Who's Online 11 Members, 0 Anonymous, 37 Guests (See full list)
Most OnlineNewest Member
2020 - Warrior Hockey Collection
163 Pages of Warrior's 2020 Collection (84 pdf pages)
G5 goalie gear, new for 2020, begins on page 92 (pdf page 48)
GT2 goalie gear, introduced in 2019, begins on page 102 (pdf page 53)
M1 Sticks, new for 2020, begin on page 140 (pdf page 72)
By Abraham Simpson
Here's Part 2 of the S190 vs 1S durability comparison, which covers the blockers and gloves.
As before, many of the variables were similar in terms of usage of the gear:
-- S190 glove and blocker were used for about 250 ice sessions from July 2017 to July 2018
-- 1S glove and blocker were used for about 250 ice sessions from July 2018 to July 2019 (gear purchased at 40% discount from list price in summer of 2018)
-- Shooters were mostly 14 to 17-year-olds
Some key differences:
-- S190 glove and blocker are INT, while 1S glove and blocker are SR
-- 1S glove and blocker were made in Canada by JRZ. Production of the 1S line was eventually moved overseas, so this suggests we may have early production units of the 1S gear.
As with the pads, the 1S blocker outperforms the S190 blocker (it's lighter, has better padding and protection, and sends the puck far from the net with little effort), but it also suffers from lower durability (the stitching is a problem, and the palm has more wear). Meanwhile, the gloves are wearing-out at roughly the same rate, although the 1S binding is wearing-out faster. However, the performance gain of the 1S glove just isn't there: Although it has a thicker padding to reduce stingers, it's been impossible to break-in, even after 250 ice sessions.
Here's a view of both blockers. The additional finger protection and inner padding of the 1S are key benefits over the 190. The 1S is also light, and sends pucks far into the corners with little effort, so in terms or performance and protection, the 1S is the clear winner.
I circled the palms to show some of the wear (hard to see in black), and both palms are wearing-out at roughly the same rate.
However, some problems are found with the durability of the 1S fingers: Small holes are beginning to appear, while the thumb is completely worn-out. It's starting to look like a hobo glove:
Another area where the 1S has problems is the stitching, which we also found faulty on the 1S pads. My wife had to break-out her needle and thread mid-season to fix the top of the blocker, and was at it again to fix a larger tear in the same area two weeks ago (her blue thread is circled in this picture). This part of the blocker is hard to fix when the stitching comes apart, since there's not much surplus material to stitch back together.
An area where both blockers suffer is the side wall near the thumb, which rubs against the shaft of the stick. Visible, and nearly identical, holes (that can't be fixed with needle and thread), exist for both blockers:
Here are side-by-side pictures of both gloves. Based on puck marks, it looks like they've seen a similar amount of action. However, an obvious difference between the two is the inability of the 1S to fully open. We've had a lot of success in getting gloves game-ready by baking them, but the 1S would never cooperate: We've baked it twice, but it was still impossible to fully close. Then we resorted to soaking it in hot water, which has helped to close it, but it never opens as wide as it should. Even today, if the glove dries-out, it needs to be moistened before hitting the ice.
The main reason the 1S glove is being used instead of the 190 is the extra padding in its palm -- the 190 is just too thin for the type of shots that my kid faces, and the stingers are very real. So performance-wise, the glove has been the only disappointment in the 1S line.
In terms of durability, both gloves have minor issues: The lacing on the 190 is thinning (although it hasn't yet ripped), while the black binding on the 1S is wearing-out, much like it is on the 1S pads. This is surprising, considering the binding only comes into contact with the ice when covering the puck. Makes me wonder whether Bauer is using a thinner and lighter binding on the 1S in order to shave a few grams off the total weight of the gear -- but does so at the cost of lower durability.
In terms of performance and protection, the 1S pads and blocker are fantastic. The 1S glove is good for protection, but performance has been terrible: Pucks initially were bouncing out when the glove wouldn't fully close, and now that it doesn't fully open, it leaves more of the net exposed.
In terms of overall durability, the 1S gear is worse, or at best no better than, the 190. This raises a question about the old rule of thumb: Use cheaper gear if you're on the ice 2-3 times per week, and higher-end gear if you're on the ice 5-6 times per week. Clearly, if you're on the ice 5-6 times per week, don't expect to get more than one season out of your 1S gear.
Some of the durability issues of the 1S have undoubtedly been addressed with the 2S and 2X lines, thanks to a stronger version of Coretech and less exposed binding, which are two problem areas in our experience. Unless Bauer is also now using a stronger thread, I still expect the stitching will still be an area of concern due to similarities in the design of Bauer lines. We'll monitor the stitching closely on any new Bauer gear that we get.
On that topic: The kid recently demoed the 2X gear at the Bauer store in Burlington, MA -- expect our one-year 2X durability review next summer ...