- Price
- Not publicly listed
- Price
- Not publicly listed
Zimmer enPuls 2.0 / Pro vs STORZ MASTERPULS MP200 ultra
Both the Zimmer enPuls 2.0 / Pro and the STORZ MASTERPULS MP200 ultra put their peak energy at the applicator surface, so they are built for the same clinical job and compare fairly. The Zimmer enPuls 2.0 / Pro uses electromagnetic ballistic wave generation; the STORZ MASTERPULS MP200 ultra uses pneumatic. Neither publishes a purchase price, so both need a written quote. FDA records located: for the Zimmer enPuls 2.0 / Pro, no record located; for the STORZ MASTERPULS MP200 ultra, no record located.
Specs and prices are estimates based on publicly available data as of September 2026. Confirm details with the manufacturer or seller before you buy.
Side by side
| Specification | RadialZimmer enPuls 2.0 / Pro | RadialSTORZ MASTERPULS MP200 ultra |
|---|---|---|
Technology | ||
| Category | Radial pressure wave | Radial pressure wave |
| Wave generation | Electromagnetic ballisticcompressor-free | Pneumaticballistic, integrated compressor |
| Energy fieldWhere the peak energy lands | Peaks at the applicator surface | Peaks at the applicator surface |
| Technology as published | Compressor-free electromagnetic ballistic radial | Pneumatic ballistic radial, with vibration and vacuum therapy |
| Stated use or positioning | Not stated | Radial shockwave, vibration and vacuum therapySTORZ's “Triple technology »Deluxe« module” of the »ultra« line |
Energy outputPressure in bar, energy flux density in mJ/mm² and energy per pulse in mJ are different quantities. A figure in one row never stands in for another. | ||
| Energy per pulsemJ | 60–185 mJin 10 mJ steps; Zimmer compares the range to 1–5 bar | Not published |
| Pressurebar | Not published | 0.3–5 bareffective |
| FrequencyHz | 1–22 Hz | 1–21 Hz |
Applicators and handpiece | ||
| Applicators and transmitters | 6, 15 and 25 mm headschanged without tools; the enPuls 2.0 ships two 15 mm heads | FALCON radial handpieceoptional V-ACTOR HF vibration handpiece at 1–50 Hz; vacuum cups in 4 sizes |
| Handpiece life | 2 million pulseshandpiece warranty | Not published |
| Applicator weight | About 1.87 lbhandpiece, with cable | Not published |
| Preset protocols | 7 presetscustomizable | Not published |
Size and setup | ||
| Unit weight | 6 lb (≈ 2.7 kg)enPuls 2.0, without handpiece | 23 kg (≈ 50.7 lb) |
| Dimensions | 12.7 × 9.3 × 5.1 inenPuls 2.0, L × W × H; the enPuls Pro is 7.9 × 13.8 × 11.8 in | 466 × 187 × 454 mmW × H × D, without touch screen |
| Configuration | Compressor-free, light chassisfoot switch triggers pulses | Console with an integrated compressoroptional 10-inch touch screen |
| Other published details | 7-inch touchscreen on the enPuls 2.0, 12-inch on the enPuls Prothe Pro weighs 8.4 lb, runs two handpieces and adds a visual analogue pain scale | Settings shown and changed on the handpieceSkin Touch pulse triggering |
Price and buying | ||
| Purchase price | Not publicly listed | Not publicly listed |
| Monthly lease | Not publicly listed | Not publicly listed |
| Warranty and guarantees | 2 million-pulse handpiece warranty | Not published |
| Sales and service | Strong direct US service channelZimmer MedizinSystems, Irvine, California | STORZ MEDICAL America, Kennesaw, GeorgiaCuraMedix also sells it, as the OrthoPulse Ultra 200 |
Regulatory recordRecord types and numbers exactly as located. A record covers one configuration and one indication, and never transfers to another product. | ||
| FDA record located | None located | None locatedrecords on other configurations from this manufacturer do not cover this model |
Our notes | ||
| Where it stands out | Strong direct US service channel and a light chassis. | Radial pressure waves, vibration and vacuum therapy in one console. |
| What to check | No device-specific 510(k) number was found. | No FDA record names the MP200, and STORZ publishes no energy flux, depth or handpiece-life figures for it. |
9 further fields have no published figure for either machine.
Zimmer enPuls 2.0 / Pro vs STORZ MASTERPULS MP200 ultra: common questions
What is the difference between the Zimmer enPuls 2.0 / Pro and the STORZ MASTERPULS MP200 ultra?
Both the Zimmer enPuls 2.0 / Pro and the STORZ MASTERPULS MP200 ultra put their peak energy at the applicator surface, so they are built for the same clinical job and compare fairly. The Zimmer enPuls 2.0 / Pro uses electromagnetic ballistic wave generation; the STORZ MASTERPULS MP200 ultra uses pneumatic. The Zimmer enPuls 2.0 / Pro is described as “Compressor-free electromagnetic ballistic radial”, the STORZ MASTERPULS MP200 ultra as “Pneumatic ballistic radial, with vibration and vacuum therapy”.
Which is cheaper, the Zimmer enPuls 2.0 / Pro or the STORZ MASTERPULS MP200 ultra?
Neither publishes a purchase price, so both need a written quote. Prices change and estimates are not quotes, so confirm both in writing.
Are the Zimmer enPuls 2.0 / Pro and the STORZ MASTERPULS MP200 ultra FDA cleared?
FDA records located: for the Zimmer enPuls 2.0 / Pro, no record located; for the STORZ MASTERPULS MP200 ultra, no record located. A record covers one configuration and one indication, and never transfers to another model, so check it against the exact configuration you are quoted.
How do I choose between the Zimmer enPuls 2.0 / Pro and the STORZ MASTERPULS MP200 ultra?
Start with the clinical job, then ask both vendors for the same five things in writing: the exact model, revision, and which accessories are included at that price; contract term, APR, total payments, and the buyout option at the end; handpiece and consumable life, and what a replacement costs; warranty coverage and US service turnaround time; the exact FDA clearance number and the current labelling for the configuration being quoted.
More comparisons
Zimmer enPuls 2.0 / Pro vs
Still deciding?
Talk it through with our equipment team
Tell us about your practice and caseload. We will help you weigh the options and send lease and purchase estimates for the machines we sell.