PetterErlandsson

Here is an additional principal sketch over different wheel setups since many players seems to have questions about it:

No, R1 has a unique hole pattern. It depends on what your purpose with the chassis are. If you are an ice hockey player using them specifically for off-ice training we recommend to stay with the original O1, but if you play roller hockey its definitely worth an upgrade! It is a substantially different feel between R1 and O1, but i would not say it comes from the different wheel setups. Both HiLo and for example all 80´s has a flat wheel base, so the difference in skate feel is marginal. As far as I understand it the idea with HiLo is not to give any rocking or difference in ground contact, but that bigger wheels is better for speed and smaller wheels is better for manoeuvrability, so with HiLo you should get a little bit of both (correct me if i am wrong, Bauer 🙂 ). The main reason we have the same wheel-setup as HiLo is that it is more room under the heel than under the toe, and we want as big wheels as possible without making the chassis too high. /Petter, Development Engineer at Marsblade

R1 is slightly lighter than O1 (around 19% lighter for size medium). No big difference in length or dimensions. Many players seems worried about the weight but despite that we feel very confident about it. During the test period for the past months with around 15 high level players that have used them regularly in training and games, no one have negatively comment or complain about the weight. Its also important to notice that O1 has a lot of movement in both directions to always challenge your balance and force you to work hard at all times. This make them feel more heavy than they actually are. With R1 its the opposite, you can do more of your natural movements without lifting up the skates from the ground than with traditional chassis, making them feel lighter.

* The main difference with the different rocker setting inserts is the size of the radius. Small radius means more movement, and bigger radius means less movement. During the development of R1 we tried a lot of different settings to find the best one for performance. What we discovered were that different players with different skating style prefer very different settings, so we decided to make the chassis customizable with changeable inserts. Other things we can adjust with different inserts is pitch/angle and balance point. O1 has a small, fixed, radius (= lot of movement in both directions). By adjusting the bushing on the O1 you can change how much you can rock, in other words how much you can push your centre of gravity forward or backward during skating. * Lower part is an aluminium / magnesium alloy, and top part is glass fibre reinforced polyamid. What we have taken into consideration when choosing materials is mainly: strength (to withstand the forces of full match play over a long period of time), impact resistance (for puck hits), and manufacturability (to keep prices at a reasonable level and ensure stable production). Main pros for the polyamid is the freedom of shapes and geometries we can do, cons is that some players may reject the chassis if its made of any type of plastic (which does not really make sense to us, keep in mind that more or less every ice hockey chassis is made of plastic). Pros with the aluminium is strength in relation to weight, and that it is widely accepted by the players. Cons is that it makes the price of the product higher. * You can absolutely use the R1 for training as well, its much more ice-like feel than a traditional, stiff, chassis. And putting a smaller wheel in the front on R1 is not a problem, but if you are looking for a chassis specifically for off-ice training then O1 is a the better choice, as it is optimized for training while R1 is optimized for maximum performance.

R1 is slightly lighter than O1 but heavier than a traditional Roller Hockey chassis. Despite that we feel very confident about the weight. During the test period for the past months with around 15 high level players that have used them regularly in training and games, no one have negatively comment or complain about the weight. Its also important to notice that O1 has a lot of movement in both directions to always challenge your balance and force you to work hard at all times. This make them feel more heavy than they actually are. With R1 its the opposite, you can do more of your natural movements without lifting up the skates from the ground than with traditional chassis, making them feel lighter.

They are connected by a bushing that holds the two parts together and also gives you the spring back. The insert radius that changes the rocker is connected to the upper part. You just remove the lower part (with one bolt) and than you attach the insert with a snap fit. Easy 🙂

Optimal is to use them individually, O1 is optimized for off-ice training while R1 is optimized for Roller Hockey. With that said R1 definitely works for outdoor training as well (with other wheels as you said), and will give you much more ice like skate feel than a traditional chassis, but it will not challange you as much as the O1 when it comes to off-ice training.

I am Petter and work as a product development engineer at Marsblade. Over the past year, together with the rest of the development team, I have been working specifically on developing the R1 chassis for roller hockey. From the first sketches on a white sheet, to final prototype testing with pro players. Personally I feel convinced that this new chassis can change the whole sport of roller hockey. If you have any questions about the new chassis, from a product development perspective, I will be happy to answer. https://www.instagram.com/p/B-r20h_jlxK/