| |
| Author |
Message |
canadian_man_44
HOF Legend
Joined: 26 Oct 2006
Posts: 2437
Location: Moncton, NB, Canada
|
 Posted: Tue Feb 19, 2008 2:43 pm Post subject: Smith 5000 pads, blocker and trapper review |
 |
|
Last night I got to hit the ice for the first time with my new Smith gear. Here are my first impressions.
Pads: 33" + 2" NHL spec
The first thing you notice about these pads is the weight. Definitely the lightest goalie pads I've ever played in.
The quality of materials and workmanship is amazing. Definitely worth the wait.
I absolutely love the setup of these pads. From the sliding toe bridge to the adjustable thigh rise, these are perfect. The boot and leg channels are just the right depth to allow for unhindered rotation. The padding in the leg channel also makes these pads the most comfortable I've ever worn. The calf and knee locks secure the pads to the legs with a feeling of stability, but, still allow enough room for rotation. I'm also lovin the adjustable knee stacks, although I will not be adjusting them anytime soon. With all the stacks in them, they have the right thickness of landing area for me. Even with the extra thickness that my previous pads didn't have, they do not get caught up in my pants. The strapping setup works very well for a butterfly goalie. The top strap is angled so it doesn't hinder pad rotation. The quick change system is great too. I tried it out just to see how long it would take to change a buckle. Less then a minute if you have quick fingers.
In just one week I've got these pads into the perfect curve that we're all looking for in good butterfly pads.
Protection 10/10
Quality 10/10
Cost 10/10
Weight 10/10
I can't really comment on the durability since I've only played one game so far in them, but, with the quality put into these pads, I'd say they'll last a long time.
Blocker: NHL spec
What can you really say about blockers. This one is very light and very protective. Again, the quality is great and it is very comfortable. I absolutely didn't feel anything through this blocker in my first game.
Protection 10/10
Quality 10/10
Cost 10/10
Weight 10/10
Trapper: NHL spec.....almost (there's an extra 1/2 inch to allow for a deeper pocket. It's only the measurement from the tip of the pocket to the heel of the glove that's not spec though.....and it's something that can be remedied by tightening up the pocket lace a little if I ever play in a league where it matters. The perimeter of the glove is NHL spec.)
This glove has it all. Quality, protection, comfort and it's also very light. The adjustments you can make inside the glove make it so you can have the perfect tightness or looseness you desire. I took a few hard shots off the palm but have had no stingers at all. There's lots of padding in the palm, but, it doesn't affect the closure. Right out of the box I could fully close it and open it with not problem at all. There's no way the pucks getting out once it's in the pocket.
Protection 10/10
Quality 10/10
Cost 10/10
Weight 10/10
As time goes on and I get more games in, I'll add to this, but for now, they're perfect.
_________________
Last edited by canadian_man_44 on Wed Feb 04, 2009 12:33 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
|
|
gimbo726
Pro
Joined: 15 Jan 2008
Posts: 984
Location: Dallas, Texas
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 19, 2008 8:35 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Glad to see you're happy with them! I'm just about ready to order me a set...
_________________
That's what she said!
The Greatest Pads That Ever Lived |
|
|
|
mx42
Pro
Joined: 11 Jun 2007
Posts: 724
Location: southern california
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 19, 2008 9:33 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| You may want to mention for any newer users what gear you are coming from. |
|
|
|
canadian_man_44
HOF Legend
Joined: 26 Oct 2006
Posts: 2437
Location: Moncton, NB, Canada
|
| Posted: Wed Feb 20, 2008 3:32 am Post subject: |
|
|
I'll let the picture tell the story.
_________________
|
|
|
|
FutureSuperstar93
GoalieForum Legend
Joined: 28 Jul 2007
Posts: 4095
Location: Maine
|
| Posted: Wed Feb 20, 2008 3:33 am Post subject: |
|
|
I like the top picture best  |
|
|
|
canadian_man_44
HOF Legend
Joined: 26 Oct 2006
Posts: 2437
Location: Moncton, NB, Canada
|
| Posted: Wed Feb 20, 2008 6:15 am Post subject: |
|
|
| FutureSuperstar93 wrote: | | I like the top picture best |
Of course you would.....they pretty much are on the same level with your Itechs. 
_________________
|
|
|
|
Maks01
Minors
Joined: 28 Mar 2007
Posts: 305
Location: Shaumburg,IL
|
| Posted: Wed Feb 20, 2008 1:07 pm Post subject: |
|
|
i think he likes it cuz there are two gloves and two blockers so he feels you would take alot more away from shooters when wearing it all at the same time..
cman are all those 10s for your ratings non biast opinions????  |
|
|
|
montreal961
GoalieForum Legend
Joined: 09 Dec 2006
Posts: 5697
Location: Canada
|
| Posted: Wed Feb 20, 2008 7:55 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| canadian_man_44 wrote: | | FutureSuperstar93 wrote: | | I like the top picture best |
Of course you would.....they pretty much are on the same level with your Itechs. |
Maybe even better.
_________________
 |
|
|
|
FutureSuperstar93
GoalieForum Legend
Joined: 28 Jul 2007
Posts: 4095
Location: Maine
|
| Posted: Wed Feb 20, 2008 8:19 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| I like the TPS blocker Shows your flaming What design... |
|
|
|
gimbo726
Pro
Joined: 15 Jan 2008
Posts: 984
Location: Dallas, Texas
|
| Posted: Wed Feb 20, 2008 9:29 pm Post subject: |
|
|
A friend of mine used to have a set of Brian's with smiley faces all over them. It was kinda weird...
_________________
That's what she said!
The Greatest Pads That Ever Lived |
|
|
|
FutureSuperstar93
GoalieForum Legend
Joined: 28 Jul 2007
Posts: 4095
Location: Maine
|
| Posted: Thu Feb 21, 2008 12:51 am Post subject: |
|
|
| The other goalie I played against tonight had Smith's, first time I've seen them up close, they're okay |
|
|
|
gimbo726
Pro
Joined: 15 Jan 2008
Posts: 984
Location: Dallas, Texas
|
|
|
|
canadian_man_44
HOF Legend
Joined: 26 Oct 2006
Posts: 2437
Location: Moncton, NB, Canada
|
| Posted: Thu Feb 21, 2008 3:33 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Maks01 wrote: | i think he likes it cuz there are two gloves and two blockers so he feels you would take alot more away from shooters when wearing it all at the same time..
cman are all those 10s for your ratings non biast opinions???? |
Definitely non biased. You'll notice that the only things I rated are things that you can tell right away about gear. There will definitely be more to come after I've had a chance to use them for awhile.
_________________
|
|
|
|
canadian_man_44
HOF Legend
Joined: 26 Oct 2006
Posts: 2437
Location: Moncton, NB, Canada
|
| Posted: Thu Feb 21, 2008 3:54 am Post subject: |
|
|
| mx42 wrote: | | You may want to mention for any newer users what gear you are coming from. |
Okay, here goes. Some side by side pictures and comparisons to the old gear and the new. I'm not going to mention the Tour blocker and trapper because they're crap and I never really used them long enough. I didn't like the stingers and bruises. Anyway, enjoy.
Let's start with the blocker. The Smith blocker is lighter, has more protection and is obviously much better looking.
Trapper. The Itech has a lot of nylon material on it. It also doesn't have much protection on the back of the hand while the Smith has an extra pad there as well as the back unhooks so you can dry the inside of the glove out very well. The padding in the palm is much thicker in the Smith, but still closes and opens easily. The break in the Smith and the Itech are pretty much at the same angle. The Smith is also lighter then the Itech.
 
