EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Ski Gear Discussion › New boot set up methodology
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

New boot set up methodology - Page 2

post #31 of 51
Thread Starter 
Interesting brother, but most people here at Epicski are here because we are fanatical about skiing. We are the percentile that does care. I can tell you that these adjustments may seem unimportant to you but to me, I know the skiing benefits they offer and how very small changes in angles have very noticable affects on skiing.

You go buy the red boots if that makes you happy or feel fast!

bud
post #32 of 51
Quote:
Originally Posted by mntlion View Post
This whole thing is like a local car mechanic talking about nascar tracks and if they would use a tire with 34 or 36 PSI. sure it matters to the driver at that level, but the mom who drives the station wagon is just happy that her kids are safe in the car.
I think you underestimate both the potential benefits of good bootfitting and of good tire maintenance. http://safercar.gov/Tires/pages/PSI.htm
post #33 of 51
Quote:
Originally Posted by bud heishman View Post
2)The next step was to measure the angles in the fore/aft plane. This particular boot has a zeppa angle of 5 degrees, a forward lean of 14 degrees, which nets 9 degrees of ankle flexion. This matches what I feel is pretty close to my needs. This is where I would like to hear differing opinions on other methodolgies. To find this angle for me, I stand in bare feet on a level floor and go through my range of ankle flexion, then focus in on finding where I can stand with 50/50 weight distribution on the ball and heel of my feet, then measure that angle. I have found that 9 degrees feels very close to me. Should this angle have been different I could have used the forward lean adjustment if the boot had one, added a heel lift, change the spoiler angle with shims, or ground down the zeppa to change this angle.

3)Now I put the boot on with my skis to check where my knees plumb out at. I found these boots put me too far forward over my toe piece so I will have to "gas pedal" my boots by adding a thicker toe plate or shimming under the toe piece. I will ski the boot first and experiment on hill before plating and routing the toes with thicker plates as this is kinda irreversible. I have found that a 5mm plate on the toe equals about a one degree change in forward lean. At this point I am thinking I may need more?? hope not. (BTW I use Salomon bindings which are on the flatter end of the spectrum with the heels about 2mm thicker than the toes.) I want to get my knees to plumb out over the toe of the boot. Then go ski and experiment with 1.5 and 3mm shims to fine tune what feels best.
Bud, Where/how did you come up with the rule of thumb of getting your kneed to plumb out over the toe of the boot. I assume this is done with your leg following the cuff of the boot with no fore or aft pressure on the cuff?

In my explorations I find that I have much more difficulty noticing on-slope changes in forward lean and boot board angle (Zeppa) than changes in boot sole canting. I can readily change these on my Dalbello boots as there are adjustments for both of these. Do you just go by feel or do you have someone observe your stance/fore-aft position while you ski?

Thanks, Si
post #34 of 51
Quote:
Originally Posted by bud heishman View Post
Interesting brother, but most people here at Epicski are here because we are fanatical about skiing. We are the percentile that does care. I can tell you that these adjustments may seem unimportant to you but to me, I know the skiing benefits they offer and how very small changes in angles have very noticable affects on skiing.

You go buy the red boots if that makes you happy or feel fast!

bud
I agree, people here are fanatical, and its great that small changes work well for you. Odds are the people might notice the change of the upper cuff by 1.5 deg, but with Soooo many people in boots too big and too stiff, the first steps are the right boot, that is comfortable, but still skis well. Other issues like where to have lunch, what beer to order, where the kids are are, what the weather will be the next day, are usually more of an issue then a small performance change in a boot.

The changes are important to you, and others on this site, and some are important to me personaly, but I was talking about the general public. 99+% of the people on the slopes.

most people are skiing for fun, being outside, bit of fitness. For them if the last 2% of the turn, on the left ski, on slopes 30-34 deg is off, they really dont care. Some people do and thats fine, but most dont.

happy turns
post #35 of 51
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by mntlion View Post
I agree, people here are fanatical, and its great that small changes work well for you. Odds are the people might notice the change of the upper cuff by 1.5 deg, but with Soooo many people in boots too big and too stiff, the first steps are the right boot, that is comfortable, but still skis well. Other issues like where to have lunch, what beer to order, where the kids are are, what the weather will be the next day, are usually more of an issue then a small performance change in a boot.

