Thoughts on IMS 9.0

[ammm88 0]

Has anyone tried out this helmet?

If so, what did you think of it?

[beerleaguecaptain 999]

nice helmet. I found the airflow better in the IMS 11.

[Winston 3]

I bought one when they first came out; it was really comfortable. I got a pretty decent concussion in it, but that probably would have happened in my old CCM HT2. My opinion... the padding in the temple area of the IMS and Reakt is way too thin (where the cage hooks screw in) you can actually feel the back of the screws when you press on it. I can't help but wonder if maybe a little more padding there would have lessened my concussion; its just too thin there for me to feel good about it. I switched to a VN lined CCM V08, which I like a lot. I do miss how comfortable the IMS 9 was, plus it looked cooler, but that doesn't mean anything when you bounce your head on the ice.

Also, the "extreme" poron XRD foam is recessed in the EPP, so I'm not sure how it's suposed to help if it's not even in contact with your head; the XRD pad should be 1/2" thicker... it really doesn't seem to be doing anything in there. I really liked the IMS a lot when I was using it though. If it had padding in the temple area I'd buy it again, but I've moved on.

[IPv6Freely 2096]

I bought one when they first came out; it was really comfortable. I got a pretty decent concussion in it, but that probably would have happened in my old CCM HT2. My opinion... the padding in the temple area of the IMS and Reakt is way too thin (where the cage hooks screw in) you can actually feel the back of the screws when you press on it. I can't help but wonder if maybe a little more padding there would have lessened my concussion; its just too thin there for me to feel good about it. I switched to a VN lined CCM V08, which I like a lot. I do miss how comfortable the IMS 9 was, plus it looked cooler, but that doesn't mean anything when you bounce your head on the ice.

Also, the "extreme" poron XRD foam is recessed in the EPP, so I'm not sure how it's suposed to help if it's not even in contact with your head; the XRD pad should be 1/2" thicker... it really doesn't seem to be doing anything in there. I really liked the IMS a lot when I was using it though. If it had padding in the temple area I'd buy it again, but I've moved on.

Helmets don't prevent concussions, and certainly not a tiny bit of extra padding.

Just so you're not thinking it was the helmet...

[Winston 3]

With my injury, a football helmet wouldn't have prevented a concussion, so no, I don't blame the helmet entirely.

In my opinion the IMS need improvement in protection as described earlier. (thicker Poron XRD pad, and much thicker temple pad). That's my "thoughts on IMS 9.0".

[Stryker 37]

ONLY ONE STAR DO NOT BUY

Just jumping on the bandwagon...

(Sarcastic post)

[Winston 3]

I shouldn't have mentioned padding and protection in a helmet discussion. Let me revise my earlier post to reflect the relevant and important details of a helmet review.... The IMS 9.0 helmet looks awesome! Totally passes the “mirror test”!!! That’s it, review complete.

Seriously though, here's what I was talking about in my earlier post, see pics:

Issue #1 for me, thin padding in temple (memory foam at cage clips): V08 vs IMS 9.0..

Issue #2 for me, Poron XRD pad recessed in EPP: How is that pad doing anything there? Shouldn't the XRD pad sit proud of the EPP and VN liner to be effective? It gets almost flush with the EPP towards the front and center, but it's still recessed in the VN a bit. To me it just seems like void space in the helmet padding.

The IMS is a really cool helmet, you can see there's a lot going on inside, I just don't like the padding at those two spots. Anyhow, that’s my unscientific observation and opinion; please don’t sue me Bauer. (Disclaimer: opinion of this poster only, not based on facts of any kind, testing data may vary, not valid in Alaska, Hawaii or New Mexico).