster then 6es ;)) and just shook his head and jumped back into play. to me that's a pretty good.

Uh, you're supposed to be able to compress the M11. It's got rubber compartments inside the shell to absorb impacts.

[andysly 1]

I went over the local LHS and tried on the M11. The large was much too large. The medium was too small. I just didn't like the way it felt. So, I ended up with the Easton E700. Comparable protection, SUPER light, lots of airflow. I don't regret my decision.....

[SolarWind 23]

Uh, you're supposed to be able to compress the M11. It's got rubber compartments inside the shell to absorb impacts.

nah - I can't buy into this logic sorry... I'd rather have the hard shell to absorb the initial impact followed by the foam cushioning the head vs. just having some ‘rubber’ receiving the direct impact.

Similarly to the idea that hard-hats employ: hard shell with the floating inner core. It’s like why would I even use the foam to absorb any impact when in the vast majority of cases the shell can happily take care of it?

BTW this is especially true for the impacts where the force is concentrated over small area such as hit with a stick or a puck.

The #s aren’t on M1 side either since ALL other manufacturers seem to have gone in the direction of hardening their shells by increasing their rigidity – certainly the case with Easton, RBK & Bauer top models.

[wrangler 157]

I thought the shell dispersed, rather than absorbed, impact.

[hockeymass 11]

nah - I can't buy into this logic sorry... I'd rather have the hard shell to absorb the initial impact followed by the foam cushioning the head vs. just having some ‘rubber’ receiving the direct impact.

Similarly to the idea that hard-hats employ: hard shell with the floating inner core. It’s like why would I even use the foam to absorb any impact when in the vast majority of cases the shell can happily take care of it?

BTW this is especially true for the impacts where the force is concentrated over small area such as hit with a stick or a puck.

The #s aren’t on M1 side either since ALL other manufacturers seem to have gone in the direction of hardening their shells by increasing their rigidity – certainly the case with Easton, RBK & Bauer top models.

The problem is that EPP based helmets degrade with successive impacts, where the rubber in the M11 does not. The rubber in the M11 spreads the force of the impact.

A hard hat is not even close to a hockey helmet. A hard hat is designed to save you from one accidental event, not stand up to the stress of repeated contact as in a contact sport. I'm not saying it's the best possible design, as I'm not qualified to say that, but I think it's quite absurd that you're dismissing the engineering that goes into it out of hand.

[Stoop 1]

The problem is that EPP based helmets degrade with successive impacts, where the rubber in the M11 does not. The rubber in the M11 spreads the force of the impact.

A hard hat is not even close to a hockey helmet. A hard hat is designed to save you from one accidental event, not stand up to the stress of repeated contact as in a contact sport. I'm not saying it's the best possible design, as I'm not qualified to say that, but I think it's quite absurd that you're dismissing the engineering that goes into it out of hand.

Yeah, you always have to read the publicity reports with a skeptical mind, but I don't put any weight at all on some guy's opinion based on pushing on it with his fingers a few times. In the other M11 thread, somebody did the finger test and came up with exactly the opposite complaint -- that it takes too much force too compress the M11 cells.

I do think manufacturers are waking up to the idea of protecting from both the everyday bumps and the rare big hit. That seems like a good thing.

[SolarWind 23]

I'm not saying it's the best possible design, as I'm not qualified to say that, but I think it's quite absurd that you're dismissing the

engineering that goes into it out of hand.

neither am I :)

nor I'm suggesting to "throw the baby with the bath water" either by 'dismissing' the design - it's quite possible that the absorption qualities of the M1 'honey comb' thingy are better than the EPP.

I'm however questioning the design that puts so much focus on absorption while ignoring the dispersing (thanks to the previous poster – that’s what I meant to say re the shell that it disperses rather than absorbs the impact) aspect all together.

re hard-hat design & hockey: 11K uses the floating core so some sinergies appear to be there hence I used it for the argument sake...

[jsykes 35]

you can compress the helmet by almost 50% just by applying light pressure. To me personally irrespective what they put inside of the helmet I can't see how it could help.

This is a non issue when absorbing impact. While its impressive to have a really hard and rigid shell, that will only help in once kind of instance, that is a crusshing motion, something that would compress the shell from both sides with equal force.

The only thing that absorbs impact when something hits you in the head is the padding that is in between you and the force. If you hit your head against the glass, you do not even need the entire other side of the helmet at all other than to just keep it in place. The only padding that matters is that sitting between you and the glass. The fact you can crush something has no bearing at all in actually absorbing the impact.

Its impressive to be rigid, and on those circumstances when someone is falling on your head or driving your head into the boards with a forearm, then a rigid helmet is nice, I'm not saying its not important.

But when it comes to simply absorbing impact it means nothing.

[hockeymass 11]

neither am I :)

nor I'm suggesting to "throw the baby with the bath water" either by 'dismissing' the design - it's quite possible that the absorption qualities of the M1 'honey comb' thingy are better than the EPP.

I'm however questioning the design that puts so much focus on absorption while ignoring the dispersing (thanks to the previous poster – that’s what I meant to say re the shell that it disperses rather than absorbs the impact) aspect all together.

re hard-hat design & hockey: 11K uses the floating core so some sinergies appear to be there hence I used it for the argument sake...

