No one wants to see this happen to their kid...
This resulted in my DD's second concussion in the past 7 months from the same thing - a foul tip to the helmet (edit: she is now clear from the concussion). This also happened after she out-grew her Wilson FX 2.0 helmet and moved to an Easton M10. Maybe the change in helmet was a coincidence, but the more I looked at it, I think the helmet was probably a contributing factor.
I started looking at helmet shapes, padding materials, and cage-mounting methods used in the construction of some of the masks out on the market. The more I did, I realized that the Easton M10 has some issues...
https://i.imgur.com/n95VHv5.jpg
https://i.imgur.com/3CfGgRM.jpg
Padding - The M10 padding consists of a layer of fairly rigid EPS foam, and a thin, removable "comfort" layer (approx. 1/4" thick). This is very similar to what you would find in a bicycle helmet. It does great for minimizing the potential of a skull fracture, but comes up short (IMO) in providing meaningful impact protection for this kind of application. In comparison, the Wilson Shock FX 2.0 has a much deeper layer of softer material which will allow the head to travel a some distance inside the helmet shell while decelerating. All-Star also uses a softer padding material. Schutt uses a multi-layer padding technology that they borrow from their football helmet lineup. (Unfortunately, my DD hated the way both of those helmets fit her head.)
Cage Mounting - The typical method of mounting the cage to the shell is with 6 screws - 2 at the forehead, 2 at the temples, and 2 at the chin - rigidly connecting the two sections. The downside of this is that impact forces to the cage are directed very quickly to the shell, especially to the forehead. A couple of manufacturers have mitigated this issue. All-Star moves the forehead mounts around to the side of the shell, and includes a flexible mounting point, allowing some movement between the cage and shell on impact, reducing impact forces transmitted to the head. The Wilson was exceptional - spring mounts at the sides, and flexible mounts at the forehead and chin.
Shape - Comparing the M10 with the Wilson, the forehead slope of the Wilson is laid back more, which will create more of a glancing blow in many situations, further reducing impact forces. All-Star's forehead slope also seems to be pretty laid back. Schutt appears about the same as Easton.
Since my kid really likes the way the Easton fits her, I started investigating ways I might be able to make improvements to the level of protection she was getting. Short of tearing out all of the padding down to the bare shell (which I considered), I decided to make improvements in the softer padding layer between the rigid foam and her head, using materials designed for impact absorption and dispersion.
Here's what I came up with...
https://i.imgur.com/M2J1wAu.jpg
https://i.imgur.com/9fG6Ym6.jpg
Grey layer - 1/8" Shocktec Air2Gel (shocktec.com) - forehead and temples
Green/black layer - Unequal Technologies Gyro football helmet liner (unequal.com) - forehead, temples, top
I am currently looking into ways to create some flexibility in the cage mounting screws. I have an idea. I just need to source the parts.
Through all of this, one thing became really clear...The Wilson FX 2.0 helmet was exceptional. Damn you, Wilson, for trashing yet another piece of great gear.
This resulted in my DD's second concussion in the past 7 months from the same thing - a foul tip to the helmet (edit: she is now clear from the concussion). This also happened after she out-grew her Wilson FX 2.0 helmet and moved to an Easton M10. Maybe the change in helmet was a coincidence, but the more I looked at it, I think the helmet was probably a contributing factor.
I started looking at helmet shapes, padding materials, and cage-mounting methods used in the construction of some of the masks out on the market. The more I did, I realized that the Easton M10 has some issues...
https://i.imgur.com/n95VHv5.jpg
https://i.imgur.com/3CfGgRM.jpg
Padding - The M10 padding consists of a layer of fairly rigid EPS foam, and a thin, removable "comfort" layer (approx. 1/4" thick). This is very similar to what you would find in a bicycle helmet. It does great for minimizing the potential of a skull fracture, but comes up short (IMO) in providing meaningful impact protection for this kind of application. In comparison, the Wilson Shock FX 2.0 has a much deeper layer of softer material which will allow the head to travel a some distance inside the helmet shell while decelerating. All-Star also uses a softer padding material. Schutt uses a multi-layer padding technology that they borrow from their football helmet lineup. (Unfortunately, my DD hated the way both of those helmets fit her head.)
Cage Mounting - The typical method of mounting the cage to the shell is with 6 screws - 2 at the forehead, 2 at the temples, and 2 at the chin - rigidly connecting the two sections. The downside of this is that impact forces to the cage are directed very quickly to the shell, especially to the forehead. A couple of manufacturers have mitigated this issue. All-Star moves the forehead mounts around to the side of the shell, and includes a flexible mounting point, allowing some movement between the cage and shell on impact, reducing impact forces transmitted to the head. The Wilson was exceptional - spring mounts at the sides, and flexible mounts at the forehead and chin.
Shape - Comparing the M10 with the Wilson, the forehead slope of the Wilson is laid back more, which will create more of a glancing blow in many situations, further reducing impact forces. All-Star's forehead slope also seems to be pretty laid back. Schutt appears about the same as Easton.
Since my kid really likes the way the Easton fits her, I started investigating ways I might be able to make improvements to the level of protection she was getting. Short of tearing out all of the padding down to the bare shell (which I considered), I decided to make improvements in the softer padding layer between the rigid foam and her head, using materials designed for impact absorption and dispersion.
Here's what I came up with...
https://i.imgur.com/M2J1wAu.jpg
https://i.imgur.com/9fG6Ym6.jpg
Grey layer - 1/8" Shocktec Air2Gel (shocktec.com) - forehead and temples
Green/black layer - Unequal Technologies Gyro football helmet liner (unequal.com) - forehead, temples, top
I am currently looking into ways to create some flexibility in the cage mounting screws. I have an idea. I just need to source the parts.
Through all of this, one thing became really clear...The Wilson FX 2.0 helmet was exceptional. Damn you, Wilson, for trashing yet another piece of great gear.
Last edited: