Do you use a back protector?

[MagnificentUnicorn]

I shattered several vertebra (T12-L3) a decade ago in an avalanche operating under the logic that my avy pack with a massive shovel blade would provide some protection. Packs dont cover your lower back down by your tailbone...

Extreme example, but a real world one.

Today I still ski with a spine protector inbounds and touring regardless of whether I am wearing a pack ontop of it.

T12-L3 aren’t down by your tailbone, that’s the small of your back up to the bottom of your ribs, that’s where the bottom of your pack is. That’s also where the bottom of your shovel blade would likely be.

Interesting that someone brought up standards for back protectors for skiing. The standards for ski helmets are about the same. If you really want to protect your back and noggin you should be wearing ANSI motorcycle protection.


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

[mc_roon]

T12-L3 aren’t down by your tailbone, that’s the small of your back up to the bottom of your ribs, that’s where the bottom of your pack is. That’s also where the bottom of your shovel blade would likely be.

Unless you are wearing a crotch strap, there is a risk that a pack gets thrown around and pulled up exposing more of your spine to trauma than you thought. Ask me how I know

[MagnificentUnicorn]

Unless you are wearing a crotch strap, there is a risk that a pack gets thrown around and pulled up exposing more of your spine to trauma than you thought. Ask me how I know

Oh, I know. Broke three ribs and bruised my spleen wearing a pack after a collision with a tree. Packs don’t really help with trauma unless they have a crotch strap AND a built in protector.


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

[Self Jupiter]

I figure the pack protection should help protect you from what you’re carrying in it

[J. Barron DeJong]

Any specific recommendations for tall skinny guy (6’4, 175)?

I assume a vest style would be no bueno. The Rossi strap style posted earlier seems like it would be better, and I see POC has a couple like that as well.

If I get the biggest size in one of those to get the necessary length, is the waist band going to be huge on a 33” waist?

[deeds]

Any have experience with sweet protection’s back protectors? I’ve been happy with their helmets but have tried anything else.

[Lord Thomas]

What are the preferred options for back protectors these days? Never worn one but would like to give it a go. Likely both inbounds and touring.

[mooseknuckles]

+1 for the POC Spine VPD 2.0 Jacket. Even grabbed one for the boss off Gear Swap a few years back and she wont ski without it. Previously had a Dainese in the kidney belt w/straps style. Greatly prefer the vest/jacket vs waist band. The armor moves with you vs around you. Just factor it in to the layering, pieces go either under or over it. Easy to fit a TNF ABS Vest over it.

[altacoup]

https://www.surfdome.us/Scott-Sports...sd50224692.htm

I’ve got one of these. Most comfortable protector I’ve used. Be prepared to entirely rethink layering. I can’t imagine wearing one while skinning.

[flabazz]

My friend had a pretty gnarly crash last year that resulted in him not being able to walk right for an hour after. His back slammed into a stump. Had he not been wearing a back protector it probably would've caused some serious permanent damage. Now I wear one every day and feel naked without it. You get used to the feel really quickly. I have a SHRED one.

[yeahman]

Interesting discussion. Never even heard of skiing with something like this. Wouldn't a front protector make just as much if not more sense than a back protector?

[MagnificentUnicorn]

Interesting discussion. Never even heard of skiing with something like this. Wouldn't a front protector make just as much if not more sense than a back protector?

Yeah but no one thinks it’s cool to wear an abdominal protector. All these anecdotes about spine protectors are just that, anecdotes. The mechanism of injury is crucial. Spine protection won’t help you with compression or burst fractures that happen when you huck your meat and land hard. I doubt they do anything for hyper flexion or extension injuries. They might prevent bruising or spinous process fractures.


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

[whyturn]

My buddy skis with a full rodeo vest after falling on a stick and puncturing his lung. Crazy times. Be safe out there


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

[bry]

I've been wearing this POC one the last five seasons. Mostly to protect from any collisions with other skiers, but I've even put it in when walking the dog and it's super icy out. It's comfortable and warm, takes the shape of your back and makes the lift a bit more comfy.



