psulion22

Keep in mind that only a very small portion of the toe of the skate is that first radius. So 6' or even 8' may sound small and like you'd fall over, it's not the part of the skate you're typically balancing on. It's not the same as just getting a 6' or 8' or even 9' single radius. But with what you're looking for 0.5 is definitely the way to go. I have a Quad 1 and honestly I think the toe radius is too short (and I have 272 runners so it feels a little longer to me). I'll be getting a Quad 0.5 on my nest set of steel for sure. If I don't like it, I can always go to Quad 1. With how much steel they take off the toe, you couldn't go from Quad 1 to 0.5. There wouldn't be any blade left.

I'll cede to your expertise and research. I had just assumed that Quad 0.5 was inbetween Quad 0 and Quad 1. That's not the case (strange numbering on PS's part). With 0.5's larger front radius and more neutral pitch, I definitely agree that it's probably the best starting point.

Depending on your skate (well, steel) size and weight, plus skating style and position, you could probably start with a Quad 1 or even Quad 2 before going all the way to Quad .5. There is a LTR on people using different ProSharp profiles on here. You might want to check that out first.

Well that sucks. I'm sure they'll get them back in at some point.

Under further inspection, they are definitely done. The entire outsole is separated from the boot on both skates. The steel definitely moves too. Maybe the damage to the boot was caused by the lack of rigidity and extra torsion in the steel. Oh well. I guess I need new skates now. Maybe I’ll think about switching to XS holders of Flare makes steel for them the next time I need a set.

Similarly, how much play is normal for any holder? Forget a vice or clamp, if I push with my fingers the steel in my Edge moves slightly. There is definitely a little play. Is that normal? Are the issues we're talking about more severe than that? Obviously they can be, but is any flex in the steel enough to create a loss of acceleration, edge control, and efficiency? Unfortunately I don't have any skates with an older holder lying around to test against. I'm asking because I have noticed a marked decrese in my acceleration and efficiency. A large part is my skates, I believe. They're MX3's that I got new and have seen a lot of use. The foam and liner inside is pretty worn and flat, and rubbed through in some spots. So, my foot is slipping a little bit. I can also feel flexion in the joint between the toe cap and quarter meaning that joint, the rivets, and/or the outsole is compromised. SO I'm wondering if the play in the steel is also included in this. Overall, the skates are feeling sloppy and not as precise as they once did.

It's not really setting up the machine. I used the calibration tools for that. It's like using a square to check for level of edges so you can make fine tuning adjustments to the jig if needed. Even with the tool, the carriage can still be off a little bit. So the square is more to make sure something isn't horribly incorrect.

All of them were the same, which was based on the calibration of the machine. I don't think any were off, but just the square was giving me a false reading because of the design. The Flare Square works on regular steel too, so I was using it on all 3 sets. Out of the holders, the readings were all consistent and pretty level, especially once I recalibrated the machine.

Thanks, guys. It was happening on three different sets of steel, both sides, two in two different holders, one not in a holder. So while I completely agree Holders can be bent or not aligned properly, that didn't seem to be the case here. It was more likely a combination of the way the Flare Square works and is designed and inconsistent sidewalls on all the steel

Thanks for the input, especially that last blog post. I went back and tried to remove as many variables as possible. I got the alignment ring back out and did that. I pulled out an old Step regular goalie runner - since we agree Step quality is probably the best - and sharpened it in the Sparx holder. And I ran 4 passes, per Sparx's recommendation, to adjust the edges. I tested in 3 places along the blade and it was all nearly perfect, maybe out by one click either way. So knowing that the machine was set to produce level edges, I took my Flare steel off the skate and sharpened it. Testing it out of the skate again produced pretty good edges, with a little more deviation. Lastly, I ran the other Flare runner in the skate, and tested it there. The results were all over the place. So it clearly seems that the problem was either with the sidewalls of the steel or the checker, or a combination of both. The Sparx is fine. The Flare Square is different than most others because it has a deeper channel and the top corner where the edge sits isn't square. I think the design was what was throwing it off because the Flare steel is worn down and may not have enough left to make good contact with the edge checker inside the skate. Either the set screw lands on the flared part, or the whole thing hits the holder.

