or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Canting questions

post #1 of 5
Thread Starter 

Hi

 

This is a repost from the canting thread in the instruction forum, since I didn't get much response on the canting part.

 

Despite of my user name I feel that one of the weak links in my skiing is the ability to adjust turn radius smoothly when skiing groomers. I feel that I have always been good at carving and good at early edge engagement. And of course I can do full blown skidded turns, pivot slips, very short turns etc, but I am bad at subtly blending in some more steering into the mostly carved turns. So when the hill gets steeper than I'm comfortable with the speed control that I get from the "purely carved" turns, the movements change abruptly. Have a feeling that I use some "reverse angulation" in the initiation of the turns when I'm trying to shorten the radius. And that this perhaps coupled with a pivot point to far forward causes the jerkiness I feel when I try to steer into shorter turns. Yes I know, video would be great, but I don't have any. :-(

In soft snow on or off groomers I don't feel like I have the same problem. Then I can vary the turn radius on a smooth continuum without any abrupt changes in the movements.

I have worked on this for years without much progress. I've read all there is to read about canting in Elling's "The All-mountain Skier",  Witherell and Evrard's "The Athletic Skier" and Lemaster's "Ultimate Skiing" and decided to start experimenting with canting on my own.

Checked the cuff adjustment first. When standing in the boots hip wide with footbeds but without liners, the legs are slightly touching the shell on the inside, even in the most inward pointing position. So not enough cuff adjustment.

Then I measured the distance from plumb line to center of knee to mold line of the boot when all buckled up. 23 cm between legs c-c.
 
Left leg:  12mm outside
Right leg: 7 mm outside
 
According to Witherell I should aim for 1-2,5 degrees inside. With my knee height that should correspond to:
Left leg thick side out: 2,5-4 degrees.
Right leg thick side out: 1,9-3,4 degrees.

Got a set of canting shims from cantco and cut them shapes fitting in between the binding and the plate of my SL-skis. First tried 2 degrees thick outside on both skis. The first day was on newly fallen wet packed snow. Felt great and I felt that I had more freedom to stear and keep the good mechanics when controlling my speed on a steep slope. The next day was on harder snow. Skied first on another setup and when I got on the SL-skis with the canting shims it felt like someone had taped my ski my edges. Tuned the SL-skis from a unknown state (home tune base edges...) to 0,5/2 and then they felt grippy enough when I got used to it. Tried 1 degree shims and felt overedged. Back to 2 degree shims for the left leg and 1.5 degree on the right leg cause that leg felt a bit to loose. After a while on that setup it felt good, and all my other skis felt hopelessly overedged.

If I want the skis to hook up early like before, I just add a touch more knee angulation early, and if i want to steer them a bit in the initiation of the turn they feel more free to do that. I'm trying to find a compromise between too loose and too hooky in the initiation. Also tried if it felt better one-legged skiing and pivot slips, and it does.
 
Project for October is to put 1,5 and 2 degrees canting shims under all of my skis, and to normalize the delta for those that I feel have had to much delta. Screws are a bit challenging. Will put in binding freedom inserts and use machine screws on the skis that does not have plates.  And perhaps I should try even more degrees since I'm still outside of Witherell's 1-2,5 degree inside suggestion. I have yet to try to much so I guess I should try that to be sure. Is Witherell's 1-2,5 degree inside "rule" from the 90s still considered valid? Lemaster is  bit more vague but seem to suggest center of knee above moldline? 

Am I going at this the right way? Should I run for professional help? Or will that leave me into the same "ball park" and still have to fine tune with on snow testing? 

I have seen the same boot model as I have now on sale. It is discontinued (salomon falcon). Tempting to buy a pair so that I don't have to go through all of this again when the current pair is worn out. Is the "not enough cuff adjustment"-problem mentioned above a sign that I shouldn't go down that route?

Edited by Smear - 10/2/15 at 7:49am
post #2 of 5

Falcons had a TON of forward lean---this combined with delta and your calf circumference can lead to you being too far forward on your skis which will MAKE you move your hips rearward (may be not good).  So, what circumference are your calf muscles at the top of the liner???  If you are having fore/aft balance problems---you need to fix this first. 

 

Warren use to come by my house and spend the night---we discussed the 1-2.5 inside issue and he agreed that with shaped skis we don't need to be that far inside in order to engage the edge of a ski. 

