or Connect
EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Ask the Boot Guys › Boot gurus - Difference WC Dobermann 130 and Technica R9.3 110?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Boot gurus - Difference WC Dobermann 130 and Technica R9.3 110?

post #1 of 8
Thread Starter 



I put a lengthier version of this up in the general gear forum but had no response so I turn to the boot gurus encyclopedic knowledge. Basically the Technica R9.3 110 and Dobermann WC 130 seem like identical boot (same factory, same 93mm last) does anyone know what accounts for the 20 flex difference? Mechanical e.g. flex cut or technical e.g. actual different plastic used.


Trying to work out if I can buy 130 (easier to get in Europe) and modify them to make them 110s.


Thanks in advance




post #2 of 8

Hi Simon,


Flex is somewhat determined by how much you weigh, and your skills. So----how much do you weigh?


Modifying flex is easily done by modifying the shell.


It is possible that the material in the shell and liner are different between the two brands which would affect the stiffness of the boots you mentioned.


Get the 130s and have them softened if that is needed ----- but ----- once you do soften them, you can't go back.  It has always been true that flex ratings between brands is not always equal, so even in this instance, the flex comparison may not be accurate, because the boots were produced by two different design teams with two different specs in mind. 


I think a 130 is not too stiff for most folks in the 8-9 skill level even if they weigh down to 175 lbs.



post #3 of 8
Thread Starter 

Thanks Mike,


My weight is approx 130lbs and skiing is reasonable standard (2 seasons) but still some bad habits (vid in old thread )


Currently on old Dobermann WC 100s, flex is about right I would say but these new 93mm shell looks good and wouldn't mind trying a boot with slightly higher cuff, the 100 is quite low. Annoyingly Nordica don't do a WC 110 with the 93mm shelll)

post #4 of 8

What size (mondo) boots do you normally wear?


What size calf muscle at the top of the liner (measure circumference for me)


manufacturers have been changing the forward lean to a more upright stance recently---this can affect your center of mass position (COMP) over the boot sole and cause the skier to be off balance in the sagital plane (fore/aft).  the boot will seem too stiff for folks with a slimmer calf and they will ski in the back seat:mad.



post #5 of 8
Thread Starter 

Hi Mike,


Without fail always 25.0 or 295mm shells for a race type fit. At 130lbs you've probably guessed my calves aren't exactly muscle machines, 23cm circumference. Bottom of heel e.g. base of foot to knee midpoint is 46.5cm if that helps.






post #6 of 8

Take the liner out of the boots you now have and place the heel of the shell against a vertical surface (a door frame), measure from the inside of the top of the shell to the vertical surface---this is a way to find out how much forward lean your boots have.


Do both of your calves measure the same circumference?



post #7 of 8
Thread Starter 

Hi Mike,


Ok, calves are same size and gap from edge of heel lug to the inside lip of the plastic on the top of the cuff is 6.2cm or with spoiler that they have which attaches to the innerboot 7.2cm. Does that help?

post #8 of 8

Flex in all boots is not a measured number.  It is a marketing number.  No factory has a flex measuring tool from which they then take the flex number.  The number is more a matter of how the boot is to me marketed.  If marketed as a performance boot for aggressive skiers it will have a number around 130.  If marketed toward performance but less aggressive it will be around a 115.  Only way to determine if you think the flex matches your preferences is to try it on.



New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Ask the Boot Guys
EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Ask the Boot Guys › Boot gurus - Difference WC Dobermann 130 and Technica R9.3 110?