I like the 0.5 Quad profile, but want more balance

[Peter Pin 10]

Hey all,

So I had my skates profiled to 0.5 last falls. 8-10-12-14 on 280mm step blacksteel on CCM Ribcor.

I like the profile. But during the holidays I went several time at my local outdoor hockey rink to play with the kids, and I used my old Reebok 4Ks because I didn't want to break/damage the blades on my Ribcor.

It made my realize that I have a lot more balance and I feel more solid and dialed to the ice with the Ribcor.  (which are 288mm normal Proformance blade, which doesn't have a lot of steel left on it, never been profiled).

With the Quad 0.5, I feel it's easier to feel I'm gone fall on my toes or my heels. Yes it's more agile for quick turns but I think I'd rather more balance. I feel I need more steel on ice.

So, do you think I should try the Quad 2 (7-10-13-16) or they also offer another profile which is (6-9-11-26.) Or should I look for a dual 8-12 or 9-13. Or something else.

The thing is, the only place that does quad locally is close of Montreal and  is 3h away from my home so the total cost is high (two way shipment + cost of profilinf)... cost about $80 all inc. So I don't want to enter the hit or miss game.

thanks

 

Edited February 6, 2022 by Peter Pin

[hockeydad3 51]

How do you sharpen your skates? Freehand ore machine? If freehand it could be that they lost the profile and have a banana rocker right now. 

[Peter Pin 10]

3 hours ago, hockeydad3 said:

How do you sharpen your skates? Freehand ore machine? If freehand it could be that they lost the profile and have a banana rocker right now. 

Had the skates sharpened 3-4 times so far with the Quad 0.5 on it.

Good old Blademaster machine each time. 9/16 - 5/8 ROH. Sharpened by experienced people each time. Yeah I thought it could be sharpening related, but honestly the 0.5 profile doesn't feel  much different than what it felt when it was freshly profiled/sharpened by Elite Performance. Maybe I should try something more shallow, as most Quad people use something like 3/4 - 1''?

[hockeydad3 51]

You should compare your skates in the same situation at the same time. If the holder/steel combination of the Ribcores gives you less height over the ice this can explain the difference in stability. 

[Peter Pin 10]

1 hour ago, hockeydad3 said:

You should compare your skates in the same situation at the same time. If the holder/steel combination of the Ribcores gives you less height over the ice this can explain the difference in stability. 

I feel the Ribcores give me more height as there is more blade height vs the old Reeboks.

But 100% agreed I should bring both pairs next time so same temp, ice quality, etc... to compare. 

[Paluce 24]

First thing is to compare both skates on the same ice surface like hockeydad3 said.  outdoor ice is very different.   

Other than the steel height difference that was mentioned, Also get your old skate profile measured.   who knows what is on there???  That's an important piece of info.  After many sharpenings,  your old blades could have gone very banana'd, and/or flat in the middle with banana'd ends.      If you find a flat center section,  maybe you prefer a center glide profile?   Quads are heal glide.   Example of an old popular center glide profile is the old MAX Edge 981,  or a CAG Profile that have a flat glide area in the middle of the blade.   I still profile some players with that 981, although the Quads (OMNI Quads that I use) are becoming much more popular. But it is all personal Preference.  The 981 has lots of blade contact but you need to be an elite skater to know how to use the various area's of the blade to turn or use the all out speed it can offer in the middle of the blade. Hence why the Quads / OMNI QUADS and elipse profiles are easier to skate on. 

Lastly,  measure the steel height at the front and back of each pair of skates to get an idea of the pitch you have on each pair. essentially you are measuring how much less steel you have on the front vs the rear.  you might be pitch forward more on the Quad 0.5 that you are on your old pair, and that's the root cause of what you are feeling.

I'm giving you a lot of info here, sometimes brining in both skates to a pro and asking these questions can help. When I profile skates for someone, I always ask to see the old blades so I can measure them. Even if I'm doing mail order Profiling, I ask for a high res image of the old steel for analysis. 

 

Young ones adapt so quickly to new Profiles.  Sometimes the smallest change really messes up us old guys 😉  

 

[Peter Pin 10]

On 2/8/2022 at 3:24 PM, Paluce said:

First thing is to compare both skates on the same ice surface like hockeydad3 said.  outdoor ice is very different.   

