Ellipse Profiles – The next revolution in skate profiling?

[Ric_Flair 4]

11 minutes ago, hockeydad3 said:

I didn't try it. I don't even know if there is a Omni profile developed for 254mm blades. You have to try and compare it to make a decision. I don't think that there is a "one fits all" profile. 

Yea, I understand. But from my understanding (at least) the OMNI Quad comes in all the same sizes (XXXS, XXS, XS, 0... etc), but just use a smoother transition between the "zones"... or maybe I misunderstood?

[hockeydad3 51]

10 minutes ago, Ric_Flair said:

Yea, I understand. But from my understanding (at least) the OMNI Quad comes in all the same sizes (XXXS, XXS, XS, 0... etc), but just use a smoother transition between the "zones"... or maybe I misunderstood?

And we still don't know about the detailed construction of the profile(angles, length of the radii, pivot point and so on). 

[BenBreeg 493]

1 hour ago, Ric_Flair said:

Yea, I understand. But from my understanding (at least) the OMNI Quad comes in all the same sizes (XXXS, XXS, XS, 0... etc), but just use a smoother transition between the "zones"... or maybe I misunderstood?

That's what they say...  but smoother compared to what they characterize as "harsh" transitions on regular Quads (their marketing department's words, I never heard any user describe them as such)...

[Ric_Flair 4]

1 hour ago, hockeydad3 said:

And we still don't know about the detailed construction of the profile(angles, length of the radii, pivot point and so on). 

This is true. I was assuming all else parallel to Quad... but i guess it's not as simple as that perhaps

[Ric_Flair 4]

7 minutes ago, BenBreeg said:

That's what they say...  but smoother compared to what they characterize as "harsh" transitions on regular Quads (their marketing department's words, I never heard any user describe them as such)...

And... well said @BenBreeg. I don't find them harsh... so I guess I found my answer. 
More marketing than anything

Edited December 14, 2021 by Ric_Flair

[Paluce 24]

3 hours ago, Ric_Flair said:

This is true. I was assuming all else parallel to Quad... but i guess it's not as simple as that perhaps

This is what my son skates on.  8' toe, smoothly transitioned to a 13' heal on a 212 runner using a Quad 0.5 Template, and 0.035" less steel in the front to get the forward lean dialed in for him.     

The beauty of the OMNI runners is that is changes continuously.... )  8', 8.1', 8.2', 8.3',8.4', 8.5'... ............... all the way to  ->14'      I could profile these blades with a 8.5' -> almost 14' if I shifted the steel back for more speed.   Get it...?  

You can achieve a Quad XS on a 254 blade by adjusting the centerline forward on a Quad 0 template and you get a 6' toe, 12' heal smoothly transitioned.   (basically you don't use the whole 6' to 13' Quad 0 on the 254 blade as I did in my image below.)

With the 4 zones on traditional Quads you can't really do this.   You can but you will get one zone in the front very long, and one in the heal very short or maybe missing which is not good.    

When I Profile people's skates I tell them the Profile Template I used, and the radius from the heal to the toe, as well as the steel height at the heal and toe where it is profiled to they know the pitch.

These Blades are: 

Quad 0.5 Profile: 8' toe, 13' heal.   0.715" steel at the toe, 0.750" steel height at the heal.  92/75 FBV sharp.      And both blades are identical when they leave within a thou.    

 

[Paluce 24]

3 hours ago, BenBreeg said:

That's what they say...  but smoother compared to what they characterize as "harsh" transitions on regular Quads (their marketing department's words, I never heard any user describe them as such)...

just to add,  the word harsh is not any company's marketing department...  Those were my words to try and get the point of the smooth transition across to everyone. I apologize if it came across that way.   I removed that word in my post as I can see how it can be taken negatively 🙂 . sorry boys.  

[BenBreeg 493]

3 minutes ago, Paluce said:

just to add,  the word harsh is not any company's marketing department...  Those were my words to try and get the point of the smooth transition across to everyone. I apologize if it came across that way.   I removed that word in my post as I can see how it can be taken negatively 🙂 . sorry boys.  

Gotcha, didn't mean to misrepresent.  I actually thought you had some connection to them, shouldn't have jumped to conclusions.

[Paluce 24]

56 minutes ago, BenBreeg said:

Gotcha, didn't mean to misrepresent.  I actually thought you had some connection to them, shouldn't have jumped to conclusions.

No Worries,  I'm just a guy that loves helping people dial in their skates the way they like em 😉 . I hardly even charge people if they want to try a new profile or something like that. If I do, it's like $20.  I just did this fellow's skates with an OMNI... After years of sharpenings, he had a banana'd blade and no blade contact with the ice. I ground that back a little, and put an OMNI Profile on there and bang. Things are great for him, and I'm so happy.           Also, Someone mentioned if you put a profile on the blade,  can you go back...  the answer is yes, you can.   

