HFBoards

HFBoards (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/index.php)
-   The Rink (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/forumdisplay.php?f=150)
-   -   Difference between a $75 stick and a $250 stick? (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/showthread.php?t=822008)

HowToHockey 09-24-2010 09:36 AM

Difference between a $75 stick and a $250 stick?
 
Just curious what the big differences are? I figure the material used, and the weight, but does anyone know specifics?

PuckHogs29 09-24-2010 09:55 AM

About a buck seventy five. ;)

Seriously though weight and material, quality basically. I've seen cheaper one piece sticks that had absolutely nothing going for them. They weren't a low priced composite, they were more like a really expensive wood stick. Not as responsive to the puck, not much flex regardless of what they were advertised as, that kinda stuff.

keslehr* 09-24-2010 10:16 AM

Not a lot, really. If you play a style where wear and tear is aggravated and sticks break all the time (like me), get cheap sticks. If not, go for the big bucks if you want...

Blueland89 09-24-2010 11:34 AM

This is something I have been wondering my self I have only used wood sticks and am about to buy my first Composite and i'm going to go cheap I figure weight would be a big factor.

droller* 09-24-2010 11:40 AM

I've used both expensive and cheap composites... i honestly don't think there is that much of a difference performance wise for the average beer league hockey player. The expensive ones will just feel "better" overall, but it's not like you have a massive edge over someone else.

One thing I noticed is that the cheap ones seem to fall apart at the heel very easily after prolonged use. Pieces of composite will begin to fall off at the heel.

I don't think the $250 is more durable in terms of general wear and tear from gameplay. If your stick gets slashed hard enough or if a hard slap shot hits your stick, I think its just as likely to have your $70 or $250 fall to pieces when you FINALLY have that scoring opportunity :).

For beer league, I'd say go on the cheap/mid range stick. If someone pays for your sticks, the choice is obvious!

blueberrydanish 09-24-2010 12:22 PM

Personally I think the feel of the puck and how a shot comes off is very different...first time I use my one95 I could definitely tell, the closest stick I had to high end before it was the XXV. Weight was slightly noticable, but also a big thing for me, the durability. My one95 blade/shaft has lasted me much longer than my XXV/v06 sticks did.

ponder 09-24-2010 01:32 PM

I have used cheap one piece composites, and hate them, for the most part they are a total waste of money and IMO way worse than a good wood stick. Maybe there are some really good cheap one out there, but the ones I've used generally do not flex nicely, are very "pingy" (terrible puck feel), when you shoot it feels like you're smacking a stiff piece of plastic into the ice instead of a nice smooth, whippy stick feel. I just do not see why anyone would chose a cheap one piece over a wood stick, other than weight. In contrast, the higher end one piece sticks can have a nice whippy feel for great snap/wrist shots, and can have puck feel similar to a wood stick. After years and years of using wood sticks and the odd cheap composite I recently got a one95 (77 flex), and it really just is so much nicer to play with, especially when it comes to shooting and receiving passes. My advice would be stick with high end wood sticks or splurge on a nice composite, entry level composites are just not fun to play with.

Devil Dancer 09-24-2010 01:38 PM

Weight, kick on shots and passes, and balance. Personally I use a $200 stick (X:60 INT), but I pretty much never break sticks, so I only buy one a year.

Jarick 09-24-2010 02:54 PM

Cheap sticks have a lot more fiberglass to them, which makes them heavier but more durable. They often don't have the same kick as a high end stick, so if you really lean into sticks while shooting, it may suffer. The blades are often poorly constructed without any foam for improved feel, which may hurt your passing.

As a rule, I avoid all sticks under $100. It's just not worth it, because I can find good (slightly) used sticks or two-pieces for the same or a bit more money. But my game is ALL shooting and stick handling and if I don't get some kick on my shots and have good puck feel, it hurts my game.

My teammates that are more about skating, passing, and garbage goals do just fine with the cheap sticks...the shooters tend to buy the nicer sticks.

EliasFan 09-24-2010 03:02 PM

Everyone has hit on the key points in my opinion. A cheaper composite, to me, feels a lot heavier. Just doesn't feel good in your hands when you pick it up. I'm currently using a Bauer Vapor XXXX. I think it retailed for $200, but I got it on sale for $100!! Before that I had a Warrior Swizzle stick. It goes for about $140, but it was light and felt great! I'd just shop around, pick up different sticks, you will know what feels good.

canuck44 09-24-2010 06:11 PM

A couple of days ago I picked up a 09 Synergy ST INT for $60, but before that I've been on the upper end - Vapor XXXX (still using), Vapor XXX (the blue one, quite possibly best overall stick I've ever had), Synergy SL, Synergy, etc.

Now I've only taken a few shots with the ST, and it doesn't seem to have the same feel as the other sticks. Now I know the ST was always designed to be more durable than the top of the line sticks, so with that in mind it's not too bad.

I think it comes down to what people mentioned before. It's pretty easy to tell the difference between feel when it comes to varying levels of sticks. It just becomes a matter of either: 1. Is it worth it? and 2. Can I swing it?

