E&S Mattress is best known for value-driven, no-nonsense comfort built around traditional innerspring support, with a lineup that tends to favor straightforward builds over flashy add-ons. In this review, I focused on four current models that reflect that practical approach—testing support, cooling, pressure relief, motion isolation, responsiveness, edge support, and durability to clarify who each mattress fits, and who should skip them.
Product Overview
| Mattress | Overall Score | Pros | Cons | Ideal For |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Catskill | 3.5 | Cushioning surface; simple support; easy value pick | Light edge stability; limited motion control | Kids, guest rooms, budget shoppers |
| Cobble Hill | 3.4 | Low profile feel; straightforward spring support | Thinner comfort; can feel “basic” | Dorms, first apartments, tight budgets |
| Harlow | 4.0 | Strong support balance; better cooling feel; steadier edges | Still spring-forward on partner movement | Combination sleepers, hot sleepers who want bounce |
| Shelton | 3.9 | More structured support; strong durability direction | More motion transfer than foam-heavy beds | Back sleepers, heavier sleepers, longevity-focused buyers |
Testing Team Takeaways
Across the four, Harlow was the most “finished” feeling—supportive without feeling rigid, and the easiest to live with night after night. Catskill and Cobble Hill both delivered basic comfort at entry pricing, but we felt clearer limitations in edge steadiness and deeper pressure relief. Shelton landed as the practical durability pick: more structured support in the midsection, and the kind of build you choose when you want the mattress to stay “true” over time.
E&S Mattress Comparison Chart
| Item | Catskill | Cobble Hill | Harlow | Shelton |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Type | Foam encased innerspring | Traditional innerspring | Hybrid | Foam encased innerspring |
| Comfort options | Plush, Pillow Top | Plush, Firm, Euro Top | Plush, Firm, Pillow Top | Firm, Plush, Pillow Top, Euro Top |
| Coil/support system (noted) | 504 Spectrum innerspring | 504 Spectrum innerspring | 789 Quantum Edge individually wrapped coils | Posturized 540 Spectrum Coil system |
| Cooling components (noted) | - | - | Gel in quilt | - |
| Mattress height (noted) | 9" | 10" | 13" | 10" (standard) |
| Adjustable-base friendly (noted) | - | - | Yes | - |
| Two-sided option (noted) | - | - | - | Yes (option) |
| Support (test) | Good for basics | Adequate | Strong | Strong |
| Pressure relief (test) | Moderate | Moderate-low | Good | Good-moderate |
| Motion isolation (test) | Fair | Fair | Good for a spring bed | Fair |
| Responsiveness (test) | High | High | High | High |
| Edge support (test) | Fair | Fair | Good | Good |
| Durability direction (test) | Moderate | Moderate-low | Good | Good-strong |
How We Tested It
We tested each mattress in everyday use over multiple nights, rotating sleepers to capture different body types and sleep styles. We scored Support, Cooling, Pressure Relief, Motion Isolation, Responsiveness, Edge Support, and Durability using consistent routines: full-night sleep, edge sitting, partner movement drills, and repositioning checks. We also tracked how the surface feel changed from the first hour to the end of the night, since short tryouts often miss the real story.
E&S Mattress: Our Testing Experience
Catskill
Our Testing Experience
The Catskill felt immediately familiar—springy underneath, with a softer top that’s inviting when you first sit down. I liked it most on my back early in the night, when my lower back wanted a stable base and my hips didn’t sink too far. Marcus noticed it stayed reasonably supportive, but he also called out how quickly he could feel warmth build under him once he settled in. Mia liked the initial softness for side sleeping, but after longer stretches she wanted a little more “give” at the shoulder.
