Microcoils, nanocoils, and minicoils are essentially the same thing—just smaller sizes with the same function. For the purpose of this article, we will refer to them as microcoils.
Having incorporated the highest quality microcoils available in our prototypes, we’ve gained valuable firsthand knowledge of their limitations and drawbacks. This experience has solidified our commitment to traditional pocket springs for superior mattress construction. For example, a 2000 spring count, 7-zoned microcoil patented layer cost us approximately $32. With this knowledge, we were able to manufacture a mattress with 20,000 microcoils for under $500. In contrast, just one layer of hand-teased Shropshire wool can cost $120 to incorporate into a mattress, and our mattresses contain a minimum of 8 layers of these premium natural fibers.
We also know firsthand how easily microcoils fail and how the comfort level they provide is not on the same level as a 100% natural luxury mattress. Microcoils are often used to make a mattress seem more high-end, but in reality, they are a cheaper way to manufacture a product that doesn’t deliver the same level of quality or longevity. Customers may be drawn to the high spring counts, thinking they indicate superior quality, but the truth is that these mattresses are often less durable and less comfortable over time.
This is why we made the decision to discontinue our entire microcoil range. Our return rate for these mattresses was over 40%, compared to less than 15% for our luxury pocket spring mattresses made with 100% natural materials. We are living proof of the difference between both types of mattresses. Our commitment to traditional pocket springs and natural fibers is not just about maintaining high standards—it’s about ensuring our customers receive the best possible sleep experience without being misled by high spring counts and marketing tactics.
By reading on, you will learn everything about microcoils and traditional pocket springs and see which is better.
When comparing microcoils to traditional pocket springs, the key differences lie primarily in their size and structure. Traditional pocket springs typically have a depth of around 16 cm, making them significantly larger than microcoils, which range from 1 cm to 4 cm in depth.
Firstly, the larger traditional pocket springs provide better support. Their greater size allows them to respond more effectively to body weight, offering superior pressure relief and spinal alignment. This is crucial for maintaining proper posture during sleep and reducing discomfort.
On the other hand, microcoils, due to their smaller size, may not provide the same level of support. Their reduced height limits their ability to absorb and distribute weight effectively, potentially leading to increased pressure points and discomfort, especially for heavier body types.
Moreover, traditional pocket springs typically offer better durability. Their larger structure can withstand prolonged use without losing their shape or support capabilities. In contrast, microcoils, because of their compact size, may wear out more quickly, leading to a decrease in comfort and support over time.
Microcoils, nanocoils, and minicoils are commonly integrated into mattress designs by being strategically layered between foam, natural fibers, or synthetic fibers. This technique is intended to enhance the mattress’s support and durability by introducing responsive elements that help evenly distribute body weight, which can improve overall sleep quality.
However, incorporating multiple layers of these smaller coils often comes at the expense of reducing the amount of comfort-enhancing fibers within the mattress. This reduction significantly impacts both the comfort and longevity of the mattress. For example, natural fibers like wool and cotton play a crucial role in providing a comfortable sleep experience. They contribute to effective body heat regulation and ensure better breathability, which is essential for maintaining a pleasant sleeping environment.
Moreover, while steel typically adds support and durability in traditional pocket springs, this is not always the case with microcoils. Due to their smaller size, microcoils do not offer the same robust structural support or longevity as larger, traditional springs. They compress more easily and can wear out faster, leading to a mattress that loses its supportive qualities over time. This reliance on microcoils, instead of sufficient natural fibers or traditional springs, can result in a mattress that feels less comfortable and less durable, ultimately diminishing the overall sleep experience.
No, microcoils do not provide comparable support to traditional pocket springs.
Firstly, traditional pocket springs typically measure around 16 cm in height, offering a robust support structure that responds effectively to various body types and weights. This height allows for greater compression and expansion, which means the springs can better contour to the body’s natural curves, providing superior pressure relief and spinal alignment.
In contrast, microcoils, which measure between 1 cm and 4 cm in height, lack the depth necessary to offer the same level of support. Their smaller size limits their ability to compress and expand adequately, reducing their capacity to evenly distribute body weight. This limitation often leads to increased pressure points, particularly for heavier individuals or those who sleep in different positions throughout the night.
