noupf

I think you are correct, but its not in the picture on their website of the ones i was gonna grab... They have 2 listings for PP12 and one has zippers and one doesn't. I'm thinking typo on PSH website https://www.prostockhockey.com/player-protective/shells/size-xl-ccm-pp12-pant-shell-team-stock-toledo-walleye/

Wow, learn something new every day. I thought all shells were created equal. Had no idea there were shells made for girdle systems and shells made for pants ( if i read your comment correctly ). I'm looking for a shell to go over my Super Tacks girdle, which is a little on the bulky side. I ended up selling the Super Tacks shell that came with my girdle as it was just way to restrictive when i put it on. I guess a pant shell would give me that little extra room i want? EDIT: I see they only have two listing for PP12's and they are not remotely the same. They have a PP12 from the Winnipeg jets that looks like the tacks shell i sold from my girdle system, the other PP12 listed looks identical to the PP10. I'm thinking somebody made a typo.

Found some shells I want to grab on pro stock hockey's web site and one is a PP10 and one is a PP12. Does anybody know if one fits differently or measures differently than the other? I'm 6'3, 230 lbs with thicker thighs, so I prefer my shells to be a little more loose than snug.

Thanks for the insight everyone.

Curious if anybody has some knowledge or insight on which stay in place better? I've owned about 4 various pairs of warrior and ccm elbow pads in my adult hokey playing life. I recall my CCM 3 piece elbow pads from about 20 years ago sliding off my elbow / arm all the time while playing, namely after a hard wrist shot or slap shot. After being sick of them falling off, I found ( at the time ) Warriors top end, 2 piece, Bonafide model elbow pads on clearance at a local hockey shop and they were fantastic in terms of staying in place. Unfortunately they fell apart quickly. I then found a pair of Warrior 2 piece pro stock elbow pads that resembled the Bonafides, that I am still using till this day, but their days are numbered. They too have been very good. I see that many of the brands offer 2 pc or 3 pc designs still, so i am curious if the 2 pc design like the super tacks linked below, do a better job staying in place than the 3 pc design, like the warriors linked below. I for one don't see why there would even be a 3 pc design available, since that part of the body ( forearm and bicept ) are only two piece designs on the human body..... Why would you want the 3 pc design ( more so the forearm segment flexibility ) on the elbow pad anyhow? https://www.icewarehouse.com/CCM_Super_Tacks_AS1/descpage-CEPAS1.html https://www.icewarehouse.com/Warrior_Alpha_LX_Pro/descpage-LXPEP.html Thoughts?

https://www.aliexpress.com/ Search hockey sticks.....quite interesting what one can get and then re-sell as pro stock or other.

Not showing the pro stock build info on each stick thats for sale tells you he could be shady .......

New York, California......potatoe - potato

Interesting, i know a shit ton of small businesses that are killing it in this economy. Didn't realize asking for a better price on a $800-1000 pair of skates was a terrible thing to do. You pay full price for everything? Kudos to you Guess we can now praise all the car dealerships out there asking for prices over MSRP. Good to know.

yea, i have a feeling you are correct. It might be something the smaller local hockey shops are willing to do and sell them at whatever margin they want, so long as they advertise the full price on the sticker of the product on the shelf / website.

yea I read up more on it and it seems like the MAP price is supposed to only pertain to the minimum advertised price of said product, but a retailer can sell them for whatever they want if the customer asks for a deal or discount. I remember years ago calling a truck accessory online dealer in regards to a $900 tonneau cover for my truck, after asking my questions, jokingly I asked if they could do any better on the price and the guy took off another $200. I have no idea if it was a MAP product, but i do recall all places that sold the cover had it listed at the exact same price. I wonder if the same can be done with hockey monkey or icewarehouse or any of those places. Might have to make some phone calls...

So, I'm likely in the market for a new pair of skates. I realize all hockey retailers ( brick and mortar and online ) have MAP pricing rules for current models of their product lines. However, I heard recently that with some retailers, you can often times get a different price in store or over the phone. Is this at all true?

