kkskate
-
Content Count
41 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
2 -
Feedback
N/A
Posts posted by kkskate
-
-
2 minutes ago, pgeorgan said:Thanks for the detailed explanation!
What about just using a pair of digital calipers or something to find the thickest point?
I believe you can ~approximate the pitch using calipers though it's difficult to guarantee an exact result. That's just my opinion of course. The only thing possibly worth mentioning above is that this process is required due to the fact that the Quad, Ellipse, and Zuperior profiling templates include a pivot point offset in them.
-
16 minutes ago, pgeorgan said:Sounds like a massive design flaw on Prosharp's part.
Personally, I don't find it to be an issue. There are pros and cons related to the different ways blades clamp into the machines. Do you have a Prosharp machine that you've worked with?
-
11 minutes ago, pgeorgan said:Perhaps I'm misunderstanding. If I wanted to put a default Quad 0 onto some used steel, are you saying this can't be done if I don't know the steel's history?
If so, I think I just found my next business venture!
It can be done though the process will vary. It's just easier if you know what's on the blades. The situation we're really talking about is if you have a Quad on the blades and are looking to transition to another Quad, Zuperior, Ellipse, etc. If you're just trying to change the shape and leave the current pitch on the blades the process is simple.
-
4 minutes ago, pgeorgan said:Just thinking out loud here, eg in the case of Bauer's runners, the center of the steel is marked. Assuming the center of the profile template is marked, if I want to transfer a shape onto the steel, do I really care about the shape of the steel? With both the steel and template centers aligned and level, I just cut and cut until there's a match, no?
With what you're saying, this implies that if I walk into a store with totally mangled runners, they'll recommend they go in the garbage because nobody knows "what was done to them" in the past?
The blades clamp into the machine different than a traditional holder. You drop the blades into the Prosharp machine onto a set of rollers so they are put in relative to the bottom of the blades. The shape doesn't really matter though the pitch can make a difference.
-
On 5/8/2022 at 2:53 PM, PBH said:The more you use them, the more you will realize their benefits. I cannot go back to regular steel at this point. I have the new TRUE Catalyst Pro demo pair, and when I tried to use them, I felt like a baby giraffe on the ice.
The boot is impressive, and the Shift Max holder feels excellent, but they need Flare.
Are the new True models shipping with JRZ blades?
-
On 5/2/2022 at 1:54 PM, strosedefence34 said:I appreciate the feedback. I had a feeling that just because it was marked for skates of X size it could be applied to other sizes because I have experience with a CAG profiler and that was the case with that. I am less concerned with stability more concerned with agility. Anyone have any thoughts?
For 272 you have a ton of options. You can easily go with the Quad 0, Quad 1, or the Ellipse Zero. Quad 1 is likely a good match for 272.
-
1
-
-
4 hours ago, Ric_Flair said:@kkskate, @jimmy I just had a channel Z put on my blades; it is quite noticeable that the channel is not perfectly straight down the center of the blade; starts almost in the center at one end and ends quite skewed to one side on the other end. It would be due to poor technician skill and/or maybe blade being slightly bent/warped (it's Tydan)... anyway, will this affect how I experience the blades... much?
TIAI don’t really do the Z-channels but I recall Prosharp mentioning the channel doesn’t have to be perfectly centered. Likely as long as it isn’t too close to either edge it’s fine.
-
1
-
-
19 hours ago, noupf said:@kkskate Hey Anthony, any chance you can do an analysis or post some pics of the elipse1 skate template on top of a quad1 and a quad 0.5 template or vice versa?
You did the ellipse1 profile on my 288 step steel blades for my grafs and I love the feeling of stability and speed in the middle and rear portions of my blades. I've gotten over and adjusted to the catching of my front toe area while skating, but i feel like i have a huge desire for a little more aggressive radius in the front 1/3rd of the blade. I am curious if quad 1 or quad 0.5 will give me what i want.
As i know it, the quad1 is 6'-9'-12'-15' and the quad 0.5 is 8'-10'-12'-14'. I just want to see if we can determine what the ellpise1 is closest to in terms of middle and rear portion of the blade profile and if either or both quads can give me that little more aggressive front radius. Hopefully I can choose one and then send it in to you for profiling.
The difference between the profile templates is so minimal in terms something you can see I don’t think it would help. If you want a bit more agility the Quad or other Ellipse might help. Contact me directly and I can call you.
-
2 minutes ago, Ellipsing said:Went from quad 0 to zuperior small
Then tried ellipse 1 and zero
Ellipse zero is by far the best profile ive tried. You can feel the elliptical profiling when turning. Its not even close in my opinion. Ultrasonic size 7 263 mm. Im getting true customs in a few weeks and Ill see how the profile respomds to the higher pitched holder. But so far ellipse zero is it. Dont even try ellipse 1 imo it feels like a turning a barge
This makes sense Ellipse 1 is recommend for size 9-10. Ellipse Zero is recommended for size 7-8.
