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

Update:

Just went with the stock Power Profile on 254mm (Quad XS, 17mm PP/pitch) in my True Customs this morning for 1.5 hours. Tho I didn't feel a HUGE diff from the Ellipse 0 (on a 263mm), perhaps too early to tell(?), there was a noticeable diff, specifically with how my feet felt "lighter" when doing button-turns and coming out of all swings/crossovers in general. Even in fwd-backward transitions tho I didn't do a lot of those today.

Next mission now will be to try maybe a Ellipse XS or even XXS on a 254. Anyone care to weigh-in on what size Ellipse would be closest to the Quad XS in 'feel'?

Early assessment, comparing the two mentioned, I like the quad more; more agile and didn't feel any/(very minimal, if so) loss of straight line speed, and was compensated for with linear-crossover ease. 

I'll be back with more updates as I continue to experiment... this is so much fun!
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/28/2021 at 10:34 AM, Ric_Flair said:

Update:

Just went with the stock Power Profile on 254mm (Quad XS, 17mm PP/pitch) in my True Customs this morning for 1.5 hours. Tho I didn't feel a HUGE diff from the Ellipse 0 (on a 263mm), perhaps too early to tell(?), there was a noticeable diff, specifically with how my feet felt "lighter" when doing button-turns and coming out of all swings/crossovers in general. Even in fwd-backward transitions tho I didn't do a lot of those today.

Next mission now will be to try maybe a Ellipse XS or even XXS on a 254. Anyone care to weigh-in on what size Ellipse would be closest to the Quad XS in 'feel'?

Early assessment, comparing the two mentioned, I like the quad more; more agile and didn't feel any/(very minimal, if so) loss of straight line speed, and was compensated for with linear-crossover ease. 

I'll be back with more updates as I continue to experiment... this is so much fun!
 

@kkskate, @PBH, @Hockeydad03, @mojo122, @pgeorgan

Are most guys here suggesting at least 1 size down then in ellipse from what is 'liked' in Quad? 
Really like the stock Power Profile (254mm) Quad XS; Ellipse XXS should be a fair trial? What you guys think?

Thanks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The quad profiles are towards agility, the zuperior profiles are more towards speed and stability and the ellipse profiles are somewhere in between. Going up one size should give you more speed/stability and going down one size should give you more agilty/acceleration.

Following the recommendations from Prosharp, you can try 9 multiradiusprofiles for your runner size 😉

Edited by hockeydad3
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, hockeydad3 said:

The quad profiles are towards agility, the zuperior profiles are more towards speed and stability and the ellipse profiles are somewhere in between. Going up one size should give you more speed/stability and going down one size should give you more agilty/acceleration.

Following the recommendations from Prosharp, you can try 9 multiradiusprofiles for your runner size 😉

Thanks @Hockeydad03.

My question is about me going from a quad XS to a ‘what’ ellipse? 
There’s been a lot of info on here about how the ellipse relates to the quad. If I really like Quad XS, should I try to drop down a size, and try a ellipse XXS? 
thanks 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you want to try something similar to the Quad XS, go down one size for the Ellipse.

If you want to try something different, try the Ellipse XS, the Quad Zero or the Quad XXS.

Or stay with the Quad XS if you like it. 🤣🤣🤣

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

The quad profiles are towards agility, the zuperior profiles are more towards speed and stability and the ellipse profiles are somewhere in between. Going up one size should give you more speed/stability and going down one size should give you more agilty/acceleration.

Following the recommendations from Prosharp, you can try 9 multiradiusprofiles for your runner size 😉

Wonder if there's some disconnect between ProSharp US and ProSharp Sweden?  ProSharp Sweden always pitched the Quads as "power profiles" and the Zuperiors as "agility profiles.

ProSharp Profiles

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think they just needed to come up with descriptors, they aren’t based on evidence.  The real disconnect is between the average player and any understanding of how the hell to choose a profile.  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, BenBreeg said:

I think they just needed to come up with descriptors, they aren’t based on evidence.  The real disconnect is between the average player and any understanding of how the hell to choose a profile.  

Agree. As many have sentimented here previously, the Quad sounds more like the agility profile and the Zup the "power". 

Share this post


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

If you want to try something similar to the Quad XS, go down one size for the Ellipse.

If you want to try something different, try the Ellipse XS, the Quad Zero or the Quad XXS.

Or stay with the Quad XS if you like it. 🤣🤣🤣

Thanks. And yes, I really like the Quad XS; just want to try its 'equivalent' in a Ellipse... XXS it will be then. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Curious if any of the hockey shop owners here who do the pro sharp profiles can show me some pics of what the difference is in templates for the Ellipse 1 vs. Quad 1. 

I am on my first ever profiled set of blades ( 288 step steel ) and I went with the ellipse 1.  I absolutely love everything about the profile except that the front 1/3 of the blade feels "long".  Meaning, when I want to get up onto my toes to dig in, crossover and accelerate, the blade just feels a little too big in its radius ( the "long" feeling ). and I really have to concentrate or try too hard to utilize the toe for quick acceleration.

