lmao, good point haha
your point is taken though- I am going to be following updatesā¦ My head is weird and hard to fit. 
And hey- letās all be glad people are getting serious about their heads!!! I saw a post this week about a hunter pace and people were jumping helmetless, in full santa outfits etc. (no helmet on some).
2 Likes
Adding my voice to the chorus to agree with this. Jumped on MIPS as soon as it was available, as I rely on my brain to pay for my riding, and replaced my non-MIPS models with MIPS that have now scored lower. Disappointed, but the only way to improve is to know there is an issue.
Couldnāt agree with you more. I was delighted to see this. There should not be a price on safety.
1 Like
I posted this in h/j land but figured Iād re-post here:
Iāve said this a few times, but I stand by it.
If this study proves anything, it proves that more testing is needed. The Folksam study was smaller and the methodology was different, but that doesnāt dismiss the results. Itās just more data people should consider.
We need more independent testing. We need more transparency in testing by helmet manufacturers. We need to ask questions and make informed decisions. We also need helmets that fit. I donāt know that we all should rush out and by new helmets based on a single study until we have more information. Especially if current helmets fit. And, anecdotal evidence shouldnāt be dismissed entirely either.
So, my researcher brain suggest that people donāt panic and instead ask questions to all parties and ask more from our helmet manufacturers. We wonāt ever get any transparency if we donāt ask.
22 Likes
Is it right that that helmet is not astm rated? So canāt be shown in (in the us)? Not suggesting it would fail, just that it is one more thing people should be careful about when selecting a helmet. It would suck to be disqualified on this kind of technicality.
It is ASTM approved but also has UK rating which is more stringent than here in North America.
2 Likes
Thatās exactly how I understand it. MIPS is one piece of the puzzle and perhaps with disciplines where rotational falls are at a higher likelihood, both sets of information should be taken into consideration. That said, I havenāt read everything the study has released so far, just skimmed a couple of things. As with all science, not one thing is the end all be all.
3 Likes
As a member of the giant Oval head brigade, most of the helmets tested were for round heads.
2 Likes
This was posted by a representative from TIpperary on a MIPS FB page
On behalf of Tipperay Equestrian:
Now that the much-anticipated results from the Virginia Tech equestrian helmet study are available, Tipperary Equestrian can review and apply these learnings to our manufacturing process and continue to provide you with the best equestrian protective gear.
Product advancements in protective equipment often come from independent innovators, MipsĀ® for example. A person or company has an idea that they study, research, and develop, then work with manufacturers to apply new technology or a concept to their products. The Virginia Tech study is a great example of this.
Much like we did with MipsĀ®, it is our job to stay on top of innovations and update our processes accordingly. Regarding the VT results, we must explore how to incorporate the new learnings while ensuring that we continue to meet the ASTM F1163-15 equestrian standard; a requirement for us as a North American brand. Most importantly, the VT evaluation is weighted towards low velocity impacts, while the current ASTM standard focuses on high velocity impacts known to cause catastrophic injuries like a skull fracture, or worse. Both impact types are entirely possible and now that the importance of low velocity impacts has been brought to light by VT, addressing both vastly different fall scenarios is necessary.
Important for all equestrians to know, the ASTM standard is updated every 5 years to capture new research. Weāre eager to see the update and subsequent changes in the equestrian industry, which is unfortunately often the last to see new innovations. Other sports get this treatment first; just as MipsĀ® was initially seen in cycling, and the VT ratings began in Football. We encourage all organizations who have the ability, time, and resources to help make our sport better. Tipperary Equestrian is always open to new information; it is the only way forward.
I can assure you that all Tipperary helmet models have met the current ASTM standard. This means your helmet will continue to protect you from a traumatic brain injury, which has always been the biggest concern in equestrian helmet protection. The results from the VT study have focused on lower velocity impacts, believed to be linked to concussions. This is brand new information that ASTM and manufacturers need to review, which is what we plan to do. Time will tell how this new information will affect our industry. If you have any concerns and want to speak to us directly, please send an email to info@tipperaryequestrian.com and weāll get back to you right away.
26 Likes
Definitely interesting. I actually like that testing by independent groups arenāt standardized (which would be hard) because it brings up strengths and weaknesses on all helmets for many reasons based on test methods. But, all the more reason for helmet manufacturers to be more transparent with their testing.
Just passing through briefly. The results are amazing and a lot to process. Sadly this is kind of horrible timing because I was out of town til Yesterday at noon. I have a busier day at work today, so my focus is on the stuff I need to do for my actual life.
I have talked to some brands. I have emailed with Dr. Miller. We are looking at doing our āPost Study results release Webinarā next week, one evening. It wonāt be Weds but waiting to hear back about which night works best for Barry.