Other than the steel height difference that was mentioned, Also get your old skate profile measured.   who knows what is on there???  That's an important piece of info.  After many sharpenings,  your old blades could have gone very banana'd, and/or flat in the middle with banana'd ends.      If you find a flat center section,  maybe you prefer a center glide profile?   Quads are heal glide.   Example of an old popular center glide profile is the old MAX Edge 981,  or a CAG Profile that have a flat glide area in the middle of the blade.   I still profile some players with that 981, although the Quads (OMNI Quads that I use) are becoming much more popular. But it is all personal Preference.  The 981 has lots of blade contact but you need to be an elite skater to know how to use the various area's of the blade to turn or use the all out speed it can offer in the middle of the blade. Hence why the Quads / OMNI QUADS and elipse profiles are easier to skate on. 

Lastly,  measure the steel height at the front and back of each pair of skates to get an idea of the pitch you have on each pair. essentially you are measuring how much less steel you have on the front vs the rear.  you might be pitch forward more on the Quad 0.5 that you are on your old pair, and that's the root cause of what you are feeling.

I'm giving you a lot of info here, sometimes brining in both skates to a pro and asking these questions can help. When I profile skates for someone, I always ask to see the old blades so I can measure them. Even if I'm doing mail order Profiling, I ask for a high res image of the old steel for analysis. 

 

Young ones adapt so quickly to new Profiles.  Sometimes the smallest change really messes up us old guys 😉  

 

You are right. It’s hard for olds like us to adapt. And  I should bring the old Reeboks  at a shop to ask them to verify what is the « profile ». 
i measured the blade in front mid and rear. It’s mostly equivalent all the way. Doesn’t look there is any pitch as the rear portion and front are identical. 

as far as CAG one, i tried cag 35/65 neutral before the 9’ rocker and quad 0.5. I’m not sure I liked cag. Well I’m more comfortable on the quad. I feel I have more grip and easier to find the edges with the quad. 

Today i went at my local outdoor rink just before the Super Bowl so my son and I had  the whole ice for us. I tried the Ribcore (the one with quad) and had them sharpened at 3/4 ROH yesterday. They felt better than 5/8. Less tracking and digging in ice. 
 I still feel like I’m too light on my feet and not dialed to ice. well not as much as I am with the old 4Ks. 
 

Beer leagues restart this week here in quebec after Xmas lockdown so I’ll have two games this wee to experiment things. 

 

 

[hockeydad3 51]

I guess it's the height difference. 

Prosharp recommends a 25mm(1") hollow for the Quad 1 profile (size 9-10). For my Quad XS profile (size 6.5) is a recommendation for a 19mm(3/4 ") hollow. I'm now on 22mm(7/8") because I'm a heavy guy. 

[Peter Pin 10]

4 hours ago, hockeydad3 said:

I guess it's the height difference. 

Prosharp recommends a 25mm(1") hollow for the Quad 1 profile (size 9-10). For my Quad XS profile (size 6.5) is a recommendation for a 19mm(3/4 ") hollow. I'm now on 22mm(7/8") because I'm a heavy guy. 

So you mean since my blade height on the newer skates is way more higher, (I measured about 4-5mm more on the CCM than on the old 4Ks) then it would make me feel less balanced and hooked to ice?

No matter the blade profile?

[hockeydad3 51]

I have two sets of runners with the same profile, but different heights due to profiling experiments. Huge difference towards stability. 

[Peter Pin 10]

5 hours ago, hockeydad3 said:

I have two sets of runners with the same profile, but different heights due to profiling experiments. Huge difference towards stability. 

Makes sense.

[Paluce 24]

There are tons of NHL players that still use LS2 steal height. Or whatever steel they use they get ground down.

[Peter Pin 10]

I may just send the stock runners that came with the Ribcore (XS 1) to have them quad 1 or something and ask them to remove 3mm or so of it while profiling.

Cause the Steps black I bought them after the skates.

 

[stick9 896]

3 hours ago, Peter Pin said:

I may just send the stock runners that came with the Ribcore (XS 1) to have them quad 1 or something and ask them to remove 3mm or so of it while profiling.