The changes are important to you, and others on this site, and some are important to me personaly, but I was talking about the general public. 99+% of the people on the slopes.

most people are skiing for fun, being outside, bit of fitness. For them if the last 2% of the turn, on the left ski, on slopes 30-34 deg is off, they really dont care. Some people do and thats fine, but most dont.

happy turns
Well Mtnlion, I guess you and I have two different clienteles. I guess my question to you is what can you do for the 1% that comes to you that is interested??? What can you contribute to the discussion with your boot fitting experience that will help us 1%?. I am always interested in learning from other experienced boot fitters. Do you offer alignment assessments or adjustments? plane boot soles? build footbeds? offer on slope assessments or coaching?

thanks,
bud
post #36 of 51
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Si View Post
Bud, Where/how did you come up with the rule of thumb of getting your kneed to plumb out over the toe of the boot. I assume this is done with your leg following the cuff of the boot with no fore or aft pressure on the cuff?

In my explorations I find that I have much more difficulty noticing on-slope changes in forward lean and boot board angle (Zeppa) than changes in boot sole canting. I can readily change these on my Dalbello boots as there are adjustments for both of these. Do you just go by feel or do you have someone observe your stance/fore-aft position while you ski?

Thanks, Si
Si,

The knee plumbing over the toe is a universally accepted norm for ball park correct. You are correct in that it should be measured with relatively neutral pressure on tongue and cuff. As discussed earlier a skier with a shorter foot and a longer leg will have different needs than a skier with a long foot and short leg, However, by using this general method they will both be in approximately the correct position. One has more leverage to flex and therefore can be a little taller stance while the other needs a little more leverage advantage in general. There is no substitute for skiing to make the final determination. This is where you can arm yourself with a pocket full of shimming material and do your own testing. I can promise you that a 3mm shim placed between your toe piece and boot or, placed between your boot heel and heel piece will yield noticable differences in your fore/aft balance and where you feel pressure on the boot cuff or tongue. Be sure to keep the top two buckles very snug when testing to get accurate feedback.

bud
post #37 of 51
interesting all around.

after spending time on these forums, i sometimes think that some of us are going too far.

it's one thing if you own a shop and have the access to the equipment and know how to grind, tweak, and the like. It's also another thing if you live in a mountain town with easy access to top flight shops with top flight techs and such.

but those of us who shoot for 50 days a year while having a desk job outside the industry are at the mercy of finding what fits and hoping that it works with minimal tweakage.

as it is, i still have to have work done up at the mountain which either entails taking time off work to get to shops like Bud's or add extra days onto an out of state vacation to meet with someone like Jeff.

I mean i skied for more than 15 years on a pair of boots that were at least 2-3 sizes too big. I never knew. mostly because I was only skiing a 5-10 days at most spread out over an entire season, with several seasons in-between where I didn't ski at all. i have no idea if i'd be a better skier now if i'd had proper fitting boots back then and there's no way to go back and find out (unless Back to the Future comes to pass).

i'm in a pair of Hot Rods (26.5/305) now that seem to be pretty damn bueno compared to the too big San Marcos I had "forever" and the sloppy Salomons my buddy gave me in exchange for a six pack that got me through a season before i plunked down on new boots.

honestly, after going to 3 shops here in the Bay area and two in Tahoe, spending close to a week trying on boots and what not, they all started to feel the same, with slight exceptions. The Hot Rods felt the best overall, except for ever-so-slight heel lift. i'd like to get that fixed, if possible, but would also hate to spend the $$ on a boot fitting/tweaking/new liner/alignment/etc. only to be told that I'm in the wrong boot and thus end up being out a pair of boots (which weren't cheap) and have to start all over at Point A.

that said, i do enjoy reading everybody's exploits and start to wonder if I got the proper fit and am in the right boot. then i flip-flop and feel like Mntlion and think "they work, my feet don't fall asleep, and I'm not flopping around in 'em, so they must be fine." Still, though, one wonders what lies on the other side of the hill...
post #38 of 51
Quote:
Originally Posted by dookey67 View Post
interesting all around.

after spending time on these forums, i sometimes think that some of us are going too far.

it's one thing if you own a shop and have the access to the equipment and know how to grind, tweak, and the like. It's also another thing if you live in a mountain town with easy access to top flight shops with top flight techs and such.

