EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Ski Gear Discussion › EPP vs EPS helmets. Your thoughts (or better yet experience )
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

EPP vs EPS helmets. Your thoughts (or better yet experience )

post #1 of 11
Thread Starter 

experience

post #2 of 11

***Cross-post from the other helmet thread based on research and not by first-hand side-by-side crash testing***

 

--snip

 

Studies have shown that the single-impact stuff doesn't cushion as well as the multi-impact materials and, like a bike helmet, you have to hit it relatively hard to compress the single-impact enough to worry about.  Also, the EPP (mutli-impact stuff) does have some "rebound" on impact instead of the "pure crush" of ESP.   Due to this, you also end up with a thicker and heavier helmet due to the extra material to reduce the rebound.

 

EPP/EPU has been around for almost 10 years.  If it were the best out there we'd see a lot more use of it than the few shells we do see and this question wouldn't even need to be asked - it would be standard in every high-end bicycle, wakeboard, ski/board and motorcycle helmet out there.  But it's not.

 

Personally, if I take a big enough hit to compromise the single-impact variety, even with the multi-impact I'm probably going to replace the lid because it will likely be cracked/trashed.  I'll take the extra protection for that one big hit. 

 

-end snip

 

You have one shot at life and skiing is expensive to start with so just factor it in.  If you're hitting your head THAT often that you need frequent helmet replacements, well, you might need more help than a helmet can give you.   =)

post #3 of 11

I mis-typed.

 

The SINGLE IMPACT absorbs BETTER than the multi-impact.  The "crush with no rebound and you have to replace it" give better protection for that one big hit.

 

Sorry. Thinking one thing and typed the reverse.

 

Read some of the MBTR forums for crash reports using both kinds of helmets.

post #4 of 11

Hi - Curious if you could give a citation for the studies you mention that show EPS absorbs single impact better, and a sense of what "better" means. (Since it could be a small statistical difference that's of little meaning biologically, or it could be a serious difference that will affect neurological risk.) 

 

Surprised because POC, which is very highly vested in racing, uses EPP, thus do a number of U.S. Ski Team members. :dunno

 

More generally, not sure about the "one big hit" idea for all trauma, since a number of studies of concussion show that the actual forces can be fairly moderate; more about the angle of hit. Something that produces rotation of the brain is a lot more problematic than something that produces a straight displacement. Or cumulative small hits; lot of concern these days about gates. Obviously, the "one big hit" idea might be valid for a penetrating straight blow, like a rock. Which is more allied with how helmets get certified. 

 

Last, not sure about the argument that we'd see more EPP around if it were better. Tech advances only get produced if their costs of retooling are offset by market demand, not because they're better. Otherwise we'd have roads that don't get potholes all the time and no one would use Windows. ;)

post #5 of 11
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by beyond View Post
 

Hi - Curious if you could give a citation for the studies you mention that show EPS absorbs single impact better, and a sense of what "better" means. (Since it could be a small statistical difference that's of little meaning biologically, or it could be a serious difference that will affect neurological risk.) 

 

Surprised because POC, which is very highly vested in racing, uses EPP, thus do a number of U.S. Ski Team members. :dunno

 

More generally, not sure about the "one big hit" idea for all trauma, since a number of studies of concussion show that the actual forces can be fairly moderate; more about the angle of hit. Something that produces rotation of the brain is a lot more problematic than something that produces a straight displacement. Or cumulative small hits; lot of concern these days about gates. Obviously, the "one big hit" idea might be valid for a penetrating straight blow, like a rock. Which is more allied with how helmets get certified. 

 

Last, not sure about the argument that we'd see more EPP around if it were better. Tech advances only get produced if their costs of retooling are offset by market demand, not because they're better. Otherwise we'd have roads that don't get potholes all the time and no one would use Windows. ;)

Are you sure that US Ski members use EPP? Which helmets they use?

And dont you go there about Windows. Windows gives you much more functionality and with that come bugs ;-)

post #6 of 11

You are absolutely right by arguing with the referred study about perceived better EPS better helmet liner vs. less market popular still EPP (multi-impact) liner. The fact that EPS liner is still more popular that the better-protective EPP liner is purely due to the manufacturer's choice, and not because EPS is better liner, except its lighter weight. 

 

But in the end even if EPS is lighter than EPP helmet liner this single fact does not make it better, period. In the end the most important thing to consider for yourself and your family is the safety, it's the protection of your most valuable asset - your head. The only other important thing to consider is the fit/size. Anything else like exterior design, colors, audio-pads and etc is not only not as important, but in some cases (i.e., audio equipment) - could be even dangerous for you and surrounding skiers/snowboarders to consider when choosing your snow, bike, hiking or equestrian helmet.

post #7 of 11
POC skull comps and the new orbic comps use EPP I believe. Pretty sure all the POC FIS helmets use EPP.
post #8 of 11
And now to add further controversy.... What about MIPS ? The POC fis helmets dont have it as far as I have seen.
post #9 of 11
Don't think any FIS helmets have it. MIPS has merit, but is it provide any additional safety in racing situations?
post #10 of 11
I own both worlds of helmets, one of the best but not as protective helmet on the market, Smith Variance Brim with one of the best active-adjustable ventilation system of 21 vents. Also, bought one of the most noteworthy most protective helmets for the last 2015/2016 season - Smith Pivot MIPS helmet.

The latest model along with the women version - Pointe, and Pivot Jr. for non-adult skiers combines almost (with one exception is not as light weight understandably, and doesn't have manually adjustable ventilation) the best of both words. But Pivot line of MIPS helmets has the same great Smith exterior design, plus MIPS all-angle protection against the head impact, and also compared to many others is equipped with multi-impact EPP foam liner.

I highly recommend this last season line of MIPS helmets also because their shape fits well most of the between head shapes I.e., semi oval-round heads, vs. only round or only oval head shapes POC or other competitors provide. With other words this line of Smith MIPS all gender and ages helmets are really most universal for the needs of especially seniors and youngsters, plus all other age groups than other brands.
post #11 of 11
And also one of the most affordable on the market today, I forgot to mention in order to get better the whole picture
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Ski Gear Discussion
EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Ski Gear Discussion › EPP vs EPS helmets. Your thoughts (or better yet experience )