Cause the Steps black I bought them after the skates.

 

IMO, change your profile to accommodate the added height. Taking 3-4mm off of brand new steel seems wasteful.

[Peter Pin 10]

58 minutes ago, stick9 said:

IMO, change your profile to accommodate the added height. Taking 3-4mm off of brand new steel seems wasteful.

3mm may be a little overkill. And yeah best case scenario is to find a profile that will offset the added height and help me retrieve the right balance.

But since I tried 3 different profiles so far without being totally satisfied, I could end asking the shop to grind off a little more than usually.

[Peter Pin 10]

As a follow up.
I had my stock Speed Blade XS blades that came with the CCM Ribcores with a quad 2 profile (originally made a typo and wrote quad 1)  3/4 ROH, and asked the shop to remove about 1.5mm of the blade height. (remember the Steps Black were on quad 0.5 - 3/4)

So I compared the net height of the XS vs Steps. the XS sits about 2mm lower than the Steps.  Can't wait to try it and compare.

I didn't have a chance to ask a shop to measure de radius on my old Reeboks but will do when I have the time.

 

Edited February 28, 2022 by Peter Pin

[218hockey 50]

On 2/8/2022 at 2:24 PM, Paluce said:

Also get your old skate profile measured.  

 

How would you do that? I've asked about that here and at the store that has the Prosharp profiler and never got any real answers. Also, there wouldn't be anything to really measure on a blade that's been sharpened by hand ten or twenty times.

[Paluce 24]

The easiest way is to place your steel against a variety of different known profile bars. And see which matches. At the NHL Level Different equipment managers may use different methods. Laser measurement, or touch probe CMM or something as simple as various sizes of drillbits placed along the bottom of the Skate Blade To measure the height change along the front and back of the rocker. While the third method is pretty crude it also works. Cad data is very helpful when using one of these three methods witch is only available through your equipment manufacturers people. Unless you want to do a lot of math yourself. Pro shops should be able to butt up your blades against Shaper bars/profile bars as my image above shows. Hope that helps.

[Peter Pin 10]

Other update.

Went to try Quad II (edited) 3/4 ROH at my outdoor local hockey rink today (no hockey game at beer league this week)

Was sunny outside and not too cold (-7C) so ice was on the soft side. Well softer than the ice I usually play at beer league.

But I immediately felt a better balance. Felt more "heavy" and solid on my feet vs the taller blades on Quad 0.5. Is it due to profiling and/or the reduced height of runners?

However the overall acceleration/grip felt similar. But on that ice quality/condition it's hard to tell.

I'll be able to better judge and do a more thorough review after a legit hockey game next Friday.

I may go to at a free skating (indoor rink) Tuesday night also and bring both pair of blades (Quad 0.5 3/4ROH on Steps Black and Quad II - 3/4 on stock speedblade XS1) and make a more decent comparison in same ice conditions.

Edited February 28, 2022 by Peter Pin

[VegasHockey 1283]

6 hours ago, Peter Pin said:

Other update.

Went to try Quad II (edited) 3/4 ROH at my outdoor local hockey rink today (no hockey game at beer league this week)

Was sunny outside and not too cold (-7C) so ice was on the soft side. Well softer than the ice I usually play at beer league.

But I immediately felt a better balance. Felt more "heavy" and solid on my feet vs the taller blades on Quad 0.5. Is it due to profiling and/or the reduced height of runners?

However the overall acceleration/grip felt similar. But on that ice quality/condition it's hard to tell.

I'll be able to better judge and do a more thorough review after a legit hockey game next Friday.

I may go to at a free skating (indoor rink) Tuesday night also and bring both pair of blades (Quad 0.5 3/4ROH on Steps Black and Quad II - 3/4 on stock speedblade XS1) and make a more decent comparison in same ice conditions.

I find players who like a more neutral balance prefer the Quad 0.5, and those that prefer a more "knees over toes" "forward pitch" choose the Quad 0, Quad 1, and Quad 2. However, any profile can be adjusted to have the pitch added/removed and the balance point adjusted. I am only referring to templates as they come "out of the box."

