G7 Rebounds

[ilyazhito]

How do G7 rebounds compare to Bauer and Brian's rebounds? AFAIK, Warrior rebounds are longer than Vaughn and EFlex rebounds, but they have historically not been as long as Bauer or Brian's rebounds.

Has this changed with the G7? I'm curious, because I'm trying to figure out what would be a good replacement for my Ultrasonics down the road. 

[dreadlocked1]

I doubt anyone has them yet, but I could be wrong.  Look for G6 reviews it'll probably be comparable. Gotta get their hypercomp in the thigh for maximum pop and I think that's the pro model only?  They could've changed it to regular senior as well.  I don't think it's compared to the ultrasonic but someone more knowledgeable should chime in.  

[ilyazhito]

Trav posted a review of them, but he's the only one who has done so at this point. I'm curious if anyone else has.

I'll take a look at G6 reviews. Maybe there is a way to make Warrior rebounds harder. Until then, Brian's and Bauer are my best options. 

[keeperton]

3 hours ago, dreadlocked1 said:

I doubt anyone has them yet, but I could be wrong.  Look for G6 reviews it'll probably be comparable. Gotta get their hypercomp in the thigh for maximum pop and I think that's the pro model only?  They could've changed it to regular senior as well.  I don't think it's compared to the ultrasonic but someone more knowledgeable should chime in.  

Not sure if it was what they would exactly label as "hypercomp" in the senior model, but I can attest that the senior model of the G6 had a very stiff thigh like it had composite in it.

[DL42]

the g7 has Hypercomp on the knee section now where the g6 was only thigh area.

 

they also made the upper outside with cordura vs synthetic leather 

[coopaloop1234]

18 hours ago, dreadlocked1 said:

I doubt anyone has them yet, but I could be wrong.  Look for G6 reviews it'll probably be comparable. Gotta get their hypercomp in the thigh for maximum pop and I think that's the pro model only?  They could've changed it to regular senior as well.  I don't think it's compared to the ultrasonic but someone more knowledgeable should chime in.  

I'd imagine they're very comparable. Aside from the strapping change up, they looked and felt very close to G6 pads. 

And yea, Pro only has the Hypercomp

18 hours ago, ilyazhito said:

Trav posted a review of them, but he's the only one who has done so at this point. I'm curious if anyone else has.

I'll take a look at G6 reviews. Maybe there is a way to make Warrior rebounds harder. Until then, Brian's and Bauer are my best options. 

Trav's reviews are fucking garbage. Feels like a whole lot of hot air in video form. 

Warrior rebounds are pretty middle of the pack and that was my experience preG6. So I'd imagine they're stronger now. 

15 hours ago, keeperton said:

Not sure if it was what they would exactly label as "hypercomp" in the senior model, but I can attest that the senior model of the G6 had a very stiff thigh like it had composite in it.

G6 E and G6 Pro were wildly different in stiffness. You could flex the senior model pretty easily, Pro was very stiff. Almost Mach stiff. 

1 hour ago, DL42 said:

the g7 has Hypercomp on the knee section now where the g6 was only thigh area.

they also made the upper outside with cordura vs synthetic leather 

Correct. The knee stack has been modified a bit to get a more integrated feel that's become the new range. 

Cam at The hockey shop told me it's similar to Stabiliflex in feel. 

[ilyazhito]

7 hours ago, coopaloop1234 said:

I'd imagine they're very comparable. Aside from the strapping change up, they looked and felt very close to G6 pads. 

And yea, Pro only has the Hypercomp

Trav's reviews are fucking garbage. Feels like a whole lot of hot air in video form. 

Warrior rebounds are pretty middle of the pack and that was my experience preG6. So I'd imagine they're stronger now. 

G6 E and G6 Pro were wildly different in stiffness. You could flex the senior model pretty easily, Pro was very stiff. Almost Mach stiff. 

Correct. The knee stack has been modified a bit to get a more integrated feel that's become the new range. 

Cam at The hockey shop told me it's similar to Stabiliflex in feel. 

Interesting. How does stiffness correlate with rebound strength? Both Vapour and Supreme lines have explosive rebounds, but Supreme is the stiff line and Vapour the softer line. 

[keeperton]

10 hours ago, coopaloop1234 said:

G6 E and G6 Pro were wildly different in stiffness. You could flex the senior model pretty easily, Pro was very stiff. Almost Mach stiff. 

I don't think I dealt with G6 E pads. Maybe I'm hallucinating (which my googling tells me I am), but I thought there was a model between the Pro+ and the E+. Maybe I was dealing with a top end intermediate pad.

