Wilson A5510 Pro Shock FX helmet
 

The PU in today's Yankees-RedSox game is wearing a Wilson A5510 Pro Shock FX helmet. I started googling it and found it on Honig's for $259.95 and at a place called Discount Sporting Goods for $92.95. Honig's only has it in black and the other place as it in black and navy blue.

1) Does anybody out there wear this HSM and if so how do you like it, where did you buy it and for how much?

2) Does anybody know who besides Honig's carries this HSM?

Thanks.

MTD, Sr.

I think there is a difference between the Wilson featured in Honigs and the other. The Wilson in Honigs has a titanium mask while the other does not.

Ice:

Thanks, you are correct. I did some research after I made my OP and the umpire's model does in fact have a titanium cage while the catcher's model has a steel cage.

MTD, Sr.

1) Yes, I bought one, tried it and sold it to another umpire. Bought it locally for $199.95 in the Spring. I got rid of it because, to me, the view was terrible.

2) Don't know.

that hsm does work ... the shocks really only come into play when the actual cage is hit the view out of that hsm isnt as bad as quite a few others

Not Very good?
 

Recently, I had some repair work that had to get done on my All Star SUL 2000 (whatever the model # the MLB guys use) and talked to a bigwig at All Star about "buckets". He told me that from All Star's testing of a couple of Wilsons and the feedback he had heard from guys at Spring Training the Wilson bucket was universally panned.

Now the source is not totally objective here, but the mask looks like a gimmick to me. But if you use it and like it good for you.

Déjà vu all over again!
 

It was déjà vu all over again tonight in the second game of the World Series game between the Devils and the Phillies. Does anybody know who the plate umpire was? He was wearing this HSM with a funky looking ice hockey goalie neck protector. I think that there has been a thread this year about this type of neck protector.

MTD, Sr.

It was Kerwin Danley. It's good to see him working after his scare earlier this year. I think Wilson makes a throat guard designed for the Shock FX. It also could be a throat protector for a hockey goalie mask.

And he fit a cap under the helmet, too.

Hey, they got rid of that word for a reason, you know. Now you're going to summon Mephistopheles, and it'll be all over for the Rays.

I tried one out and had a pitcher throw a straight shot, high-80s, and it took it as well as any mask or bucket I ever tried. The shock absorbers definitely work. It also has a better view than any bucket when it is worn properly. For the few times I get drilled straight between the eyes, it's probably overkill, but if I ever got a concussion, I would turn straight to the Wilson for added protection. It's lighter than the others as well.

And this site is a good place to find it and $199 is about the best price you'll find.

http://www.hq4sports.com/wilson-umpi...-a5590bla.html

I was not aware that the Phillies were playing ice hockey in the NHL last night.:rolleyes:

OOPS!! Me bad. :D I meant Rays, not Devils (Devil Rays).

MTD, Sr.

Again,
 

As with another of my posts take this with a large grain of salt:

The same study done by the MiLB showed that umpires that wore the Wilson A5510 Pro Shock sustained not only MORE concussions but they were of greater severity.

Remember this is a very small sampling the I would guess you CANNOT extrapolate any definitive final judgement from the study.

Just wanted to share the MiLB review.

Regards,

Logic would dictate that only straight on, middle of the mask shots would allow the shocks to actually do their job.

http://www.baseballsavings.com/image...5320/thumb.jpg

Also, the sound inside these contraptions is really LOUD. I've got an All Star helmet that I wear on certain fields, and blows to that make my ears ring. That may play a role in concussion. The percussion + the blow can't be good for your noggin.

Another telling thing for me is the number of MLB guys who have migrated away from the HSM.

Sound has nothing to do with concussions. A concussion is caused by a rapid change of velocity by the head, which causes the brain to move around within the skull.

You're right. I was thinking of a fluid-percussion type of brain injury, but wanted to dumb it down a bit. Sorry.

Hey,
 

Kyle some of us knew where you were going.

Regards,

You're welcome, good thing I am here to help.

Yeah, I don't know what we would do without you.:rolleyes:

Logic dictates nothing of the kind, only bad physics or a false assumption dictate that. :rolleyes:

Better physics dictates that the shock absorbers will absorb the component of the force vector that runs along their axis. That should be most of it, since the ball is most likely to hit the mask from the front.

The other way to reach your conclusion is to assume that the shock absorbers' job is to absorb 100% of the energy of every collision, which is not likely the engineers' conception.

The great thing about this whole debate, or any such Mask/HSM debate, is that it is not based on scientific facts, practical reality or anything logical. It is based on the biased belief of many that a mask, which they prefer, is as safe or effective as a helmet. A study is cited, and a trend is cited, but their conclusions are curious at best. I took a really good shot in a Wilson Shock FX, and it was the least impact I have ever felt from a shot of that type.

I prefer a mask. I probably always will. I keep getting a better and better mask with better and better pads, but unless I get an injury, I won't be switching to an HSM. I have caught games and bullpens with an All-Star HSM, and I have done informal demos with the new Wilson, but I have never worked a game in anything but a mask. But I would never hang on to the contention that a mask is safer than an HSM, just because I need validation for insisting on wearing a mask. There are added risks when wearing a mask, but I don't ever turn my head, and I've only been grazed by a bat once, so the added bulk of a helmet for something that virtually never happens is not for me. But a HSM is safer and the Wilson is the safest I have tried and gives the best view.

Perhaps. But your stance, to date, has been based on assumptions and your singular personal experience, which any reputable statistician or research specialist will identify as the worst evidence upon which to base conclusions.

I fully realize that, and my "stance" that you refer to is based on a sarcastic reference I made that my experience was a scientific finding. It was in the spirit of "I got your scientific study right here..." As a result, I am getting treated like I am representing a scientific study when I am making a point that everyone is free to use or believe whatever they want, but that in the rare case that a bat breaks or gets flung or swung near your ear, a HSM is safer, and that on a straight shot to the grill, a Wilson Shock FX softens the blow the best ...
from what I have been able to tell
in my very limited experience of four decades catching and umpiring.

a Wilson Shock FX softens the blow the best ...
Haven't you read the news?
Good news, the disertation I wrote on the subject was deleted.
3 major flaws in the choice of HSM: 1) design, 2) comfort, and 3) cost.
We could argue about the benefits and drawbacks of either style all night.

BTW, football helmet makers spend a lot more money on research.
Newer helmets allow for better air flow and upgrade fasemask, padding and shell technology.
You may have noticed some recent changes in the look of the LLWS baseball helmet too.
Despite the fact, the NY Giants are still wearing the old familiar NFL helmets on TV today.

You'll pardon me if I don't swallow the curious findings of a sampling of users in a "scientific" study on this subject. The brain is still a medical mystery ...how can you just read a conclusion like that about concussions and accept it and close yourself off to any other information? I am open to anything, but I don't just believe everything that is written. I try it out if it's important to me. I add what is written and reported to what I know or have found to be true about something. If you want to have your opinion formed by the writer only ...fine. I use a more broadly based method.