Additionally, studies on mattress support systems indicate that traditional pocket springs can maintain their structural integrity and support for longer periods, often outlasting microcoils. Microcoils, due to their smaller size and thinner wire gauge, are more prone to wear and tear. Over time, they lose their resilience, leading to a decline in support and comfort.
Moreover, the material composition of microcoils also plays a role in their inferior support. Traditional pocket springs are typically made from high-gauge steel, which provides both durability and flexibility. Microcoils, however, often use lower-gauge steel, which compromises their ability to sustain prolonged pressure without losing shape.
In conclusion, traditional pocket springs offer superior support compared to microcoils due to their larger size, better material composition, and greater durability. These factors ensure that traditional pocket springs can provide long-lasting, even support that microcoils simply cannot match.
The contouring ability of microcoils differs significantly from that of larger pocket springs, and traditional pocket springs provide superior contouring for several reasons.
Firstly, the larger size of traditional pocket springs, typically around 16 cm in height, allows them to compress and expand more effectively. This greater range of motion enables the springs to contour more closely to the body’s natural curves, providing personalized support across various pressure points. As a result, traditional pocket springs can better align with the body’s shape, reducing spinal cord compression and ensuring proper posture during sleep.
In contrast, microcoils, which are much smaller—ranging between 1 cm and 4 cm—offer limited contouring capabilities. Their reduced height restricts their ability to compress deeply, which means they do not conform as closely to the body’s curves. This limitation can lead to uneven support, where some areas of the body may experience more pressure than others, particularly for those with heavier body types or those who sleep in multiple sleeping positions.
Moreover, traditional pocket springs are often made from thicker, higher-gauge steel, which gives them both strength and flexibility. This combination allows the springs to adapt to different body shapes and sleeping positions without losing their supportive qualities. On the other hand, microcoils, due to their smaller size and often thinner wire gauge, lack this adaptability. They cannot provide the same level of customized support, which can lead to discomfort and improper spinal alignment over time.
Microcoils are significantly less expensive to produce than traditional pocket springs. In fact, we know this firsthand because we previously sourced the very best microcoils available. A high-quality microcoil layer with 2,000 springs typically costs around $30. By comparison, a traditional pocket spring unit with 1,600 springs costs more than ten times that amount.
This price difference highlights a crucial point: microcoils are a cost-effective alternative, but they do not offer the same level of quality as traditional pocket springs. Manufacturers often use microcoils as a marketing gimmick, presenting them as a high-end feature in mattresses. However, this approach masks the reality that microcoils are a cheaper way to make a mattress appear more luxurious than it truly is.
Because of this, we decided to discontinue our entire range that included microcoils years ago. The difference in cost directly translates to a difference in the quality of the mattress, and we prioritize offering products that truly deliver on comfort, durability, and support. Traditional pocket springs, despite being more expensive, provide a far superior sleep experience, making them worth the investment. Microcoils simply cannot match the performance of traditional pocket springs, and their lower production cost reflects that.
A traditional pocket spring unit has a far longer lifespan compared to microcoils. This longevity is one of the main reasons why traditional pocket spring mattresses, like those from our brand, as well as other high-end manufacturers like Vi-Spring, Savoir, and Hästens, offer guarantees ranging from 20 to 30 years. In contrast, mattresses that rely on microcoils typically come with guarantees of only 5 to 10 years.
This significant difference in lifespan stems from the robust construction of traditional pocket springs. These springs are designed to maintain their support and integrity over decades, providing consistent comfort and durability. On the other hand, microcoils, due to their smaller size and thinner wire gauge, wear out more quickly. As a result, they simply cannot offer the same long-term performance as traditional pocket springs, leading to a shorter overall lifespan for mattresses that use them.
Ultimately, if you’re looking for a mattress that will stand the test of time, traditional pocket springs are the superior choice. Their proven durability and long warranties reflect the confidence that premium manufacturers have in their products.
Traditional pocket springs excel in motion isolation compared to microcoils. This difference in performance comes down to the design and size of the springs. Traditional pocket springs are individually encased and larger in size, allowing each spring to respond independently to pressure. This independent movement minimizes the transfer of motion across the mattress, so when one person moves, it doesn’t disturb the other.
