thigh rise on

[Drummy31]

no prob... now you owe me one tho

[jfitz32]

Originally Posted by cupsave

I retract my statement. nitty's are a 37" + 1" (95% sure). Wards 36"+1" (educated guess). Believe me or not.

open your eyes, if nitty's is a +1 then wards is a -3

LOOK AT THE PIC ITS CLEARLY A TALLER RISE

[cupsave]

Having personally made two pairs for nitty (including those in the pics), and after checking the actual spec sheet that those pads in the pic were made from, I can 300% say for sure that nitty's pads are 37"+1" (the order is written up as 36"+2", however in velocity sizing, 36"+2" and 37"+1" turn out to be the exact same size. Those sizes are interchangable.) If nitty's pads had 3-1/2" inches that someone claims they seen on a spec sheet added to the top, the shin would have to be equivalent to the shin of a 33" pad to keep them in NHL specs. Nitty is 6'1". Unless he has bassett hound legs, which he doesnt, there is no possible way to added more then 2" to the top and keep them legal. Trust me, I make pads all day long. Pros pads are not 100% made to their size, they wear the same sizes as everyone else. They take a stock size and add or minus inches where they need them. Nitty happens to fit perfectly into a 36"+2" (exact same size as 37"+1"). So show me all your evidence that says I am wrong. I have more evidence to prove my point if it is needed. I will only admit defeat when I am beat. Bring it on.

You can believe me if want (if want to be right, you'll believe me) or you can keep relying on decieving pics and imaginary spec sheets.

BOO-YAH!!!

As for Ward, canada deals with him so I just have my professional opinion.

[jfitz32]

Originally Posted by cupsave

Having personally made two pairs for nitty (including those in the pics), and after checking the actual spec sheet that those pads in the pic were made from, I can 300% say for sure that nitty's pads are 37"+1" (the order is written up as 36"+2", however in velocity sizing, 36"+2" and 37"+1" turn out to be the exact same size. Those sizes are interchangable.) If nitty's pads had 3-1/2" inches that someone claims they seen on a spec sheet added to the top, the shin would have to be equivalent to the shin of a 33" pad to keep them in NHL specs. Nitty is 6'1". Unless he has bassett hound legs, which he doesnt, there is no possible way to added more then 2" to the top and keep them legal. Trust me, I make pads all day long. Pros pads are not 100% made to their size, they wear the same sizes as everyone else. They take a stock size and add or minus inches where they need them. Nitty happens to fit perfectly into a 36"+2" (exact same size as 37"+1"). So show me all your evidence that says I am wrong. I have more evidence to prove my point if it is needed. I will only admit defeat when I am beat. Bring it on.

You can believe me if want (if want to be right, you'll believe me) or you can keep relying on decieving pics and imaginary spec sheets.

BOO-YAH!!!

As for Ward, canada deals with him so I just have my professional opinion.

I don’t get the whole 37+1 is the same as a 36+2.
I understand that nhl rules say that goalie pads cannot be more than 38"
a 37+1 =38 and a 36+2 =38
I understand that the pads are going to be the same height and same size but a 36+2 should have a taller thigh rise than a 37+1 point being I’m sure nitty's total pad size is 38" but now the question is what is his shin to knee size because his thigh rise is huge.

The way I see it, and the way It SHOULD WORK is: say you order 35+2 the knee roll would be in the same place as if the pads are 35" but add 2" to the tight rise making the pad 37"

If 36+2 is the same as 37+1 would that make 34+2 the same as 35+1 and so on
Maybe I should be overdramatic is 34+4 the same as a 37+1? even though the pad total size is 38" the pads would /should have a huge differences in thigh rise

[cupsave]

A standard 37" is just a 36"+1" (so 37"+1" equals 36"+2"). Dont ask me why, but thats just how vaughn decided to size the velocities. But this is the ONLY, i repeat, the ONLY instance where this is true. 36"+1" equals std. 37", but 34"+1" does NOT equal std. 35", and 35"+1" does NOT equal std. 36", 35"+3" does NOT equal std. 38".

[teamgoalie]

Dude.....I don't know how to break this to you....but you need a new tape measure.

Nitty's are +3.....you can say whatever you want......but the pads were in Duke's.....they are the same size as a 38" pad......but they have a 3" thigh rise....and I read the actual spec sheet.....maybe Nitty has a smaller ATK then most, but he's wearing a 35+3......which isn't so hard to imagine, because I'm 5"11 and wearing a 34+2.5....maybe he likes his knee in the top of the knee cradle instead on the middle......maybe he should be wearing a 36+2......but the guy's pads are 35+3......end of story.



cue my PR man Drummy.......


