or Connect
EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Ski Gear Discussion › Ski Boots - Do millimeters make a difference
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Ski Boots - Do millimeters make a difference - Page 3

post #61 of 77
Quote:
Originally Posted by astur View Post
 


Ok. I got all details:

 

dalbello boss ms

317 mm

9 1/2

mondo 275

27.5 msp

 

 

My shoe size = 9

As mentioned by many you are in a boot at least one if not two sizes too big.

 

My street shoes are usually size 9 or 9.5 wide. My actual measured lengths are left foot 269MM  right foot 271mm, 104mm wide at the widest point. Standing on the brannock device I measure 27/27.5 (as mentioned no difference in shell size. and actually both articles say they are the same)

I am in a Salomon X3-RC CS Size 25 shell (98 last stretched and punched to accommodate width and bunion) and plenty of room for my toes. When I got my new boots Salomon X-max 130's I probably could have gone down to a 24 shell and still gotten away with it.

 

DC

post #62 of 77
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hogar View Post

So if shell fit shows 10-15 mm space behind the heel that is OK?


In terms of length, and forgetting about width or last shape, yes, that's a good "athletic" fit (typical shop jargon for snug but not Draconian). <10 is generally for race plugs that you won't wear all day (at least in bumps), >15 is moving toward a "comfort" fit that will reduce your efficiency in getting force to the edges. Other's MMV, a lot of this is affected by the last shape. And IME each brand should have its own chart, since despite the term "mondo," the ratio is not comparable across brands. Finally, boot fit has about as much relation to street shoe fit as a F1 has to a Honda Civic. They both have engines and wheels...

 

Wish people would either just give up on charts or at least realize they are a rough sorting device, allow shops to figure out which boots to pull out of the back. And big box stores with students selling you stuff to point to something "official," avoid the hassle of pulling the liner. If the shop doesn't recommend a shell fit after the rough sort, you're in the wrong place. 

post #63 of 77
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hogar View Post

So if shell fit shows 10-15 mm space behind the heel that is OK?


If the shell fit shows the big head of a small mag light flashlight fits behind the heel, its a recreational fit and you will be okay if you ski casually about 10 days a year. 

post #64 of 77

This thread has a video in the first post which might be useful...

 

http://www.epicski.com/t/112188/fit-stick-for-shell-sizing

 

 

Assuming the 10-15mm (max) ideal shell fit is measured right there at the bottom part of the stick in the pic above, the difficulty is that the rearmost portion of the heel is about an inch or so above the sole bottom, and moves into the rearward curve of the boot shell behind the heel. Easy to see and get at (from the side and above) with the boot cut off as shown, but in a normal boot not so easy to see and get at.

 

I'm in the process of checking out some different boots. Here's a pair of 10 year old Head RS 80's (BSL 317mm), and a new pair of Lange SX 120's (BSL 316mm). Both size 27.5/27 shell...

 

 

The boot board (zeppa) in the RS 80 is 12mm thick at the front and 30mm thick at the rear! The SX 120's boot board is 3mm thick in the front and 10mm thick in the rear.

 

I poke around in thrift stores a lot and last summer the RS 80's caught my eye. They looked to be in pretty good condition, and were the same BSL and last width (103mm) as my current Head boots. I yanked the liner and the shell fit was pretty good, and they were selling for $19.95, so I snagged em. I mainly got them because I play around with some exercises in ski boots at home, and also could use them for adjusting bindings, and my regular boots are usually kept elsewhere. Wasn't planning to actually try and use them for skiing, but I did take them out for a few runs end of one day this season. The fit was very snug, (not a bad thing), and without shell mods I had some hotspots (bony protrusions), but the main thing I remember is that after just a run or two my quads were really complaining (problem I don't normally have). Looking at the ramp in that boot board I think I now understand why.

 

 

I seem to be right on the cusp of a 27 shell typically being just a little longer than I would like, and a 26 shell being a little too short. The 27.5 SX 120's with the stock liner and that boot board definitely feel loose all around, so I'm going to try an SX 120 in a 26.5 and see what kind of fit that provides.

 

To answer the original question - yes.  ;-)

post #65 of 77
I suspect that a lot of skiers that measure their foot with a tracing will measure large which has has more to do with how they do the tracing. The easiest method I find is to bump the heel against a wall and slide a small block against the longest toe, remove foot and measure. You'll likely have a 4-6mm difference which is a 1/4 of an inch.
post #66 of 77
My Dalbellos are 27.0 whilst my Scarpas are 27.5. The Dalbellos are 27.0 shell with a thinner liner. The Scarpas are 28.0 shell with a thicker liner. Just to confuse everyone even more, the Dalbellos BSL is longer than the Scarpas.

I guess the moral is there is no standard, even in Mondo.

Also, I would consider it dishonest and fraudulent for a ski boot labled 27.5 to be no different from a 27.0. Hard for me to believe thete is no difference.
post #67 of 77
So I recall someone on this site mentioning that last changes with foot length, that a 97 mm last for narrow feet is only this width in a 26/26.5 length, but wider as the foot is longer. Is there a rule of thumb for this?
post #68 of 77
Quote:
Originally Posted by XLTL View Post

So I recall someone on this site mentioning that last changes with foot length, that a 97 mm last for narrow feet is only this width in a 26/26.5 length, but wider as the foot is longer. Is there a rule of thumb for this?
2mm per size , up or down and all published last sizes are for a 26.5 boot. So for a 98mm last boot, it is 94mm for a 24.5 and 102mm for a 27.5.
post #69 of 77
Quote:
Originally Posted by joe strummer View Post

My Dalbellos are 27.0 whilst my Scarpas are 27.5. The Dalbellos are 27.0 shell with a thinner liner. The Scarpas are 28.0 shell with a thicker liner. Just to confuse everyone even more, the Dalbellos BSL is longer than the Scarpas.