but those of us who shoot for 50 days a year while having a desk job outside the industry are at the mercy of finding what fits and hoping that it works with minimal tweakage.
Dookey,
I am one of those striving for 50 days a year - haven't quite gotten there but I came close last year! I have worked over the last number of years to better understand and affect my alignment. At first I probably got invovled with my own alignment out of technical curiosity and the far flung hope of advancing my own skiing. Then, it became a little bit of a compulsion in trying to figure things out and make them work. Now, as results have come my way I certainly wouldn't want to go back to the way things were. If I had good natural alignment in my boots then perhaps I might think otherwise but that has not been the case.

I can appreciate that this is way too techical for some but I also think it is well within the grasp of those who are motivated to make the effort. One thing I believe is that there is no avid skier (who is measurably out of alignment) who will reject the improvements offered through an alignment process once effectively demonstrated.
post #39 of 51
Quote:
Originally Posted by bud heishman View Post
Si,

The knee plumbing over the toe is a universally accepted norm for ball park correct. You are correct in that it should be measured with relatively neutral pressure on tongue and cuff. As discussed earlier a skier with a shorter foot and a longer leg will have different needs than a skier with a long foot and short leg, However, by using this general method they will both be in approximately the correct position. One has more leverage to flex and therefore can be a little taller stance while the other needs a little more leverage advantage in general. There is no substitute for skiing to make the final determination. This is where you can arm yourself with a pocket full of shimming material and do your own testing. I can promise you that a 3mm shim placed between your toe piece and boot or, placed between your boot heel and heel piece will yield noticeable differences in your fore/aft balance and where you feel pressure on the boot cuff or tongue. Be sure to keep the top two buckles very snug when testing to get accurate feedback.

bud
Bud, I have just gotten to the point that I think I've got my lateral alignment pretty close. I've only played with zeppa angle, forward cuff angle, and heel lifts in terms of fore/aft alignment. I also have spent time with shims testing lateral alignment. If I can finalize lateral alignment on my left (see: A (long) Alignment Anecdote) I may then start to play with changes in boot sole fore/aft angle (delta?) using shims under both sides of heel or toe. At this point, though, I don't think I'm way off from what I've read here and elsewhere.

Best, Si
post #40 of 51
Bud,

With all that you've described you haven't mentioned ski binding mounting location. I'm curious what you do for that as it can affect performance as much as anything. I'm especially interested as I am facing a choice in terms of how to mount my new Snoop Daddys
(see: Snoop Daddy Mounting Point).

Best, Si
post #41 of 51
Thread Starter 
Si,

I would check with the manufacturer on their recommendation. I personally have not bought into the campbell balancing thinking because I have not had a chance to ski on skis using that mounting method, so the jury is still out for me. In general if you are free skiing vs park riding and skiing fakey, I would probably stay closer to the manufacturer's mounting point.

The campbell balancer vs. delta angle is a whole other topic I would love to explore because the campbell balancer assessment does NOT consider what delta angle a binding has since it is assessed bindingless.

b
post #42 of 51
Quote:
Originally Posted by bud heishman View Post
Well Mtnlion, I guess you and I have two different clienteles. I guess my question to you is what can you do for the 1% that comes to you that is interested??? What can you contribute to the discussion with your boot fitting experience that will help us 1%?. I am always interested in learning from other experienced boot fitters. Do you offer alignment assessments or adjustments? plane boot soles? build footbeds? offer on slope assessments or coaching?

thanks,
bud
I would think so.

90% of the mid winter clients are blue/black run, 10 days a year skiers. NOT epic skiers.

what we are dealing with this time of year is a lot of the local banff area ski pros, CSIA guys just came thru with the fall convention, ski school directors, sponcered guys, local ski touring guides, etc getting the new gear dialed in.

Basic first steps, are not at all unique, same thing any good shop does.
shell fit lengh, then width, then flex based on needs, size, ankle ROM, etc. Then footbed for what they need. This is after a 10 mintute talk about who they are, what they can ski, what they want to ski, other sports etc. Get a well rounded idea

Then another 10 minutes of foot analisis, widths, ankle ROM, pronation, calf size, etc.

