althoma1

Step in. Think Dynasty, but lighter with more segmentation and a new colour scheme.

I have some retail Mako 2's and Pro Stocks that are stiffer. I'm debating if I should use the stiffer pro stocks for a roller conversion or keep them for ice. Any thoughts?

Having no negative space means you aren't losing energy transfer. If money is no object then either going with the CCM full pro custom option or the True skates would be what I would choose (I like the flexible tendon guard on the True skates and they're the most similar to the Easton Makos I currently wear, so I would lean toward the True skates). The True skates, CCM Jetspeed FT1 and Tacks AS1 are also all one piece boots, they have no separate outsole; this should also help maximize energy transfer.

I was going to recommend the Surgeon 500 gloves before even reading the post from Santos. I tried the XC9 and QRL gloves on at Modsquadhockey events and both felt comfortable, but the QRL is the snugger fitting glove of those two. I own a pair of HSX gloves and STX Surgeons and the Surgeon gloves are definitely the tightest in the fingers and backhand, but open up more in the wrist area. If I was buying new gloves today I would go for another pair of STX Surgeons, but the QRL gloves would be on the shortlist. You could also consider the CCM Quicklite gloves.

I found some new in the box size 4 Mako II's for $150. Sent you a PM. I'd have a hard time justifying spending $800 for skates for a player who is going to grow out of them in a year as well.

I don't think any of the retail models out now will feel anything like the Makos. With that said, you do have one piece boot options in the Jetspeed FT1, CCM Supertacks and Verbero Vortex and Cypress models. If you're thinking of spending the coin on top of the line retail models at full pop though; I'd seriously consider the VH/True route. What size Mako would your son need? I search for Makos in my size periodically and come across others - I could let you know if I see your son's size.

Warrior Gionta or Smyth.

You can't post them directly. Use an external hosting site and then post the URLs. tinypic.com is one example of a free image hosting site. There are plenty of others.

Sorry for your loss. Pets are part of the family and it's always tough losing one.

They need to put in the price - I see it's $199US at the major US e-tailers. That's not cheap, but it's $100 less than the 4 star Reakt 200.

As soon as marka reads this he's going to be on his way to a shop to grab a CCM FL500

Even if the pros testing/endorsing them wanted to wear them, I'm not sure they could without getting league approval first. They're definitely not cheap, but they'd be more expensive to produce than most holders because there are more parts. They're also being produced by a smaller company in smaller numbers than the most popular holders; that also drives costs up. You'd definitely be limited to the proprietary runners; it'd likely be a stainless steel runner. No one knows for sure how they'll hold up over time right now. It seems like they've been testing them for a while now. It's not the same thing as profiled steel - it's allowing more blade to be in contact regardless of the profile. You could use a custom profile in conjunction with these holders. The same profile with these holders and traditional holders would allow for more steel contact in turns. I don't think they'll necessarily get more traction from players learning the game. They'll get traction from people willing to spend money to possibly gain a competitive advantage and that could be players of all levels. With that said, it'll be a niche product to start for sure; I view it as similar to Sprung in the inline world. I think the Sprungs are better than the stock chassis on most skates, but most players are fine with the stock chassis and aren't willing to spend the money to buy a new chassis. Most people are also comfortable with the stock holder on their skates and aren't willing to spend the money to swap it, but there are those who do and will. While I did spend the coin on the Sprung chassis for inline, I did that because I played ice first and was always searching for that ice like feel in inline (had already used the Tuuk Rocker chassis). For ice, I'd have to be shown that there would be a DRASTIC improvement with the new chassis to consider spending the money on the new chassis and getting it mounted. That's why I'm also in the wait and see camp on this, but the concept is interesting. Oh, and for those wondering why I compared this to the Sprung holder in inline vs. the Marsblade inline chassis; I don't have the numbers, but think Marsblade may have sold more to ice players who don't even play inline on a regular basis because it was marketed as a training tool.

