Chico Escuela posted:Elijah posted:Chico Escuela posted:"An S100 isn't necessarily better than the top of the line model from a different manufacturer, even if that helmet doesn't carry a label saying it's rated to 100 mph."
Not sure what you base that statement on. I don't have the data to argue against it, either. My guess is that if the other companies could make a claim of protection as it relates to mph, they would. As it stands, the only company that does is Rawlings and they didn't see the cost/benefit in marketing it when it was available to others that did not wear an MLB jersey.
What I meant is that in the absence of independent testing, I have no reason to assume the S100 is better than other helmets. I also said that IMO the S100 seemed to be "at least as good as anything else that was, or is, out there."
But I'm going to revise what I said. I just found this article, from the NY Times:
https://www.nytimes.com/2013/0...baseball-helmet.html
This is from 2013, and I thought I recalled seeing Rawlings 100 mph-rated helmets for sale after that, but... According to this, the original 100 mph design was six ounces heavier than a standard helmet, and MLB players hated it. Rawlings redesigned the helmet using carbon fiber for the shell. This resulted in a helmet that was only about 1 oz. heavier, but "about five times more expensive to produce." I guess that's why the helmet at BaseballMom2020's link costs $500.
If the S100 is carbon fiber instead of plastic, then it ought to be a step up from anything else out there. My guess is Rawlings decided that there wasn't enough of a market among non-professional players for either a) a helmet that was 6 oz. heavier than others or b) a helmet that cost $500. The S100 appears to only be for sale today with one earflap--and I don't know of any non-pro league that would allow a one-flap helmet.
I'd try writing and calling Rawlings. There may be some 2-flap helmets in their warehouses, for MLB switch-hitters. (Technically your son still might not be able to use this helmet, since it wouldn't be NOCSAE certified.) You also could ask Rawlings to market the S100 to youth, HS and college players, but I don't know if that would be feasible for them. Of course anyone would agree that it's worth $500 to avoid a life-threatening injury to their child; but when push comes to shove, Rawlings may have concluded not enough people would pay that for a batting helmet. (Again, I'm not arguing that this evaluation of the risks is correct. I spent a lot of time researching helmets a few years ago before my son became a PO and I might spend the money if he were still taking ABs in games.)
Good points. I have already put in a call to a local Rawlings rep (referred by the parent). Hopefully, they have made technological improvements that would allow for a lighter helmet.