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

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

jjtt99

Therma Blade

Recommended Posts

I just can't help but think that this increase in the "thickness of the water layer between the blade and the ice" has to have an adverse effect on tight turns and cornering. If the blades are sitting on top of a film of water, doesn't this mean that there is less blade "in" the ice? If that's the case, doesn't that mean that there is going to be less stability on tight cuts and crossovers? I would think that something like this would lead to more "blown tires" than anything else.

Could someone explain to me why this isn't the case? I feel retarded here, but I'm just sitting here thinking "quicker acceleration is great, but what's the point if you can't change direction effectively?". I hope I'm wrong.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Most of the anecdotal evidence from testers suggests the opposite effect..most of them report that the baldes turn better than a conventional blade. There are now videos on the site showing tight turns and improvement etc.

My guess is that when you are gliding on a flat blade, the water film builds up under the hollow, contained by the two edges of the blade. Sort of like a hydroplaning effect, except of course you don't lose control as the two edges of your blade are in contact with the ice and provide tracking.

If this is correct, and the additional water created by Thermablades has provided some additional lift (thus reducing drag), it likely gets released as the blade tips over to make a turn. I suspect that the improvement in turning (if it really exists) would come from either, a) increased entry speed, "b)" a slower disipation of the "lift effect" or c) increased confidence in the blade due to improved "feel"; or a combination of these effects.

Certainly, this thing is gaining momentum and it will be interesting to follow. They had a big launch at the Hockey Hall of Fame yesterday and they put up a much improved website at the same time. They seem to have NHL interested due to Gretzky.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just can't help but think that this increase in the "thickness of the water layer between the blade and the ice" has to have an adverse effect on tight turns and cornering. If the blades are sitting on top of a film of water, doesn't this mean that there is less blade "in" the ice? If that's the case, doesn't that mean that there is going to be less stability on tight cuts and crossovers? I would think that something like this would lead to more "blown tires" than anything else.

Could someone explain to me why this isn't the case? I feel retarded here, but I'm just sitting here thinking "quicker acceleration is great, but what's the point if you can't change direction effectively?". I hope I'm wrong.

well, you see the whole water layer thing only really makes sense when you're nice and level... skating is really complicated, just because ice is really complicated. I'd be hesitant to freely accept quite a bit of what's said about the mechanics of it all at the interface level...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can't wait to hear about someone who will use it here.The credibility from a seller of the product is not has good and partial as someone who really test it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can't wait to hear about someone who will use it here.The credibility from a seller of the product is not has good and partial as someone who really test it.

Should have mine any day now.

How soon does NBH sue them for the shape? Tuuk's patent includes the "C" shape between the towers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow - I thought the Tuuk patent only covered the blade-locking mechanism. C-shaped towers is one hell of a broad standard -- how'd Mission sneak the Pitch through?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If the Tuuk patent is *that* broad, he's in serious trouble. I have, however, edited my original post for clarity.

My point was simply that with something as superfluous as the ornamental design of the holder at issue, he's done himself no favors by advancing the product this close to market without investigating that potential. This is typically a pretty early-days sort of concern, in my understanding, though as should be obvious I am not party to the specifics of this invention.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

CCM/Easton/RBK will want to have a distinct looking blade to distinguish their brand.

The UmaTherma blade's target is tuuk users, since they hold the largest share (correct??). So looking close to the tuuk, but different enough to be able to avoid triggering/being able to defend a legal action against would be the ticket.

Tip - install only one and then go skate. With one say Tuuk and one heater you be able to tell the difference in glide etc. Less work if you need to revert back too.

It is written that the Q-Blade project is around $500K. I believe that number is about right seeing the product, which features Formula 1 levels of engineering, materials and assembly.

Opinion/speculation: It must be that the $5M quoted in the Thermablade has operating costs and expenses such as advertising and endorsement fees promised.

Thrasha#81

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

www.hockeybuzz.com even picked up on thermablades today. I guess they are interviewing the TB president.

More hype from the home of hype. Eklund is the biggest fraud in hockey, but his site is now pretty legit with many top tv & print guys.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...