New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Plug Boots Question

post #1 of 16
Thread Starter 
Hi guys,

I would like to know why some plugs have a thicker sole. From what i know, they have a 3mm lifter added to the sole. I have read that this is not DIN compatible. But what does this mean? Is it unsafe to ski them right out of the box or add a lifter to the toe? Please help me b/c i just don't understand whatthe problem is. I'm considering a pair of Atomic Race Techs and it seems these boots have a 3mm lifter added to the sole. I would like to add a 4mm lifter to the toe. Is it a bad thing to do this? If i did this, i would have a 7mm lifter added to the sole.

And one more thing: if i add a 4mm lifter to the toe of the boot and also grind the heel of the boot (those 3mm of lift), does this reduce the forward lean of the boot?

Thanks a lot.

Tom
post #2 of 16
Quote:
Originally Posted by XT-17
I have read that this is not DIN compatible. But what does this mean?
The relevant DIN standard specifies the height (and width and shape) of the lugs on the toe and heel that fit into the binding. If you start out with a boot that meets the standard, then add material to the sole without grinding down the top of the lug by the same amount, it won't be DIN-compatiable, and may not fit into bindings at all, or may not work properly.

Quote:
And one more thing: if i add a 4mm lifter to the toe of the boot and also grind the heel of the boot (those 3mm of lift), does this reduce the forward lean of the boot?
It depends on what you mean by "forward lean."

It should be obvious that you'll flatten (or reverse) the slope that your foot is standing on, which some people call "ramp" or "ramp angle."

To be slightly more elaborate:

- In most boots, your heel is a little higher than your toe. If you lower the heel and raise the toe, you'll wind up closer to flat, or with your toe higher than your heel.

- In all (or nearly all) boots, the boot is built so that your ankle is bent into an acute (less than 90-degree) angle, i.e. even if the heel and toe were the same height, your tibia wouldn't be vertical, but would be tipped toward the front of the boot. Some people call this "forward lean," while others use the same term to describe the total effect of the ramp (heel higher than toe) and this.

- Some bindings lift the heel a little higher than the toe also.
post #3 of 16
XT-17, some plugs are created with thicker soles specifically so that they can be planed for balancing without having to add plates to the bottom. For example, I have a 3mm plate screwed into the toes of my XT-17s. This was necessary because the soles were the normal (DIN) thickness and I needed to be balanced to the rear. If the soles had been thicker, Jeff could have just planed 3mm off the back and adjusted the lugs on the front.

Does that make sense?
post #4 of 16
toe DIN standard is 19mm thick

heel lug is 30mm

the difference between the two is not a standard (ramp angle)
post #5 of 16
Quote:
Originally Posted by XT-17

And one more thing: if i add a 4mm lifter to the toe of the boot and also grind the heel of the boot (those 3mm of lift), does this reduce the forward lean of the boot?

Thanks a lot.

Tom
yes
post #6 of 16
Thread Starter 
Thank for the input. Now i know how it works. Fortunately, the XT was DIN standard out-of-the-box. This is my second plug i'm considering and had no problems with my older boots.
post #7 of 16
Quote:
Originally Posted by L7
yes

wouldn't that just effect the ramp angle, the same a binding lifters It will tilt him more forward, but will not change the ankle angle. Might do the same thing on snow.
post #8 of 16
Quote:
Originally Posted by mntlion
wouldn't that just effect the ramp angle, the same a binding lifters It will tilt him more forward, but will not change the ankle angle. Might do the same thing on snow.
Guess it depends what you consider forward lean. It will not change the relationship of the foot to the tibia but for the purpose of balance point I think of forward lean as how far foward the tibia (boot cuff) is from perpendicular. Again not perpendicular from the foot but perpendicular from the flat surface the boot is on. So in this way his suggestion would dramatically affect forward lean of the lower leg which can greatly alter balance point over the feet/skis.

Sort of opposite to how a heel lift won't effect forward lean UNLESS it lifts calf muscle out of the boot but either way it will still open up the ankle joint.

There were some PMs and I also told him shimming under the binding would have the same result and often the binding was the real culprit any ways.
post #9 of 16
ya, we are talking about the same thing, just different ways.
post #10 of 16
It is, of course, the case that there's no real practical difference between raising your heel (or your toe) by adding to the sole (and planing the top of the lug that fits in the binding), or by raising the sole with a shim under the binding.

There is a "rules" difference if you're racing, because the boot sole can't be more than 55mm above the base of the ski, and your foot can't be more than 45mm above the boot sole. 60+40 is right out, even though it has the same overall effect as 55+45. Presumably, the "standard practice" fitters use in dealing with plug boots assumes that you need to comply with FIS/USSA rules.
post #11 of 16
sjj, absolutely. I like to do it on the boots, though, so I can easily move from ski-to-ski without my balance changing dramatically. Yes, different bindings do make a difference.
post #12 of 16
Thread Starter 
This is exactly what i was thinking about. I do not race and i think it is much easier to add a lifter (i have home made lifters) under the binding than to add a lifter under the toe lug and then plane the top of the lug.

But if you have a ski quiver, it would be better to do it on the boot.
post #13 of 16
Quote:
Originally Posted by XT-17
This is exactly what i was thinking about. I do not race and i think it is much easier to add a lifter (i have home made lifters) under the binding than to add a lifter under the toe lug and then plane the top of the lug.

But if you have a ski quiver, it would be better to do it on the boot.
...or if one has a demo addiction. But, we wouldn't know anyone like that, now, would we?
post #14 of 16
F.Y.I.

Harold Harb has some new sole plates that are precanted in 1/2 degree increments so that it is not neccessary to plane the soles just screw'm on and rout the tops to DIN.
post #15 of 16
Thread Starter 
I do have one more question for you guys. I am looking at the Nordica Dobermann, Tecnica plug and the Atomic plug. I wouldl ike to know how to make the boot more upright. Can i grind the back of the cuf where it meets the heel? Or should i cut the lower ? This would not affect rear support (I think).Can someone explain how it should be done? I would have to do everything myself. I would like to make the Tecnica plug and the Atomic RT more upright b/c they have more forward lean than the Nordica.

Any suggestions are welcome!



Thanks again!

XT-17
post #16 of 16
I'd don't think of the RT as having a lot of forward lean. Is this an impression you have from having your foot in the respective boots or from some stat you read. If it is going from a stat I would first get in the boot and ski it before worrying about it.

If you decide you still need to straighten it you are best to determine where the boot is contacting your leg and pushing you forward. If it is simply at the top of the boot on the back of your calf muscle then by far the easiest and most productive is to flare the top of the cuff back. If it just above the ankle along the achilles it may be effective and easy to grind out and open up the channel your achilles fits into to allow your leg to come back.

I find messing with the cuff contact a bit of a headache and it may not even help if the contact is down low along the achilles for example.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Ski Gear Discussion