In contrast, microcoils, due to their smaller size and tighter grouping, don’t isolate motion as effectively. Their reduced height and closer arrangement mean that movement in one area is more likely to ripple through other parts of the mattress. Consequently, microcoils tend to transfer more motion, which can be disruptive, especially for light sleepers or those who share a bed.
Furthermore, the robust structure of traditional pocket springs adds to their superior ability to absorb and dampen movement. This characteristic makes them a better choice for those who prioritize a stable and undisturbed sleep environment. While microcoils can offer some level of motion isolation, they simply don’t match the effectiveness of traditional pocket springs in this regard.
Microcoils definitely take up valuable space in a mattress that could otherwise be used for natural fibers, and this trade-off has significant drawbacks. When manufacturers incorporate layers of microcoils, they reduce the available space for materials like wool, cotton, and other natural fibers, which are essential for comfort, breathability, and temperature regulation.
Natural fibers not only provide a more luxurious and breathable sleep surface but also contribute to better moisture wicking and overall sleep quality. By replacing these fibers with microcoils, the mattress loses these benefits, leading to a sleep environment that may feel less comfortable and more synthetic. Additionally, natural fibers conform to the body more gently, enhancing the mattress’s ability to relieve pressure and offer a truly restful sleep experience.
Moreover, natural fibers are significantly more expensive to include in a mattress than microcoils. This cost difference is why many manufacturers opt to use microcoils—they are much cheaper to produce, allowing the mattress to be marketed as high-end without the corresponding investment in quality materials. This practice often misleads customers into thinking they are getting a premium product when, in reality, the mattress lacks the essential natural materials that provide superior comfort and durability.
In summary, while microcoils make the manufacturing process cheaper, they do so at the expense of comfort, quality, and environmental friendliness. Natural fibers, though more costly, deliver a far better sleep experience, making them a critical component of a truly high-end mattress.
Microcoils, nanocoils, and minicoils are 100% marketing gimmicks rather than genuine innovations in mattress design. While they are often touted as advanced features that enhance comfort and support, the reality is that these smaller coils serve more to create an impression of sophistication than to deliver meaningful improvements in sleep quality.
Firstly, the use of microcoils, nanocoils, and minicoils allows manufacturers to reduce costs by filling space in a mattress with inexpensive materials rather than investing in higher-quality, natural fibers. This approach makes it easier for companies to market these mattresses as premium products without the corresponding investment in genuinely superior materials. The smaller coils may sound innovative, but they do not offer the same level of comfort, support, or durability as traditional pocket springs or natural fibers like wool and cotton.
Furthermore, the performance of these tiny coils does not match up to the claims often made in marketing materials. Their limited height and reduced ability to compress and expand effectively mean they provide inferior support and pressure relief compared to larger, traditional springs. As a result, customers are left with a product that may look and sound advanced but fails to deliver the long-lasting comfort and quality one would expect from a truly high-end mattress.
In conclusion, microcoils, nanocoils, and minicoils are more about marketing than real innovation. They allow manufacturers to cut costs and inflate the perceived value of a mattress without delivering the substantive benefits that consumers deserve. True innovation in mattress design should prioritize genuine improvements in comfort, support, and durability—qualities that these smaller coils simply do not provide.
Looking for more information
Explore our expert guides on pocketed coil mattresses, including: Is a pocket spring mattress better than foam? Is a pocket spring mattress good for hip pain? Is a pocket spring mattress good for back pain? What is a pocket coil mattress? These articles provide expert advice on pocket spring mattresses, offering valuable insights to help you make informed decisions for the best possible sleep experience.
Published: 6th September 2024 (Updated: 3rd October 2024) |
Government-approved dispute resolution service for consumers to help reach a fair outcome.
Have peace of mind that the mattress you are buying is safe, clean and exactly what it says it is.
Mattresses made by artisans with over 97 years of british handcrafting heritage.
Purchase with confidence. We are regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority & members of The Furniture Ombudsman.
© 2024 Winstons Beds Ltd.
