psulion22

Can customs be ordered? How does that program compare to myBauer?

Is the FT Ghost available in P90TM? The FT5 Pro blade is way too stiff and puck feel is terrible. I like the Jetspeed line (though the FT5 Pro feels much more like a Trigger) so I’d like something with the softer blade. I’ll wait for the FT7 but would buy a Ghost now if I could get that curve.

I hate waxed laces too. But Elite makes thicker unwaxed laces that give a tighter hold like waxed do (I think they’re called Pro-X7). They’re the only laces I’ll use now.

If you prefer Quad 1, I think you'd like Ellipse 1 if you lower the pitch. I'm on 272 runners and went from Quad 1 to Ellipse 1 with a 5mm pitch (vs the stock 20mm). It was better than the Quad 1 in every way.

Honestly, i'd even skip the FT5 Pro and just go for the FT5. I haven't shot the Pro, but the FT5 is a monster stick for the price point and shoots and feels better than my FT4 Pro did. I don't know that the 50+% increase in price would be warranted.

Do not make too many changes at once. Get the Ellipse XS with a 5/8 and see how that feels compared to what you had in your last skate. I'd probably have that put on your current steel before buying new as well, or buy a cheap used set on Sideline Swap or Ebay just to test with. Even now, you made two pretty big changes - steel size and not lacing the top eyelet (not to mention much stiffer skates in a correct size with a different flex and wrap profile and pitch to your last) - and you can't really pinpoint which of them made the improvement in your game. It's possible all the increased agility was due to the better forward flex, and you'd be fine by just having the holders on the skates changed back to your 263s. I would suggest not adding a third variable by changing the profile (and then a fourth by changing the hollow), before you get a clear idea what the first two variables did. Go back and try skating on the 246 with the old way of lacing a few times to see if it was the flexion or just getting used to the steel that made the difference. Then make the next change you think will help based on the information you gather - be it a different profile or a shallower hollow. Do not rush this, there's no reason to. I know you want to see even more improvements right away, but doing things without fully testing what you have and giving time to adjust may cause bad decisions and you could end up with something that isn't the best for you. I just went through this. I am going to need new steel soon, so I sent all my old steel to be profiled differently - Quad 2, Ellipse 1, and Quad 1. I had been skating on the Quad 2 for a while and was pretty happy, but the steel is pretty worn down so I switched to old runners that had a Quad 1 on them and more steel. I found a huge increase in agility that I liked a lot, but after a few games I found I had lost accelleration and top speed. Players were skating with me or catching me from behind when they weren't before. Putting the Quad 2 steel back on was awful and I lost pretty much all agility and was even tripping over my toes. So I went on a search to find the best profile to give me what I want. Putting the Ellipse 1 on was like an epiphany. It was completely natural to me. If I would have made a decision right then, it would 100% be the Ellipse 1. But then after a few skates, i noticed that I was still not getting the speed I wanted. So to be true to the process, I put back on the Quad 2 and gave myself the time to test it adequately. The first skate was rough, I felt like it was long and I was off balance. I had to go and put the Ellipse back on mid-skate. But I stuck with the Quad 2 and it turns out it's better for me. I'm faster and more efficient, and I don't feel less agile anymore. It turns out the profile wasn't done correctly before - the toe wasn't blended enough plus it had the full 20mm of pitch. That's why I kept tripping over my toes and had lost all the agility. But when I had them done this time, it was much better (and it's still a little longer than normal because there wasn't enough steel in the toe to blend). I think on new Flare steel and the complete toe blending it will be what I was looking for. If I hadn't stuck to the program, I would have made a bad decision and ended up with a profile that felt good but didn't really fix the issues.

If there's a perceivable difference in height, I'd say it's best not to mix runners from different pairs. If you can see it, you're going to be able to feel it. But if the options are mixing a set or not playing because you don't have any other usable steel, then play with what you got.