 

Canting is "often" worked out while skiing, out on the hill----to find the optimum lateral position you will need to be able to adjust the cant angle as you ski.  I suggest you find a fitter that does on hill assessment and get him to ski with you.

 

mike

post #3 of 5

run for professional help!

 

whilst you are trying to do what you have read  it is no longer correct as modern skis have much more shape so i would be looking to get you much more centre knee mass over centre mould line of the boot.

 

dropping a plumb bob is one part of the assessment, normally i like to do a dynamic assessment as well as the static one, as the whole thing changes as soon as you step off the floor and onto the snow and it is these changes that are causing the problems by the sounds of things 

 

the first thing i would be trying to rectify would be the cuff adjustment, either a different boot model, or adapting the adjustment to give you more movement or adding padding to the liner to "fill the gap" and trick the boot into thinking you are centred 

 

the boot you have is now several years old and technology has changed in terms of stance of newer boots (much more upright than the boot you have) this might be a better direction than messing with another old model boot

post #4 of 5

second the professional help...elling, mcmaster, witherall books are awesome stay home and read them, so you won't have to ski... when it comes to alignment a little book knowledge is just a little book knowledge...alignment is critical for hard snow, less critical when the snow gives away from the edge.

 

I do hundreds of alignments in a season, even I have one of my guys check my alignment... any dr that performs work on themselves has a fool for a patient...

 

current availability of performance boots are positionally more neutral out of the box than the falcon. thank your falcons for a nice ride, then get rid of them... newer boots come out of the box with less forward lean, middle of the road ramp angle, and less sole and cuff cant out of the box...less steps in the alignment process...

 

you are giving too much value to cuff adjustability. it is a piece of the puzzle that is a nice to have but not critical for perfect alignment...simply moving it in the direction that it needs to go is generally enough...not a move that needs a bullseye, save that for the sole alignment...

 

jim

post #5 of 5
Thread Starter 

Wow, responsive crowd :D

 

The boot is Salomon Falcon CS Pro 09/10. The boot on closeout sale is X3 130 CS that I suspect is of the same mold. So far that seems like that is a good deal on the wrong product :(

 

I think the lower shell fit is very good in my uneducated opinion. They fit snugly over instep after some boot board grinding and taking away some material on the lower cuff buckle to get a bit more space. To thight before those modifications. And the length and width is also just sufficient. Can feel the sides of the shell but not uncomfortable. My foot measures 25,5 cm, the boot is 24.0 but does not have problem with length of the shell.  Liner is short but it has a flexible toe box so works fine. Had 130$ custom footbeds made, conformable winter custom ski when the boot where new, unposted. The original footbeds that came with the liners are ridiculously narrow and short compared to my feet and guy who made the custom ones cut them into size of the footbeds that came with the liner. They feel better with the same but bigger insoles from my AT-boots, so I'm planning to get new ones made for the falcons at another shop before this season if I decide to stay with the boots.

 

My right foot sometimes goes dead after a while. Tingeling feeling starting at the metatarsal and ends up in numbness in the whole forefoot. But this happens with that foot in any kind of restrictive footwear like stiff-soled mountaineering boots, biking shoes, climbing shoes,  tele boots, AT boots, xc-skating boots and probably also high heeled woman party shoes although I haven't tried the latter. I have come to think this is just a feature of my foot and nothing to do with the boots. But perhaps a corrective orthic could help in all of those except in the climbing shoes?

 

Fore/Aft:

I have very good mobility in the ankle in form of dorsiflexion, 5,5 inches in @iriponsnow's test. Have tested reducing binding delta on the same ski from +4 mm to 0 mm and settled first on 2 mm, but later changed to 0 mm. Just made decision by feel, so it might be wrong. I can definitivly relate to the problem of letting the ass go to far back, but also feel that I need the amount of forwardness I have to not get in the backseat when going low. Often use deliberate attention on not to let the hips move back, but I also need that focus in movements and setups as diverse as XC-skating, classic diagonal stride and tele skiing,  Will try to get video this season to see if spine and lower leg is roughly parallel when in neutral between the turns.

 

 

Quote:

Originally Posted by miketsc View Post
 

Falcons had a TON of forward lean---this combined with delta and your calf circumference can lead to you being too far forward on your skis which will MAKE you move your hips rearward (may be not good).  So, what circumference are your calf muscles at the top of the liner???  If you are having fore/aft balance problems---you need to fix this first. 