-
2
-
-
1 hour ago, Ric_Flair said:Yes, the specs would tell us so. Maybe it was something like "optimal amount of blade in contact at all times."
Here's a quote from @kkskate webpage, maybe this is what I am remembering, tho I thought I read/heard as I stated above:
"Quad profiles are designed with four different radii's which are strategically placed on the same blade profile to provide perfect blade contact with the ice in ALL situations."
Maybe I'm confusing "perfect blade contact" with "most...."?
In any event, thanks again PBH.
Correct. Perfect blade contact for different situations is not necessarily the most ice contact. The shorter radius in the front of many of the profiles gives less ice contact though enables you to move much quicker. "Perfect" is obviously very subjective and will vary based on the skaters skill, style, and size.
-
1
-
-
46 minutes ago, PBH said:Quad is absolutely more popular.
Out of all the profiles we do, about 600 per year, I only have one customer who has stuck with the Ellipse. All of the others changed back to a Quad, Triple or dual radii profile either immediately or soon after trying the Ellipse.
The higher the level of player, the more they disliked the Ellipse.
Facts are facts so I can't disagree with other findings though I've had a lot of players stick with the Ellipse. Most players who are already happy on the Quad end up sticking with the Quad over the Ellipse. As @PBH mentioned the higher level players love the Quad. It seems to offer maximum quickness and agility. On the flip side many skaters who were trying profiles for the first time preferred the Ellipse over the Quad. It's possible the Ellipse is a slightly more balanced profile than the Quad and works better for certain players.
-
3 hours ago, Ric_Flair said:Any confirmation on what profiles come with that size? I've got 254 Power Profile runner, what "Quad" do I have? @blueshirts, @start_today
ThanksShould be the Quad XS. Size 7 and above should be the Quad Zero.
-
9 minutes ago, Ric_Flair said:This I can agree with. Found Zup much diff, too far forward, less agility... much diff.
Quad and Ellipse are quite similar IMHO. Can almost agree with how some people describe the "smooth, natural" feeling of the Ellipse.
Now to figure out whether to use a Ellipse 0 or XS on my 254s. Have used the Ellipse 0 recently on a 263 and it felt great. What's yer thoughts there @kkskate?I personally found the Ellipse XS to "short" for my taste on a 254 mm blade. I felt like I gained a lot of quickness though lost some power and stability. For me I'd likely go with the Ellipse Zero, the Quad Zero, or the Quad 1. There is my preference not necessarily advice for others to follow. I see skaters who like the Ellipse XS on longer blades. The other thing to consider is when you drop to the XS you loose the senior pitch offset. It goes from 20 mm to 17 mm. Not a huge difference though just be aware.
-
On 9/15/2021 at 3:26 PM, Ric_Flair said:Ah ok, good to know.
Will try the quad/power profile that comes stock (is it fair to assume it’s a quad XS on the stock 254 Ultrasonics?)I will have couple other sets of blades as well. If I wanted to try other quad sizes, is it better to start from “upper size” and move down, in the event I don’t like it and want to resize the quad, for example?
ie. start with quad 1, if I don’t like I can move down to 0 etc… is that the best way to go to not chew away too much blade if/when re-profiling?
You’ve tried ellipse? Sizes? Like, dis-like? Compare to quads?
Thanks man, much appreciated.
Oh… and the pitch, you mean CL moved back 20mm so that you’re “pitched” forward in stance? Don’t think I like the forward pitch feel, remember my old 704s and couldn’t figure out why I didn’t like them… days before all this analysis etc
The Quad 0 and the Quad 1 are very similar so I don't think it will make too much of a difference either way. It's possible the Quad 1 might take off more steel to get the 15' radius in the rear. I like the Ellipse though for my blade size I felt a bit in between the Ellipse XS and the Ellipse 0.
Correct on the 20 mm. It's the pivot point of the blade. It can be customized to your preference.
-
12 hours ago, Ric_Flair said:Ah OK. And how do you like that compared to... whatever quad you have tried/used? Am liking the quad (it's on a 263 runner, so I will assume with 95% certainty that it's quad 0); Am moving down to a smaller skate and hence runner shortly (254). What do you suggest I use to "keep the same feeling" when skating?
Thanks maa.The Quad 0 is still a good fit for 254, you can likely stick with it.
Quad Zero (6-9-11-13 ft, 221-263, 20mm)
I personally skated on the Quad 1 for years with 254 runners and was my favorite.
Quad I (6-9-12-15 ft, 254-280, 20mm pitch)
-
1
-
-
On 9/11/2021 at 12:47 PM, Ric_Flair said:Which size is it that your skates use, 246 or 254... it can't be both?
I have 2 sets of True customs. The skates have different holders. 1 is 246 the other is 254.