Three different kinds, with three different characteristics, in three different holders. One is Flare regular steel that is in my player skates. One is Massive Blade DLC in my goalie skates. And one is a set of Tydan regulars that I sharpened in the Sparx blade holder. All three showed the same results.

Which boots were highest on that study, out of curiosity? It's also nowhere near the price. As with just about everything else, there is always a tradeoff between price and quality. When considering price and performance, the Sparx is an excellent product for most home users, particularly those who don't have access to quality, or even competent, local sharpeners. And before you argue - no, not everyone has an extra $1000 to buy a ProSharp. No, most people don't have the time - either in training or sharpening - or possibly even the skill to use a manual machine. No, not everyone has a nearby sharpener that can sharpen a skate without ruining the profile - not even themselves. Yes, there is a lot to be said for the convenience of sharpening a skate while you pack your bag, allowing you to have good edges every session. No, the end result is not as good as other machines or a good hand sharpener. Yes, there are limitations on what it can do. Yes, it's probably still a good idea to send the steel to a quality sharpener for a refresh periodically. Yes, that partially defeats the purpose of having the machine. Yes, despite that it's still worth the money for what it delivers.

Has anyone else had a problem where the toe and heel of the steel are not in alignment? I finally got an edge checker. What I'm finding is that the toe and heel are not equal, as if the carraige isn't running straight along the blade. No matter how much I adjust the knob, the relation stays the same between them. The right edge of the toe was high, but the heel was level. When I adjusted the knob to make the toe level, the left edge of the heel was high. It was the same issue, off by the same amount on 3 sets of steel I tried (just to make sure it wasn't the runner being bent) leading me to assume it's the Sparx itself. It could absolutely be user error with either the machine or edge checker. But when the results are replicable and consistent every time, that is probably unlikely. Anyone else experience this?

An interesting question, and one I hadn't thought of. I was using a Quad 1 before the Flare, so I just stuck with it. Since I didn't skate on the Flare before the profile was put on, I can't say for sure. But I would guess that it might be overkill. The whole point of the Quad is to milk the most performance out of the blade. But the Flare does some of the things that the Quad is supposed to do on it's own, and from experience, does more than I use. For example, the edge stability goes beyond an attack angle I typically get to. I can get lower without blowing a tire than I normally go. And the turning radius is greatly improved because you're essentially getting 6* lower at any given point on each turn. That would mean the ultra short front radius, and section that eats away the most blade, on the Quad is probably unnecessary. And even if there is a benefit, it may not be enough to outweigh the amount of lost steel. A dual, or even triple, with a longer front radius would probably be all you need on the Flare. I will say that if you haven't Flare, do so. It's a very differet feeling, but once you get used to it, you really do see a pretty significant performance increase.

I have, and it's not the same. In fact, I have a Quad 1 on my Flare steel. The improvements/changes from Flare are more like those of FBV than a profile - more glide in flats and more bite at a given angle. But the feeling is much more pronounced on the Flare. FBV works by allowing a player to increase their edge sharpness by increasing glide through a change in the angle of the walls of the hollow. So you can go sharper and still get the same, or more, glide. Flare is different in that it is a mechanical alteration to the edge itself while keeping the hollow angle the same, allowing a player to decrease thier ROH, by sometimes up to 100%, while also increasing bite and edge stability. The runner profile maximizes the performance of different characteristics along the blade when combined with each individual's skating mechanics, personal attributes, and preferences. The Flare maximizes the performance of the bite angle with the ice across all blade characteristics and profiles.

Right now, only the Supreme is available retail. The Vapor was originally, but they have long sold out. To get Vapor or Nexus ADVs you need to find pro stocks with codes BGP2B and 1NXL, respectively.

ADV is a construction technique that cuts weight. It was first used on the Vapor line, but now they offer it on all 3 stick lines - Vapor ADV, 1NXL, Supreme ADV - maintaining the flex profile of those lines.

I find that 99% of the guys that can blow pucks by me are using hockey sticks.

Yep, and NHL guys are so strong they don't need the true low kick to do the work for them. So they move the kick point up to get more velocity through energy transfer and less deflection.