I am curious if the Quad 1 would be a better choice.  I am very very happy with the middle / rear section of the ellipse 1, as I have never felt more stable on my blades while playing, I just feel like I could use a little more of a short radius up front to maximize my first couple push offs with the toe.

I wish pro sharp had specs published about the ellipse profiles....it would make this a whole lot easier.  🙂

Edited by noupf

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, noupf said:

Curious if any of the hockey shop owners here who do the pro sharp profiles can show me some pics of what the difference is in templates for the Ellipse 1 vs. Quad 1. 

I am on my first ever profiled set of blades ( 288 step steel ) and I went with the ellipse 1.  I absolutely love everything about the profile except that the front 1/3 of the blade feels "long".  Meaning, when I want to get up onto my toes to dig in, crossover and accelerate, the blade just feels a little too big in its radius ( the "long" feeling ). and I really have to concentrate or try too hard to utilize the toe for quick acceleration.

I am curious if the Quad 1 would be a better choice.  I am very very happy with the middle / rear section of the ellipse 1, as I have never felt more stable on my blades while playing, I just feel like I could use a little more of a short radius up front to maximize my first couple push offs with the toe.

Sounds similar to what I experience on an ellipse, albeit its an XS (recommended for my 254 blade). Try a quad if you have chance, I love it! 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Ric_Flair said:

Sounds similar to what I experience on an ellipse, albeit its an XS (recommended for my 254 blade). Try a quad if you have chance, I love it! 

 

did you have the same set of steel profiled multiple times or did you get separate blade sets with only one profile on them....and then just switch them in and out to compare?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, noupf said:

did you have the same set of steel profiled multiple times or did you get separate blade sets with only one profile on them....and then just switch them in and out to compare?

Separate. I will still experiment every now and then with the ellipse, might even go down an ellipse size or two (to XXS or even XXXS) as some people seem to experience that the 2-sized smaller ellipse is similar to the Quad (that is two sizes larger). So, a Quad 0 is similar to ellipse XXS, for example. Some people say two sizes down, some say 1... I haven't ran that "test" yet.

I've several different sets of blades, but must say for me, the stock "power profile" which is a Quad XS for my blades, I really like! 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, noupf said:

I am on my first ever profiled set of blades ( 288 step steel ) and I went with the ellipse 1.  I absolutely love everything about the profile except that the front 1/3 of the blade feels "long".  Meaning, when I want to get up onto my toes to dig in, crossover and accelerate, the blade just feels a little too big in its radius ( the "long" feeling ). and I really have to concentrate or try too hard to utilize the toe for quick acceleration.

That's the same problem I had with the Ellipse and Zuperior profile. I tried a lot of profiles for my 254mm runners(Ellipse Zero, Ellipse XS, Quad Zero, Zuperior XS and Quad XS) with my two sets of runners. I don´t like the toe area of the Ellipse and Zuperior profile. Finally it seems that I'm going to stay with the Quad XS for the next time. And with the Quad XS(recommended for 254mm) I could go to the recommended ROH 19mm(3/4"). Before the change I was using a 92/75 FBV(9/16" ROH) with my 11' single profile. Prosharp recommends a 25mm(1") ROH for the  Quad I and the Quad I for 288mm runners.

I´m happy with the agility and acceleration of the Quad XS.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, hockeydad3 said:

That's the same problem I had with the Ellipse and Zuperior profile. I tried a lot of profiles for my 254mm runners(Ellipse Zero, Ellipse XS, Quad Zero, Zuperior XS and Quad XS) with my two sets of runners. I don´t like the toe area of the Ellipse and Zuperior profile. Finally it seems that I'm going to stay with the Quad XS for the next time. And with the Quad XS(recommended for 254mm) I could go to the recommended ROH 19mm(3/4"). Before the change I was using a 92/75 FBV(9/16" ROH) with my 11' single profile. Prosharp recommends a 25mm(1") ROH for the  Quad I and the Quad I for 288mm runners.

I´m happy with the agility and acceleration of the Quad XS.

yea, that's why i'd like to see a quad 1 profiled blade ( or the profile template ) on top of an ellipse 1 profiled blade ( or template ) to see if the toe is closer to where i'd like it to be.  I'm on a 3/4 ROH now with the ellpise 1 and am completely fine with that sharpening.  I love it all.....just not quite in love with the toe area radius.

Edited by noupf

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I tried to compare two different runners. It´s almost impossible to see a big difference. But you can feel a big difference while skating.

Compared to the Ellipse, the toe area of the Quad is more like a short traditional single radius profile.

Share this post


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

I tried to compare two different runners. It´s almost impossible to see a big difference. But you can feel a big difference while skating.

Compared to the Ellipse, the toe area of the Quad is more like a short traditional single radius profile.