Jeff

[jfitz32]

Originally Posted by teamgoalie

Dude.....I don't know how to break this to you....but you need a new tape measure.

Nitty's are +3.....you can say whatever you want......but the pads were in Duke's.....they are the same size as a 38" pad......but they have a 3" thigh rise....and I read the actual spec sheet.....maybe Nitty has a smaller ATK then most, but he's wearing a 35+3......which isn't so hard to imagine, because I'm 5"11 and wearing a 34+2.5....maybe he likes his knee in the top of the knee cradle instead on the middle......maybe he should be wearing a 36+2......but the guy's pads are 35+3......end of story.



cue my PR man Drummy.......


Jeff

jeff know what im saying

[Soritong]

Originally Posted by jfitz32

jeff know what im saying

.......what?


Oh. And for everyone going, "Look at the picture, Nitty's is obviously bigger", it's because the picture is at a different closeness and angle.



Both lines are the same length. Same dealio.

[jfitz32]

Originally Posted by Soritong

.......what?


Oh. And for everyone going, "Look at the picture, Nitty's is obviously bigger", it's because the picture is at a different closeness and angle.



Both lines are the same length. Same dealio.

for there to be an illusion in the picture the diffrents in the closeness and angle would need to be huge

tell me that in all these pics its the angle sugesting the tallness of the rise

[juha]

I'm with cupsave about the sizes.

Nitty's pads are 37+1 and based on that Cam's are 37 (or 36+1). There is two things why I believe this is how it is. 1) Got 37+1 information from factory. 2) My new pads are exactly same sized and were ordered 36+2 and came out 37+1. (had both nitty's and mine next to each other so I'm sure about this.)

What comes to Cam's pads those look from the pic pretty much same than my old 36+1 pads so you guys better believe cupsave.

I think that the misunderstanding comes when people don't think that the standard rise naturally becomes taller when the pad size gets bigger. So for example rise on 34+2 could look same as standard 37 rise. (I don't know the real sizing of vaughn rises but that would be close to it). This is why all of you are thinking that Nitty is using +3 rise.

-juha-

edit: typos

[jfitz32]

one more queston (for the vanghn guy or any one that realy knows):

i have a 35+1 and i want a 35+2
is the pad going to be 1 inch taller than my old ones?

[GlacierGoalie35]

You guys got me worried on this now. I originally had 34" v1's, i just ordered a 35+1 becuase my knee was up too high in the 34"s and i needed another inch in the thigh. but now that i think about it, my pads might be an inch taller. because if cupsave is right then, a thighrise on a 34 could be like 5 inches long, and a thighrise on a 35 could be 6 inches long. When i ordered that +1 it would make the thighrise 7 inches. Making the length of my pad 1 inch too long. I hope this makes sense, and if im wrong please correct me.

[GlacierGoalie35]

Originally Posted by jfitz32

one more queston (for the vanghn guy or any one that realy knows):

i have a 35+1 and i want a 35+2
is the pad going to be 1 inch taller than my old ones?

I am 90 % sure that it will be one inch taller because the knee area is the same. Because if you were to stand a 35+1 next to a 35+2, you would see that the thighrise is one inch bigger. When you do this, make sure you look at the knee area because it will be the same. I hate the whole a 36+2 is the same as a 37+1 because it isnt. It is the same overall length but the knee area is different. So they arent the same. So when people say they have 35" goalie pads but its really a 34+1 then why dont they save its built like a 34 with an extra inch on the rise. Just my 2 cents.

[kold]

Originally Posted by GlacierGoalie35

You guys got me worried on this now. I originally had 34" v1's, i just ordered a 35+1 becuase my knee was up too high in the 34"s and i needed another inch in the thigh. but now that i think about it, my pads might be an inch taller. because if cupsave is right then, a thighrise on a 34 could be like 5 inches long, and a thighrise on a 35 could be 6 inches long. When i ordered that +1 it would make the thighrise 7 inches. Making the length of my pad 1 inch too long. I hope this makes sense, and if im wrong please correct me.

Your stock 34" Velo will be a total of 34" long, and your 35 + 1 will have a total length of 36". The knee will be higher by one inch, and the standard thigh rise will also be extended by one inch to give you the 2 inch total. I believe the 35" has the same thigh rise as the 34" (stock).

[GlacierGoalie35]

Thank you Kold, you answered my question perfectly although i could not word it right. I was pretty much trying to say is the thighrise the same on a 34 as a 35. Thank you.