Edited December 14, 2021 by Paluce

[hockeydad3 51]

If the pitch or pivot point of a runner has been altered before, it has to be calculated into the profiling on a prosharp machine. Otherwise the new profile would be off center. 

[kkskate 12]

4 minutes ago, pgeorgan said:

Just thinking out loud here, eg in the case of Bauer's runners, the center of the steel is marked. Assuming the center of the profile template is marked, if I want to transfer a shape onto the steel, do I really care about the shape of the steel? With both the steel and template centers aligned and level, I just cut and cut until there's a match, no? 

With what you're saying, this implies that if I walk into a store with totally mangled runners, they'll recommend they go in the garbage because nobody knows "what was done to them" in the past? 

The blades clamp into the machine different than a traditional holder. You drop the blades into the Prosharp machine onto a set of rollers so they are put in relative to the bottom of the blades. The shape doesn't really matter though the pitch can make a difference.

[hockeydad3 51]

In a prosharp the runners are centered on the ice-side. If there is a pitch, than it is added to a new profile. 

[kkskate 12]

11 minutes ago, pgeorgan said:

Perhaps I'm misunderstanding. If I wanted to put a default Quad 0 onto some used steel, are you saying this can't be done if I don't know the steel's history? 

If so, I think I just found my next business venture!

It can be done though the process will vary. It's just easier if you know what's on the blades. The situation we're really talking about is if you have a Quad on the blades and are looking to transition to another Quad, Zuperior, Ellipse, etc. If you're just trying to change the shape and leave the current pitch on the blades the process is simple.

[kkskate 12]

16 minutes ago, pgeorgan said:

Sounds like a massive design flaw on Prosharp's part. 

Personally, I don't find it to be an issue. There are pros and cons related to the different ways blades clamp into the machines. Do you have a Prosharp machine that you've worked with?

[PUCKSTOPPROSHOPJL 6]

I've been following this thread since this morning.  I'm a pro shop owner and work with both PROSHARP AS 2001 AS and Sparx Sharpeners in the Boston area.  A couple of things jump out. First off, blades do not have to be trashed just because you don't know the history. PROSHARP has a process and charts on how to set up the machine for a previously profile blades with either the QUAD, ZUPERIOR or ELLIPSE. If the owner doesn't know or you don't know where the pivot point is, you can use a piece of paper (   I use yellow sticky notes) and on a flat surface, try and located the PP. Now, saying that, I'm not a big fan of this. What I like to do is rebalance, rematch the blades together in the AS 2001. Then I put back on either a 13, 11 or 10 radius. What that does is assure you where the PP is back in the middle before you start a more professional profile like the QUAD's or Zuperior.  Now I've also discovered that I can save some metal on the blades if I'm going to put on a ELLISPE by using the previously mention method depending on the size of the blade you're going to work with. I've also started using the Detroit 1 (a 10/20 combo radius)  if I'm doing a ZUPERIOR profile or a 10/13 combo if I doing a QUAD.  All this is an effort to give the customer the best possible outcome. I have elite hockey players who are D1, D3,  USHL, NAHL.  NE PREP and NE HS players routinely testing profiles on ice at my proshop. So accuracy is as important to them as it is to me.   I hope this helps. 

[kkskate 12]

2 minutes ago, pgeorgan said:

Thanks for the detailed explanation! 

What about just using a pair of digital calipers or something to find the thickest point? 

I believe you can ~approximate the pitch using calipers though it's difficult to guarantee an exact result. That's just my opinion of course. The only thing possibly worth mentioning above is that this process is required due to the fact that the Quad, Ellipse, and Zuperior profiling templates include a pivot point offset in them.

[PUCKSTOPPROSHOPJL 6]

The problem with using a digital caliper, and I have one, is the top of the blade is not a straight line, its curved along with the blade, so its difficult to assess accurately if your truly getting the right low point (or pivot point). So learning this the hard way, I find the best way to assure an accurate starting point is to reprofile the blade using the method I have described. This works best for me and its what I teach in the shop. Hope it helps.. 

[marka 526]

Howdy,

6 hours ago, kkskate said:

The blades clamp into the machine different than a traditional holder. You drop the blades into the Prosharp machine onto a set of rollers so they are put in relative to the bottom of the blades. The shape doesn't really matter though the pitch can make a difference.

Uh... Wow.  Why would you do that?  That seems totally insane.  PARTICULARLY if your goal is to profile.

