Are Race Boots Just For Elite Skiers?
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 28 сен 2024
- Join Tom Gellie and Lou Rosenfeld in this enlightening episode of the Big Picture Skiing Podcast, where they delve into the intricacies of ski boot selection. Discover why Lou recommends specific boot types, from beginners to seasoned experts, and the surprising benefits of opting for a "race boot." Explore the crucial role angles play in ski boot design, and how they can significantly impact your skiing technique and performance on the slopes. Plus, gain insights into the often-overlooked aspects of kids' ski boot design and the potential pitfalls of excessive ramp angle. Whether you're a novice or a seasoned pro, this episode promises valuable insights to elevate your skiing game.
⭐️ Ready to take your skiing skills to new heights? Unlock exclusive online learning resources for RUclips subscribers by clicking the link below. You will get acces to 5 free videos!
bigpictureskii...
😎 And hey, why not show off your love for skiing with our Skiing Skeleton "Skellie" T-shirt? Grab yours today at:
big-picture-sk...
I have small feet and narrow heels, without race boots I wouldn’t be able to find boots. As it is I have a hard time finding a store with boots that I can try on. Stores always carry giant boots for big guys but don’t seem to give a second thought to skiers with small statures. Some companies don’t make rec boots less than a size 8.
Great discussion! Thank you both. Anyone who is thinking about buying ski boots should watch this. I learned so much
Glad it was helpful!
Really enjoyed this, and agree with both Tom's and Lou's very thoughtful views.
I'd just like to mention to Lou that you can't use a Brannock sizer to compare what's an appropriate width across different mondo sizes. That's because while ski boots increase in width by 2 mm-3 mm per mondo size, the Brannock width increases by 3.75 mm for every 1 cm increase in length, i.e., by 3.75 mm per mondo size. So as you change size they get out of sync.
For instance, if a certain model of boot is right for folks with C-width feet in a 24.5, they're going to need B-width feet to get an equivalent fit in the 27.5 (assuming the shell increases by 2.5 mm/mondo size).
The bottom line is that the appropriate Brannock letter sizing for a certain width-class of boots isn't going to stay constant with the size, thus you can't simply judge by the letter, as Lou was suggesting. You need to add the complication of both the letter and the foot size. And once you have to do that, it's simpler to just deal in mm, IMO.
At least that's assuming the ski boots really do increase in size by only 2-3 mm/mondo, instead of the 3.75 mm/mondo you get from Brannock. If the ski boots actually increase in size by closer to 3.75 mm/mondo, then Lou's idea should work great.
[I'm not a bootfitter. I'm just a consumer who was curious about this, so several years ago I contacted Brannock and asked them for their formula for converting their length and width sizing into mm, and they were happy to oblige.]
And then of course, as you know, there's the heel-instep perimeter. That could require upsizing or downsizing, further throwing things off.
I like that you guys are offering contrarian opinions. I'd like to offer one of my own: Many serious skiers have more than one ski of the same type, because they're always seeking something even better. But boots are even more important. So next season, instead of dropping $1k+ to order that new pair of [insert model here] everyone's raving about, they should consider getting fitted and aligned with a new pair of boots. That's because, even if they like what they already have, a different boot will have a different geometry and might set up even better for them. Then, once they have both dialed (which takes both in-shop and on-snow assessment), they should get video and have an experienced coach assess their skiing in one vs. the other.
I'd also like to make a comment on this: "If you don't have a high-level boot fitting shop where you live chances are where you're going skiing there is one."
IME, while that might work for someone seeking lower-flex race boots, this doesn't hold (at least in the US) if you're looking for a mid-flex (say 130-140) 92 mm shell--e.g., Atomic TI 130, Fischer Podium RD 130, Head WCR 3 or 4, Lange ZB, Dalbello DRS WC S, Nordica Dobermann 5 RD-M, etc. At most US ski areas you'll be lucky to find a shop that stocks even one of these models. But for a proper fitting, you want the fitter to be able to select from among a range of these (say, three or four models), to determine which is the best match for the shape of your foot, i.e., the best starting point for all the bootwork a plug will need. And you're only going to find that kind of selection in a handful of shops across the entire US.
Anyone have the Tecnica Firebird? Thoughts?
I ski Firebirds in the narrowest, what Tom and I called WC last. Most comfortable boot I've ever owned but too high over the instep for me so I've had to pad it. I like there are so many flex options, Like Head's series of 98 mm and narrower boots. That said the whole purpose of this presentation was to explain what works for me may not work for you and the secret to great boots is starting with something close and having a competent fitter work some magic.
Thanks Louis. Would I be able to contact you directly?
@@webskis Although not as quick, especially since I am often without internet now while I'm travelling, I think we should do everything here so I can answer the question for everyone at the same time.