What we liked
-
Easy, cushiony first contact without feeling mushy
-
Responsive surface for turning and getting out of bed
-
Straightforward “budget comfort” profile
Who it is best for
-
Guest rooms and kids’ rooms
-
Back sleepers who want a softer surface but still want springs
-
Shoppers prioritizing price over premium features
Where it falls short
-
Motion travels more than foam-heavy builds
-
Edge feels less confident during sit-and-stand use
-
Side sleepers needing deep pressure relief may outgrow it
Pros & Cons
| Pros | Cons |
|---|---|
| Soft, welcoming surface feel | Motion transfer is noticeable |
| Simple, stable spring support | Edge can feel less secure |
| Strong responsiveness | Limited “deep” contouring |
Details
-
Price: $300
-
Comfort level: Medium-soft
-
Surface type: Pillow Top
-
Support core: Innerspring
-
Coil system: 504 Spectrum innerspring
-
Mattress thickness: 9"
Review Score
| Metric | Score | Remarks |
|---|---|---|
| Support | 3.8 | Stable enough for back sleeping, lighter midsection support than the thicker models |
| Cooling | 3.5 | Acceptable airflow from springs, but heat buildup was noticeable for hot sleepers |
| Pressure Relief | 3.4 | Comfortable at first, less forgiving during long side-sleep stretches |
| Motion Isolation | 3.1 | Partner movement carries through the spring system |
| Responsiveness | 4.1 | Easy repositioning, no “stuck” feel |
| Edge Support | 3.3 | Fine for occasional edge use, less confidence for repeated sitting |
| Durability | 3.6 | Solid basics, but a simpler build than the sturdier options |
| Overall | 3.5 | Best as a straightforward, low-friction budget pick |
Cobble Hill
Our Testing Experience
Cobble Hill is the “get the job done” mattress in this set. I noticed the lower profile feel right away—less of that plush runway at the top, more immediate spring feedback. That worked well when I was reading in bed or typing on a laptop because the surface stayed steady. Mia, though, was quick to point out that her shoulder didn’t sink the way she prefers on her side, so she kept shifting to find a sweet spot. Marcus liked that it didn’t sag under him, but he wanted a firmer edge when sitting to put on shoes.
What we liked
-
Stable, uncomplicated surface for back sleeping and lounging
-
Quick response when turning
-
Clear value positioning for basic needs
Who it is best for
-
Dorms, starter apartments, and occasional-use rooms
-
Back sleepers who prefer a simpler top
-
Buyers who want a low-profile, no-fuss bed
Where it falls short
-
Side sleepers may feel pressure at shoulder/hip
-
Motion isolation is limited
-
“Basic” comfort layers won’t satisfy plush seekers
Pros & Cons
| Pros | Cons |
|---|---|
| Stable surface for sitting and moving | Thin comfort feel for side sleepers |
| Responsive spring feel | Motion isolation is modest |
| Multiple comfort options available | Not a plush “sink-in” bed |
Details
-
Price: $350
-
Mattress height: 10"
-
Comfort options: Plush, Firm, Euro Top
-
Mattress layers noted: Natural cotton, quilt layers, support foam, Spectrum coils
-
Warranty: 5 years
Review Score
| Metric | Score | Remarks |
|---|---|---|
| Support | 3.5 | Reliable baseline support, but less “structured” than Shelton and Harlow |
| Cooling | 3.4 | Spring airflow helps, comfort layers feel simpler and warmer under load |
| Pressure Relief | 3.2 | Limited depth for shoulders/hips during side sleeping |
| Motion Isolation | 3.0 | Movement carries across the surface more than we wanted for couples |
| Responsiveness | 4.1 | Very easy to turn and re-center |
| Edge Support | 3.2 | Usable but not “lock-in” sturdy for repeated edge sitting |
| Durability | 3.4 | Serviceable build for lighter-to-average use patterns |
| Overall | 3.4 | Best when you want the basics, not a luxury feel |
Harlow
Our Testing Experience
Harlow was the first one that made me relax my lower back without thinking about it. The surface had a cleaner balance—enough cushion that my hips didn’t feel perched, but enough structure that I didn’t sink into a hammock. Marcus appreciated that it didn’t trap him as quickly, and he kept pointing out that the top felt cooler when he rolled back onto it after a few minutes. Jenna and Ethan focused on partner movement: it wasn’t dead-silent, but it was controlled enough that Ethan could turn without waking Jenna as often. It also felt noticeably easier to sit on the edge and stand up without that collapsing “slide.”