The point was not to compare manufacturing a car to manufacturing hockey equipment. The point was to illustrate how the auto industry caused probably the worst inventory shortage in the history of the automobile by reducing their orders for semiconductors amid a supply crisis. This ain’t limited to cars. Dozens, if not hundreds, of industries cut back on their chip orders and manufacturing and faced massive inventory shortages when they couldn’t get those chips back later. Global production capacity is still severely stunted. Reducing the production runs for hockey gear at factories could result in the same shortages later when the forfeited capacity can’t be regained or the materials can’t be obtained.

Supply chains are in turmoil because materials and production capability have become scarce. Companies can not afford to delay the manufacturing of product while they can obtain necessary materials because that availability may not be there when they are ready to produce. They're booking production line usage months or years out, and can't pull back because another company will scoop it up. That's what happened in the car industry with COVID. Car sales were slow, so auto makers cut back on their purchase and manufacturing of chips for the next cycle. Consumer electronics manufacturers bought up all that suppply and openings because sales were high. When the auto makers saw an return to normal for buyers, they couldn't get the chips they had given up back.

Has he gained any of that acceleration? If not, then I’d say it’s a definite nope. If he has, then you’d have to look at the trade offs and maybe give it a little more time. Trying new things is great, but there have to be advantages to switching. If there’s nothing gained, then there’s no reason to switch. There are a lot of ways to get that extra acceleration. Try a different profile, or different type of profile - triple, center glide, quad, ellipse. Dial the +2 back to a +1 and see if that gives him the middle ground. Try a shallower hollow to reduce drag. Try a different type of steel, like Flare or Bladetech. Getting the right profile can make a huge difference in someone’s skating. But finding that profile takes a lot of trying different things to see what works and doesn’t. My suggestion is to take all his old steel and have it profiled different ways. Then try it all out and see what sticks. If he doesn’t have a lot of old steel, find some cheap used sets on SidelineSwap. I just went through the same thing myself. I tried and tried to get input from different people here to avoid the trial and error portion. In the end, I just had 3 old sets profiled differently and tried them all out. I’m glad I did because the one that felt best was an Ellipse and given reviews and input, I probably wouldn’t have picked that.

I have been baking my Bauers using an Ace bandage afterwards and it seems to help with the end result. I feel like the fit and wrap of the skate is better when I'm done if I use that bandage after a really hand form the boot to my foot. I think it's the same idea as the shrink wrap - keeping the boot from misshaping or returning to its original shape as it cools after forming.

So. Many. Smalls. A medium showed up a few months ago and was gone in a few hours before I could get to it.

I'd do bad things for an 11K or first generation Fitlite helmet right now.

While Bauer gets bashed a lot for their kind of out there periodic offerings, I agree with you. They are usually high innovation products that see some of the tech trickle into general consumer lines eventually. The OD1N project put a ton of tech into current gear, mostly related to the use of Curv materials. You can say what you want about the blade of the Nexus ADV, but it really did what it advertised. Companies tried for years to create better puck feel in composite blades (True started with a urethane core in their blades). The Nexus ADV delivered on that and increased performance, if you could just get over the hole. The 5 sided shaft they're using now feels pretty good, and better than a regular 4 sided. And I hope most of you never see the Konekt goalie skates because I think half of your heads will expolde. But most reviews I've seen on those say they're an absolute game changing tech in terms of both fit/comfort and performance. Maybe Bauer will find a way to trickle that tech down into lower lines or player skates. The integrated knee block of the Ultrasonic line forward did the same thing. Every so often they release these kinds of products, and sometimes their overuse of tech or innovation creates an inferior or problematic product, like the Hyperlite protective line. At least they only update lines every two years. CCM is a bit much with the yearly stick refreshes, with little change from one to the next. I agree 100% on that last comment. The introduction of 70 flex senior sticks that actually perform has been a massive improvement for us smaller players. I actually can get a stick that performs well after being cut. I used to have to choose between an Intermediate that was a noodle or a 77 that was rebar, with a few exceptions like the Nexus 1000. I feel like the pop, performance, and efficiency of energy transfer in player sticks has drmatically improved over the last few years, agrred just around the Trigger 3. I can really shoot the puck now and this is absolutely attributable to the 70 flex stick. I do wonder if the yearly refresh cycle waters that down. It's like having a puppy. When you see it every day, you don't realize how big it's getting. But somone who only sees it occaisonally will be surprised and see a bigg difference each time. On the flip side the two year refresh cycle can cause the opposite reaction where the changes seem too drastic and can cause negative feedback, vs gradually adding making them.

