krisdrum

My analysis is based solely on product claims easily found on each of their websites. If there is additional information on either/both, that is great to know, but it was not part of my breakdown. Update: After reading through Russ' response... I think you have to take it with a grain of salt, unless he wants to share the results of those head-to-head tests. I'm sure both units a good machines, with their pros and cons. It would be nice if someone would do a head-to-head to assess long-term value in a controlled unbiased environment. As I mentioned earlier, I am not in the market for a machine, I have access to one already and the $100 grinding wheel entry price was more than reasonable for me. My son and I have been sharing it for the last 18+ months with great results. Well worth the price considering we've only had a handful of times his blades were damaged enough to necessitate a trip to our LHS to get it sorted by a trained professional. As for the product page you linked to, not for the Home version, for the SkatePal. The Home machine wheels are $99.99 USD. No clue what the difference is or why 1 is more expensive for seemingly less sharpenings. Reading through the recent responses, I saw a few issues mentioned that I haven't experienced with the Home machine I have access to. If those issues are deal breakers or something that is giving folks pause, I figured I'd mention my experience with the ProSharp. Nothing more, nothing less, I've got no skin in this game. My son and I and our extended family (3 serious players in that household) have been very happy with the results the ProSharp provides. YMMV.

Ok, sorry, don't want to derail this thread, but I ran the numbers again for my own curiosity and unless I am missing something the units are much closer in price to operate to the same amount of sharpenings, at least from my US-based perspective. YMMV in your location. ProSharp Home Sparx Pro Sparx adjusted to equal 500 sharps Machine 1400 900 900 Wheels, each after initial purchase 100 65 520 Claimed sharpenings per wheel 500 60 8 Sparx wheels = 1 ProSharp Total 1400 1420 If you are looking at the newer Sparx, you are saying $200, which is about 3 wheels worth of saving. Granted the upfront costs of the ProSharp are higher and not everyone can drop $1400. Just food for thought for those looking at the long term value of the two machines.

@Giltis Take my comments with a grain of salt, I haven't used a Sparx. However, I do use a ProSharp Home on a regular basis (not mine, but a family member has one, so my only investment in this so far is a single grind wheel that my son and I share). Based on the recent comments (expensive wheels, needing to adjust after wheel swaps in some cases), you might want to explore the ProSharp option. Now, their wheels are expensive as well, but you get way more sharpenings out of them (I did the math a few years ago and if memory serves the Sparx was more expensive to own and maintain after 3 or 4 wheel changes than the ProSharp was thanks to more sharpenings per wheel) and if Sparx just raised their prices, the value likely leans even more towards ProSharp. I've also never had any issues swapping between wheels and needing to re-align as long as I make sure the newly installed wheel is all the way on the spindle. And we share the machine, so I am swapping my wheel in every time I need to sharpen and putting their wheel back on after I finish. No complains of bad edges on our end or theirs that I am aware of. I usually do 2 passes and then hone with a course stone, fine stone and strop on high end standard finish stainless runners (Step). Now I can't comment on the quality of the sharpening by both, but will say I have been impressed with the ProSharp machine. Honestly, the honing takes more time and effort than the sharpening.

Not that Vet88 doesn't know his stuff (he most certainly does), but I'll confirm his input. I've had several boots punched in the heel to make room for my bumps. The hard part is pinpointing where the punches should be and how deep. Any shop worth their salt will take care and do a little at a time. If you aren't confident in the shop's abilities, seek out another shop.

Have you looked into getting the heels of your AS3 punched? I just did this with my Ribcor 76Ks. Much better.

Interesting. In the year the new fit system has been out, believe this is the first I am hearing a concrete definition of some nuanced fit differences between the Vapor and Supreme boots. There has been talk on here about construction (symmetric vs. asymmetric) and feature (eyelet changes) differences, but I don't think anyone has broken it down as clearly as you have about the shape of the boot producing slightly different fit results.

Regardless of the new fit system? So Vapor in all 3 fits has these characteristics compared to the same 3 fits in a Supreme boot?

Just an educated guess but I'd imagine the Vapor boot in the same fit (Fit 1) might heighten the issue you are already having, as historically it is a narrower/shallower fit. But it really comes down to the construction differences between the 2 lines. Moving the Vapor up to a Fit 2 and I'd be concerned you'd lose the heel lock you are praising in the 3S but maybe gaining a bit of room in the forefoot.

Why not just get the forefoot punched out to fit your foot better? If the heel works, I'd probably stick with it and try to adjust the boot to your liking.

Yeah, I'm a newbie (my son isn't) and have been enjoying the P88 the most, but am very tempted to try the P90TM as one of the reasons I don't like the P29 is the "dual lie" rounded shape to the bottom of the blade. The P90TM has a flatter bottom, which I like, but also has some additional features the P88 can't provide. It looks like a great curve.

Thanks @PBH for confirming. That is great. My son is really enjoying the P90TM (after using a P29 for most of his life) and of course the FT3 we bought him with that curve is a 40 flex, but have since been informed he is strong enough to go up to a 50 flex and after demoing a 50 flex FT4 Pro, he is chomping at the bit for one. The price tag on the FT4 is a bit easier to swallow than the FT4 Pro.

@CCMHockey - I tried reaching out via Insta and have yet to get a response. Hoping this will be more fruitful. Will the new FT4 (not the Pro) stick be available with the P90TM curve in a 50 flex? I've been looking at pre-order pages from the major US retailers (Pure, IW, Monkey) and none list that combination as available. Wondering if it will be released later after the initial pre-order or simply not an option this year (hoping for the former). Thanks.