-
10 hours ago, hockeydad3 said:With my skates size 6.5/254mm I am between the recommendations of ProSharp for the Quad Zero/XS and the Ellipse Zero/XS profile. I had the opportunity to try the Ellipse Zero profile, but I want a little more agility and acceleration without sacrificing speed and stability to much. If I understood properly, both the Quad Zero and the Ellipse XS profile are more agile than the Ellipse Zero. Could someone please tell me his experiences with these three profiles on a similarly sized skate? And what are the major differences between these profiles? I´m coming from single radius profiles and would like to know which profile I should try next.
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.
-
17 hours ago, pgeorgan said:Skated on the Ellipse XS last night.
It's definitely way better than the Ellipse 0 in terms of fit for my holder size (254 and coming from a Quad 0). If you do want to try this profile and you already have a Quad, start with one size lower than what you're used to. I can see why @PBH liked a Quad 1 and now appears to prefer an Ellipse two sizes lower. Our experiences have been similar, and if I continue down his path, I'd probably end up with an Ellipse XXS next. However, I'm not sure I want to go that route. Perhaps just make the toe a little more aggressive? If I knew the specs, I might be able to make that determination ahead of time, rather than having to go in blindly with all this proprietary mumbo jumbo.
The profile has potential but a) it would be nice to know what I'm skating on and b) armed with that knowledge, begin the process of figuring out how to tweak it and make the toe more aggressive while keeping everything else the same.
I will reiterate that the Ellipse is nothing like a Quad. And as far as a being a "Paradigm Shift"... I don't think so. You might prefer it coming from a Zup or something, but if you're coming from a Quad, expect to sacrifice all the agility you're used to (which is the exact opposite of the marketing material). Personally, I think they have the profiles backwards. Quad should be the agility profile and Zup, the power one.
I'll keep it around for now and see if it doesn't grow on me, but I'm not getting rid of my Quad anytime soon.
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.
-
On 3/12/2021 at 5:15 PM, psulion22 said:As far as the profile, It's a happy medium. Too short, and you can't generate enough force when pushing. Too long and there's too much steel on the ice slowing you down. It's probably why CAG One profiles are still seemingly popular with pros. They're getting a shorter profile to reduce the amount of steel on the ice and therefore drag, but have that flat spot to generate power from.
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.
-
1
-
-
26 minutes ago, BenBreeg said:And why in reality, profiling isn't really innovative for the general population. People don't have the money, the time, or the expertise (nor is it being provided by the LHS) to actually find a profile that optimizes their performance.
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.
-
1
-
-
2 hours ago, pgeorgan said:Perhaps.
Either way, the Ellipse just felt like a slight variation of a Zup. I guess I was expecting something different.
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 minutes ago, flip12 said:Any particular voices you recommend? (Seen some of the PEP stuff and it seems quite fluffy; promotional propaganda.)
"Not short strides...others...have much longer traditional stride(s)." I still don't quite get what you're saying.
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.
-
31 minutes ago, PBH said:If you had a previous profile done and the pivot point was not altered, then it would be 20mm back of center.
When they reprofile the steel to an Ellipse the steel would be positioned in the sled holder based on that previously set pivot point. Otherwise, you would be 40mm back of center.
I totally understand how you feel about the Ellipse vs the Quad 0 in regards to mobility. In my testing, I think the Ellipse XS would be significantly closer to your feeling of a Quad 0 as compared to the Ellipse 0. You can put both templates on a lightbox and see how they are the same yet different, specifically in the front 1/3 of the profile.
I am not entirely sure why the Ellipse was made with a much less aggressive front 1/3 compared to Quad or Zuperior. The Ellipse doesn't activate muscle groups that next-generation players are using (McDavid, MacKinnon, Bedard, etc) and results in much longer strides. For some older players, this might feel more comfortable but advanced younger players aren't coached to skate in the same way and I think the Ellipse might actually be bad for them.
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.
-
1
-
-
5 minutes ago, PBH said:What size steel and what brand?
I know some shops will alter the pivot point based on the steel size or brand of steel. For example, when I profile Flare I usually dont do as much forward pitch since I want to remove a minimal amount of steel possible.
Also, I always tell my customers exactly what I am doing when I profile their steel. If they can't come back to me, or decide they want to go elsewhere, I don't want to be the "gatekeeper" to their profile. I know there are some shops that refuse to share details with their customers and while I understand some of that information could be considered proprietary I feel like it's customer lock-in.
Very true. Byonic blades have a pitch built into them as well.
Ellipse Profiles – The next revolution in skate profiling?
in Ice Hockey Equipment
Posted · Report reply
Ellipse Zero is Prosharp's recommendation for 271/2.
Ellipse Zero - Elliptic value closest to zero (a circle) – also meaning it’s the shortest profile of them all. Currently making it the most agile in the series, while packing the dynamic punch that all Ellipse profiles do. We've taken inspiration from the Quad Zero on this one, making it best suited for skate sizes 7-8 (only a recommendation). (Skate sizes 263-272, 20 mm pitch)