You have absolutely no basis for reaching this conclusion.

Again, you're telling me that just because a helmet has fancy technology, if it doesn't fit well, it's going to protect my head than a helmet that fits properly? I would think the poor fitment negates the fancy technology.

You're still engaging in pure speculation, since (1) a properly-fitting MIPS helmet might've given even better protection, and/or (2) even the poorly-fitting Giro might've given even better protection. There's a possibility that either (1) or (2) might have prevented your minor concussion. The only way to know for sure is for you to wear the GIRO and perform the crash all over again.

If helmets are considered to be safety equipment, then in my personal experience and anecdotally, poorly fitting equipment is more hazardous than it is beneficial. It doesn't matter if it's got the best technology and safety features if they can't be employed properly because of poor fitment.

My original point was to say that it's more important to wear the helmet that fits and is comfortable. The OP asked about a specific helmet and I provided my experience of that helmet. If Kask (or any brand) made a helmet with MIPS that fit comfortably, I'd wear it. As it is, I'm quite happy with my Mojito.

Now you’re suggesting that a poorly-fitting helmet is worse than no helmet.

At which point I will direct you back to my original post where I said my non MIPS Kask cracked and not my skull. Not sure about you but I'd consider that a glowing endorsement as to why one should wear a helmet.

Unless you have something useful to contribute to the OP's thread, then I'm not interested in arguing with you over opinions.

OP, wear the helmet that fits you best, MIPS or non MIPS. I've had good experiences with Kask and it's my personal opinion that fitment is more important than fancy technologies. That being said, I'd love to see Kask develop a MIPS version but for now, I'll stick with my Mojito X.

OT, but I'm curious how a brand signs up for MIPS? Does the MIPS company make the special liners to spec and sell them at a basic unit cost, or just provide a blueprint of sorts and charges a licensing fee? I can imagine why Bontrager wanted to create their own alternative and keep the fees as their own.

Articles like this one suggest that helmet brands contract with MIPS to design a system for a particular helmet. I have no idea whether the system is then produced by MIPS or a different company, but other articles like this one indicate that MIPS does test to a minimum 10% improvement in performance over the same helmet without MIPS, otherwise the brand cannot use the MIPS branding. So whatever the case, I’m sure MIPS exercises some control over production in order to insure their guarantees.

Also, Singletracks.com quoted MIPS’ Max Strandwitz on the question of licensing:

“Yes we do charge a license fee to brands for the right to use our brand, technology, patents, and marketing material. Reasons for brands developing their own systems is difficult for us to answer. Indeed if they do that they do not need to pay a licensee fee but instead they need to pay for an organization that can replicate what we are doing in terms of development of the technique, implementing in helmets for mass production, marketing, research etc. Bear in mind that we have now done more than 23,000 tests and it took us 20 years to become profitable, so it is not that easy.”

https://www.singletracks.com/mtb-gea...han-different/

10% improvement in a single type of test is different from 10% safer overall.
Just worth clarifying.

Lots of MIPS out there. Just find one that fits.

They all have to pass a safety standard but by how much and for which part of the standard is not known, so everything is just speculation.
MIPs doesn't necessarily mean it is a safer helmet. For example I am sure a motorcycle helmet without MIPs is far safer than a cycling helmet with it.

And sitting on your couch is safer than riding a bike… which, as far as comparisons go, is about as relevant as yours.

I’ve been saying this for years. Knowing and assuming are two different things.

The point is that all the helmets have to meet a safety standard.
Some will exceed that standard by more than others wether they have MIPS or not, but that data is not given to the consumer.

I was (quite obviously) responding to the portion of your post that is in bold, below -- because it is utter nonsense. No one wears a motorcycle helmet to ride a bike, just as motorcyclists do not wear bicycle helmets.

You do realize that there are independent labs testing bike helmets, and there are studies of the effectiveness of MIPS and other technologies? The claim that "everything is just speculation" is simply not true.

That is false, in the sense that the CPSC standard does not test in excess of the minimum requirements. In other words, the CPSC testing does not measure the extent to which the helmet meets the impact attenuation peak acceleration value beyond the specified velocities.

To further illustrate with an example, let’s say Helmet A may record a peak acceleration value of 180g on the flat anvil drop test which is performed at 20ft/sec velocity. That’s well under the maximum PA allowed, but it is not again tested at higher velocities to see if it continues to perform within range.