I guess the moral is there is no standard, even in Mondo.

Also, I would consider it dishonest and fraudulent for a ski boot labled 27.5 to be no different from a 27.0. Hard for me to believe thete is no difference.
Best believe it because that is the way it is for downhill boots.
post #70 of 77
Quote:
Originally Posted by mtcyclist View Post

2mm per size , up or down and all published last sizes are for a 26.5 boot. So for a 98mm last boot, it is 94mm for a 24.5 and 102mm for a 27.5.

Those sound like some mm that would make a big difference in quality of fit!
post #71 of 77
Yes, they can make a difference in fit, but making a boot wider is not a big deal.
post #72 of 77

So, main thing for shell fit is to get the boot length right, and not too wide in the last, as the boot shell can be made wider but not narrower.

 

 

I would think for most folks you want to measure the length of the shell fit at the rearmost point of the foot behind the heel bone, which, as the pic above shows at the bottom of the "fit stick" is maybe an inch or so above the bottom of the sole. Seems like you might want a nail (or something) protruding 1" or so from the bottom of the stick, so when you run the stick down inside an actual boot, (which is not conveniently cross-sectioned like the one above), you'll know when you have it in the right position. I mean, we are discussing millimeters here, and it's easy to see how raising or lowering the stick position just a little could make a few millimeters difference in the length measurement. After all, people seem to think there's a noticeable diff between a 10mm and 15mm shell fit. 5mm = 1/5".

 

Also it's commonly advised to do shell fit checks with foot on your (custom) footbed (if you use one) resting on the boot board, as the arch support provided by the footbed may keep the foot from spreading out and perhaps becoming wider when you stand on it.

 

Question: Length and width taken care of, what's the best way to check for appropriate volume of the boot shell, particularly with regards to instep?

post #73 of 77
Quote:
Originally Posted by mtcyclist View Post

Yes, they can make a difference in fit, but making a boot wider is not a big deal.

Yes, but I need narrow low volume boots and there are limited options at >= 30.5.
post #74 of 77

Well if you need really long and narrow you may have to go custom shell.

Not sure if the Fischer Vaccuum will work for you.

There's Strolz, Dale boot, and Dodge (carbon fiber boots).

 

Checking volume of boots?? You have to know the model. Otherwise, you could look at two and compare insteps.

Boot fitters with that knowledge  can be a real help there.

post #75 of 77
Quote:
Originally Posted by XLTL View Post

Yes, but I need narrow low volume boots and there are limited options at >= 30.5.
You need to work with a real boot fitter. Check the "Who's Who" on the "Ask the Boot Guys" forum. I know there are some competent fitters in PA, but don't know where they are in relation to where you are. If you don't deal with a real fitter, you are likely to waste a lot of money.
post #76 of 77
Billy Kaplan of Performance Pedorthics is about 1.5 hours from him.
post #77 of 77

I got a pair of Lange SX 120's in size 26.5/306mm BSL. The shell fit is much better than the 27.5 SX 120, (about 1/2" vs roughly 1"), as is the overall fit with a custom footbed in the stock liner. Things are snug, and it feels like I might need to have a punch for a bony protrusion on the top of my instep, but interestingly my huge inner ankle bones (medial malleolus) seem to be pretty well accommodated by the stock boot and liner. Of course actually getting out skiing in the boots could yield different impressions.

 

The liner for the size 27.5 SX 120 is 290mm long, and the 26.5 liner is 280mm. The boot board is exactly the same for both the 27.5 and 26.5 sizes...

 

 

My foot length, measured with the heel back against a flat wall out to the furthermost point at the toes, is about 265mm, and the width at the widest point is about 104mm. (My right foot is slightly larger, about a millimeter wider and a couple mm longer than the left.) Mileage will vary with different brands of boots, but the 26.5 SX 120 would appear to be the right size for me - 27.5 is definitely too large.

 

FWIW most of my street shoes are size 10.5, and I wear a New Balance tennis shoe size 10.5 4E.

 

 

Quote:

Originally Posted by jc-ski View Post

 

I'm in the process of checking out some different boots. Here's a pair of 10 year old Head RS 80's (BSL 317mm), and a new pair of Lange SX 120's (BSL 316mm). Both size 27.5/27 shell...

 

 

The boot board (zeppa) in the RS 80 is 12mm thick at the front and 30mm thick at the rear! The SX 120's boot board is 3mm thick in the front and 10mm thick in the rear.

 

I seem to be right on the cusp of a 27 shell typically being just a little longer than I would like, and a 26 shell being a little too short. The 27.5 SX 120's with the stock liner and that boot board definitely feel loose all around, so I'm going to try an SX 120 in a 26.5 and see what kind of fit that provides.

 

To answer the original question - yes.  ;-)

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Ski Gear Discussion
EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Ski Gear Discussion › Ski Boots - Do millimeters make a difference