Nike skates

[pid95]

anyone got any info on the nike Hi-Ho silvers or roller daddy's? i've got mission D3's after having proto vs's for 3 years, and it's a bit of a step down. looking for either a top-of-the-line or next-one-down-skate, probably not missions, don't like the dna lacing, i've heard tours can be a bit unsupportive round the ankles and that the bauers this year are just bad. so was wondering about nike. any info much appreciated.

[urukhai74]

I bought a pair of Roller Daddys and ended up returning them. They felt great everywhere except on the soles, the arch support was way too far back for my foot. It cut into my heel, no way I was going to wear those skates.

I am or was a Tour guy, but they screwed their skates up yet again. They took out an eyelet and that reduced the support around the ankle and then of course the stupid Humer chassiss. I bought a pair of the Redmaxes, only to return them because of several reasons.

#1. The tongue of the skate was wafer thin, although someone said that they have fixed that now. Who knows!

#2. The Humer chassiss is way too big and long, especially for a defensmen. There is a reason speed skaters have longer chassis and larger wheels...SPEED. The turning and transitions were terrible. Felt like being on tractor wheels.

#3. The Redmax boot was way to soft for my size. It already had very little support from the lack of eyelets and boot, but the stiffness factor was way under 4 at a 3.5 stiffness.
I am 210 lbs.

The Bauers and CCMs new line of skates are starting to show some promise, I am leaning toward the CCM but I am going to wait until I can put my foot in the CCM first.

Mission = very poor quality, they come apart too easy and these new Heliums seem to be no different + that DNA lace system looks like a Fitness skate setup and I could not get them tight, but Missions boots are too narrow for my foot anyway.

The Bauers are not bad really, just ugly as Hell!! ;-)

[MDE3]

First to say the 2004 Nike HiHo's were one of the most comfortable skates my son has ever worn right out of the box. The chassis was run of the mill...no problems with it, but nothing special either. I think Nike has made a few small changes for the 2005 line including putting a 78 mm wheel on the rear of the chassis..not sure why..a token "rocker" arrangement maybe. I have heard that they include 2 x 80 mm wheels in the box if you want to go back to the traditional 72/72/80/80 set up.

Counterpont on the Tour skates....

My son has the Beemers and has been using them for about 5 weeks now and loves them...all in what feels right I guess.

As to the "longer chassis": on the size 9 Beemers with the "medium" Hum'er chassis, the axle wheelbase is identical to the size 9 Nexeds we used to have...9.3". On smaller sizes the 80 mm version of the Hum'er chassis will be larger than the normal HiLo's due to the fact that the all 80 mm wheel set up has a minimum spacing which will be larger than a 72/72/80/80 HiLo set up.

He had skated on the Hum'ers for about 3-4 months but they were mounted on Nike HiHo's. He has had no problems with agility with this chassis, once he got used to the feel of the chassis..for him about two to three usages. For him, he loves the gain in speed, turning and stopping grip, as well as the extra acceleration.

One thing we have noticed, and this will depend on how aggressively you skate....the extra leverage this chassis creates on the front wheels during the "push" may require a harder durometer wheel if you are aggressive, so that the wheel does not deflect as much. Going up from an x-soft to a soft or medium durometer may be necessary. When he tried too soft a wheel on his original Hum'ers, he felt like the skate was buckling under him..in fact it was the lead wheel deforming. Because the larger wheels can give you more leverage on the front of the skate, it appears that some skaters can actually deform the softer wheels.

As far as the boot goes...he loves the Beemers..for him one of, if not the most comfortable boots he has ever worn...no problem with the toung either, but he has a later version with more padding ..or so I have been told.

Actually the arch in the Beemers is one of the lowest I have seen in all the skates, but as far as the front to rear location that's personal preference.

The small Hum'er chassis has the mounting plates closer together than the medium..otherwise they are identical. I had to shim the HiHo's in order to mount a "small" Hum'er chassis properly. If I had mounted the chassis with the rear soleplate centered on the heel, it would have moved the whole chassis too far to the rear. But when I moved it forward, to where the wheels were now centered front to rear, the leading edge of the rear sole plate would have dug into the arch of the skate. That is one reason why I made a special shim for the skate. I really should have selected a medium chassis for the size 8 Nike's..which are almost perfectly a size 9 with most other brands. Maybe this is what happened on your Red Max's?

He wants to try the Blue Max next to see what the difference is...he has borrowed a pair from a friend to try for a while so we will see which he prefers.

[pid95]

thanks guys. MDE3, how long did your son use the HiHo's before he went on to the Beemers? were there any issues with them?

[MDE3]

He used them "stock" for 4 months +/- and then converted them to the Hum'er chassis in july and wore them part way through Oct. of this year. About 7 months total..no issues, except that he wore the sides pretty thin on both sides of the wide portion of the skate. This of course is as much to do with skating style and how aggressive you are as a skater, as anything else. We(I say "we" because my pocketbook is still involved) like the Beemers better in this area because they have plastic guards to help protect against this type of wear.

But the HiHo's were a good skate for him, although he does prefer the Hum'er chassis...again personal preference. He feels he has better overall acceleration and stopping with the Hum'ers, probably top speed as well, but that is less important in hockey. Lateral agility has not been an issue for him with the Hum'ers. LOL in fact watching John Pinheiro this past weekend playing in XIHL for Ct. Thunder, I would not say "agility" was much of an issue for him either....he was wearing Beemers too.

Those HiHo's are still in "active combat" and doing fine...a fellow Werewolve is now using them in XIHL.