3 hours ago, ilyazhito said:

Interesting. How does stiffness correlate with rebound strength? Both Vapour and Supreme lines have explosive rebounds, but Supreme is the stiff line and Vapour the softer line. 

The thing with the Vapor is that it's a springy pad. I don't want to act like I'm huffing all of Bauer's fumes, but they really do have something with the coefficient of restitution technology (the CORtech) that they peddle with the skin and face foams. All that said, the Vapor is still a surprisingly stiff pad if you're used to an old school "soft" definition, because it's springy instead of foldable.

Edited March 28 by keeperton

[ilyazhito]

8 hours ago, keeperton said:

I don't think I dealt with G6 E pads. Maybe I'm hallucinating (which my googling tells me I am), but I thought there was a model between the Pro+ and the E+. Maybe I was dealing with a top end intermediate pad.

The thing with the Vapor is that it's a springy pad. I don't want to act like I'm huffing all of Bauer's fumes, but they really do have something with the coefficient of restitution technology (the CORtech) that they peddle with the skin and face foams. All that said, the Vapor is still a surprisingly stiff pad if you're used to an old school "soft" definition, because it's springy instead of foldable.

Wow. It is crazy how Bauer's skin really makes the rebounds fly. Of course, the construction helps too. I would imagine Warrior pads are closer to a Vapour in construction than to a Supreme, but Warrior doesn't have the CORTech equivalent that can launch rebounds beyond the blue line like a Supreme or Optik pad. 

[ArdeFIN]

It might have something to do with the top foam under the front skin of the pad not being energy absorbing but more so energy rebounding. 

Tried to look for some info on energy return of the modern foams and it seems that they reach 70% or even more. 

Speaking of foams I just refurbished a Vapor 1X blocker that had some 5mm thick foam attached to the back of the front face (Cortech) material. Remains to be seen how good the rebound fly will be with that one. I can compare it to a Reactor 9000 with more standard foam setup. Sure the 1X has Curv too while Reactor has old fashion (replaced) 3mm plastic plate. Curv could be more springy and rebouncing plate from the feel of it. 

[coopaloop1234]

14 hours ago, keeperton said:

I don't think I dealt with G6 E pads. Maybe I'm hallucinating (which my googling tells me I am), but I thought there was a model between the Pro+ and the E+. Maybe I was dealing with a top end intermediate pad.

The thing with the Vapor is that it's a springy pad. I don't want to act like I'm huffing all of Bauer's fumes, but they really do have something with the coefficient of restitution technology (the CORtech) that they peddle with the skin and face foams. All that said, the Vapor is still a surprisingly stiff pad if you're used to an old school "soft" definition, because it's springy instead of foldable.

G6 only has the two senior lines, and one INT and YTH. So you're definitely nuts.  

[DL42]

they are prob thinking about sticks which have 4 lines.  like pro +  pro E+ and E

[UCLALabrat]

I cant imagine the skin does much of anything in terms of rebounds unless it just helps keep the foam tension. Having a hard plate on the surface with softer foam underneath probably drives most of it.

Im sure there are a few other engineering tricks to get more force back into the puck

[ser33]

16 hours ago, ilyazhito said:

Wow. It is crazy how Bauer's skin really makes the rebounds fly. Of course, the construction helps too. I would imagine Warrior pads are closer to a Vapour in construction than to a Supreme, but Warrior doesn't have the CORTech equivalent that can launch rebounds beyond the blue line like a Supreme or Optik pad. 

For some time I had an Opt1k with a Fly core and a Bauer 1S at the same time. and I wouldn’t say that Opt1k is capable of giving a rebound beyond the blue line. Perhaps in new integrations of pads Brians worked in this direction, but knowing the internal structure of Opt1k and 1S and assuming the further development of these lines, I have certain doubts about Brians’ achievements in this direction, which is purely my personal opinion and I could be wrong

[ser33]

14 hours ago, ArdeFIN said:

It might have something to do with the top foam under the front skin of the pad not being energy absorbing but more so energy rebounding. 

Tried to look for some info on energy return of the modern foams and it seems that they reach 70% or even more. 

Speaking of foams I just refurbished a Vapor 1X blocker that had some 5mm thick foam attached to the back of the front face (Cortech) material. Remains to be seen how good the rebound fly will be with that one. I can compare it to a Reactor 9000 with more standard foam setup. Sure the 1X has Curv too while Reactor has old fashion (replaced) 3mm plastic plate. Curv could be more springy and rebouncing plate from the feel of it. 

