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

Ellipse Profiles – The next revolution in skate profiling?

Recommended Posts

17 hours ago, pgeorgan said:

Skated on the Ellipse XS last night.

It's definitely way better than the Ellipse 0 in terms of fit for my holder size (254 and coming from a Quad 0). If you do want to try this profile and you already have a Quad, start with one size lower than what you're used to. I can see why @PBH liked a Quad 1 and now appears to prefer an Ellipse two sizes lower. Our experiences have been similar, and if I continue down his path, I'd probably end up with an Ellipse XXS next. However, I'm not sure I want to go that route. Perhaps just make the toe a little more aggressive? If I knew the specs, I might be able to make that determination ahead of time, rather than having to go in blindly with all this proprietary mumbo jumbo. 

The profile has potential but a) it would be nice to know what I'm skating on and b) armed with that knowledge, begin the process of figuring out how to tweak it and make the toe more aggressive while keeping everything else the same. 

I will reiterate that the Ellipse is nothing like a Quad. And as far as a being a "Paradigm Shift"... I don't think so. You might prefer it coming from a Zup or something, but if you're coming from a Quad, expect to sacrifice all the agility you're used to (which is the exact opposite of the marketing material). Personally, I think they have the profiles backwards. Quad should be the agility profile and Zup, the power one. 

I'll keep it around for now and see if it doesn't grow on me, but I'm not getting rid of my Quad anytime soon.

If you're a size 254 holder then the Ellipse XS is the profile that's recommended by Prosharp for you.  They recommend it for skate sizes 5 and 6.  I think skaters were all over the place with what Quads they used where as with the Ellipse profiles you should start with the one recommended for your size.  You may disagree though in some senses they've made it easier to find a good starting point. 

I would 100% agree with you with regards to the Quad being more for agility and the Zuperior being more of a power profile.  It seems like this is mostly Bauer's marketing.  If you read Prosharp's description of the Zuperior profile template it is mainly centered around speed, strength, and stability.  Below are the points of emphasis.

  • Excellent straight line speed.
  • Excellent glide speed.
  • Stability/balance to battle off opponents.
  • Strength focus.

I've recently went back and evaluated this profile again after being off of it for some time and I feel like the description is very accurate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, hockeydad3 said:

With my skates size 6.5/254mm I am between the recommendations of ProSharp for the Quad Zero/XS and the Ellipse Zero/XS profile. I had the opportunity to try the Ellipse Zero profile, but I want a little more agility and acceleration without sacrificing speed and stability to much. If I understood properly, both the Quad Zero and the Ellipse XS profile are more agile than the Ellipse Zero. Could someone please tell me his experiences with these three profiles on a similarly sized skate? And what are the major differences between these profiles? I´m coming from single radius profiles and would like to know which profile I should try next.

I think for the Ellipse profile Prosharp recommends the Ellipse XS for 254.  I've skated on both the Ellipse XS and Zero lately and the XS does give you a bit quicker feet and agility.  I did feel like I lost a bit of glide and stability though not enough that it was an issue.  I've made a note to go back and try the quads again to contrast them with the Ellipse.  I've been off of the quad profile for roughly 4 months.  I didn't personally feel all the major differences that other people mention between the Ellipse and the Quads.  This was just my experience, not discounting others opinions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, hockeydad3 said:

If I understood properly, both the Quad Zero and the Ellipse XS profile are more agile than the Ellipse Zero. Could someone please tell me his experiences with these three profiles on a similarly sized skate? And what are the major differences between these profiles? I´m coming from single radius profiles and would like to know which profile I should try next.

Yes. We have the same sized holder. Read my posts above. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, kkskate said:

If you're a size 254 holder then the Ellipse XS is the profile that's recommended by Prosharp for you.  They recommend it for skate sizes 5 and 6.  I think skaters were all over the place with what Quads they used where as with the Ellipse profiles you should start with the one recommended for your size.  You may disagree though in some senses they've made it easier to find a good starting point. 

I'm not disagreeing that is it the recommendation. That being said, there seem to be some inconsistencies across the profiles as far as how accurate the starting points are.