Sent from my SM-N981U using Tapatalk

[DarthMarkus]

Yeah but no one thinks it’s cool to wear an abdominal protector. All these anecdotes about spine protectors are just that, anecdotes. The mechanism of injury is crucial. Spine protection won’t help you with compression or burst fractures that happen when you huck your meat and land hard. I doubt they do anything for hyper flexion or extension injuries. They might prevent bruising or spinous process fractures.


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

The same kind of holds true with helmets. ASTM tests don't test anything other than impact, yet we're introducing things like MIPS as an additional level of protection, even if all that's allowed to be said about MIPS is that it "handles rotational impact 10% better than other helmets without MIPS." ASTM otherwise doesn't really care about MIPS.

litigation has limited a lot of what is allowed to be said about research in the world of body and head protection. As a result what the world has access to IS largely anecdotal, because any claim otherwise would get manufacturers sued when someone gets injured. But that doesn't mean that the research isn't being done, or that technology isn't improving.

Point being, even as anecdotal as spine protection appears to be, there's still a lot of research supporting the rationale behind a lot of technology. This applies to motorcycle protection as well.

My current protector is malleable in regards to slow movement, which allows it to mold to the shape of my body, but in a fast impact, it disperses force across a much wider area. A silly putty type concept. Pretty cool technology, but certification standards aren't accounting for "extras" that companies include, e.g. MIPS.

Moral of the story is, if a hypothetical impact happens near my cervical spine, or kidneys, I'd rather have back protection on. Same goes for MIPS.

Sent from my Redmi Note 8 Pro using Tapatalk

[yeahman]

The same kind of holds true with helmets. ASTM tests don't test anything other than impact, yet we're introducing things like MIPS as an additional level of protection, even if all that's allowed to be said about MIPS is that it "handles rotational impact 10% better than other helmets without MIPS." ASTM otherwise doesn't really care about MIPS.

litigation has limited a lot of what is allowed to be said about research in the world of body and head protection. As a result what the world has access to IS largely anecdotal, because any claim otherwise would get manufacturers sued when someone gets injured. But that doesn't mean that the research isn't being done, or that technology isn't improving.

Point being, even as anecdotal as spine protection appears to be, there's still a lot of research supporting the rationale behind a lot of technology. This applies to motorcycle protection as well.

My current protector is malleable in regards to slow movement, which allows it to mold to the shape of my body, but in a fast impact, it disperses force across a much wider area. A silly putty type concept. Pretty cool technology, but certification standards aren't accounting for "extras" that companies include, e.g. MIPS.

Moral of the story is, if a hypothetical impact happens near my cervical spine, or kidneys, I'd rather have back protection on. Same goes for MIPS.

Sent from my Redmi Note 8 Pro using Tapatalk

That's a very interesting post, thanks.

I'm curious if the people wearing these protectors are doing things that would be considered extra risky for suffering an impact, such as hucking off stuff, doing tricks in the park, etc. I don't do that stuff anymore, I'm in my 50s and a pretty "normal" skier. I blew my ACL in the park about 7 years ago and at that point decided I could have plenty of fun without my skis leaving the snow, so to speak. I do ski trees but not at speed, and I feel like I can always hit the brakes if need be before slamming into something. I only take one or two wrecks a year, and they sometimes seem to involve unexpected drops in flat light, where my poles jam into my ribs and cause soreness for months (that's happened twice). My pack has definitely absorbed a couple impacts over the years to my upper back, though again, wrecks are rare these days because I don't push it. So I'm thinking I'm not the ideal candidate for one of these back protectors, because the way I ski the odds are really slim I'm going to take that kind of wreck.

So does anybody wear one of these things who skis like me, i.e. relatively hard but at the same time conservative? Anybody wear full torso protection, front and back?

[Lord Thomas]

That's a very interesting post, thanks.

