flip12

From the VA Tech lab's track record of football helmet ratings, it sounds as though it's likely to be ongoing. I haven't read their papers all the way through, but there should be a portion of the discussion at the end of the paper where they outline their plans.

I can't help but think that VH will improve their durability just like almost any other first-generation skate. Look at the one90's heel separation and brutal tongue, the Mako's shredding shell and prickly upper cuff, the Vapor 8 had facing-shredding and rock-hard tendon guard that were addressed with the Vapor 10... The improvements look like they address the durability issues that have come up, although I'd still like to see some things adjusted a little bit. mc88, I've had a similar feeling of discomfort in the top edge of my MLX, especially since I'm used to Graf's radiused padding at the top which allows for extreme ankle rotation, but my plan to fix it is to just spot heat that area and remold it with my ankle rotated out the way it normally is for forward strides. It took me a while to think of that versus just rolling the top out some arbitrary amount with my fingers. What I really think needs to happen is they just need to make the boots even shorter a bit, with an upper pillow similar to what's on their short track boots, and also make the top eyelets more aggressive, like Mission's old Past-Vert eyelets (thanks JR for reminding me about those!), like in Cruikshank's prototype that led to the MLX.

Got it, sorry for the repetitions :)

Still for the baking process or for skating in after they've been molded? Sorry I keep asking the same thing, it just hasn't been crystal clear from what I've read on your trouble shooting process. Sorry it's still troubling you too. The reason I thought maybe trying to give a little more volume back (which I thought forming a little bit looser in the uncomfortable section might help do) was I experienced similar excruciating arch pain in Graf 705's that were extra-stiff from having not been skated in for several months. When I skated in them everyday, I could lace them to firmly wrap my foot throughout the arch and they were perfect: no hint of pain and super responsive. Yet, skating in them dry, they wouldn't form to my feet on the sides so I had to lace them less tight to compensate. With these thermoformable shells as with the Mako, it's still a bit of a mystery process to me. I've been going through different approaches to my MLX and still haven't quite nailed it. I've fortunately not had any arch pain in those, however.

How tight did you lace this area when baking them?

Just an outside possibility, but how tight are you tying your skates Anjin-san? A lot of people have mentioned feeling awkwardness or pain in their Makos until they lacing their boots with barely any tension at all. If you're not cranking down on the laces, maybe try molding them again but leave a little more slack in the eyelets that are directly above where the pain in your foot is.

Did you ask if the new tendon guard is mobile or fixed? I'm curious about that.

It's growing on me. I'm intrigued especially by the new tendon guard. This is still a bit of an odd area for the current generation speed skate style hockey boots. I was just surprised when I saw these because I had been imagining changes for those areas, while thinking of something just a little bit different. Is there leather covering the side of the toe cap in the video? Is that why it looks so much more rough? It looks much better in the release pdf.

I've been wondering about the difference as well. Hockey Monkey lists the Mako II as 840 grams and the same size Mako M8 as 852 grams, so only a very slight difference in weight. Over in the Easton catalog thread, I asked if anyone could clarify what the material differences are between the models. From what I recall reading, the original Mako had a Texalium composite shell, not carbon composite. I don't know anything about how those two compare in performance or anything, just that they're different composite fabrics used in similar ways for composite part construction. What's potentially significant about the difference in Texalium on the original Mako and composite on the II, M8, etc. is the catalog lists a C-number, which could be the carbon content of the fabric? From my understanding, carbon can be substituted for fiberglas or other heavier materials, with similar end performance, just with higher stiffness in full-carbon fabrics and less in those containing some glas, etc. In the case of the 3-tiered Mako line, the C-numbers drop from C-100 to C-80 and C-50 from the top of the line (C-100) down to the bottom (C-50). I'm guessing at most of this, so anyone with better knowledge, please correct my misunderstandings. If I'm reading/guessing right, there's a 20% glas (or similar) content in the M8 compared to the Mako II and that doesn't make for that much of a weight increase.

It looks like it's maybe the same toe cap as in this video (warning, annoying audio). It looks gnarly, so much so that I assumed it was a special boot for extra forefoot protection or something.

Comparing the Mako Skates from II to M8 and M7 the "Carbon XXX" number decreases, from Carbon 100 to C- 80 and C- 50. Is this the carbon fiber to fiberglas (or some similar material) ratio?

Sounds great. I'd try it.

Great taste in boots there: Mega Air 90's, Graf G7's, Vapor 10's.