Testing is pass or fail, not testing to failure. You can learn about testing requirements on the CPSC government website: https://www.cpsc.gov/Business--Manuf...icycle-Helmets

I assume the term "fit" above means the helmet feels snug with no space between the pads and the cyclists head and the helmet can not slide on the head with the chin strap centered under the chin, fitting snugly so that opening the mouth wide the helmet pulls down on the head.
MIPS will help in a crash with a good fitting helmet and a lesser fit will interfere to some degree with the MIPS advantage as it would with a helmet with simple padding protection.
My three daughters, granddaughter and me with a 7 3/4 hat size and rectangular head can get a MIPS to fit.

Santa brought me a new Lazer G1 mips to replace the one that saved my head in a crash recently. The trauma doctors could not believe that I did not have a concussion given the extent of other damages to my body. The helmet was cracked and dented at the occipital bone area, so, one might surmise MIPS might have decreased the rate of deceleration. N = 1. Sold here. Besides, the ventilation and comfort on that helmet is fantastic.

As other have said, there are too many MIPS models out there for one to plausibly claim that none of them are good fits.

I went down pretty hard on a Giro Synthe MIPS helmet last year, dented the helmet pretty good, and walked away without any adverse head injuries. (A bunch of road rash, yeah). Would a non-MIPS helmet have protected me as well? I haven't done that test, but something like 90% of the helmets top-rated for safety by Va Tech are MIPS or Wavecell. At all price points. I'd have to have a damned good reason to wear a non-MIPS helmet, and I can't think of one.

So now I have two MIPS helmets. With Giro's generous crash-replacement deal, I replaced the Synthe with a Vanquish MIPS and also I have $50 helmet very highly rated by Va Tech - the Specialized Align.

At this point, if I were helmet shopping, I wouldn't even bother considering helmets that lack MIPS, or WaveCell, or some similar technology. If you can't find a MIPS helmet that fits properly, you aren't really looking.

Maybe we need a separate thread to ask if anyone has crashed, hit their head while wearing a non-Mips helmet, and walked away without injuries.

I have the opposite experience. Our son had a major ski crash (racer) that led to 2.5 weeks in a coma, 5 weeks inpatient rehab and 1 year out patient rehab. There wasn't a mark on his non-MIPS ski helmet. It protected him from a skull fracture but not from the "shaken baby" syndrome of damage to his brain.

With all that time sitting in hospitals and being an engineer, I started looking into the whole thing. This is just before MIPS was scheduled to come up and I wound up talking to some engineers I know involved in helmet design as well as corresponding with POC and through them, with MIPS engineering. Bottom line is that as acceleration on the brain increases, you eventually reach the knee in the curve where damage to the brain takes off and dramatically increases with acceleration experience by the brain. Any bit you can back down this curve pays large dividends in reducing damage. If you can get it below the knee in the curve, you can almost eliminate damage thanks to the anatomy of the head.

With MIPS technology, and with most of the others, there is going to be little to no downside in having it with respect to injury. Testing helmets in actual practice is sort of like testing firecrackers, and you're not likely to get a lot of volunteers willing to crash for the sack of science. As my son's neurosurgeon put it when I asked him about damage - "It's difficult to fully ascertain the extent of the damage without an autopsy which are generally not in the best interest of the patient."

Anyhow, having been through this, I'd strongly suggest doing anything one can to minimize the accelerations the brain experiences. It's just not worth betting against a simple technology like MIPS that has little chance to do additional harm and potential to be really beneficial especially when it just isn't a price point issue any longer.

It's intellectual property for the slip plane tech and patents that you license from MIPS. You have to put the sticker on the helmet and pay a royalty. So MIPS doesn't make helmets they license their tech to helmet manufacturers to implement. IIRT, Bell/Giro has a big equity stake in them now. Probably why Bontrager and Smith developed their own. POC developed their own (SPIN) after using MIPS for while and wound up in a spat with MIPS which they apparently settled since POC is back in the MIPS camp (as I understand it).

J.

Why?

First gen (I think) of Giro helmets with MIPS were less comfortable than the non-MIPS models (I had a Synthe and Foray), but I have two Aegiles helmets now that are far more comfortable, and that's at the low-mid range price point. Earlier in the year I had a crash on a solo ride wearing a MIPS helmet that resulted in a minor concussion I wasn't totally aware of until I got home. I would not ride without one now because the brain is mostly non-repairable.

Well typically in any 'is Mips worth it' type of thread, you only hear from riders who wore Mips helmets and crashed and survived. Makes you wonder what happened before mips.