Also keep in mind that most of the discussion about shot and release speed is considering the shot event in a vacuum - that being how release speed translates into the goalkeeper's ability to stop a clean shot on a static angle. But there are other variables that would affect the potential scoring ability of a shot where release speed would matter. The biggest one to me would be the presence of a shooting lane. A few milliseconds could be the difference between a shot getting through and going off a shin guard or stick blade. It may not affect the goalie's ability to stop the puck, but rather whether he has to. Another would be the total motion required to release a shot. A lower kick flex point allows the stick to load with less motion on it, meaning the puck doesn't have to travel as far in the player's stance to generate power. The difference in time it takes for the puck to leave the blade is nearly negligent, however the amount of movement and applicable time it takes to create the shot event is pretty large. A slap shot takes longer than a full wrist shot which takes longer than a quick toe snap shot. The low kick allows the player to shoot the puck with power from more hand and body positions which gives the goaltender less time to recognize the shot motion and anticipate the shot. The time the goalie has to see the shot coming off the blade is about the same. But the time the goalie has to anticipate having to look for it is much less with a low kick stick. Being able to deceive a goalie by releasing a full power shot with the hands more in front of the body, which can be used for a deke or pass as well, is more effective than just trying to blow it by him. As for why more NHL players aren't using low kicks if release speed is so important, I suspect that second part is exactly it. These guys are so strong that they can create the same release speed with a mid kick as a low kick, without the blade deflection that often accompanies low kicks as a result of the tapers used to transfer maximum energy.

At least you got a lot of action, and it wasn't a bunch of ringers. Not a whole lot of defense, but it's pickup and no one was going all out either. Sometimes it's just nice to have these kinds of sessions to get the gear on and make some saves without having to worry about the score or the other team's johnny-try-hard. I actually played in my rink's beginner league this last season. The director needed goalies, I had pads that I wasn't using, so I figured it would help us both out. The level of play was well below my skill level (and the director put me on the worst team as a result). But, surprisingly, I had a lot of fun. In the whole season, I only allowed one goal from beyond the faceoff dots. But I saw a ton of shots from in close and at that distance it doesn't matter how skilled the player is, you still have to make an effort to save them. The team was fun and everyone tried their hardest. It's a league run by the rink that has a draft each season, so there are no ringers or the perpetual arms race that happens in other leagues. Plus, it was nice to be the reason we won any game and have to other teams talk about how good you were. I felt like Henrik Lundqvist. lol

USA Hockey has a mobile app that has appendicies for things like this. They are also contained in the back of the rulebook.

If a P90T is in fact a Benn clone, then it is not a P30. The P30 is a P88 with a kinked toe being the only change to the curve (the rocker is different). The face of the blade is closed until you get to the toe, and the curve is a true mid. Bauer's Benn was more of a P92 variant, with a heel-ish twist and straighter blade of a P92 until you got to the toe where it had a sharp curve and kink to it like the P28. The Benn had a higher lie than the P30, again closer to the P92 but not quite that high. The toe was roughly the same shape and not as tapered as the P28, closer to, you guessed it, a P92 with a more square top but rounded bottom. Compared to the pic of that pro stock P90T, the Benn was more open throughout the blade and had a rounder toe. That P90T does look very much like a P30, the difference being the toe isn't quite as kinked at the bottom. I'm hoping they bring it to retail, as it really seems to be a full size blade version of Bauer's P14. I do not have them both in hand, but did compare them side by side at my LHS with the new Bauer Pro Custom samples.

I finally won a game in net, and kept my GA under 4, for the first time since returning from knee injuries almost a year ago. Not that I've played poorly, I've been playing really well. But I just seemed to allow too many or one I could/should have stopped too often. It was frustrating to have that happen so many times.

No, that's short sighted. What you need is to have 5 or 6 guys that are above the league level, one or two of them being far above. Then you rotate them in and out as subs during the regular season, making sure that they all get the required playoff eligibility, but never all show up at once. This is important because you have to have a 7-5 regular season record so the league doesn't want to move your team up a level. It helps if you start off 0-3. Then for the playoffs, you bring all your ringers and play them as much as possible, including only the 6 of them for the last half of the third, and all of any ensuing overtime. Collect your trophy and free beer certificate every season. Or at least that's what one team in two different leagues I play in does.