Leaderboard

Howdy, Is it possible to ban users from specific threads? Mark

Yeah, here are only a couple places/people who do skates well even in Pittsburgh. One is near a rink 30 mins away that we never go to and you need an appt. The other is a specific guy at the rink who is rarely there, and the last i over an hour away. Go to Pure and some guy asks what hollow you want, skates get lined up with 10 other pair with no way to know what skates get which hollow, and two kids manning a machine each do your skates while BSing the whole time. Convenience is by far the #1 motivator. I would love to get a traditional machine just because cause I would enjoy learning to do it but without someone to mentor I don't know if that makes sense.

What a colossel waste of time... Anyway. On the economics or if. That 7, 8 year range is about what I figured. Money wise, I doubt I make my money back. I sharpen for me and maybe a few friends. I never charge. The convince of it though, oh hell yeah. Not having to rely on anyone else is nice and I love having fresh edges. I never put a dollar value to that but it has to be worth something. For me it's always been about the convince and consistency. It's the same edge every time. If they're hosed, its on me.

That’s a great breakdown, and while I agree that you obviously can’t directly correlate time wasted to your hourly salary, my time is definitely worth SOMETHING, and keeping my sanity is worth even more. Not having piss poor sharpening done, or showing up during posted business hours to find the shop closed “because it was slow so the guy went home” after the 30+ minute to drive there. Bottom line, for me: I didn’t buy a Sparx to save money. Not even close.

Those Kings Unis might as well go all the way and have one black glove and one white. I think black glove on the white sleeve, and vice versa, for maximum regrettableness.

Okay guys just leave it alone. Don’t feed trolls. We don’t need to waste another four pages on this. At this point it doesn’t benefit anyone to reply to ridiculous statements.

Or maybe a chunky two-tone glove like the old Flaks. Or shiny silver gloves. The aftermarket demand for those would be insane. So would the durability, I’m guessing.

Or Barge cement thin leather over the wear area.

to keep this simple for you 1. a vastly differing number of sharpenings on the packaging may seem dubious for a non blind consumer that actually pays a lot of money for these rings 2. again and again... the total number of cycles has nothing to do with the amount of material a "newer" 60 sharpenings 1/2, 3/8...ring may be able to remove in one cycle vs. an "older" 40 sharpenings 1/2, 3/8,11/16, 5/8... ring therefore 40 vs 60 doable sharpenings are perfectly possible and I truly want this to be proofed with data.( you can switch "newer" and "older" around. choose for yourself. no one knows for sure) 3. All I want from them is to come out on their website and publish information on the fact that both variants are in circulation, and as I've already said, proof the fact that an "older production" 1/2 ring will yield the same number of sharpenings, under isolated conditions, compared to the "new" 1/2 ring. Additionally,it remains to be proven if it takes the same amount of cycles with the "newer production/new packaging" 1/2'' rings to reach the desired radius of hollow than with the lesser agressive 11/16,5/8...1 inch rings in the "old packaging". All of these tests have to be done under isolated conditions, using new identical blades. This would help us to make a qualified buying decision in the future. Maybe there are some differences maybe not? how can we know this as consumers? The goal here is that nobody has to feel like a piece of crap after spending 200$ including shipping on two of these rings just to find out that the stated number of sharpenings varies by 33% from ring to ring. that's it. As long as these things aren't published and proved, I'm awaiting a serious apology from their side. I just had to answer on that. no worries,I'll discuss the rest with Sparx directly.