Jump to content
Slate Blackcurrant Watermelon Strawberry Orange Banana Apple Emerald Chocolate Marble
Slate Blackcurrant Watermelon Strawberry Orange Banana Apple Emerald Chocolate Marble

kkskate

Members
  • Content Count

    24
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Feedback

    N/A

Community Reputation

4 Neutral

1 Follower

Profile Information

  • Spambot control
    123333333

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. I think for the Ellipse profile Prosharp recommends the Ellipse XS for 254. I've skated on both the Ellipse XS and Zero lately and the XS does give you a bit quicker feet and agility. I did feel like I lost a bit of glide and stability though not enough that it was an issue. I've made a note to go back and try the quads again to contrast them with the Ellipse. I've been off of the quad profile for roughly 4 months. I didn't personally feel all the major differences that other people mention between the Ellipse and the Quads. This was just my experience, not discounting others opinions.
  2. If you're a size 254 holder then the Ellipse XS is the profile that's recommended by Prosharp for you. They recommend it for skate sizes 5 and 6. I think skaters were all over the place with what Quads they used where as with the Ellipse profiles you should start with the one recommended for your size. You may disagree though in some senses they've made it easier to find a good starting point. I would 100% agree with you with regards to the Quad being more for agility and the Zuperior being more of a power profile. It seems like this is mostly Bauer's marketing. If you read Prosharp's description of the Zuperior profile template it is mainly centered around speed, strength, and stability. Below are the points of emphasis. Excellent straight line speed. Excellent glide speed. Stability/balance to battle off opponents. Strength focus. I've recently went back and evaluated this profile again after being off of it for some time and I feel like the description is very accurate.
  3. The Prosharp concepts are the same. Shorter radius/shape in the front of the blade to allow you to move your feet quickly and a longer/flatter radius in the back for glide and stability. Both profiles seem like they're attempting to accomplish similar things in different ways.
  4. That's a fair opinion. I've found that many skaters are very interested in the process and more than willing to spend the time and energy. I dare say that many enjoy the process. Your point is valid though, it's possible it's not for everyone. From what I see, those who make the effort to find the correct profile and hollow they're pleased with the end result.
  5. That's interesting and likely why people need to try things for themselves. I've recently skated an all 3 (Quads, Ellipse, and Zuperior) and the found the Zuperior to be much different than the Quad and Ellipse.
  6. Just an example of what I think he's saying. Lots of quick cross-over strides with the toes pointing up ice. If you want quicker feet and more agility check out the Ellipse XS. I've recently been skating on this. Best way to describe is my feet feel lighter when skating. You will give up a little glide and stability though going to the XS from the Zero.
  7. It's possible they're just more in line with the size recommendations. For example size 254 is a size 5-6 skate. Based on the Quad recommendations you should go with the Quad XS though many skaters with this size were on a Quad 0 or Quad 1. Since the Ellipse profiles don't have any real specifications to examine it's possible the (Ellipse) profiles size recommendations are more accurate.
  8. Very true. Byonic blades have a pitch built into them as well.
  9. I evaluated the Ellipse XS last night and I was impressed. My skates use a smaller runner 246/254 so keep that in mind. I used to skate on the Quad 1 though recently converted to the Ellipse 0/1. I have 2 sets of blades and have been alternating. Overall my feet felt lighter, more agile, and I was able to turn them over faster. I didn't not notice the pitch difference between the Ellipse XS and the Ellipse 0/1. Ellipse XS has slightly less pitch the the 0, 1, and 2. I did feel a slight loss in stability though the positive gains were enough that I'll probably stick with the XS over the others.
  10. Thanks for the comment! The only thing I'd add is that you ended up with the 10 mm pivot point offset for moderate pitch. I think it equates to ~0.6 degrees forward pitch. This is half of the default offset embedded in the template. 10 degrees would be quite a lot
  11. I think you'll like it. DM me if you want steel for the older True holders (Bladetech or STEP). I still skate on the older nut and bolt model though I recently purchased new ones with the Shift.
  12. I skate on True with 254 holders. My blades have the Ellipse 1 profile and the Quad 1 before that. The Ellipse Zero is good also though I prefer the extra stability of the Quad 1/Ellipse 1.
  13. When discussing profiles the variances are very subtle and in the range you're describing. Prosharp addressed this in one of their recent videos. I tried to link to the specific section below where they give an example. That said, your description is probably too far off from the truth. I have noticed some variances in the sections of the Ellipse templates from the Quads though they are small. If you're on a Quad I'd probably go with the Ellipse going forward. If you're already on a Quad and happy it may not be justifiable to re-profile unless you're just curious to feel the differences yourself.
  14. Based on skating on the Ellipse my observation was that transitions were a bit improved. I've skated on the Quad 1 for years. Without specifications it would be hard to pinpoint why. The Ellipse I seemed very similar to the Quad 1. Given the similarities, if I had to guess it's meant more as a replacement for the Quads rather than an addition to the list of profiles. This of course is just my opinion.
×
×
  • Create New...