Now that I've gotten to test out an XS, if that is what ProSharp recommends, I'm going to have to pass. On the other hand, an XXS might work, but then we are back to completely ignoring ProSharp's recommendations (which most people seem to do anyway). 

Add to all that the proprietary jargon of this current release, and I'm already finding myself discouraged from even trying the XXS because of the hassle. I still don't know what the heck I'm skating on, and ProSharp's marketing material is not exactly confidence inspiring. As we've both discovered, it seems to be somewhat contradictory.

All this leads me to believe the Ellipse is more hype than substance. 

Put my Quad 0 back on for last night's tilt and I was back to wheelin' ! 

 

Edited by pgeorgan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I got a nice present in the mail today...my new  blades profiled with Ellipse 1.  I’m a 288 steel in a Shift holder, and thanks @KKSkate for doing great work on the profile.  Coming from a Quad 1.  Initial feedback (one skate, assorted edge work drills and then breakouts and zone entries) is that I feel a bit less on my tiptoes with this profile vs the quad, despite the same 20mm back Center, but I still feel like I can access the acceleration “zone” at the front of the blade.  Stability was good, agility was maybe a touch less, but overcomeable with a bit more effort.  Forwards and Backwards transitions and crossovers felt as good, but less feeling like I am as uncomfortably on my toes. 
 

no skating until Wednesday next week so won’t be able to really dial in my opinion until then.  Nothing screams “give me my quad back” yet...

Edited by JV23
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/19/2021 at 6:09 PM, JV23 said:

I got a nice present in the mail today...my new  blades profiled with Ellipse 1.  I’m a 288 steel in a Shift holder, and thanks @KKSkate for doing great work on the profile.  Coming from a Quad 1.  Initial feedback (one skate, assorted edge work drills and then breakouts and zone entries) is that I feel a bit less on my tiptoes with this profile vs the quad, despite the same 20mm back Center, but I still feel like I can access the acceleration “zone” at the front of the blade.  Stability was good, agility was maybe a touch less, but overcomeable with a bit more effort.  Forwards and Backwards transitions and crossovers felt as good, but less feeling like I am as uncomfortably on my toes. 
 

no skating until Wednesday next week so won’t be able to really dial in my opinion until then.  Nothing screams “give me my quad back” yet...

Interesting.

I couldn't even turn on an Ellipse 0 coming from a Quad 0.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, pgeorgan said:

Interesting.

I couldn't even turn on an Ellipse 0 coming from a Quad 0.

Did you change your sharpening? Coming from a 95/75FBV(1/2" ROH) with my 11' profile,  the LHS recommended a 3/4 ROH for the Ellipse zero and was right.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, hockeydad3 said:

Did you change your sharpening? Coming from a 95/75FBV(1/2" ROH) with my 11' profile,  the LHS recommended a 3/4 ROH for the Ellipse zero and was right.

I could see shallowing up the hollow coming from a single 11 ’, but from quad to ellipse shouldn’t be that big a deal...  I stayed at my 11/16” roh, didn’t notice a difference...maybe a bit more bite, but at this point could be my imagination or the difference between the manual sharpen that came on the blades and my usual Sparx run.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, JV23 said:

I could see shallowing up the hollow coming from a single 11 ’, but from quad to ellipse shouldn’t be that big a deal...  I stayed at my 11/16” roh, didn’t notice a difference...maybe a bit more bite, but at this point could be my imagination or the difference between the manual sharpen that came on the blades and my usual Sparx run.  

I just reread your post nvm:)

Edited by Beflar

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/22/2021 at 2:26 PM, hockeydad3 said:

Did you change your sharpening? Coming from a 95/75FBV(1/2" ROH) with my 11' profile,  the LHS recommended a 3/4 ROH for the Ellipse zero and was right.

I meant that the front of the profile is wildly different than the front of the equivalent in a Quad. Not that it was too dull or sharp. 