I haven't been a fan of much of the Hyperlite stuff. The Re-Akt 150 helmet is better. The 3X pro elbows are better. The 2X Pro gloves are better. From what I've seen, the 2X Pro shoulders are better. Most of the protective seems to be falling short because Bauer over used the Thermo Core + liner (the red layer) to try and decrease the weight. The whole point of that liner is to draw sweat away from the body, cooling the wearer. So yes, it does absorb and retain moisture, that's what it's designed to do. But it appers that they put in too many places to get away from using more traditional components, or had to sacrifice those components to include the liner. The 2X Pro shoulders are pretty nice, I think they're better than the APX2s I had before them. But I can see how the Hyperlite is a regression because of the liner. The 2X Pro used perforated Aerolite foam in the entire back and around the ribs to cut weight and add ventilation. The Hyperlite replaced all of that with the Thermo Core liner, which is mistake. And the weird bicep strapping system seems to have gotten worse, which I didn't think was possible. Much like the shoulders, the gloves are worse because of the liner. All Vapor gloves going back at least as far as the APX2 Pros had the floating backhand pad. But it was kind of thick and semi-rigid so it stayed in place. The Hyperlite seems to have a thinner pad with the TC+ liner that doesn't stay where it should because it's more flimsy, again likely to try and cut weight. The helmet is fractionally lighter, but loses all of the ventilation of the Re-Akt 150, one of the most comfortable helmets on the market. The 3X Pro elbows were actually pretty nice, and my favorite of the few I tried on, as i posted earlier. I like the 3 piece design because it's more mobile and less restrictive. It's like a hybrid of a hockey and lacrosse elbow pad. On the 3X pro the elbow is deeper and it fits more traditionally. But, the hyperlite was almost floating on your elbow and felt strange. So much so that the difference between the two was surprising. I didn't like it at all. I wear a girdle so I can't really comment on the pants. It does look like they're using the belt system they've used in the goalie pants for a few years. But there, you're tucking the chesty in and tightening the belt, so there's something bewteen you and the belt. And I'll never switch from my 1S shins, so I have no need to look at the Hyperlites. it's pretty disappointing because Bauer is absolutely killing it with the newest lines of goalie gear. They have redesigned and innovated every piece of gear, while fixing the durability issues they had. The Mach and Hyperlite gear is really pushing the envelope in terms of performance and quality. And the Konekt skates are downright crazy but they seem to work every bit as well as advertised, which is rare. It's too bad the player gear has been falling so short the last few years.

I preferred the 3X Pro elbows to the Hyperlite. It had a better fit and feel, the elbow sits in deeper and it covers a little more. But it's still a little more mobile being it fits in the "low profile" design.

So like a quad if I took out the included pitch? Are there any advantages or differences to going with a SSM/Elite profile vs a quad in terms of how the profiles perform? More speed/slide in relation to agility on a certain profile?

I'm looking for feedback on SSM Natural and Elite SCS profiles. I know they're similar to a CAG in that they are trying to put a longer radius in the middle of the blade for glide, speed, and stability. But they're using a different approach by altering the radius instead of adding a flat spot (though I suppose the flat spot is still just a really, really long radius). Has anyone skated on these "center glide" profiles? Are they just fancy CAGs, with the same effect? How do they feel and compare to the quads and ellipses, or even the Zuperior, that get progressively longer from toe to heel? There's a lot of info, feedback, and reviews on Quads, but very little on these center glide profiles. Thanks

I find the DLC lasts a lot longer than the regular (I have one set of each). At first, I was skeptical of how effective DLC really was, but the difference in edge retention is pretty significant. I haven't skated on regular steel in years, so I really couldn't say the difference between that and Flare. I sharpen my regular steel with a 7/8" regular wheel (I find the Sparx profiles to be about 1/16" less sharp than listed, and I'd prefer 1") and give two cycles every 4-6 hours of ice, which is 1-2 weeks for me. The DLC lasted almost double that.

