stick flex, can we trust the number?

[lkool 1]

I have a son who is a squirt. He has been using an Easton S5 shaft with a couple different wood blades over the last year or so. It claims to be a 45 flex, and he can barely flex it, I can't even seem to get a good flex out of it without really putting my weight into it. he is about ready to switch to a junior stick and he wants a OPS. Seems most of the sticks he wants are 50 flex, they are a few inches longer than his, but that is OK, he has been growing. He seems to be able to flex these 50 flex sticks much better than his 45 flex s5, I am just wondering if I am crazy or if the design / materials of the stick really do make that much of a difference and comparing two sticks of different materials is really like comparing apples and oranges. I believe the Easton S5 shaft is made out of a Carbon/Glass material.

[Sniper9 547]

the lower end hockey sticks have brutal flex ratings.. you can almost count on them being 10 pts stiffer than the rating..this is from what i have noticed. even if the materials are crappier, you would think the ratings should be consistent.. then again I am not sure if flex rating is determined on how much the stick bends, or how much it bends until its breaking point. if it is the latter, then the flex rating could be accurate, as lower end sticks probably would break easier

[Jordan 13]

The flex ratings are wildly undependable in youth and junior sticks. You really have to try to feel the flex and make a decision from there.

At one point my son had a Reebok 10k junior, rated as a 50 flex. Honestly it was stiffer than my senior 100 flex stick. FWIW, we have found that in general, Warriors and Eastons are more whippy than other brands, for a given flex in junior sticks.

That said, they keep coming out with more and more new sticks, a lot can change.

[AIREAYE 248]

the lower end hockey sticks have brutal flex ratings.. you can almost count on them being 10 pts stiffer than the rating..this is from what i have noticed. even if the materials are crappier, you would think the ratings should be consistent.. then again I am not sure if flex rating is determined on how much the stick bends, or how much it bends until its breaking point. if it is the latter, then the flex rating could be accurate, as lower end sticks probably would break easier

No, lower end sticks have more fibreglass in them; a tougher more durable material than carbon. Then again, since the material isn't as responsive as carbon, there should be slight inconsistencies in terms of feel; I wouldn't proclaim a 10pt difference though. How have you noticed this? Did you take some sticks off the shelf and try to flex them? Stiffness is all relative.

@ the OP: did you cut that shaft to his height when you bought it?

The flex ratings are wildly undependable in youth and junior sticks. You really have to try to feel the flex and make a decision from there.

At one point my son had a Reebok 10k junior, rated as a 50 flex. Honestly it was stiffer than my senior 100 flex stick. FWIW, we have found that in general, Warriors and Eastons are more whippy than other brands, for a given flex in junior sticks.

That said, they keep coming out with more and more new sticks, a lot can change.

See? Stiffness is all relative; if you honestly think a junior-length 50 flex is stiffer than a full length senior 100 flex stick...

[17D1998 1]

the lower end hockey sticks have brutal flex ratings..

So true. I still have an old Easton Ultra Extreme (LOL) shaft rated at 100 but it just doesn't flex at all. Feels more like 120 or something