Edited by pgeorgan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All right, I've now had two more skates, 1 more fully on ellipse, where I was paying attention to things like acceleration and agility (we're talking relative terms here...while not a member of the Loyal Order of Water Buffalo, my lightweight days are behind me), and one where I started with ellipse and did a blade change back to Quad 1.  And the winner is the Quad 1.  More jump, more pop, more explosive starts, sharper turns, better pivots, better feeling of front of skate.  It's funny, I didn't really notice anything bad on the ellipse, but the minute I put the Quad back on, the guys I was with were all wondering what happened...

So, I'm going to agree with @pgeorgan, there's something less aggressive at the front that is slowing the ellipse down.

PS - I know I'm dating myself with the LOWB reference...ah, childhood memories of that and classic animated flashing sky Spiderman.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, JV23 said:

All right, I've now had two more skates, 1 more fully on ellipse, where I was paying attention to things like acceleration and agility (we're talking relative terms here...while not a member of the Loyal Order of Water Buffalo, my lightweight days are behind me), and one where I started with ellipse and did a blade change back to Quad 1.  And the winner is the Quad 1.  More jump, more pop, more explosive starts, sharper turns, better pivots, better feeling of front of skate.  It's funny, I didn't really notice anything bad on the ellipse, but the minute I put the Quad back on, the guys I was with were all wondering what happened...

So, I'm going to agree with @pgeorgan, there's something less aggressive at the front that is slowing the ellipse down.

PS - I know I'm dating myself with the LOWB reference...ah, childhood memories of that and classic animated flashing sky Spiderman.

Some people already had a similar opinion. It seems that you have to go down a number if you want to compare the Ellipse profile with a Quad profile of the same range.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I could offer two sets of profiled ls3 blades to every skater on this thread (one 11 ’ and one 13’) but market them as one quad and one ellipse profile and get the same results/conversations. 

  • Like 2
  • Facepalm 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, xxlulzxx said:

I could offer two sets of profiled ls3 blades to every skater on this thread (one 11 ’ and one 13’) but market them as one quad and one ellipse profile and get the same results/conversations. 

Distinct possibility, but that says a lot about trying to split hairs with all these profiles.  It doesn’t seem like they came up with them through research, but from a theoretical approach and just threw them out there.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, xxlulzxx said:

I could offer two sets of profiled ls3 blades to every skater on this thread (one 11 ’ and one 13’) but market them as one quad and one ellipse profile and get the same results/conversations. 

Maybe, but only if they didn´t use a multiple radius profile before. If you are talking about the gliding area of a blade, these profiles are more or less similar to a single radius. The Quad zero has a 11' gliding area.

I had made experiences with 10', 11' and 13' single radius profiles before. This winter I could test the Ellipse zero Profile and the True stock 9'/10' dual profile. These newer profiles have distinct and recognizable individual different properties.

I think that those multiple radius profiles could lead to a smaller individual compromise between agility/acceleration and stability/glide.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The name of the quad vs eclipse profiles being off by roughly 1, plus the fact that the quad .5 was “half way” between 1 and 2, makes me think that maybe they should take an extra few days to review their naming processes before they start marketing them. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yep, the naming sucks, but maybe they should first figure out how to match a profile with a skater so people have a clue instead of creating all these profiles that make peoples eyes glaze over when they look at them.  My gut (albeit with no data) says there are only a few profiles that matter.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think one mistake people make is to compare different sizes of one profile instead of comparing different profiles developped for their runner length. For example if you put a Quad II profile on a size 2 skate you will allmost get a 13' single radius profile. I am missing a good technical definition of the practical differences between the three multiradius profiles instead of calling them agility, power and dynamic. A database with the runner length, instead of skate sizes, for which the profiles were developed and a description of the effect that a bigger or smaller runner would have on the properties of the profile would be nice.