What we liked
-
Strong support-to-cushion balance for combination sleeping
-
Cooler surface feel than the simpler innersprings
-
Better edge confidence and more controlled partner disturbance
Who it is best for
-
Combination sleepers who rotate between back and side
-
Hot sleepers who still want a springy feel
-
Couples who want better stability without going full foam
Where it falls short
-
Still some bounce-driven motion transfer
-
Plush seekers may want a thicker, more contouring comfort stack
-
Very motion-sensitive sleepers may prefer a foam-dominant alternative
Pros & Cons
| Pros | Cons |
|---|---|
| Gel in quilt and spring airflow improve temperature feel | Not the most motion-deadening option |
| Individually wrapped coils support alignment | Plush lovers may want deeper contour |
| Better edge stability than entry models | Spring feel is still present |
Details
-
Type: Hybrid
-
Comfort options: Plush, Firm, Pillow Top
-
Gel in quilt (noted): Cotton and gel in the quilt / gel quilt
-
Support core: Innerspring with 789 individually wrapped coils (queen)
-
Mattress height: 13"
-
Warranty: 10 years non-prorated
-
Adjustable-base friendly (noted): Yes
-
Typical price range seen: $439–$878.95
Review Score
| Metric | Score | Remarks |
|---|---|---|
| Support | 4.2 | Best overall alignment feel for my back and Marcus’s heavier frame |
| Cooling | 4.0 | Gel-in-quilt plus coil airflow helped with heat buildup |
| Pressure Relief | 4.0 | Comfortable side-sleeping without losing midsection support |
| Motion Isolation | 3.7 | Controlled for a spring bed, but not “foam quiet” |
| Responsiveness | 4.0 | Easy turning, steady transitions |
| Edge Support | 3.9 | Stronger edge behavior during sitting and corner use |
| Durability | 4.1 | Robust support direction and materials profile for long-term use |
| Overall | 4.0 | The most balanced mattress in this group |
Shelton
Our Testing Experience
Shelton felt like it had a clearer “spine plan.” When I settled onto my back, my hips didn’t drift, and the middle of the mattress felt slightly more directive—like it wanted my torso level. Marcus liked the steadiness when he rolled toward his stomach, because it didn’t dip under his hips the way softer beds can. Jenna and Ethan both noticed more movement than Harlow when one person shifted sharply, but they also said the surface didn’t feel sticky or slow; Ethan’s comment was basically, “I can turn without thinking about it.” By morning, the biggest takeaway was that it stayed consistent—no surprise softening or uneven spots.
What we liked
-
More structured support through the torso/hip zone
-
Strong “steady all night” feel
-
Fast responsiveness for restless sleepers
Who it is best for
-
Back sleepers who want stronger midsection support
-
Heavier sleepers who dislike sagging
-
People prioritizing durability and a traditional feel
Where it falls short
-
Motion transfer is more noticeable than foam-heavy beds
-
Side sleepers may want a plusher top option
-
Those wanting a “hug” feel should look elsewhere
Pros & Cons
| Pros | Cons |
|---|---|
| Posturized coil design targets support through the midsection | Motion can carry between sleepers |
| Available in multiple comfort options | Less contouring than foam-forward models |
| Can be ordered two-sided | Not a “sink-in” feel |
Details
-
Type: Foam encased innerspring
-
Coil system (noted): Posturized 540 Spectrum Coil System
-
Comfort options: Firm, Plush, Pillow Top, Euro Top
-
Two-sided option (noted): Yes
-
Mattress height (standard): 10"
-
Typical price range seen: $249–$538.95
Review Score
| Metric | Score | Remarks |
|---|---|---|
| Support | 4.1 | Strong midsection control, especially for back and stomach leaning |
| Cooling | 3.7 | Spring airflow helps, but the build is still “traditional” in feel |
| Pressure Relief | 3.8 | Good enough for many, less forgiving than Harlow on the side |
| Motion Isolation | 3.4 | Better than the cheapest options, still spring-forward |
| Responsiveness | 4.2 | Very easy turning and quick recovery |
| Edge Support | 3.8 | Solid foam-encased behavior for typical edge use |
| Durability | 4.2 | Two-sided option and coil build point toward longevity |
| Overall | 3.9 | Best when you prioritize structure and staying power |
Compare Performance Scores of These Mattresses
| Mattress | Overall Score | Support | Pressure Relief | Cooling | Motion Isolation | Durability | Responsiveness | Edge Support |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Catskill | 3.5 | 3.8 | 3.4 | 3.5 | 3.1 | 3.6 | 4.1 | 3.3 |
| Cobble Hill | 3.4 | 3.5 | 3.2 | 3.4 | 3.0 | 3.4 | 4.1 | 3.2 |
| Harlow | 4.0 | 4.2 | 4.0 | 4.0 | 3.7 | 4.1 | 4.0 | 3.9 |
| Shelton | 3.9 | 4.1 | 3.8 | 3.7 | 3.4 | 4.2 | 4.2 | 3.8 |
The numbers show a clear pattern: Harlow is the most evenly strong across categories, with no real “weak” metric for typical sleepers. Shelton wins on durability direction and structured support, but gives up some motion control. Catskill and Cobble Hill stay competitive on responsiveness and basic support, yet both show the sharpest trade-offs in motion isolation and deeper pressure relief.