Interesting, I too use the standard step steel ( the $80-90 price point version ) blades and I have not noticed this. I skate twice a week in men's league, play D and I'm a pretty active skater and put plenty of weight and abuse on my blades weighing in at 235 lbs. My experience is kind of the opposite, as I feel that my step steel blades have held up better and longer between sharpening's than the original steel that came on my Grafs. Nicks and gouges i think are just part of the game, as you catch another players blade, step on sticks, the bench area and so on...... I too have had the occasional nick or gouge, but nothing more or less than i've ever noticed before.

buddy of mine bought the 2.9's a few months back for about $275 ( were $359 new ) if it helps. Looks like the new 3X is priced higher ( $419 usd ) than the 2.9's when they were new. No idea if the 3X is a "better" skate to justify the higher price.

yea I've read through this thread extensively, multiple times and came to that conclusion too. This is my first set of profiled blades in my 20+ years of skating, and for me, the idea of the ellipse made a lot of sense, as its one continuous arc, but like you said, if done properly on the quads, ( and I assume pro sharp does it as proper as they can ), the easement between each radius is there, and virtually un-noticeable. I almost wish i didn't find this whole profiling thing. Once I get immersed into something, I have to follow through with exploring all avenues......which is where I'm at. I need to try some other profiles to find the one i like the best. I really like the middle and rear portions of the ellipse1, I just feel like I'd benefit from a little shorter of a radius in the font 1/3rd of the blade to help with my first couple acceleration steps.

so Renfrew brand tape from my local dicks sporting goods is lower quality?

Lets pretend I'm an idiot ( LOL ), what would be some of the better recommended brands of tape out there ?

@kkskate Hey Anthony, any chance you can do an analysis or post some pics of the elipse1 skate template on top of a quad1 and a quad 0.5 template or vice versa? You did the ellipse1 profile on my 288 step steel blades for my grafs and I love the feeling of stability and speed in the middle and rear portions of my blades. I've gotten over and adjusted to the catching of my front toe area while skating, but i feel like i have a huge desire for a little more aggressive radius in the front 1/3rd of the blade. I am curious if quad 1 or quad 0.5 will give me what i want. As i know it, the quad1 is 6'-9'-12'-15' and the quad 0.5 is 8'-10'-12'-14'. I just want to see if we can determine what the ellpise1 is closest to in terms of middle and rear portion of the blade profile and if either or both quads can give me that little more aggressive front radius. Hopefully I can choose one and then send it in to you for profiling.

I read in another thread that somebody used a roller hockey ball and wedged it into the toe cap / box to get it to raise some. It was done on CCM skates dues to the removeable tounge system they have causing an issue for the top of the guys forefoot. I think they used a hair dryer ever so slightly inside and out to warm the plastic a little. At the very least, i'd make sure to do this with a skate that's been sitting inside at room temp to make sure the plastic isnt cold and at all brittle.

Yup, i completely understand what you are saying about the radius continually changing on the ellipse profiles. I think I found the pic you are referring to in one of your other posts. It makes sense, the more defined transition zones you have, the more seamless the transitions.......plus you actually know what radius is being used in each area of the blade.

That's exactly what i am looking for ( AS1, AS2 or AS3 pro stocks ) P40 with the squared toe !!!!. The reason I started this thread was bc i was told by a pro stock retailer / seller that CCM discontinued the P40's around when the the AS1 sticks came out a few years ago and they replaced the P40 with a very similar to P88 but with a more rounded toe. Any time i look for AS1, AS2 or AS3 pro stocks, i cant find them with a P40 curve......but i also cant seem to find P88 in them either. Seems like Super Tacks 2.0 was the last model that had the P40 Guess I'll just have to keep scouring the sites that sell pro stocks and hope i can find some P40's in the newer stick models.

yea, that's why i'd like to see a quad 1 profiled blade ( or the profile template ) on top of an ellipse 1 profiled blade ( or template ) to see if the toe is closer to where i'd like it to be. I'm on a 3/4 ROH now with the ellpise 1 and am completely fine with that sharpening. I love it all.....just not quite in love with the toe area radius.

did you have the same set of steel profiled multiple times or did you get separate blade sets with only one profile on them....and then just switch them in and out to compare?

Curious if any of the hockey shop owners here who do the pro sharp profiles can show me some pics of what the difference is in templates for the Ellipse 1 vs. Quad 1. I am on my first ever profiled set of blades ( 288 step steel ) and I went with the ellipse 1. I absolutely love everything about the profile except that the front 1/3 of the blade feels "long". Meaning, when I want to get up onto my toes to dig in, crossover and accelerate, the blade just feels a little too big in its radius ( the "long" feeling ). and I really have to concentrate or try too hard to utilize the toe for quick acceleration. I am curious if the Quad 1 would be a better choice. I am very very happy with the middle / rear section of the ellipse 1, as I have never felt more stable on my blades while playing, I just feel like I could use a little more of a short radius up front to maximize my first couple push offs with the toe. I wish pro sharp had specs published about the ellipse profiles....it would make this a whole lot easier. 🙂

How old are you and what sort of stretches do you do? I'm 44 and in pretty good shape for my age, but I do have a slight lower back issue and right hip issue. I do some basic stretching before I play ( twice a week ),but I've recently started feeling "old" bc of those two issue I pointed out. Would love to get some more specific stretches to help keep me going.