Awesome content and insight as always
I now have 3 different types of second hand ski boots so I can also learn about them. I always felt like I'm falling back and keep leaning my body forward like I'm riding my motorcycle. As I try to bend straight down, body wants to fall to the rear. I watched a video on Leg/Torso legnths. I have long legs - leg/torso ratio. I figured I could add a shim or something. I modded one of my boots by cutting the upper internal cuff and re-melting the plastic (same technique used for plastic soldering). The small piece allowed the cuff to tilt forward and I soldered it at that angle. I had so many clamps and my digital caliper to measure the same on both boots. Once together, the new Forward Lean angle is 16 degrees; I thought Oh wow...that's aggressive like the Head Raptors. It has the stock ramp angle which I think is zero.
Once I put them on, it felt really nice, it gave me dorsilflexion to feel balanced. Went out and skied on them and my quads were screaming. However, I never felt SO balanced and turn-in was SO great it was amazing. I was confident; turn in was so easy. One thing I noticed is when I'm turning, my non engaged ski followed easier. In the past I had to yank my inner ski to get it to turn because it felt like it was hesitating. Forward lean also made it was easier to enter the small halfpipe we have where the entry is almost vertical.
The forward lean plus having the boots canted (using the cam screw) makes me pay attention. Having my feet shoulder width I have some slight edge engagement and will catch if I get lazy turning casually when I'm going to another trail. I do not like when my skis are neutral and I can turn without minimal edge engagement, like I see in casual skiing. It feels dirty to flat turn vs tilting my knee a bit to start the turn. It is mindblowing.
However if I am doing an off piste steep terrain, the slide turn is easier and being more upright, since there is no hard snow to bite on like slalom. The hilarious thing is sometimes when I start to turn (off piste), I try to lean my knee like it's a slalom run and have to go "oh wait, I'm not doing a slalom run" haha. Otherwise when I do, my turn is following the turn radius of the ski.,
I call them my Wanna-Be Raptor boots lol. I don't even mind my quads burning (which means I need to get them used to it); skiing was just so much more effortless. I wasn't having to fight as much, they just go well. I also realized I walk like raptor because I can't stand all the way up lol. Now I know why so many racers when resting standing up are leaning on the ski poles. All worth it.
A "race" boot is so much easier to use. I think the more upright boots don't engage your quads as much so people can ski all day. Head made a ski boot following their raptor forwad lean however, there is a metal latch which you can disconnect so you can stand to rest or calmly skiing to the next terrain.
Great show, I appreciate the tips so much. You've helped me understand the boot mechanics much more. Thank you.
Do you find your quad burn all across the muscle (from knee to hip) or just near the knee?
For me when I’m skidding it’s a whole-quad burn.
When I’m carving properly, it’s a far more manageable quad burn near the knee, along with more glutes - and far more aerobic!
@@kuanjuliu Most of my quads. However more pain concentrated on my Vastus Lateralis closest to my knee.
2024 Nordica Dobermann 5 Stiff
I agree with most of what you said, something to add though:
If a boot is marketed by the manufacturer as a race/plug boot it is usually not just the lastwidth or general volume of the shell that is lower but one also gets a completely different liner-concept and way more shell thickness (=weight).
I think for a beginner it could be an issue if they can not leave their liner in the shell and slip into it but instead have to lace it and do the worldcup entry. Also lighter weight individuals might not like their boots to be like 2.5kg each, even if they are just downhill skiing.
For more advanced skiers though, i can hardly see how one could dislike a plugboot skiing groomers. Especially if things are icy/steep and one is going fast - it just feels so much more secure to be in a boot that translates every movement directly into the ski.
Because i have a 110mm forefoot and super high instep in the past i always went for 100-102mm lasted "consumer"boots in 130 flex. Bootfitter widened the forefot a bit = good to go.
This season i changed the thinking to "does it matter if the bootfitter has to widen the boot just a bit or a whole damn lot?" and bought the Fischer RC4 Worldcup boot in 170 flex. Every doubt i had like "do i really have the right footshape for such a boot" or "isn't 170 actually way to stiff" was blown away the first few runs skiing in them - soo so good.
Totally those top end race boots are something else aren’t they when you ski them. Stoked you took the plunge! I was the same going to a 150 plug boot last year. So happy with it now it’s the best bit I’ve owned after getting the fit right.
On the point of beginners in “race” boots. The 60 ,70 flex boots and upwards to 130 flex don’t necessarily have lace up liners. In fact most don’t.
This years mantra. Back2Basic - Balance.
Interesting , I am advanced intermediate and
Thanks to BPS and Tom advice I changed my boots too large to « rave boots « RC4 Fischer boa mv pro 100 mm , note that this boot is with zip fit do thinner than usual premium liners
Some punch at ankles bones and I did 95 % of the work
I have important dorsiflexion knees ahead from toes when flexing
The boot was too stiff I removed 1 screw behind to be less back seated and they cbanged my skiing a lot to get more fore and aft flex
Ramp angle is 3 mm in the boot
Binding is flat
Do you think I need to put the ramp angle to 0’or 1 to be more for forward ?
My old patterns were to be backseated with beginners shoes
You should just work out a way to test without it being permanent. That’s all I did to figure out what worked best. I also skied with heel lifts for a few weeks to see what that did as well.