I will post that here when I can. But I cannot talk now. I will when I can.
Do not lose faith. ALL your helmets are still safe. These findings are a big deal because quite literally the low impact findings are brand new and HUGELY significant. All the certification testing are a bit different from one another and VT is no exception. If helmets can be made safer against this, we will ALL be better off.
Em
14 Likes
Echoing what @Xctrygirl said I think this study is a great addition to the information we have out there and an additional layer of testing - but it isnāt the end all be all and we shouldnāt treat it as such. It is another piece of the puzzle that we as consumers can use to make an informed decision on what helmets we are putting on our heads, in conjunction with other independent studies and the results based on their test methods.
6 Likes
Cheaper brands tend not to have big marketing budgets and lots of sponsored riders.
4 Likes
Thanks for keeping us updated!
2 Likes
i had a nice long visit on the phone with a person from Tipperary. She said all that Enjoytheride posted. I also asked her about the difference between the plain Sportage (8500) and the Sportage Hybrid.She said the structural components were the same but that the Hybrid has a removable liner to wash and that was the main difference. I also asked about time to replace a helmet that has never been in a wreck. She said that the industry wide guideline is 5 years (not just a Tipp guideline). Some of this is related to the fact that ASTM revises/reviews/updates their testing every 5 years. Also it is a guideline not set in stone as so much is dependent on use, storage etc that will vary from person to person. Replacement guidelines are NOT based on manufacture date (found inside the helmet, sometimes after you remove the liner or MIPS liner) but based on date of start of use.
11 Likes
This test by no means is complete or comprehensive. If you look at the explanation of rating information you will see they used a pendulum impact on a head that moves away after the blow. https://www.helmet.beam.vt.edu/equestrian-helmet-ratings.html I would say that is a good simulation of a kick to the head not a fall to the ground. This document shows how they developed their test. https://www.chronofhorse.com/article/helmet-ratings-are-on-the-horizon-step-inside-the-lab-creating-them They had one person observe videos of people falling off horses to determine the kinds of forces the rider experiences in a fall. Well videos are generally done in more controlled situations. They arenāt going to cover the less controlled situation like a runaway on a trail, or the monster buck when refusing to cross a road. Also only one person observing the videos means you only get that personās perspective. A second person might have seen other factors. The determination was made that the speed of the horse was not a factor (tell that to an eventor sailing over the head of their horse on a refusal )nor were there any shear forces (the skid marks Iāve collected on my helmets over the years beg to differ).
The surfaces they considered were the ones they found at a local riding center (āsand footing, harder high-clay-content footing, grass and artificial footingā) and used those for determining the boundaries of the forces to be tested. This testing excludes gravel, concrete, asphalt, rocky trail and other surfaces that horses may be navigating. And totally neglects that statistically most horse injuries occur on a trail where the footing is not so consistent.
Personally I love this statement. āIf youāre on a trail ride, walking, and your horse bucks you off, thatās not probably not going to be high impact for it to breakā Uh I was leading my horse on a trail slipped and cracked my tipperary open on a rock. Iām pretty sure if my horse had bucked me off onto the rock it would have been damaged then too.
There there is this https://vtechworks.lib.vt.edu/bitstream/handle/10919/112802/Equestrian%20STAR%20Protocol.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y Which shows āThis setup allowed for linear and rotational motion to be generated during an impact and representative of the head, neck and torso of a 50th percentile male.ā okay that would be nice if most of the equestrians were male but thatās not the case. Google male vs female concussion rates and you will see the musculature of women does (even in active fit women) results in a higher concussion rate than men.
Also there seems to be some question on the shape of the head form they used for the tests and that helmets that were mean for a more oval shape did poorly because of that.
I really wish they had used the cycling test apparatus that duplicates impact with the ground in testing the helmets.
I feel they did the best they could with the money they had but so much more needs to be looked at than the 12 impacts they studied (vs the 24 they studies for cycling and 36 for flag football) Guess we need to pay more attention to the next gofundme they do for this.
The TLDR:
Geeky equestrian engineer feels more comprehensive studies are needed before this test is used as criteria for buying a helmet.
28 Likes
I have had some time to think about it and I just want to add that the wide ranging interest across the disciplines is so encouraging to me. I grew up in an Every Time, Every Ride video household & my mom was an RN who ran an ICU with plenty of exposure to TBI.
Iām a dressage rider but the attention to both detail and results is heartening to me. Even a few year ago there was so much argument about wearing a helmet AT ALL. But now here we are dissecting the intricacies of a study when it comes to brain bucket security. And that means a lot to me.
11 Likes
See Webinar details here.
Going to be held 12/12/22 at 7pm EST.
Em
4 Likes
Yes! The harness sits weird under my chin.
1 Like