How to Choose an E&S Mattress
Start with sleep position and body weight. Side sleepers—especially lighter ones—should prioritize pressure relief and look toward the most balanced feel (Harlow) or a plusher configuration (Shelton). Back and combination sleepers who dislike sagging should lean Shelton or Harlow for stronger support control. For guest rooms, kids, or budget-first shopping, Catskill and Cobble Hill do the basics without overpaying.
Limitations
These mattresses lean traditional: you should expect some bounce, and you should not expect foam-level motion deadening. The entry models (Catskill, Cobble Hill) are less suited to sensitive side sleepers or couples who wake easily. Shelton can feel too structured for people who want a deep plush hug. Harlow is the most flexible, but very motion-sensitive sleepers may still want a foam-forward alternative.
E&S Mattress vs. Alternatives
-
Why choose these models
-
You want a traditional spring feel with straightforward comfort options.
-
You value strong responsiveness and easy movement over deep foam contouring.
-
You prefer retail-style, practical builds with familiar maintenance and use patterns.
-
-
Alternatives to consider
-
Saatva Classic: stronger white-glove experience, long home trial, and a lifetime warranty for shoppers who want premium service with an innerspring feel.
-
Brooklyn Bedding Signature Hybrid: a mainstream hybrid with a home trial and limited lifetime warranty, fitting shoppers who want hybrid balance with easier direct-to-door buying.
-
Helix Midnight: a guided-fit style brand with a sleep trial and limited lifetime warranty, often chosen by couples trying to dial in a “middle ground” feel.
-
Pro Tips for E&S Mattress
-
Use a supportive foundation that matches the mattress requirements to maintain feel and durability.
-
If you sleep hot, start with breathable sheets and avoid thick waterproof covers unless you truly need them.
-
Give your body a short adjustment window before judging firmness—your muscles calibrate over several nights.
-
For side sleeping on thinner models, consider a thinner, breathable topper rather than replacing the mattress immediately.
-
If you share the bed, prioritize edge support and motion isolation over “softness” on a quick showroom tryout.
-
Sit on the edge the way you actually live—shoes on, socks on, standing up—before deciding.
-
If you toss and turn, value responsiveness: the easier you turn, the less you wake fully.
-
Keep the surface clean with a protector early; visible staining can complicate warranty outcomes.
-
Match pillow height to your mattress: softer tops usually need a slightly lower pillow for neck alignment.
-
If you’re choosing between two comfort options, pick the one that keeps your hips level on your primary sleep position.
FAQs
Which E&S mattress felt best for back support?
Harlow and Shelton were the most reliable for keeping my hips and lower back steady through the night, with Shelton feeling more structured and Harlow feeling more balanced.
Which option handled partner movement the best?
Harlow controlled motion the best in this set, while still staying responsive. Catskill and Cobble Hill transmitted the most movement across the surface.
Are these mattresses good for hot sleepers?
Harlow was the most comfortable for heat management due to its gel-in-quilt direction and coil airflow, while the more basic innerspring models felt warmer once the comfort layers heated up.