The plastic shell still disperses some of the impact across the shell.

[ahbroody 1]

I have been thinking about this since my last post.

I am starting to think a cars crash concept might not be a bad point of reference. The M11 reminds me of the crumple zone effect in unibody cars that was first laughed at. The compression is helping absorb some of the impact and help with deceleration. I think with most low to moderste speed impacts this is a good idea. As I said earlier my son has taken a few good shots this year all collisions he had were with bigger kids who weighed more. He has yet to be hurt or complain. If the helmet was so flimsy and unsafe/ inferior I wouldnt feel comfortable having my son playing up in it.

I think as mentioned the rigid helmets are designed to disperse the impact across the hole head. It would sppear they would degrade with each impact. It seems its two ways to skin a cat. To me both have upsides. Like most people say fit is everything. I would still like to know if the OPs son was wearing a mouthguard.

Solar M11 not M1. Dont know why, but its driving me nuts.

[akravetz 29]

Thanks for all the posts. The knowledge base on this site is truly amazing. Like I said, we are going to look over the summer and look for fit, cost and of course, looks. He is six, ya know. But I do appreciate all the help. I'll try to remember to keep people up to speed on what we do if you care. Right now, he's playing hard and the helmet fits great. Very snug and no signs of the foam on the inside cracking or breaking down. In theory, the helmet might be fine for another year but we just want to be sure. Thanks again for all your help.

Andy

[danno25nh 3]

A lot of bro-science in this thread.

The only possible dispersion improvement we'd see from a very rigid shell would be for a very small impact point. There aren't that many of this type of impact in hockey. Even then some studies would be in order. A perfectly rigid shell would simply pass the kinetic energy to the surrounding foam and the skull. A less rigid shell will absorb some of the kinetic energy. A hard hat is meant to protect from a sharp impact such as a bolt dropped from a couple of floors up. It's not going to do much for a shoulder to the head from a 200 lb guy that is moving at high speed or a collision with the ice or boards.

A motorcycle helmet isn't really meant to prevent concussion. It's meant to protect your skull from cracking when it bounces off the pavement and to keep the pavement from grinding through your skull as you slide along the ground.

The perfect hockey helmet would be semi-rigid with a lot of dispersing material like foam. Unfortunately you'd have a helmet about 2 feet in diameter and we'd look like a bunch of melon heads.

The mechanism of injury in a concussion is not usually the impact. It is instead the rebound. In hockey we see both coup and contrecoup injuries which supports this hypothesis.

[Law Goalie 147]

A lot of bro-science in this thread.

The only possible dispersion improvement we'd see from a very rigid shell would be for a very small impact point. There aren't that many of this type of impact in hockey. Even then some studies would be in order. A perfectly rigid shell would simply pass the kinetic energy to the surrounding foam and the skull. A less rigid shell will absorb some of the kinetic energy. A hard hat is meant to protect from a sharp impact such as a bolt dropped from a couple of floors up. It's not going to do much for a shoulder to the head from a 200 lb guy that is moving at high speed or a collision with the ice or boards.

A motorcycle helmet isn't really meant to prevent concussion. It's meant to protect your skull from cracking when it bounces off the pavement and to keep the pavement from grinding through your skull as you slide along the ground.

The perfect hockey helmet would be semi-rigid with a lot of dispersing material like foam. Unfortunately you'd have a helmet about 2 feet in diameter and we'd look like a bunch of melon heads.

The mechanism of injury in a concussion is not usually the impact. It is instead the rebound. In hockey we see both coup and contrecoup injuries which supports this hypothesis.

Well put, with the sole exception of the kind of limited and punctilious impacts that goalies experience.

[danno25nh 3]

I would still like to know if the OPs son was wearing a mouthguard.

A mouthguard cannot prevent or reduce concussion. It cannot make one faster, stronger, more agile, or increase endurance. Despite marketing hype by those that sell these pieces of plastic and rubber that cover our teeth they simply cannot do these things. Simple physiology and kinesiology tells us this with no doubt.

Concussion results from the brain bouncing off the skull usually in a forward and back motion from one side of the skull to the other. A rotational injury is possible but we'd expect some neck injury with this. A piece of plastic in your mouth cannot mitigate this injury.

Certain mouthpieces may give a slight improvement in airflow to the lungs by repositioning the jaw, but it's doubtful anyone short of a world class athlete would show any measurable increase in O2 intake. Do the math. If a mouthpiece gives 10% better air exchange and ambient air is 21% oxygen we'd see an increase of 2% oxygen intake per breath assuming we don't fill our lungs completely. This would slow our breathing by maybe 1 breath per minute.

The mouthpiece cannot improve how we deal with lactic acid buildup in muscle tissue. It cannot prevent the brain from bouncing around in our skull. It cannot improve our VO2 max. It cannot make our muscles more efficient.

If you still buy the hype consider this. If mouthpieces prevent concussion why do boxers who wear custom mouthpieces continue to get knocked out? They help us keep our teeth and that is all.

[troy 12]

The boxer example is useless given your previous statement about most concussions coming from rebound. A mouthguard obviously will not stop the rotation and whip of a boxer's head after getting drilled in the jaw.