 

 

34,5 cm measured like this:

 

 

 

Do I get bonus points for being better at it than @levy1 :D? And more importantly, do these boots make my calves look fat?

 

 

Quote:

Originally Posted by miketsc View Post
 

Warren use to come by my house and spend the night---we discussed the 1-2.5 inside issue and he agreed that with shaped skis we don't need to be that far inside in order to engage the edge of a ski. 

 

 

Cool :D info directly from the source. Condolences, he must have been an interesting guest and friend. How far inside is the common starting point recommendation now? Center over center or always a bit on the inside like 0.5-1 degree? My self corrected setup is 0,5 degree inside on both feet.

 

I measured the distance from plumb line to center of knee to mold line of the boot when all buckled up. 23 cm between legs c-c.
 
Left leg:  12mm outside
Right leg: 7 mm outside
 
According to Witherell I should aim for 1-2,5 degrees inside. With my knee height that should correspond to:

Left leg thick side out: 2,5-4 degrees.
Right leg thick side out: 1,9-3,4 degrees.

 

Self corrected setup:
Left leg thick side out: 2 degrees
Right leg thick side out: 1.5 degrees

 

Witherell also insisted in that book on 0 degree base bevel. I guess that also might influence the recommendation range? 

 

I haven't tried to assess inward/outward movement of the knee as I flex the ankle further. Above measurements are made neutral in the boot fore aft or very slightly flexed. My interpretation from Lemaster is that I should make the knee go straight forward by making adjustments under the footbed. Correct? Do I need posted footbeds to do that?

 

Quote:

Originally Posted by CEM View Post
 

 

dropping a plumb bob is one part of the assessment, normally i like to do a dynamic assessment as well as the static one, as the whole thing changes as soon as you step off the floor and onto the snow and it is these changes that are causing the problems by the sounds of things 

 

 

Inspired by the foam mat/devil level test in Mark Elling's book I tried to make my own dynamic test. I put 10 cm thick blue airex pads underneat each ski and a smart phone with inclinometer app on the topsheet of each ski. Turned out to be useless since it was way to loose because of the softness of the pads, but it was very cool to read the edge angle of each ski while making edging movements with knees and hips. :) Will try again with a 2 cm mat that is as long as the skis to provide more suitable resistance. Is that a useful test? Elling's suggestions was that the skis should end up flat to 0.5 degrees on inside egde on that test. Is dynamic test something else? like those half cylinders under the boots?

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by CEM View Post
 

the first thing i would be trying to rectify would be the cuff adjustment, either a different boot model, or adapting the adjustment to give you more movement or adding padding to the liner to "fill the gap" and trick the boot into thinking you are centred 

 

 

After putting shims under the boot so that the center of knee is 0,5 degrees to the inside with liners, there is about equal space around the calf when standing in the boot without liners but with footbeds. But I don't know what would happen if to the knee if i first centered the cuff without the shims under the boot. Hmm.. makes my head spin.

 

And now to something completly different. All my shoes get like this after a while, and these are almost new. Ankle support of right leg tilting toward the inside. Is there any relevant biomechanical insights to gain from that?

 

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by starthaus View Post
 

second the professional help...elling, mcmaster, witherall books are awesome stay home and read them, so you won't have to ski... when it comes to alignment a little book knowledge is just a little book knowledge...alignment is critical for hard snow, less critical when the snow gives away from the edge.

 

I do hundreds of alignments in a season, even I have one of my guys check my alignment... any dr that performs work on themselves has a fool for a patient...

 

 

I know. But also interesting to learn something new. Hopeless DIY-person in all areas of life. If I can buy an expensive tool, learn something new and do it myself instead of buying a service, I often end up with the tools. Even when in the situations where it's dumb and unproductive...

 

Haven't located any bootfitters that does alignment in Oslo yet, Tips appreciated. Only surefoot so far and not convinced on going that route... Have found one dealer that sells dale boots and Masterfit semi-weight bearing insoles. Thinking about going there for new insoles and since they do the dale boot thing at least they mustt have some experience in alignment.

 

Thanks for all of your responses.

 

Edited by Smear - 10/6/15 at 12:09am
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Ask the Boot Guys