Frankie Spankie 09-24-2010 07:39 PM

Cheap sticks definitely feel heavier but other than that, I never noticed a difference. I don't mind the extra weight and cheaper ones seem to be more durable and last longer so I go for the cheaper ones.

Harv 09-24-2010 08:50 PM

I good tip on buying sticks is that a 2 or 3 year old top of the line pro stick is always better than a current low-mid level stick. And they can usually be had for the same price.


I'd buy a 2 year old Vapor XXXX stick over a just released Vapor X40 stick.

Dump and Chase 09-24-2010 10:47 PM

The first composite I bought was a cheaper Easton for under a hundred bucks. I had to shoot every shot from in tight to the heel to get any zip on it. Torsionally the stick is a noodle and the blade was pretty soggy right out of the box.

It is an 85 flex and the stick really loses its integrity when you get the least bit aggressive when shooting. Is that pretty standard for that flex or could it be the stick?


The next stick I bought was a pro stock Reebok 10K and that stick wants for absolutely nothing. I have held lighter sticks but when you get really light you sacrifice a lot of feel. The 10K is right on that line for me.


I paid 79 for the Easton and 129 for the Reebok.


There is absolutely no comparison between the two sticks.

kr580 09-25-2010 12:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dump and Chase (Post 27934403)
The first composite I bought was a cheaper Easton for under a hundred bucks. I had to shoot every shot from in tight to the heel to get any zip on it. Torsionally the stick is a noodle and the blade was pretty soggy right out of the box.

It is an 85 flex and the stick really loses its integrity when you get the least bit aggressive when shooting. Is that pretty standard for that flex or could it be the stick?

What year was the Easton from? I know they rate their sticks' flex ratings after you've cut them 3 inches, but I'm not sure when they started doing that. I have a 65 flex intermediate Easton ST but it's really a 60 flex. On the butt end it has a 3" mark that says '65' and a 6" mark that says '70'.

Dump and Chase 09-25-2010 08:03 AM

It's an Easton S3 and I bought it last spring.

I nipped about 2" off the butt

nystromshairstylist 09-25-2010 11:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ponder (Post 27924625)
I have used cheap one piece composites, and hate them, for the most part they are a total waste of money and IMO way worse than a good wood stick. Maybe there are some really good cheap one out there, but the ones I've used generally do not flex nicely, are very "pingy" (terrible puck feel), when you shoot it feels like you're smacking a stiff piece of plastic into the ice instead of a nice smooth, whippy stick feel. I just do not see why anyone would chose a cheap one piece over a wood stick, other than weight. In contrast, the higher end one piece sticks can have a nice whippy feel for great snap/wrist shots, and can have puck feel similar to a wood stick. After years and years of using wood sticks and the odd cheap composite I recently got a one95 (77 flex), and it really just is so much nicer to play with, especially when it comes to shooting and receiving passes. My advice would be stick with high end wood sticks or splurge on a nice composite, entry level composites are just not fun to play with.

Wood sticks are total garbage, they lasted me no more than one or two times on the ice. I spent $45 on top-end woodies, and then $15 more on cheap composites, which have lasted far longer. It is more than a weight issue, the woodies get wet and start cracking very quickly. I honestly cannot believe how people played using them for so many decades, they are awful :cry:

ponder 09-25-2010 02:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by nystromshairstylist (Post 27938882)
Wood sticks are total garbage, they lasted me no more than one or two times on the ice. I spent $45 on top-end woodies, and then $15 more on cheap composites, which have lasted far longer. It is more than a weight issue, the woodies get wet and start cracking very quickly. I honestly cannot believe how people played using them for so many decades, they are awful :cry:

Not sure why you have such a problem with the wet/cracking, when I used woodies I would make sure to always have fresh tape and wax on the blade and never had many issues, it's only when you play with worn down tape that you can start to wear through the fiberglass, and expose the actual wood. I don't break a lot of sticks in general, and prefer the feel of most high end woodies to most bottom of the line composites, which I just cannot feel the puck on. It's obviously personal preference though, and I do definitely prefer a high end composite over any woodie.

ponder 09-25-2010 02:18 PM

I am curious though, does anyone have much experience with mid priced composites vs. the high end ones? I've really only tried out woodies, bottom of the line composites, and top of the line.

LastChancePrice 09-25-2010 06:56 PM

Id say about 175$ difference.

Jarick 09-25-2010 07:51 PM

The higher mid composites I've used were a little heavier and a little more durable than the high end ones, had almost all the performance, feel was good or bad depending on the model.

Super high end composites are insanely light. Probably not important for most people, but a really light stick is nice for poke checks, sweeps, etc. They almost always have a fantastic kick to them, but they are susceptible to snapping because they aren't very resilient.

Right now I'm using a Harrow 300 2-piece, which is about the same as your average higher mid composite. It's a little heavier, but balance is good, puck feel is great, kick is very good, and it's insanely durable.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:17 AM.

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com, A property of CraveOnline, a division of AtomicOnline LLC ©2009 CraveOnline Media, LLC. All Rights Reserved.