The $469 is the tag price, but it might scan at $399 (as that's what the 8EE pair was marked at); either way it'd be an additional 30% off the lowest price. With that said, going between widths is certainly a gamble. I wear 8EE Makos and tried a clearance 8D M8 and even after baking they were too narrow in the forefoot for me so I had to resell them. That's why I didn't bite on the 8D Mako II's.

Ontario tax at the retail level is 13% HST. I scoured the store and those were the only Makos I found. So there are the OG 8EE and 8.5EE pairs in the box and the 8D Mako II's with no box on a rack.

For those Mako lovers in the Greater Toronto Area, I spotted some clearance Makos at the Pickering Sport Chek that's closing in mid-December. Everything is currently 30% off lowest ticketed prices - the discount may increase as the closing date approaches (I believe the final day is Dec 17). They had 8EE OG Makos in the box for $399.88, 8.5EE OG Makos in the box marked at $469.88 (may scan at the same price as the other OG Makos) and 8D Mako II skates out of the box on a rack for $469.88. These are the prices before the 30% discount. If the Mako II's were 8EE I would've grabbed them myself. The did have the OG Makos in my size, but I already have several Mako II's so left them all. I did open the OG Mako boxes to check that they were in fact the originals - they were.

That sounds like the perfect size. They should just be brushing the toe cap when they're laced and standing and then come off slightly when you bend your knees and get into a skating position. Baking will help with the break in. When the padding compresses you may gain 1mm or so as Vet88 suggests, but that's a good thing - you don't want to gain a bunch of room as you're describing the ideal performance length.

Basing sizing on measurement makes more sense than going by shoe size as some people wear shoes looser than others and different brands fit diffently. I wear 10W in most dress shoes 10 sandals, 10 winter boots and 10.5 in most sneakers. The box that my 8EE Mako skates came in says they are for 9.5 shoes...if I went by the shoe size guidelines I would have ended up in an 8.5 which would be too big for sure. I would try on both 7.5 and 8 in a D Nexus if you go that route. For the Tacks line you would most likely need an 8EE, but trying on multiple sizes makes sense. If none of them feel great or are approaching the $1000 range, look into True/VH.

I think 8.5EE would be too long in the current Bauer and CCM lines (as well as the discontinued Easton Makos) if your feet are 27cm in length. My feet are 26.7cm long barefoot and I'm in 8EE Makos and feel like I could actually go down to a 7.75EE if that were an option (with the 7.5EE my feet are pressed right against the cap). I could see why you'd think 8.5 would be the way to go since you were wearing 9 Grafs and most people drop a half size down from Graf to other brands, but I'd trust your foot measurement. The Grafs could be a half size long and feel like the right size because they're narrower than you need and are elongating your foot - you should unlace the Grafs, push your foot all the way forward until it's against the cap and then see how much room you have behind the heel using a standard pencil (if you can fit the pencil width all the way down then they're likely a half size long). I also have wide feet, a bit wider than yours with an approximately 12cm forefoot width, but have an average arch. The 8EE Mako line works well for me, but it's discontinued and the arch may be a bit high for you. The D width Nexus skates are based on a EE last. I wouldn't go all the way to EE if you go the Nexus route as I have tried on a D Nexus (7.5D) and that was plenty wide for my forefoot - it was just too wide for my heel as I have a narrower heel. The Nexus is certainly a deep and wide boot. The 7.5D felt long enough for me in the Nexus line, but this was an older Nexus 800 from several years ago. Take that with a grain of salt, but I do think the D width Nexus is still wide enough in the forefoot for most people and EE would be sloppy wide for anyone that doesn't have EXTREMELY wide feet. Tacks in an 8EE might work for you - they were a bit too narrow for me in the forefoot, but your feet aren't quite as wide as mine. The heel lock was good in the Tacks. I have not tried the new Ribcore skates, but the Ribcore line has been known for being good for flat feet in the past. I also know that it was a fairly shallow fit though; I don't know if that has changed with the latest model. I agree with Jamaraquan, if you're going to spend high end money then just go the True Custom route. Trace and measure your feet and let them know you have flat arches and they'll build a custom skate based on that that will cost you around the same amount as a top end Bauer or CCM stock skate.

