They rated 40 helmets… how did yours do?
My MIPS?? Not so hot… yikes
1 Like
36/40! 
Well, shit.
2 Likes
#4 and #7 for me 
Wow! I am surprised- I wear a GPA First Lady, which wasn’t studied, but the Speed Air is the same thing with a different brim and that came in at #9. At the time it was the only thing on the market that fit my head and I am glad to see that not only is it best for me because it fits, but it’s also offering good protection!
My “Wow!” reaction is also about some of the other helmets on the list. My mom just needed to replace her helmet and I told her MIPS, MIPS, MIPS. The best fit was the Tipp Windsor which ranked at #36 
3 Likes
Mine came in at number 6, but I was very surprised to see that MIPS helmets ended up both at the top and bottom of the rankings.
#5 for me- I’m not keen on how the Sportage looks, but I can’t stand the dial fit in other similarly priced helmets. Glad it gives me reasonable protection! I guess I’ll ditch my IRH medalist I use for showing , tho. It was WAY down the listing!
It is really interesting that these are all approved helmets. Certainly shows that expensive doesn’t mean safer in helmets!
3 Likes
Any sense of how this test compares to the Swedish Folksam test from 2021? Very different results in that test.
Results of Folksam test available here.
Me too.
Mine is an older version of #5.
I think I paid $70 for it at the time.
If I ever replace it, I will go for # 2!
Oh my, the prices on some of those helmets boggles the mind!
1 Like
I pondered this in one of the other threads on this topic, I do not think this testing included the features that MIPS protects you from, so that feature is not taken into account in the ratings.
1 Like
I couldn’t see anything in their overview that explained how they selected the helmets they included. How did my helmet do? Don’t know, it’s not there…
I’ve ridden a Charles Owen JR8 forever because I’ve got a pretty small head and it fits great. Not sure how I should proceed.
#6. I have a Trauma Void EQ3 and very happy with it. I must say, I was very surprised that the Tuffrider helmet came in 2nd at $58.00. Take that all you Kask and Samshield lovers! 
1 Like
I’m really bummed to see where my newly purchased OneK MIPS showed up. I’ve been wearing Uvex helmets for years and love them, but their MIPS was not a good fit for me, and I preferred the OneK so went with that. I’ll have to read more about what these rankings mean and see whether that guides me to change what I have.
4 Likes
@horsepoor I have a OneK MIPS helmet as well, and I’m really disappointed to see it’s low rating. I have really liked it and it is super comfortable, but safety is really my first consideration in a helmet. I sure wish I had that $360.00 back.
3 Likes
Don’t sell your helmet. 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 aren’t going to cover the more 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 person’s 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 I’ve collected on my helmet over the years beg to differ).
The surfaces they considered were the ones they found at a local riding center (“sand footing, harder high-clay-content footing, grass and artificial footing”) 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. “If you’re on a trail ride, walking, and your horse bucks you off, that’s not probably not going to be high impact for it to break” Uh I was leading my horse on a trail slipped and cracked my tipperary open on a rock. I’m 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 “This 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.” okay that would be nice if most of the equestrians were male but that’s 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.
13 Likes
From one geeky equestrian engineer to another, thank you for sharing your thoughts. Lots to think about for sure!
3 Likes
Won’t be selling my helmet; plan to do more reading (including your much appreciated post) before I change anything.
1 Like
I wouldn’t go anywhere near this study. The website says:
*Any player in any sport can sustain a head injury with even the very best head protection. This analysis is based on data trends and probabilities, and therefore a specific person’s risk may vary. This variation is likely dominated by genetic differences, health history, and impact factors such as muscle activation."
Helmets that we have purchased for years are ASTM/SEI certififed. ASTM establishes standards for different types of headgear . They are huge and well-establsihed. They are involved in far more than equestrian helmets. SEI certifies the helmet manufacturer’s product meets the ASTM standards.
A bike helmet has most of the protection on the front of the head because when you go flying off a bike that is where you land. I was at a barn with a large lesson program and they posted that bike helmets cannot be used at the barn. Who knows what direction you will come off your horse, and what position and what part of the head will hit the ground.
It looks like VTech created their own “standards” and “tested” each helmet to create a score. Then they made a list in order from good to not as good… Their testing looks sort of like someone whacked the side of a helmet with a baseball bat. Then they figured out what the score was.
The independent research that was done on MIPS helmets was done by an independent insurance organization. It was done before the MIPS helmet could be sold in the US. MIPS is a significant change on helmet technology and it was used in bicycles before it came to the horse world. It’s not brand-spanking new techology.
ASTM is a standard that acts sort of like a minimum. SEI looks at whether the manufacturer meets the standard for that helmet. The helmet manufacturer is not going to say that its helmet exceeds the standard therefore it offers better protection than other brands. Maybe it does, but the manufacturer would be nuts to promise better performance. Your concussion would be how much worse if you weren’t wearing their helmet?
I’m sticking with MIPS. I read something a few days ago that your brain is floating in liquid all the time. MIPS allows the liner to move when you hit your head at an angle. Your brain can rotate enough that it might reduce the severity of injury. Earlier helmets are designed for blows at a 90 degree angle.
The Snell Foundation creates their own standards and testing. They started out in the 50s making helmets for use in motorized vehicles. A well-known amateur autoracing driver died from head injuries when his helmet didn’t protect his head. That was back when we wore black velvet-covered hardhats. I still have mine.
5 Likes
Just so everyone knows and can attend if they like, we are hosting a live webinar with Dr. Barry Miller from the Virginia Tech Helmet Lab to analyze and discuss these study results this coming Monday 12/12/22 at 7pm EST.
You MUST sign up using this form to be guaranteed access to the live webinar and the recording of the webinar.
Link to sign up here.
Also, there is a frightening amount of false information on this thread alone. PLEASE consider coming to the webinar to learn more. And also all are welcome to join my MIPS group on Facebook as well.
We have helmet brand reps, concussion specialists and LOTS of amazing people who can explain facts.
Search Facebook for “MIPS Protection System Equestrian Helmets”
Many thanks,
Em
4 Likes