I'm curious if the people wearing these protectors are doing things that would be considered extra risky for suffering an impact, such as hucking off stuff, doing tricks in the park, etc. I don't do that stuff anymore, I'm in my 50s and a pretty "normal" skier. I blew my ACL in the park about 7 years ago and at that point decided I could have plenty of fun without my skis leaving the snow, so to speak. I do ski trees but not at speed, and I feel like I can always hit the brakes if need be before slamming into something. I only take one or two wrecks a year, and they sometimes seem to involve unexpected drops in flat light, where my poles jam into my ribs and cause soreness for months (that's happened twice). My pack has definitely absorbed a couple impacts over the years to my upper back, though again, wrecks are rare these days because I don't push it. So I'm thinking I'm not the ideal candidate for one of these back protectors, because the way I ski the odds are really slim I'm going to take that kind of wreck.

So does anybody wear one of these things who skis like me, i.e. relatively hard but at the same time conservative? Anybody wear full torso protection, front and back?

I'm kinda in the same boat with age and skiing aggression and am not considering wearing a protector for the first time. I may not ski quite as hard as 10 years ago but it only takes one stupid little unexpected "thing" to ruing everything...and you don't have to hit a tree-rock-tower-etc. to break all kinds of shit. So, the way I'm starting to think of it is that I have nothing to loose and a tiny chance of gaining a HELL OF A LOT in one of those 2-3 times a year you yard sale it. I'll take those odds.

[MagnificentUnicorn]

That's a very interesting post, thanks.

I'm curious if the people wearing these protectors are doing things that would be considered extra risky for suffering an impact, such as hucking off stuff, doing tricks in the park, etc. I don't do that stuff anymore, I'm in my 50s and a pretty "normal" skier. I blew my ACL in the park about 7 years ago and at that point decided I could have plenty of fun without my skis leaving the snow, so to speak. I do ski trees but not at speed, and I feel like I can always hit the brakes if need be before slamming into something. I only take one or two wrecks a year, and they sometimes seem to involve unexpected drops in flat light, where my poles jam into my ribs and cause soreness for months (that's happened twice). My pack has definitely absorbed a couple impacts over the years to my upper back, though again, wrecks are rare these days because I don't push it. So I'm thinking I'm not the ideal candidate for one of these back protectors, because the way I ski the odds are really slim I'm going to take that kind of wreck.

So does anybody wear one of these things who skis like me, i.e. relatively hard but at the same time conservative? Anybody wear full torso protection, front and back?

I don’t. I really dialed the speed back after two pretty serious accidents within 18 months. That was six years ago and I’m 53


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

[DarthMarkus]

I'm kinda in the same boat with age and skiing aggression and am not considering wearing a protector for the first time. I may not ski quite as hard as 10 years ago but it only takes one stupid little unexpected "thing" to ruing everything...and you don't have to hit a tree-rock-tower-etc. to break all kinds of shit. So, the way I'm starting to think of it is that I have nothing to loose and a tiny chance of gaining a HELL OF A LOT in one of those 2-3 times a year you yard sale it. I'll take those odds.

Last year I took the position of only wearing it in situations where I knew I was getting into more hairy terrain or hucking my meat. Got hit by a snowboarder on a blue and he broke my boots and either separated or fractured a few of my ribs near my shoulder/back.

Wore it more often the rest of last season, and I'll wear it a lot more this season. Who knows if it would have saved my ribs. Regardless, it's an extra piece that isn't too bothersome anymore and worth the possibility of avoiding some injury.

That being said, I'm still a strong advocate of it being personal preference. I think helmets are a no-brainer, but a piece of equipment that could limit movement ought to be at the discretion of the skier.

[margotron]

Last year I took the position of only wearing it in situations where I knew I was getting into more hairy terrain or hucking my meat. Got hit by a snowboarder on a blue and he broke my boots and either separated or fractured a few of my ribs near my shoulder/back.

Wore it more often the rest of last season, and I'll wear it a lot more this season. Who knows if it would have saved my ribs. Regardless, it's an extra piece that isn't too bothersome anymore and worth the possibility of avoiding some injury.

That being said, I'm still a strong advocate of it being personal preference. I think helmets are a no-brainer, but a piece of equipment that could limit movement ought to be at the discretion of the skier.

I don’t see how your Rossi one limits mobility any more than a backpack