Could you share a range of starting points they recommend? Is there a way to guess a starting point depending on what one's used to coming from a traditional ROH? I tend to like my radius very shallow, probably more like what's common in Sweden (at the LHS closest to my place, which is just one of two in the whole city, they just do a standard 15mm, and they simply don't offer anything else). Would it be common to try a shallower hollow than usual because the channel has the effect of emphasizing the grip of what edge there is or maybe vice versa? I'd like to get a little insight on the theory before I start grinding my steel down next fall. There's a place that does it in Malmo, but their replies were vague by email and it's a bit pricey to physically go back and forth just to get some initial information.

Contacted by journalists, you mean? That's a good point. My guess would be it's because a headline about the safest helmet (according to a study, not to forget that that qualification would likely be left out) isn't as click-baity as one about how many concussions you're prone to get wearing helmets from the most prominent manufacturers.

Just from reading the intro to the article in the Annals of Biomedical Engineering (http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10439-015-1278-7), it's clear that the authors of the study are much more aware of and true to the nuances of concussion risk assessment. Also, they're aware of and testing for rotational components of impact in their study: "Given the fact that all head impacts have both linear and rotational acceleration components, future helmet evaluation should quantify injury risk using both linear and rotational head kinematics," (page 2).

That's why it's tricky to try two variable changes at once. You don't know what effect they have, if any. What about a 3/4" with a medium channel?

Do you still have the original tongue from your VH? It would be interesting to see how much more mass there is to the thicker ones. As much as the weight sits in people's minds, it would be nice if there were weights for all the sizes in a range, especially since a size 8 in one brand doesn't fit the same as a size 8 in another. I forgot to mention, but I noticed a similar sluggish feeling you mention having with the CXN when comparing my MLX holder to the LS2 (The MLX holder I have is a little longer though, so maybe that's the feeling I don't like?). Along with the LS2 the other holders I really feel comfortable in are Cobras and Tuuk Custom+. I'm wondering if having the hardware securing the steel down low by the toe and the heel can cause a holder to feel sluggish to some people.

Your 930-gram VH skate isn't standard is it? Standard tongue and toe-box, width, etc?

I wasn't trying to pick on you, but didn't want to let a potential misunderstanding continue to brew...it's quick for someone to misread, "getting hit by Borland is like getting shot by a bullet!" In a way that statement could be true, but it may not be the way people think at first. It was mostly the medical thing that I think is important for us all to remember. We're getting better at treating ourselves. Improved research and design is part of that and there are bound to be these storms along the way. I just happen to have that experience of seeing the two sides of publishing new knowledge talking at cross purposes, so this morass is familiar.

I think maybe you meant the same momentum as a fired bullet. Velocity is just velocity: rate of distance moved over the time interval chosen (measured in miles per hour, meters per second, etc.). The momentum thing is true, and an unintuitive fact right out of Newton's mechanical laws, "every action has an equal and opposite reaction." But, that also means that the kickback force of a gun is the same as accelerating force causing the bullet to move, which just shows, absorbing the momentum of the bullet is not the same experience as absorbing that of the gun's kickback. Not that I want to get hit by either a fired bullet or a retired Borland, but those two are also not the same experience. The point is good though. There is a lot more force at play in today's contact sports where players are both bigger and faster than they were in the past. Seriously, I would not want to play against Dustin Byfuglien. He flicks opponents off like toys. Hella fun to watch him do that though. Anyway, bigger+faster just isn't the whole story: medicine has also improved, and part of the reason why there seem to be way more concussions is because it's much better understood that there's something serious going on in these instances of head trauma. The same thing can be said for PTSD, for instance. Everyone is making great points. Yes, journalism is flawed, peer-reviewed research is flawed, and those two pools don't really mingle all that happily (my wife is doing her Ph.D and tells me about frustrations just like the problems with this case: journalists just want a simple truth, as sexy as possible, controversial is a big plus, to plug into their story that has to get in and out of their editors' and readers' faces as enjoyably and as quickly as possible. On the other hand, researchers are often more aware of or engaged with the nuances of their area of expertise, which is literally their job). If we can get out on the other side of this development, having a new voice in assessing helmet safety, maybe we can have improved protection a few years down the road. But there are certainly going to be some rotten and broken eggs along the way. That's just life.

I noticed some new s500's on eBay for $150 today. I was tempted, but they only had D-widths.

Nice old Flyweights. I like that model, tried to make them my primary skates last year, but didn't realize I needed to get them in wide for my flipper feet.

Reminds me of Bauer's 1X branding, which reminded me of the Mako. Too little difference between brands these days.

For me, it would be a sure way to get the edge I want, FBV-style or just a shallower hollow, without having to ship my steel to Sweden or Germany. I'm fairly certain I'd still go to Malmo to get my radius done. Sharpening here is about $6.33 every time, and it's the same 1/2 every time, at that. Over a season or two, it could easily pay for itself. Especially if other people at the club want to try out different cuts and whatnot.