on to rocker chassis . . .

[gwood1]

At the risk of being called a dork by Gary, here's my second topic.
First everything I could find about the bauer rocker chassis:
I really encourage you to check out excellent though biased discussion at www.smarthocky.com, too lengthy to duplicate here. I believe they must have sold their tech to Bauer.
Then here are some comments of users:
"Well they certainly feel more manoeuvrable or at least less stable. I planted first time I wore them. My recommendation for your first skate is to keep the rocker mechanism tight and then loosen it later to arrive at a setting you feel comfortable on. They?re slightly noisy on pavements as the rocker system clatters, but otherwise it's a quiet ride.
I definitely think they make crossovers easier and smoother and turning did feel a little more natural. I?m still not 100% confident on them so hockey stops are still a little unreliable but when I pulled them off correctly the skates stick well to the floor and you stop fast."
" I was so disappointed with them. The rocker chassis feels much longer than a regular chassis, and as a result my turning circle was huge compared to my RH5000, stopping therefore was also very poor. The actual "rockering" of the chassis aswell was a truly terrible experience. It works sure, when you're crusing and leanning back you're going on the rear 3wheels, but when u lean forward to accelerate, you skate on the front 3 wheels. This would be fine, except the front wheel is going slower than the rear wheels and so it feels as like skating through glue, the wheel slows you down when you make contact with the ground which feels absolutely awful. . . . Saying that, I know at least one other person who has been wearing Vapor8s for the last year, and he's had no problems that I'm aware of. . . .TRY BEFORE YOU BUY! Some people may love them, but these skates are very different."
"from Michigan, on 09/19/01, rates this: (5 stars)
I'm very pleased with the roller blades. Smooth skating; great control. Love the rocker technology.

"Jay from Rocky River, OH, on 06/02/01, rates this: (4 stars)
These skates are amazing. They simulate the feel of an Ice hockey skate perfectly. They are also extremely light, and fairly inexpensive. The bearings are decent, but I put my own abec 7s in there.

"A customer from aldergrove,B.C., on 03/10/02, rates this:
These are good blades worth the money and once you get them broken in, they're awesome. You'll never regret getting these. They simulate riding in ice skates perfectly.

(I think these comments I actually pulled off this site

"Just have to make a quick point. I use the Rocker chasis and I actually like it.. It is slower than the Hi-Lo but as an ice hockey player also the transition is seamless. I can go from ice to roller and back and not have a problem adjusting to either.

SO - I play ice (on a 9' radius Bauer) and inline, a seamless transition sounds great. However, having another moving part - that fulcrum in the middle - sounds like trouble. And a comment one of you made here - that a tight turning radius has as much to do with not slipping out (ie 4 wheels in contact is GOOD) as shortening the wheelbase - makes sense. Ditto for 4 wheels for your push off.
So what is the deal? Should I give up on the ice-inline similarity and just accept some re-adjustment as some of you have said? Who is Gard Mayer? Why did kamikaze pilots wear helmets? If you have skated a rocker and conventional chassis, please tell me your thoughts. Bonus points if you have skated ice too. thanks

[DannyG]

I have skated ice (bauers), the Bauer/Tuuk inline rocker chassis (borrowed Skylier's), my old Rollerblade Lightning 608's, both straightline, and rockered, Mission hi-lo's, both with the Mission chassis, and the Suregrip wedge 76/72 hilo chassis, and now, my Stubbies.

We all know that Stubbies rule, but I will make a point regarding rockering, anyway. This might sound like Mike's physics, but I am very simple about this:

The father/son coaching team at Harvard wrote a book some years back, and they made a flat statement about skating technique that has stuck with me: "...ankle flexion determines skating ability. The most flexion, wins..." I have found this is true.

We have all seen kids we envied, who seem to have "floppy legs and ankles," they are so flexible in their skating.

Over the past few years, I have deliberately worked on my own skating technique, exaggerating the bending of my ankles while doing so. As you deliberately bend at the ankles more, the knees and hips come into play automatically, bending more themselves. You lower the center of gravity/balance, your agility, manueverability, etc., all improve.

At one time, back in the mid-nineties, I would actually advise aspiring young inline skaters that they should rocker their chassis, it would improve their skating. Of course, at the time, I was guilty of assuming that the components of ice skating technique, adapted to inline, were the only way to get to be the best.

Frankly (and here comes my pseudo 'physics') the fact that the ice skate must dig into the ice to generate a push, and the inline skate need not, produces a whole different skating technique. We note that uninitiated ice skaters "tromp" on the floor upon their first contact with wheels, we say they are "frankenskaters." Mike highlights that the toe-push is hyper-exaggerated in high-level inline technique, compared to ice.

Other contributors have added other insights. My point in summarizing all this, is that the rocker concept is largely useless with inline skating, and rather unnecessary.