This is awesome if it means I'll be able to walk into a LHS and buy a ProSharp Home grinding ring, instead of having to mail order them.

I've seen video of places that has you on an elevated platform with the synthetic ice tiles on the floor. Platform is big enough to allow most folks to get a full weight transfer and simulate the leg movement of being on ice.

So many factors to weigh out. I've seen a few videos with a guy who recommends 1/3 body weight, but also recommends the stick be under the chin on skates (so shorter than the generic chin to nose recommendation). In the Matthews video you can see he likes a shorter stick, so I assume uses a lower flex to get the action he needs/likes as cutting a higher flex stick down would make it too stiff. I'm a small guy (5-6, 175lb) and still definitely working on my technique (I'm a beginner), but at the moment using a 60 flex that is cut down about 2 inches (so pretty close to that 1/3 recommendation). Seriously considering picking up a 55 flex. Took a look at some in the LHS and I could probably use uncut or maybe just take an inch or less off. I think my shooting might be better and maybe the lesser flex would help me develop technique.

I modified a standard A&R nylon pouch by cutting some thin-ish (1.5-2mm thick) PE plastic sheeting to size (a bit smaller than the sleeve size) and sliding them in. Definitely makes it more rigid, although I was trying to solve for smaller sized steel getting stuck in there and being hard to get out, this will probably solve for your problem.

Definitely seen guys in the show with jaw/mouth injuries wear a similar set up.

Usually innovation has the intent of solving a problem previously unsolved for. What problem does this solve?

Yeah, I don't get it. If you like the vision a visor provides, but want full face protection, there are other options already available. I don't see what issue this solves for that other products haven't already covered. Seems more like a pride thing: "I still wear a visor, which makes me super cool and "pro", but can't have my face jacked up now that I am an adult and have a job and stuff". And then you factor in price, and I have to think there is something better out there.

From my experience, I don't think Vapors are the path forward. They are pretty low volume/depth. I had a pair (EE) when I first started skating (about 6 years ago) and lace bite was a factor. I had to experiment with a bunch of different lacing approaches to find comfort and my margin for error was pretty narrow. A bit too tight on certain eyelets and I went from comfortable to agony. @BenBreeg and I have very similar feet. High instep/depth around the ankle. I have a pretty narrow heel and wide-ish forefoot. I just picked up a pair of Ribcor 76K D width, that have surprised me. They need a few small punch outs, but otherwise I really like them. And no lace bite or depth issues. They seem to be the most versatile in the CCM line, might be worth a look. My son (same age as yours) has a pair of the 78K D, coming from 2 or 3 seasons in Vapor D and loves them.

Maybe you need a bit more credibility to my original answer. I am an adult who has small feet and wears a size 5 skate in pretty much every brand I've tried (Graf, Bauer, CCM). The fit profiles that traditionally accompany each model (before the fit systems were released by Bauer and CCM) will carry down each line of skates regardless of boot size. Traditionally a Vapor will be narrow and low volume and a Supreme will be medium width and mid-volume. You may feel some fit differences from model to model as they make value oriented materials decisions, so some boots may fit you a bit better than others, but generally a Supreme will not fit like a Vapor. Obviously that is changing now that Bauer has had their Fit system out for the last year and CCM is just introducing their version this year. My understanding is even with the fit systems, boot construction/materials choices from model to model or skate line to skate line may provide some nuanced fit differences. For example Vapors having an asymmetrical boot while Supremes do not. Even if you try both on in a Fit 2, you may feel those differences.

Yes. The fit profiles will be the same regardless of size of the boot.

Ok, good, then it sounds like the team/coach has the right intentions. If you were paying, I'd be cautious that the team/org was just looking to grab some extra cash and may not be that serious about placing your son on the team. That does not seem to be the case here. I would ask to speak to the coach after the next workout session. From there you can ask some questions to get a better idea of their interest level, if this is the right team for your son, or if you need to pursue other options.

There is also a wide range of "fit" in a given width/boot lay up. Perhaps those folks who are saying they were perfectly happy in Vapor D, but can't get Fit 1 to work for them were on the outer limits (the edges of the bell curve) of the Vapor D fit range, and now have to look at the Fit 2. Given that Bauer is saying they made the fit decisions based on scan data, I would assume they had to target the majority of folks in a given range (the middle of the bell curve). So unless they designed the system with overlap (a certain percentage of folks could use Fit 1 and 2), there are going to be gaps (despite what they say in their marketing materials). I haven't tried any of the new fit system boots on (Bauer or CCM), but won't be surprised if I am a gap person. I have a pretty narrow hard to fit heel and wider forefoot, with a decent amount of depth. I'm guessing when I need new skates, I'll likely have to go custom, since none of the fit systems show an option that combines those attributes. I may be pleasantly surprised, but I am not hopeful.

If you missed the official tryouts and they have open spots, having him join the team for some workouts is logical. I've certainly seen the opposite scenario, pre-tryouts, having a kid the coach is potentially interested in coming and skating with the team to assess fit, ability, etc. And a conversation follows that would indicate if they should officially tryout, or seek another situation. Not sure there is a "typical" in this situation as it isn't formalized like a tryout period, but if the coach and organization are halfway decent they realize the more time you spend with them, the less time you have to find another team if this isn't going to work out. So, I would ask the question, but believe a decision can be made after a couple interactions at most. Are you paying for the time with the team? Or you an invited guest?