[urukhai74]

Yeah, I would like a pair of BEEMERS, but my pocket book won't comply! ;-) Skates are funny things, everyones foot is different and their tastes in stiffness as well. I prefer a real stiff boot, it helps my skating a lot, while a weak boot...absolutely drives me Crazy!!! I am now looking into the new Bauer 30-70, they look somewhat promising. I wish CCM would make a EE in their new Roller Hockey boots, but I have not seen any. I would like to try the Bluemax, but $329.00 is still a little more than I want to spend...but I don't know why I even mention Tour, I hate the Humer Chassis!!! Skating on it for two 3 hour pick up sessions, did not convince me of anything other than a straight line speed increase...transitions and quick turns and stops were brutal, the boot was very weak and the chassis combined with the taller wheels and my weight and skating style, made it unbearable for me. I am in need of a new pair of Inlines soon, my tour 962's are almost 5 years old and I play at least 4 times a week, sometimes more. I will have to try something soon and I think it will be the Bauers.

[wordman8]

Hey,

I just got a pair of Nike Quest 2 with the "ROCKER CHASSIS". The boot is good, but the rocker chassis is unbelievable.

If you don't know anything about the rocker chassis it enables you to do 20% better everything on skates. Ice hockey skates didn't have "rocker" or "radius" technology until 1914. When a student at Princeton implemented it... Princeton won 2 national championships before anyone caught on... then everyone went to it...

Here is the link... Expand your mind.

http://store.yahoo.com/hockeygiant/tuukrkrfrm.html

[MDE3]

Before declaring that you have just discovered that the world is in fact "flat" quite so publically, maybe read up on the discussions that have taken place on the rocker chassis for many years....[img]/wtimages/icons/wink.gif[/img]

I have to chuckle, because about two years ago there was a player who extolled the virtues of the rocker chassis at length on this very board. He sited his contacts among the patent engineer who designed the rocker. He continuously brought up the fact that he was playing in the MLRH as "an elite" player as proof that the rocker chassis worked at even high levels of inline hockey.

What he failed to mention was that he played less than 4 shifts a game, and only as as an "alternate" in maybe three games out of the whole season. He also failed to mention that he was not given much floor time because he was constantly falling in critical situations.....trying to stop and turn with players who were NOT wearing rocker chassis......To this day he may not have made the connection.....

Look..the rocker has a place in inline hockey...it takes less transition to go from ice to inline when using the rocker, and this is a good thing for those who are constantly switching back and forth, and are not as concerned about maximum performance. In fact these players are probably much better off and can adapt to the inline game faster when using the rocker with less change in skating technique required. But (there's always a "but&quot....that does not mean that the rocker is the best chassis for peak performance or for all inline players.....for the reasons stated in my post above.

[wordman8]

Hello MDE3,

You sound extremely intelligent. I think your post is great and I agree with you that you may be right.

If you learned how to skate on a HI-LO or an all-even chassis then you should probably just stick with that.

It is all personal preference.

I however have taken certain undisputed truths from physics and mathematics to help my sports performance in several different sports including Basketball, Soccer, and Hockey.

It is whatever works for you personally, and whatever you are confident about that will give you the edge.

Example: In basketball if you put a higher arc on the ball and it is coming down from a higher point it has a greater mathematical chance to go through the hoop. --- As you increase the angle to 90 Degrees (Directly above the hoop) more of the hoop is visible and open to go in. ----- LESSON: If you shoot line drives you will shoot a lower percentabe than if you put more arc on the ball.

Several professional basketball teams use a computer and video system to measure arc. If the player can shoot at a consistent 45 degree arc he shoots better. It is a fact.

The Dallas Mavericks, who already lead the league in free throw percentage bought the computer, changed the arc of their shots and increased their percentage by 3%. It went from like 75% to 78% or something like that. It is very very hard to get better at shooting when you already shoot better than any team in the NBA. And geometry and math made them better yet.



Try to convince a street ball player about the mathematics of a ball going through a hoop and the geometry, angles and see what kind of reaction you get.

Again, you are probably right about this point. I just know I can pivot and turn much faster. And when I start out, I am pushing forward instead of up.

It may be that the rocker helps the marginally bad player, and an experienced skater it makes no difference.

That is why there are different models and types of chassis.

Let me know any tips you have on other gear or hockey info. I am always willing to learn.

Robert

[MDE3]

Well you are drawing a scientific parellel that is based on a bit of a false assumption....

The limited "bite"(limited in the sense that the whole blade is not in contact with the skating surface) of a rockered ice skate is still sufficient to "hold an edge" while executing various extreme hockey manouvers on ice. However the limited grip of two or even three wheels for a rockered inline skate is NOT sufficient or at least equal to the "bite" you get from all four wheels in contact with the floor. That is where the difference becomes apparent, and your analogy breaks down.

With existing wheel and floor technology up until maybe the last 18 months, even four wheels in contact with the floor was still insufficient to hold grip at full speed in certain situations, but it was still an improvement over two or three wheels.

With some of the newest floors..such as the Exxcess floor from Ice Court, "Skate court" from the same company, plus the latest high grip wheels from Rink Rat, Labeda and Revision etc., it may be possible to approximate the same amount of "bite" on inline skates as you can on ice skates doing the same manouvers(but with 4 wheels touching).

If the coefficient of friction between the wheels and floors eventually gets high enough, it might be possible in the future that the rockered skate will see more penetration into the sport, because two or three wheels in contact with the floor, may then be sufficient to still "maintain an edge" even under extreme conditions.

I am not trying to appear "superior" when I keep mentioning the "elite level" players here, but I do so only because they tend to be more concious of the performance of their equipment than the average player, and keep looking for whatever performance "edge" the latest equipment can offer. What I am saying is that if a rockered skate was truly an advantage at their level, these players would all be skating on them, and singing their praises. The manufacturers would be "throwing" free rockered skates at these guys (again) if they thought they would really take off. It's not lack of awareness or opportunity that has kept them on "four on the floor".