Thanks! I sent you a PM.

Without trying to hijack the thread, are the profiles the same on the Elite machines?

I'm on Flare 272 with a Quad 1 at the normal pitch. It was the best combination of speed, agility, and preservation of the Flare. I'm in a similar boat to you. Quad 0 took off too much Flare and I lost some stability and speed, Quad 2 is super stable but there's too much steel in the toe. On a 288, you may want to try Quad 2. The stock profile on Flare is a single 10'. Quad 1 is a 6' front and Quad 2 is a 7' front, both have less in the toe than the stock Flare. I'm also using a Sparx on mine. If you're getting that much of a burr, you're doing too many passes at a time or the wheel is set too high. Try dropping the wheel down one click to see if it helps, if that isn't sharpening enough of the steel try using the goalie risers and adjusting the wheel. I found the goalie risers change the settings by about half a click. Also do two passes at a time and remove any burr after those before doing more if needed. I've found that doing one or two passes more often gave me better, more consistent edges than doing 4+ when the steel felt dull. Where do you have your Flare profiled? I need a new set of steel and am looking for a place to have them profiled that has experience with them. I'd rather not get the shims and hand them to someone that's never seen them.

So I completely forgot I had a P92L5 in the garage. The lie and blade shape between the P92L5 and P90tm are nearly identical. The difference between the P90TM and the P88 is at the heel, the P90 is more rounded giving it that dual lie. But I do feel it plays flatter than a P92, even the lie 5 variant, likely because of the toe hook. You're playing with more of the toe down than heel like you might with a P92. P28 is a lie 5. Retail P92 is a lie 6. P90TM is a P29L5 blade, slightly less open from the heel, with a hook on the toe. I didn't like the shape of the P28 blade, it's too tapered and the toe is too narrow. And I feel like it's too closed through the heel with the change to the toe beak being too drastic. It kind of created a dead spot for me where the puck would die if you didn't release it before or after that spot. It made saucer passes tough. I don't like the P92 because the toe doesn't have enough curve to it and I feel there's too much rocker in the blade. The P90TM fixes both of those issues.

P90TM is similar to P30 in that it was subtle but had some performance features. I'd say P30 was a P88 with a little more rocker and a kink on the bottom of the toe. P90TM is a combination of the three main retail curves. It's a flatter rocker and wider blade like the P88, with the heel twist of the P29, and the toe beak of the P28. And the same Lie5 as the P30. As someone who used both, I'd say that if you liked the P30, you'll probably be happy with the P90TM. I personally love the P90TM, much more than the P30 (but that may be the stick itself too). The Bauer P14 (and I guess Sherwood PP14) had a similar shape but it was shorter and not as much kink on the bottom of the toe. I wouldn't call it the same.

While this definitely may be a solution in search of a problem, the idea isn't as wacky as it seems. The fabric cords won't deflect or cave in like just about everyone expects. They have incredibly high tensile strength in relation to their size. I'd expect them to be as strong as metal. If you lived in Florida, or any other hurricane threatened zone, you'd see that hurricane shutters are now being made of fabrics like this. You take a sheet of it, stretch it across the opening, and it can withstand "missiles" from Cat 5 storms with the same ability as steel/aluminum shutters or impact glass. There are benefits to this. It's lighter and thinner, which increases visibility and comfort. It can be arranged in patterns to limit sticks or pucks from impacting the eyes, while not impeding vision. Impacts to the "cage" may not be as violent to the wearer because this might dissipate impact better than rigid metal.