I agree with your assumption that the foam on CoreTech does not affect absorption but the elasticity of the skin, allowing for increased rebound. on the Bauer pads it’s done the same way as on the blocker you mentioned

[ser33]

3 hours ago, UCLALabrat said:

I cant imagine the skin does much of anything in terms of rebounds unless it just helps keep the foam tension. Having a hard plate on the surface with softer foam underneath probably drives most of it.

Im sure there are a few other engineering tricks to get more force back into the puck

however, this is most likely the case. it was the appearance of Bauer's new skin that contributed to the increased rebound. At the same time, the internal design of the pads, their core, has remained virtually unchanged and remains similar to the core of the same Premier released much earlier. Soft foam under the plastic (whether carbon, polyethylene or Curve) absorbs energy and does not improve rebound. on the contrary, an increase in the overall rigidity of the structure contributes to a better rebound. this is clearly demonstrated by Bauer who uses granular polyurethane instead of foam

[UCLALabrat]

8 hours ago, ser33 said:

however, this is most likely the case. it was the appearance of Bauer's new skin that contributed to the increased rebound. At the same time, the internal design of the pads, their core, has remained virtually unchanged and remains similar to the core of the same Premier released much earlier. Soft foam under the plastic (whether carbon, polyethylene or Curve) absorbs energy and does not improve rebound. on the contrary, an increase in the overall rigidity of the structure contributes to a better rebound. this is clearly demonstrated by Bauer who uses granular polyurethane instead of foam

Theres a lot about the materials and construction that may look superficial but have a huge impact (pun intended) on the performance of the pad (density, foam type, construction/gluing techniques) and improve its ability to absorb and transfer energy back to the puck.

Sure the foam absorbs energy but the design itself can dictate how the energy is dissipated, whether into the leg or back into the puck. Id be very skeptical of any claims regarding the skin material improving rebound control.

[ArdeFIN]

1 hour ago, UCLALabrat said:

Theres a lot about the materials and construction that may look superficial but have a huge impact (pun intended) on the performance of the pad (density, foam type, construction/gluing techniques) and improve its ability to absorb and transfer energy back to the puck.

Sure the foam absorbs energy but the design itself can dictate how the energy is dissipated, whether into the leg or back into the puck. Id be very skeptical of any claims regarding the skin material improving rebound control.

Not the skin itself, but the foam attached to the skin. And in Bauer case it is there for good and cannot be removed without force.

That said, they don't apply the same foam on catcher skin material for obvious reasons.

But Bauer isn't the only one doing this and I still believe strongly that it is the whole pad that does the superior rebounds.

Even between Curv and PE plastic sheet there is difference and that added to a sophisticated foam+skin, but also foam under the sheet, makes it happen.

I've made a small test comparing a few different Poron foams and some very basic foams, camping mattress and what ever. Test was simple as foam on a rigid plywood sheet and I dropped a puck to the foam from 50cm height and took a video to see how high the puck bounces.

Well as you might quess most of the Porons I have are energy absorbing and the puck didn't even jump up. While some random foams bounced the puck back up to 100mm height. That's a lot of energy returned.

Puck dropped to the plywood bounced to 15mm of height. 

[UCLALabrat]

Ah ok then i misinterpreted the argument. I agree the skin itself may play a role but id argue its small relative to the underlying construction.

[ilyazhito]

19 hours ago, ArdeFIN said:

Not the skin itself, but the foam attached to the skin. And in Bauer case it is there for good and cannot be removed without force.

That said, they don't apply the same foam on catcher skin material for obvious reasons.

But Bauer isn't the only one doing this and I still believe strongly that it is the whole pad that does the superior rebounds.

Even between Curv and PE plastic sheet there is difference and that added to a sophisticated foam+skin, but also foam under the sheet, makes it happen.

I've made a small test comparing a few different Poron foams and some very basic foams, camping mattress and what ever. Test was simple as foam on a rigid plywood sheet and I dropped a puck to the foam from 50cm height and took a video to see how high the puck bounces.

Well as you might quess most of the Porons I have are energy absorbing and the puck didn't even jump up. While some random foams bounced the puck back up to 100mm height. That's a lot of energy returned.

Puck dropped to the plywood bounced to 15mm of height. 

Is there a link to that video? I would like to see it.

 

Maybe that can explain how Bauer, and to some degree Brian's, have the explosive rebounds that they are known for. Maybe Warrior can catch up to them with the G8s.