Yes, easier to get up on the toes with the Quad I think. Try Ellipse a few sizes down from the recommendation, see if that helps? I will try that at some point. But still just want to get completely dialed inn to the Quad right now... love it!

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/24/2021 at 2:03 PM, noupf said:

yea, that's why i'd like to see a quad 1 profiled blade ( or the profile template ) on top of an ellipse 1 profiled blade ( or template ) to see if the toe is closer to where i'd like it to be.  I'm on a 3/4 ROH now with the ellpise 1 and am completely fine with that sharpening.  I love it all.....just not quite in love with the toe area radius.

The Problem with the Elipse Profiles is that you can not control the radius in a specific spot on the blade. An elipse as defined by Math is nothing more than an A - B (major - minor) radius to get your shape. So the radius is continuously changing to make it smooth (no transition points like the quad),   but you can not control what you want at different points along the runner.   That's why many dislike the elipse.     What you want is the "OMNI Quad's" from Blackstone. It takes the Quad 0, 0.5, 1, II  and makes them continuously variable (like an elipse) to be super smooth, but better! And you know what the radii are along the blade!  Let me find a picture to help explain... 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Paluce said:

The Problem with the Elipse Profiles is that you can not control the radius in a specific spot on the blade. An elipse as defined by Math is nothing more than an A - B (major - minor) radius to get your shape. So the radius is continuously changing to make it smooth (no transition points like the quad),   but you can not control what you want at different points along the runner.   That's why many dislike the elipse.     What you want is the "OMNI Quad's" from Blackstone. It takes the Quad 0, 0.5, 1, II  and makes them continuously variable (like an elipse) to be super smooth, but better! And you know what the radii are along the blade!  Let me find a picture to help explain... 

Yup, i completely understand what you are saying about the radius continually changing on the ellipse profiles.  I think I found the pic you are referring to in one of your other posts.  It makes sense, the more defined transition zones you have, the more seamless the transitions.......plus you actually know what radius is being used in each area of the blade. 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, noupf said:

Yup, i completely understand what you are saying about the radius continually changing on the ellipse profiles.  I think I found the pic you are referring to in one of your other posts.  It makes sense, the more defined transition zones you have, the more seamless the transitions.......plus you actually know what radius is being used in each area of the blade. 

 

 

Here's a good pic on my FB page

https://www.facebook.com/LaSalleSkateShop

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Problem solved, we are soon going to have Quad Ellipses!!!!  Smooth transitions between different size ellipses along the blade...  then people will be more confused than they are now! 

  • Haha 1

Share this post


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

Problem solved, we are soon going to have Quad Ellipses!!!!  Smooth transitions between different size ellipses along the blade...  then people will be more confused than they are now! 

^^^ now that was the funniest thing I’ve read all day! 🙂    But no, for others reading this, that’s not how it works.  

Edited by Paluce

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Went from quad 0 to zuperior small

Then tried ellipse 1 and zero

Ellipse zero is by far the best profile ive tried. You can feel the elliptical profiling when turning. Its not even close in my opinion. Ultrasonic size 7 263 mm. Im getting true customs in a few weeks and Ill see how the profile responds to the higher pitched holder. But so far ellipse zero is it. Dont even try ellipse 1 imo it feels like a turning a barge

Edited by Ellipsing

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Ellipsing said:

Went from quad 0 to zuperior small

Then tried ellipse 1 and zero

Ellipse zero is by far the best profile ive tried. You can feel the elliptical profiling when turning. Its not even close in my opinion. Ultrasonic size 7 263 mm. Im getting true customs in a few weeks and Ill see how the profile respomds to the higher pitched holder. But so far ellipse zero is it. Dont even try ellipse 1 imo it feels like a turning a barge

This makes sense Ellipse 1 is recommend for size 9-10.  Ellipse Zero is recommended for size 7-8.

  • Like 2

Share this post


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

This makes sense Ellipse 1 is recommend for size 9-10.  Ellipse Zero is recommended for size 7-8.

 

2 hours ago, Ellipsing said:

Went from quad 0 to zuperior small

Then tried ellipse 1 and zero

Ellipse zero is by far the best profile ive tried. You can feel the elliptical profiling when turning. Its not even close in my opinion. Ultrasonic size 7 263 mm. Im getting true customs in a few weeks and Ill see how the profile responds to the higher pitched holder. But so far ellipse zero is it. Dont even try ellipse 1 imo it feels like a turning a barge

Yea, i liked ellipse zero on 263s. Recently went down a size in skates and so am on 254s. Tried ellipse xs (recommended for 254 runners) and yea, ok liked it. But have really liked the quad xs (the stock power profiles for 254s actually, which is a quad xs). For me that’s the winner. As many have said here, there’s something not aggressive enough about the toe of the ellipse… but I’ll try them again tomorrow morning, just for a giggle… I’ll be back 

  • Like 1

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...