You will do fine just working on your skating style, and observing high-level skaters, paying particular attention to both ankle flexion and toe-push techniques.

Don't even worry about rockered chassis components.

<font color=purple>DannyG</font color=purple>

[chrisg21]

Allright, Now I will give you my take on the Rockers. I believe the Rockers do exactly as advertised, they give you the abilty to turn sharper (more manueverable), and I believe you can also accelerate quicker, than with a flat chassis. The reason for the quicker turning radius is because of the fct that when you lean into a turn, your wheelbase length is shortened by virtue of only 3 of the 4 wheels being in contact with the floor. It stands to reason that a skate with a shorter wheelbase length would out manuever a skate with a longer length. However that manueverability does come with a price, that being stability. Having less contact area with the skating surface means the skater has less to balance on, and at high speeds the Rocker can definately get squirrely. It is not something unmanageable, but if the skater is a of lesser experience I believe it could be un-nerving.

I also believe you can get better acceleration, by virtue of the additional "snap" length of your toes that the Rocker affords. My opinion has no scientific backing, but it does feel as though you are able to get farther onto the balls, and toes of your foot allowing a better push off. That's pure seat of the pants though, I have no hard data to verify that.

The Rocker is not for everyone, personally I would not use anything else, and I have tried just about every frame, from flat to Hi-Lo, to V-Form, to Big Wheel, and for me the Rocker just has to many advantages to go back to flat technology. They can get squirelly at times, but it is manageable. What it comes down to is preference, I guess, and for me the manueverability gained outweighs the stability at top speed.....

Chris

[chrisg21]

Danny,

Just so you know my post below yours was not in answer to yours, since we both posted at the same time ( iwas answering the initial post). Just didn't want you to think that. Your post makes good sense, and I can agree with alot of it, however for me, I still believe I am recieving benefits from the rocker. Though your point about ankle flexion is definately valid.

Chris

[MDE3]

Like I could resist...........lol

Well nothing much to add except that the fastest skaters I know who are also extremely agile in lateral movement do not use rocker chassis. If the chassis brings more players from ice because the feel is similar - that's just fine and in that sense it serves a good purpose. As far as it's pure function compared to straight hi/lo or other non rockered chassis there are countless reasons enumerated as to why one may be better than the other. And truly it comes down to what you feel most comfortable playing in - to state the obvious. If I was starting to play serious Inline Hockey and trying to make a decision as to which skate to go with, the only evidence I would look at is what the best skaters at the highest levels are wearing and ask them why.

My son, who plays Inline Hockey at the Pro level and who also played ice, gave up on the rockers after one lap - but he was a roller hockey player first and ice hockey second.

The other reason he doesn't like them is because of his &quot;footwork&quot; with the puck. He kicks the puck forward or &quot;passes&quot; the puck often with his feet. With a rockered chassis he feels strongly that the external rocker frame edges will tend to make his &quot;foot control' of the puck eratic - given the vertical ridges not found on the side of a straight hi/lo or other non rockered chassis.

The toe push argument favoring the rocker chassis is more true if you are converting from ice. Good properly instructed inline hockey players also use a &quot;toe snap&quot; when they skate (yes even with non rockered chassis) but the technique is slightly different from ice making the adaptation from one to the other a little more difficult.

Ultimately it boils down to this: do you want to play at the highest level and compete with the best - thereby requiring you learn the subtle (or not) differences between the best skating techniques in ice and inline? Or do you just want to play rec inline hockey for exercise where you look at ice hockey as your primary sport? In the latter case the rocker chassis is probably your best choice - because it requires the least change in technique, and allows you to feel comfortable switching back and forth. If you want maximum performance and are willing to learn the techniques, then the hi/lo chassis is probably the best choice.

[rlrhky13]

I skate at the pro level with your son actually and I use a rocker chasis.. I converted from a hi-lo and skate just as fast.. Its all about wheel set-up. After experimenting with a few different set-ups and speaking at length with Gard Mayer the inventor of the rocker, we came to a conclusion of a whell set up that gave me the speed that I had with my hi-lo's. I play both ice and roller and have to switch back and forth alot and it has made a huge difference in my ability to do so.. So theres my 2 centsa I really think its preference over anything else.. Although the rocker definately feels lighter than the hi-lo I had but its also carbon fiber so thats probably why..

[MDE3]

well I agree that it's preference first and am quite prepared to be corrected - can only go on what I see.

[rlrhky13]

Agreed... When I first started to use it it was definately slower, but as I worked with Gard we had come up with a solution and adjusted to chasis so it is exactly ( or as close as possible ) to my ice skates.. But again I agree it is definately a preference thing...

[MDE3]

Well as I said - when swithcing back and forth it is certainly seems to have a more consistant feel from what I've heard. I wont even get into the "2 degree" Nexed stuff lol.