If the computer told you to try Supremes then you could just move to Mission skates. The Mission skates are built using the Supreme last. The Mission skates also use a Hi Lo chassis though; so if you prefer the Hummer 2 or another chassis then of course converting would make sense. I'll let others answer the shim question as I haven't used them myself.

I see there are new Pro Clip visors for 2017. It seems the shape of the straight visor is slightly tweaked, they've improved the scratch resistance on the outside and the fog resistance on the inside and perhaps tweaked the clip mechanism vs. the HDO Pro Clip. I've used the HDO Pro Clip for a couple years to ref and haven't had fogging issues, but improved scratch resistance is welcome as it'll potentially mean less frequent lens replacement. What I'm wondering is, are the new Pro Clip lenses compatible with the HDO Pro Clips and vice versa?

Thanks for coming out Steve. I tried the 3/4" fire ring. I was impressed that the machine did it's job so quietly and with no dust. When the skates came out the finish was great and I had even edges. The blades were not hot to the touch (I've had sharpeners overheat the CXN and before that the Mission Pitch steel because it's harder and they don't take their time. This leads to hot steel and usually burnt heels) and I comfortably handled them. I'd brought a second set of steel freshly sharpened to 90/50 FBV, the hollow I've now been using for years, just in case I didn't like the feel of the fire ring sharpening. The last regular hollow I'd used before converting to FBV was 7/8", but I gradually went shallower from 5/8" to 3/4" to 7/8"; so I have experience with all of those hollows. I didn't end up switching out the blades and skated on the 3/4" Fire Ring sharpening for the entire 2 hours on Saturday and then used the same sharpening to ref 4 games on Sunday night. The edges were even and I had good glide, but I'd say it felt like there was a bit less bite than a freshly sharpened 90/50 FBV cut. At the end of the day, the Fire Ring is a bit different than the FBV cut I was used to, but I had no problems skating on it and wouldn't hesitate to get my skates sharpened with a Sparx machine in the future. My steel was not burnt, the finish was good, I had edges and it was shallow enough for me that I didn't catch any edges when transitioning or chatter when stopping (if I ask for a shallow cut and the sharpener puts on something deeper, I know right away as I feel the edges when pivoting and get chatter when I stop - I can't stand skating on a deep hollow). A consistent sharpening without fear of your profile getting ruined or the steel getting burnt/overheated is definitely a great thing.

I've read about the cracking problem with the original Makos, but haven't experienced that. My first converted for roller pair of OG Makos got really soft after a year of playing, has rips in the liner and the padding is compressed - I now only use those to ref recreational games on cement and have a newer conversion for playing. I've had Mako II's that I've used to ref hundreds of games over a year and have no padding or liner issues and they feel as stiff as when I got them. For me the durability on the Mako II's has been much better than the originals and I now have a small stockpile of them in my size. With that said, when my stockpile runs out I'll definitely be looking to True first. The concept is similar and they feel much stiffer than the retail Mako II's. I have one pair of pro stock Mako II's with extra stiffness that I haven't used yet, but feel similar in stiffness to the VH/True skates on display. I asked the rep if the skates on display were extra stiff or something, but he said it they were not and did not have the stiffness of the extra shot blockers built in.

Were you in Makos before? At SummerJam it looked like you were in 1x skates and skating quite well in them. Did the Makos just wear out and you couldn't find another set in your size so you grabbed the Vapors?

It'll be great to have you there and I'll be glad to try out a sharpening and check out the machine. If you can bring the fire ring that's the closest to 90/50 FBV that'd be greatly appreciated.

I completely agree with adams. I don't have VH/TRUE skates, but if I ever go that route I'd definitely go to one of the fit centers. If you have a fit centre with the VH/TRUE scanner anywhere near you and want to order custom VH/TRUE skates then it's a no brainer to go through them as there's no extra cost and you're more likely to get better results. The scan just gives them more data to work with and you also have access to a professional fitter.