[Peter Pin 10]

I only did a 30 min skate yesterday with the quad 2 but I kind of agree it felt a tad more forward pitched with the Quad2 than the 0.5. Which I liked.

Probably because of the higher radiuses on rear portions of runners, right?

6 hours ago, PBH said:

I find players who like a more neutral balance prefer the Quad 0.5, and those that prefer a more "knees over toes" "forward pitch" choose the Quad 0, Quad 1, and Quad 2. However, any profile can be adjusted to have the pitch added/removed and the balance point adjusted. I am only referring to templates as they come "out of the box."

 

[Paluce 24]

4 minutes ago, Peter Pin said:

I only did a 30 min skate yesterday with the quad 2 but I kind of agree it felt a tad more forward pitched with the Quad2 than the 0.5. Which I liked.

Probably because of the higher radiuses on rear portions of runners, right?

 

Yes, and the 7ft toe on the 2, vs 8ft toe on the Quad 0.5

 

When I profile, I always measure steel height with a micrometer or a set of calipers to check how much less steel height is on the toe vs the heal. I can always set pitch between profiles to match if this difference is kept constant. You never know how the steel was placed into the holder. Depending on how the steel was put into the holder/machine, your going to get a different end result. This should be checked at the end and recorded. But… I am extremely precise when I profile and sharpen. People always have issues when they get new steel or new skates. This is a full proof solution. 

[Peter Pin 10]

yeah

4 hours ago, Paluce said:

Yes, and the 7ft toe on the 2, vs 8ft toe on the Quad 0.5

 

When I profile, I always measure steel height with a micrometer or a set of calipers to check how much less steel height is on the toe vs the heal. I can always set pitch between profiles to match if this difference is kept constant. You never know how the steel was placed into the holder. Depending on how the steel was put into the holder/machine, your going to get a different end result. This should be checked at the end and recorded. But… I am extremely precise when I profile and sharpen. People always have issues when they get new steel or new skates. This is a full proof solution. 

Yeah, before buying the Ribcores, I honestly didn't suspect the long journey it would bring me to. Before that I never heard of skate profiling, forward pitch, and stuff like this.

I just knew about ROH sharpening, period. If I ever find the right profiling/pitch/sharpening combination that suits my tastes, I'll have the blades "measured" or recorded or whatsoever.

because one day I'll need to buy new skates again.

 

 

[Peter Pin 10]

Well just back from the free skate session at the local indoor rink.

To be able to compare two sets of runners during the same session on same ice was very interesting and educational. I would recommend it to anyone that wants to live the true skake profiling experience.It the best way to appreciate profiled blades.

Quad II (7-10-13-16) on XS1   vs Quad 0.5 (8-10-12-14) on steps black, both at 3/4 ROH 280mm runners. The Quad 0.5 with a little taller blades (about 2mm higher)

- well the biggest difference I was able to feel is mobility/agility. The turns were way more easy to engage with the Quad II. Apply little weight on outside skate and it turned much easier that Quad 0.5.

- Other difference is glide. I felt more fast (top speed) and less fatigue with the quad II.

-Acceleration and power were similar.

- Braking was more controlled with the quad 0.5. Don't know why. The grip while hard stopping was just better.

-As far as balance, similar as well. Maybe a tinny bit more "balanced" with the 0.5. Hard to tell... I never felt I was going to fall or loose edge with the 0.5. But with the Quad II, since they are fast and the glide is better, sometimes I had the impression i was going to fall. But I didn't.

The 0.5 overall felt more conventional in a way. Like more similar to the non-profiled skates I used to have in the past. THe quad II felt more profiled and "refined".

Overall, this experience made me realize you just got to trust the blades/edge and full send it on the ice. 

BTW I swapped the runners 6 times during the 50 minutes session. The XS holders were flawless and blades easy to swap.

Currently the Quad II is winner for me. But maybe 3/4 is too shallow for me. I will try 5/8 or 9/16 next time I think.

[hockeydad3 51]

Give yourself some time to adjust to the 3/4" hollow. If you really can't manage it go down to 11/16". This was the right way for me. Now I'm on 7/8" and I love the glide, but the bite is still sufficient for me.