Edited by hockeydad3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Let us try a theoretical and analytic approach to compare the Zuperior and the Quad profile and let us use the information provided by Prosharp (all with a grain of salt):

prosharp | Hockeyshop Forster - Eishockey & Inlinehockey Online Shop

Pro Sharp, 25,00 €

Comparing the Zuperior S and the Quad Zero (both developped for size 7-8 skates):

Assuming that the dominat zone for most skating action is the middle(maybe 80%?) part oft the speed/agility area, the Zuperior S has a 12' radius with a bit of a 20' radius towards the heel with a little bit of a 6' radius towards the toes and the Quad Zero has a 11' radius with a bit of a 9' radius towards the toes and a little bit of a 13' radius towards the heel. If we put a longer profile on a shorter runner, the middle part of the profile becomes even more dominant.

Who knows what happens if we put a shorter profile on a longer runner? And what happens to the pitch if we change the runner size? Or what happens to the profile if we change the pitch?

Those numbers can explain the differences between the two profiles. And it could explain why a Zuperior XS feels more close to a Quad Zero.

If the Ellipse XS feels more close to a Quad Zero, then it could be that the Ellipse profile is more like a Zuperior profile, or it could be located in between the Zuperior profile and the Quad profile.

So to get further with our findings we should compare the three profiles(Zuperior, Quad and Ellipse), in the size developed for the runner size, on the ice.

Edited by hockeydad3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/28/2021 at 5:11 PM, start_today said:

The name of the quad vs eclipse profiles being off by roughly 1, plus the fact that the quad .5 was “half way” between 1 and 2, makes me think that maybe they should take an extra few days to review their naming processes before they start marketing them. 

The quad 0.5 was created for people skating on a single profile their whole lives.  (I think one of the posters here played a hand in suggesting it).  So it is a Quad but not as dramatic 8-10-12-14 vs 7-10-13-16, which is why a lot of people seem to like it.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/30/2021 at 4:31 PM, Beflar said:

The quad 0.5 was created for people skating on a single profile their whole lives.  (I think one of the posters here played a hand in suggesting it).  So it is a Quad but not as dramatic 8-10-12-14 vs 7-10-13-16, which is why a lot of people seem to like it.

Correct. it was designed for the North American player using single and doubles that wanted just a slight change.  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/15/2021 at 1:33 PM, pgeorgan said:

Skated on the Ellipse XS last night.

It's definitely way better than the Ellipse 0 in terms of fit for my holder size (254 and coming from a Quad 0).

I tried the Ellipse 0 last winter and I lacked some agility. I'm just thinking about the profile I want to try next. I'm on 254mm steel. From your experience, can you remember the differences between the Quad 0 and Ellipse XS profiles?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Because I was searching for something more maneuverable than Ellipse Zero, I had the choice between the Ellipse XS, Zuperior XS and Quad Zero. Finally I made the decision to try the Ellipse XS next.

Due to covid lockdown during the last months, I only had been playing for some Times on TF7 roller skates on outdoor rinks. And I was skating for my own on a pond for maybe 5-10 times during the winter. End of september was the last time I was in a inside hockey rink. So you should take my latest experiences with a grain of salt.

On wednesday I was on ice playing hockey with my almost brandnew TF7( 6.5R 254mm, never played Hockey with them). My first impression with the Ellipse Zero(3/4") was awfull, too much forward pitch, too much steel under my toes and under my heel and the feeling like beeing on rails. After two minutes I changed my Step runners for the stock ones with the Ellipse XS(11/16"). Way better, everything was feeling natural as it should be and more than enough maneuverability, grip and glide.

I will continue with the Ellipse Xs and after some time I will reevaluate again. It would be nice if I had finally found a hockeyskate setup for myself and could concentrate on skating.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/26/2021 at 12:25 AM, kkskate said:

I evaluated the Ellipse XS last night and I was impressed.  My skates use a smaller runner 246/254 so keep that in mind.  I used to skate on the Quad 1 though recently converted to the Ellipse 0/1.  I have 2 sets of blades and have been alternating.  Overall my feet felt lighter, more agile, and I was able to turn them over faster.  I didn't not notice the pitch difference between the Ellipse XS and the Ellipse 0/1.  Ellipse XS has slightly less pitch the the 0, 1, and 2.  I did feel a slight loss in stability though the positive gains were enough that I'll probably stick with the XS over the others.

Which size is it that your skates use, 246 or 254... it can't be both?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...