Pads. The Smith pads are obviously a lot better quality then the Tours. The Tours had a deep leg channel so they didn't rotate easily while the Smiths have a shallow leg channel specifically made for a butterfly goalie. There is a lot more protection for the sides of the leg. The Smiths have a thicker and softer knee stack system while the Tours knee stacks are thin and don't offer a very comfortable landing area. The Smiths knee lock doesn't inhibit rotation while on the Tours I had to tape the knee stacks together in such a way that they pulled off to the side so they wouldn't catch on my pants. The thigh board on the Tours I removed because it was constantly getting caught in my pants. The thigh boards on the Smiths are larger with a longer strap so they will fit on the outside of the pants and haven't caught on my pants after numerous carpet flys and one game. The area of the knee stacks and calf wrap that contact the ice on the Tours is made of cordura(thick nylon) so they wouldn't slide at all on wet, snowy, or soft ice. On the other hand, although it's only been one game, the Smiths slid me out of position a few times because of the synthetic leather weave that contacts the ice in the butterfly. That will definitely take some getting used to. The Smiths also have a better strapping system. The top strap is angled so it doesn't inhibit rotation on the butterfly, while the top strap on the Tours is straight across(I actually had to take both top straps and fit them into one buckle so they weren't in the way to butterfly). Because the Smiths are custom made, the strap at the knee is in the perfect for me, just below the bend in the knee. The sliding toe bridge is something I wish I had years ago. It works amazingly well.
  
As far as quality.....here's a few shots of the Tour pads in the condition they are currently in after having played in them for about one season all together. I moved a couple times during hockey seasons so I didn't get much ice time in those two years. The first one is of the sideroll where it is tearing off of the pad. The second is of one of the many places on the pads(this is the knee rolls) where the stitching is coming out or has vanished altogether. It's the same on both pads. You can actually see the insides of the pads from the right angle.
 
_________________
|
|
|
|
FutureSuperstar93
GoalieForum Legend
Joined: 28 Jul 2007
Posts: 4095
Location: Maine
|
| Posted: Thu Feb 21, 2008 3:54 am Post subject: |
|
|
| gimbo726 wrote: | | Okay fashion wise or okay performance wise? |
Well I wasn't wearing them so what do you think? I probably would have said they were ugly, but, they matched his jeresey perfectly. |
|
|
|
|