Mark

[the_game 452]

4 hours ago, PUCKSTOPPROSHOPJL said:

I've been following this thread since this morning.  I'm a pro shop owner and work with both PROSHARP AS 2001 AS and Sparx Sharpeners in the Boston area.  A couple of things jump out. First off, blades do not have to be trashed just because you don't know the history. PROSHARP has a process and charts on how to set up the machine for a previously profile blades with either the QUAD, ZUPERIOR or ELLIPSE. If the owner doesn't know or you don't know where the pivot point is, you can use a piece of paper (   I use yellow sticky notes) and on a flat surface, try and located the PP. Now, saying that, I'm not a big fan of this. What I like to do is rebalance, rematch the blades together in the AS 2001. Then I put back on either a 13, 11 or 10 radius. What that does is assure you where the PP is back in the middle before you start a more professional profile like the QUAD's or Zuperior.  Now I've also discovered that I can save some metal on the blades if I'm going to put on a ELLISPE by using the previously mention method depending on the size of the blade you're going to work with. I've also started using the Detroit 1 (a 10/20 combo radius)  if I'm doing a ZUPERIOR profile or a 10/13 combo if I doing a QUAD.  All this is an effort to give the customer the best possible outcome. I have elite hockey players who are D1, D3,  USHL, NAHL.  NE PREP and NE HS players routinely testing profiles on ice at my proshop. So accuracy is as important to them as it is to me.   I hope this helps. 

Just dropping a note here that @PUCKSTOPPROSHOPJL knows his stuff and does great work. 

And he didn’t mention the over the hill beer leaguers who will try anything to get an edge that he helps out too!

 

[VegasHockey 1280]

On 7/18/2022 at 11:34 AM, pgeorgan said:

@PBH, @kkskate. Hey guys. I've noticed a pretty big difference in the "components" if-you-will, of the Hyperlites size 5.5 and size 6. It seems to be a border where Bauer uses bigger components (tendon guard and tongue very obvious, and overall boot size when you look at them). In addition, the inside/insole of the skate. If you take out the stock liners, or whatever we call them, and actually compare at the foot beds, the 5.5 has a white almost wooly-type appearance, while the 6 has a silver-colored 'graphite' look. Can't figure out how to post the pics here...

Either of you folks know what happens regarding the construction and hence the differences of these two half-size-differentiated skates? I'm asking because I am caught in between buying size 6 fit 2, or size 5.5 fit 3 (both have 254mm runners which I want to stay at)? I'm about 5'9", 175-180 and would consider myself an advanced skater; would one hold up better that the other, one softer than the other, etc.?

Again, many thanks in advance folks.

The intermediate boot will be slightly softer. 

[Hanrider 0]

Hello, I want to try ellipsis profile, but don't know which one. I am actually on quad 0.5 on 271 ccm holder. I maybe like quad 1 more. Don't like zuperior or Quad 2. Could you please recommend me which ellipsis should I try. Thanks

[kkskate 12]

2 hours ago, Hanrider said:

Hello, I want to try ellipsis profile, but don't know which one. I am actually on quad 0.5 on 271 ccm holder. I maybe like quad 1 more. Don't like zuperior or Quad 2. Could you please recommend me which ellipsis should I try. Thanks

Ellipse Zero is Prosharp's recommendation for 271/2.

Ellipse Zero - Elliptic value closest to zero (a circle) – also meaning it’s the shortest profile of them all. Currently making it the most agile in the series, while packing the dynamic punch that all Ellipse profiles do. We've taken inspiration from the Quad Zero on this one, making it best suited for skate sizes 7-8 (only a recommendation). (Skate sizes 263-272, 20 mm pitch) 

[Ric_Flair 4]

13 hours ago, kkskate said:

Ellipse Zero is Prosharp's recommendation for 271/2.

Ellipse Zero - Elliptic value closest to zero (a circle) – also meaning it’s the shortest profile of them all. Currently making it the most agile in the series, while packing the dynamic punch that all Ellipse profiles do. We've taken inspiration from the Quad Zero on this one, making it best suited for skate sizes 7-8 (only a recommendation). (Skate sizes 263-272, 20 mm pitch) 

Go two sizes down, try the ellipse xxs 😉

[hockeydad3 51]

23 hours ago, Hanrider said:

Hello, I want to try ellipsis profile, but don't know which one. I am actually on quad 0.5 on 271 ccm holder. I maybe like quad 1 more. Don't like zuperior or Quad 2. Could you please recommend me which ellipsis should I try. Thanks

Ellipse Zero with a 7/8 ROH is Prosharps recommendation for your skate size. If you are coming from a deeper hollow I would suggest to try it with a 3/4 ROH. Or try a Quad Zero (also recommendated from Prosharp for your skate size) with a 3/4 ROH, which has a more traditional feeling.

[psulion22 402]

If you prefer Quad 1, I think you'd like Ellipse 1 if you lower the pitch.  I'm on 272 runners and went from Quad 1 to Ellipse 1 with a 5mm pitch (vs the stock 20mm).  It was better than the Quad 1 in every way.

Edited September 28, 2022 by psulion22