hi-lo <-> tuuk rocker

[cgin6 0]

I've been playing inline for the past 3 years and I have only ever used a hi-lo chassis. I remember on the old board people raving about the rocker chassis and I believe the general consensus was that the rocker was indeed 'better'. I was wondering if that perception has changed since then and if anyone could compare their experiences having tried both of them. My friend is buying an old pair of vapors and he wants to use them to play net and I am thinking about buying the kevlar? tuuks off them and replacing my old penetrators. I've noticed that 2004 skates I've seen including the Bauer megas do not come with rocker chassis which I found interesting. Sorry if I'm bringing up a topic which has been beaten to death.

C

[Eazy_b97 1]

I was under the impression not many people liked it. I remember reading the wite up posted on it, and how it was supposed to be closer to skating on ice. Apprerantly it didn't catch on and now they've switched to a different chasis.

[Aggie 9]

I guess I am one of the few guys that likes the Rocker chassis! I even started inline skating years before I started ice! I like the Rocker because I feel better balanced on them, especially when skating backwards. I also like the maneuverability better with the Rocker.

[kenneth 5]

^

ditto, i can cut much better with the, the only downside i have is their weight. and you do lose some top end speed stability.

[Timber 0]

I've skated in both the Vapor 2 (Tuuk rocker) and Mision Proto Vsi (Vibe 2). The rocker does for me what it claims to do in that transitions and tight turns feel more like ice skating (you can feel your front to back weight shift putting you at different positions on the wheebase "arc"). What I didn't expect was the odd feeling of the skate boot being noticeably higher off the ground with this chassis (the overall chassis is taller on the rocker than any Hi-Lo that I'e seen). I noticed this most in cross-overs; the extra height seems to create higher forces on you boot/ankle making it more difficult to stabilize.

The Hi-Lo Vibes definitely feel more flat footed and stable; Unfortunately, I don't get that feeling of skating on a wheelbase arc, rather a flat wheelbase. The result for me was transitions and tight turns were a little sloppier, but my overall skating ability was more stable. Overall I like the Missions beter than the Vapors.

[43%burnt 0]

i think the biggest knock against the rocker frames was the weight. it was always pretty heavy, even the carbon version. other than that, they do seem to do what everybody has already conveyed so far about the turning. if you're going to try them, make sure you get the carbon frames instead of the aluminum ones.

[kenneth 5]

the carbon ones are actually the same plastic used in ice skate chasiss, i wonder how they would be if tehy were actually made of carbon fiber but that would be $$$. But i agree get teh plastic ones over the aluminum ones, i had both the aluminum ones are way too heavy.

[43%burnt 0]

yeah, the plastic ones. people always refered to them as the carbon ones to me. mission had carbon fiber like frames on the wicked lights back in the day. they were crazy light, but the would break easy.

[kenneth 5]

ya carbon fiber is strong yet brittle :P

[Dan_The_Man_16 0]

Yeah my new blades have them, I really like them.

[MDE3 0]

I cannot bide my toung....the rocker chassis concept was marketed to allow ice players to feel more comfortable when switching back and forth between ice and inline hockey, as was the Mission chassis concept in 2001- 2002. However these chassis did not do well with the elite players at the pro levels or at the upper end of the youth levels. If there truly was an advantage, these upper end players would have jumped all over it.

What happened for most is that under hard turns and stops, you only had two or three wheels in contact with the floor unlike a solid chassis, where you could have all four in contact when you needed them. Because grip is related to the amount of total wheel surface area in contact with the floor, these chassis could not compete with the "four on the floor" of either the Hi Lo's or straight chassis' under certain power turning or stopping conditions.

The skating technique without a rockered chassis, is more distant from ice technique than when using a rockered chassis, but once learned, it is ultimately more effective when used in combination with either a hi/lo or straight chassis.

[cgin6 0]

Thanks to everyone who responded. I am convinced to stick with the hi-lo. Now I just need to find some cheap wheels. My LHS sells a 4 pack of dynasties for 60 bucks USD, and cheap labeda grippers (not even millenium) for 10 bucks each not including tax! I guess you can get away with that in Vancouver because inline is not as popular.

[chrisg19 5]

What happened for most is that under hard turns and stops, you only had two or three wheels in contact with the floor unlike a solid chassis, where you could have all four in contact when you needed them. Because grip is related to the amount of total wheel surface area in contact with the floor, these chassis could not compete with the "four on the floor" of either the Hi Lo's or straight chassis' under certain power turning or stopping conditions.

The skating technique without a rockered chassis, is more distant from ice technique than when using a rockered chassis, but once learned, it is ultimately more effective when used in combination with either a hi/lo or straight chassis.

This is probably the most accurate drawback to the chassis. Although I am a big fan of the rocker, and would never switch back to flat frames again, they do have limitations. It is just refreshing to read a negative post about them that has actual substance to it....

chris

[MDE3 0]

PS thank you...I actually did try them briefly when they first came out..like about 10 minutes, when I was still coaching and running clinics, but I could not put as much load on them when making hard cuts, or on a hard push off, as I could with my hi/lo's..I think I was using Fishbones at the time.

I used to teach slightly different techniques for each discipline to try and maximize performance, and so when I tried the rockers, I did not find they suited my inline technique..although I grant anyone that they will feel more comfortable if they are an ice player switching over to inline, and trying to maintain a more pure ice technique.

Also depending on the type of floor, the difference in grip will be maximized or minimized. Certain floors will just not grip(dust), and it really would not matter which chassis style you used, so the one you feel most comfortable with is the obvious choice.

[jeremytai 0]

If there truly was an advantage, these upper end players  would have jumped all over it.

I just got some rockers this year and feel a lot better than with my old Hi-Lo's. Turning feels better as well as stopping and accelerating. As to your point of being an advantage, if this was true Sony's Betamax format (which was perceived by the public as being technically better) would have won over JVC's VHS format.

The Rocker technology has a patent on it and was therefore licensed to Bauer/Nike. When Bauer/Nike didn't sell enough skates with the Rocker technology then it only made sense for them to discontinue the license and consequently not offer the Rocker chassis.

I believe it has nothing to do with "advantage" and all to do with Bauer/Nike's bottom line. Money.

[MDE3 0]

I only know three guys in the pro leagues and touring pro's (inline) who continue to use a rockered skate of some kind...both are constantly switching from inline to ice, so it makes sense. One of them simply uses smaller wheels on the front and rear to create a rocker effect...but that is because he must wear a certain brand, and that's the only way he can achieve this with their chassis. I assume last season's version of Team Bauer may also have been using these also, but I do not know for sure.

There are no doubt others whom I do not know using a form of rockered chassis, but I would believe very few...and it's not like they didn't get to try them in most cases..as many of these guys are solicited for their equipment opinions. Believe me when I say if there was an advantage to be had....we would have heard the buzz about it.

My son and I see these guys every week, for maybe 8 - 10 months of the year, and are always talking about what's new and different, so someone raving about a major technical advantage would not go unnoticed.