Marsblade

Great to hear! Let me know if you have any other questions. 🙂 //Per

Hey! The pitch of the i2s in it's forward position is about 4.5 degrees, approximately 1 degree more than a traditional holder. Depending on what rocker insert you're using your pitch rocking back will be different. With the most amount of rocker (14ft rocker insert) you'll reach a pitch of 2.9 degrees rocking back. //Per Mars, Inventor

Nice! Just make sure to test the different inserts as they feel very different. Some guys forgets this. Make sure to challenge yourself in turns, crossovers and trusting the edges more than normal. Also, possibly going for a less sharp hollow as the more steel on the ice will help you with more bite. Some guys feel it too much bite with the same hollow. Less sharp is of course better for glide. //Per

The rocker movement is much more subtle on the I2s vs the O1s as they are designed for performance vs the O1s that are designed for training. The I2s only have the rocker in the back part, the front is rigid to provide firm support when pushing off. You are still able to get a significant rocker movement with the I2s but there's always that stability in the front, so that's a significant difference between the two. Let me know if you want me to elaborate or if you have other questions. //Per

Thanks man! Will do! 🙂 //Per

Hey man, Great questions! The O1 has an H4-T4 rocker radius. There's currently not that exact option for R1. H5-T8 would be the closest. But there's stuff cooking here so at Marsblade so stay tuned for updates in this area during the year 😉 //Per Mars

Yes, they operate differently. The spring is located in the front to create resistance when rocking back and pull the blade back into it's neutral position when lifting the skate up from the ice. You will need to mount the holder to the boot to get the full stiffness of the holder and see the system work properly when the blade / quick release mechanism is attached. Then you'll see that as you press down the heel you'll get the rocker. The old holder was in carbon fiber and was really stiff without being mounted to the boot but had some challenges in it's design. By making it in plastic we could overcome all the challenges but then it needs the stiffness of the boot to be stiff enough. If you want to feel the rocker before the holder is mounted to the boot you'll need to release the blade from the quick release and then rock. Hope this explains it. //Per

@PBH Definitely possible 🙂

@CBnCO Hi, Good thoughts. How the steel interacts with the ice is not largely effected with Flow Motion Technology. All guys that currently are on them I'd say use the same profile as they have with the regular holders. What FMT does is that it allows for the steel to stay on the ice longer for better glide and power transfer while you get better maneuverability for better agility. So regardless of profile, FMT will give you the best of both worlds. What a lot of guys do feel is that they can go for a more shallow hollow since the steel stays on the ice longer. This is very positive of course since a more shallow hollow will give you better glide and endurance. So you do need to profile the steels, but no worries on needing to experiment a lot, just use the same profile and it will work awesome. //Per Mars, Inventor

@PBH The I2 is so much better in all aspects, completely different product in my eyes. We currently have about 10 NHL guys on them. Pretty much all NHL guys that has tried them has continued to use them and loves the feel and performance. //Per Mars, Inventor

Hey, The sizing chart refers to Bauers chart. They have different size holders on the half size skates, so a 6.5 D uses a 254 while a 6.5 EE uses a 263. Hope that makes sense. Holes lines up with the TUUK. //Per

@Westside @Miller55 We want to keep the fit of the lower and upper chassis as tight as possible to get the best possible stability. Unfortunately the visible wear is therefore hard to avoid but as I think you indicate @Westside it's only aesthetic. Hope that makes sense. //Per Mars, Inventor

@ivani Ok, that's what I thought. Although you get better maneuverability than with a straight setup, the downside of rockering the wheels with smaller front and rear wheels is of course that you get less stability and grip to the surface. It also gets a bit "choppy" since the rocker is more "on and off" between the different positions. With our Flow Motion Technology you get a much smoother rocker movement and weight transfer for better feel, power transfer and roll on the wheels. If you use our Standard (straight) wheel setup and want more maneuverability we suggest our Advanced setup with a smaller front wheel in addition to our technology. You could of course also put a smaller rear wheel also (as in the banana setup) but my personal opinion is that you get too much movement and lack of stability. //Per

Hi @ivani, When you're turning the weight on the wheel base shifts back and puts more pressure on the back wheels than the front wheels. Since the wheels are soft the rear wheel can even be pressed down enough so the front wheel can even lift off the ground allowing you to turn. The rocker makes it easier and more natural to shift the weight along the length of the foot and easier to put more heel pressure for easier turns. When you say banana rocker, what do you mean? //Per

Hi guys, Yes Bauer and Mission skates/chassis are definitely more common than our R1 chassis right now. But keep in mind that we're introducing a new technology to a conservative market and it's takes time to break through. Bauer / Mission and other roller hockey brands have been out on the market for many many years and we launched our chassis less than one year ago. You will start seeing more and more R1s going forward and in a few years everyone will be using Flow Motion Technology 🙂 As far as durability, we've just recently changed the material in the plastic and are confident we have solved any issues with them breaking. //Per, Inventor

Ok sounds good!

Are you sure that you have 76 in the back on your current jr frames? I haven't seen anything else than a 72/68 setup on Hi/lo jr skates. //Per

@jtkaczuk Sorry to hear that you haven't received reply to your e-mail to our customer service. Not sure why that is, they are up to speed and should be able to get back in no more than a day or two. Please e-mail me at per@marsblade.com and I'll take it further. @marka I follow this thread as closely as I can and jump in when I feel it's needed or if anyone has a direct question to the extent possible. And yes, I'm not working in customer support daily, need to work on new and improving our current products 🙂 //Per

Hi @caseyjones. The R1 has 80/76 setup. If you're an ice player that prefer more of an ice feel I understand you don't like the longer wheel base. If you prefer the performance R1 over our training O1 frame it's possible that our Small R1 (72/68 wheels) frame would be more to your liking. //Per

@JSchultz Ok! Great to hear! Let us know if you have further thoughts/questions. //Per

@JSchultz Ah ok, so all good then? We're looking at widening the gap slightly in future productions. //Per

@JSchultz Sorry, the first picture I sent was the Large chassis, Here's the Medium chassis according to drawings. So they seem to be correct. Can you try measuring the wheels again. It seems very strange that they would touch if your 76mm wheels are actually smaller. I'd be happy to get on a call if you want to discuss how to proceed. Feel free to call me at +4670 328 88 35. Or e-mail me at per@marsblade.com and I'll give you a call. //Per

@JSchultz having some issues with posting the picture... 🙂 Sorry I was a bit unclear in the last post. If you can measure the distance between the 1st and 2nd wheel and also the distance between the 3rd and 4th wheel that would be awesome. They should measure 71.6mm and 75.6mm. //Per