Test test test and you be the judge
I’m a 265 in ski boots. I moved to barefoot, wide toe box, zero drop running shoes about 5 years ago and my feet have never been happier. I know I want more contact for ski boots, but I own Dalbellos that seem to scrunch my toes and wish that I had that extra toe box space. How does healthy space for feet translate to ski boots when I feel the shoe space for toe box should be more ample?
Interesting comment and question. First remember 26.5 and 26.0 are identical boots. Looking at boots with that knowledge may help you broaden your selection at stores. But your question is interesting to me since I sit here now in a new pair of Altra low top hiking shoes with a very wide toe box. Boots for certain have substantially less. I can't answer your question since there is no option to experiment but I'll be making the toe box of my boots wider for next season to learn the results.
Perhaps you could have your local fitter widen the toe box?
Hi Lou, good to see you. Good talk
I would love if in a future podcast you could tease out what Lou feels about accommodating for duck-footed stances!
I especially love Lou's comment that beginners would, if anything, benefit from a costlier but better-fitting boot than the typical beginner boot.
I had that experience with playing violin in my youth: I didn't really "get" it until I finally lucked out on a truly excellent instrument. Sure, I could play my prior inexpensive instruments much better after that, but I wouldn't have achieved that level of skill without the good one.
I removed the forward lean in my boots this year and it *transformed* my ability to get forward properly. (Big calves, flexible ankles). Until then, I was as Tom described himself in a poorly-fitting set of boots: if I tried to flex my ankles and get forward, my heel would come off the bottom of the boot. In stark contrast, today I can feel my balance under the balls of my feet, I can also flex my boot progressively - the whole time with my heels still firmly down.
In other words, I can finally do what every single instructor (including Tom) has ever told me to do but couldn't for want of ~5mm off the back of my Head Vector 120 boots.
Just. Five. Millimeters.
I look forward to playing with a gas pedal next season. I can get "forward" so much more easily when skiing switch, and this podcast has made me wonder why ....
Incredible how such a small change can open up learning opportunities for improvement. I’ll get Lou to check the comments on this podcast episode to perhaps reply to your duck foot question.
@@Bigpictureskiing Well Tom and I haven't discussed this so I've no idea of his thoughts. My thoughts however are this: Duck-footedness with some exceptions for malformations comes from external rotation of the entire leg at the hip. Spending all day sitting and without stretching is often thought to be a cause, as I understand it. Therefore, the foot is not duck-footed but instead the entire leg is. If duck-footed stance is accommodated inside the boot it means the leg and most importantly in my opinion ,the knee is externally rotated relative the ski and not bending and moving in alignment with the ski. I think it would promote being on the inside edge always and is a great way to introduce sore knees into what was a comfortable setup.
Interesting conversation - and timing with my own skiing journey. You convinced me last year to make the leap to a 130 boot (Lange RX 130 LV), and my skiing has definitely improved this season. (From high 130s to high 140s on CARV - with a 151 as my best day). Now I’m wondering if another step up in boot performance is the right way to go. Something like a RS 130 or Atomic Redster CS 130 etc. I have a very low volume foot, hence the interest in narrow lasted boots. How do you know when to make the jump up in performance vs just tinkering with your own boots? Ramp angles, heel lifts, etc.?
Hard to say but if you’re thinking it I’d say it could be time
@@Bigpictureskiing I agree with Tom. Unfortunately from the expense standpoint you won't learn without trying. But when you say another step in performance what do you mean? A narrower boot or a stiffer boot?
I was looking for a new boot a couple years ago and found a shop in Calgary named Lou’s Performance (?) I think it was. Unfortunately I missed out, as he was closing up shop. I think this may have been the owner? Great information and great interview!
You are correct. Lou was the owner of Lou's Performance Center in Calgary. I got my boots from him and was sad that he closed the shop. I am looking to get new boots next season and now have to find a new boot fitter.
@@Yellowfruit65 Ski West is using the same press I used to modify your boots and I've spent a lot of time in the store showing Dave (the owner) how I fit boots. I am recommending Ski West to my searching customers. I may be in Calgary in the fall and would be happy to help. Dave will contact me if you think it is necessary.
Very informative. Thank you!
Glad it was helpful!
This brings us to another issue. System bindings on an adjustable track
High level racing skis with race plates have the ability to give more knee angulation and the ability to move bindings until you find the sweet spot. I love Look Pivot turntable bindings, but unfortunately I haven't seen a way to adapt them to race plate. Therefor, if you are experimenting, you will end up making a lot of holes in your skis until you find the correct mounting position that works for you.
So good to get that knowledge you've both shared. It's (boot fitting) a part of many so called "black arts". By that I just mean few people teach a Black art, in order to protect their positions and status as an expert. Black arts are often using misleading terms and slang words. Really counter productive! I bought two new pair, one for my wife the other my daughter. Neither fitted well enough to ski one full day. Getting adjustment after was free but you gotta know it's a process that takes time and skill.
@@Landwy1 Rossignol made a racing version of the Pivot years ago, called FKS185. Binding itself was the same as a Look Pivot 18 but there was a really overengineered 2-piece raceplate to go with it. Think you could find one somewhere for cheap (and use a 2024 Pivot 18 on it if you don't trust old bindings) ;)