For the mods above that I tend to take a more based on boot feeling them fitting. I have found that not everyone wants, likes, or need a boot with a XX% ramp boot board, and a XX% forward lean. That might be right for them in our eyes, but for them just doesn't work or feel right. People's ski different (see my above post for differences) so a lot is "what do you feel?" if they dont know then I try a shim, or align cuff or other thing and then get them to idealy ski the boot and see what it did for them. lots of asking "better, worse, different?"

we offer our advice, on allingment and adjust both based on what the person needs (based on our measuring) and based on what they want.

boot planing, and lifter plates, same thing

on snow. sure, owner is a CSIA level 4 examiner, he seems to be able to detect things that are wrong with peoples skiing and can then pass the info to the store to do the boot mods as needed

footbeds: yup, make and change as needed/wanted. both off the rack and full custom.

I've been playing around with trying to find a static balanced possition
for people, that will translate to a more balanced position on snow. again I think that too many variables play into this, but it is a nice tool to have, as one of many.

A lot of the skiers don't "paint the carving/instructor" picture, but might need a boot to help them land a 900, or ski tour for 200km, or sled ski without having the boots slip on the sled. we can help all of them with things that they feel are important for them.
post #43 of 51
Thanks Bud,

My experience with my last couple of skis is that I prefer a mounting point forward of the manufacturers (so far I've based mounting on the ball of foot on the center of the running surface). As you've mentioned the balance point on the boot should be dependent on the delta angle (which the ball of foot ignores). The ski mounting point is also probably related to the flex and shape characteristics of the ski in addition to the length of the running surface. For these reasons I don't entirely trust either mounting based on a Campbell balancer or b.o.f. centered on the running surface. Trouble is that I don't trust the manufacturers mounting point either based on 2 experiences where I've moved the bindings forward after having tried the manufacturer's suggested mounting.

Here's a study you may already be familiar with using the Campbell Balancer if anyone is interested:
post #44 of 51
Thread Starter 
I have read my buddie Lou's study and like you am still trying to figure out a system that would always work, and there are just too many variables. Perhaps we should just mount a moveable toe demo binding on our skis first and experiment to find our favorite spot then pull it off, plug the holes, and mount our retail bindings on that spot. That is, as long as they have the same delta. Can we use your skis?

b
post #45 of 51
Bud, i would like to ask you something.

You said that you will do your own testing on snow to find the best set-up for you. I am going to do the same thing but i want to know what is your opinion on a negative delta angle under the boot. I will put a lifter under the toe piece to get the delta down to zero. But, what happens if i put a thicker lifter and my delta is negative? What happens if my binding toe piece is 2/3/4mm higher than the heel piece?


Also, do you think that a negative delta would affect the boot-binding connection negatively? I do not think so because this setup is simply the opposite of a positive delta angle.

You said that you have a salomon binding with a low delta angle. With this angle it is easier to achieve a negative delta.

I have a Marker WC Piston Plate w/ Comp 14.0 EPS and without a lifter my heel is 4mm higher than the toe. The Marker Piston Plate is 2mm higher in the toe than in the heel which means that the Comp 14.0 is 6mm higher in the heel than in the toe. If i measure the distance between the boot contact point on the AFD and the boot contact point on the heel piece (i have a UK5 shell) i would have 2+ degrees delta. This is bad because the delta adds to the zeppa angle and i end up with 6 degrees.

I can easily get the binding ramp down to zero with a 4mm lifter (and i will do it) but what happens if i add a thicker lifter? I want to try this because grinding the zeppa will result in more ankle flexion and i do not want this.
IMO a negative delta will have an impact on the zeppa angle which will be flatter without more ankle flexion. What do you think?
I will try this setup on snow but i want to know what to expect.

Thank you very much!
Jamie
post #46 of 51
Quote:
Originally Posted by bud heishman View Post
Can we use your skis?

b
Sure, I've got new AT skis (Snoop Daddys) and I'm giving my daughter my old AT skis (175 Pocket Rockets). That leaves her old AT skis (165 Poocket Rockets) with one bent ski left to do all the testing we want :. Actually, bindings like the Neox (which I have on my B5's) allow you to play with this (as do demo bindings) within limits. Obvioulsy, moveable mounting systems are really the only way to find your own sweet spot.
post #47 of 51
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by sywsyw View Post
Bud, i would like to ask you something.

You said that you will do your own testing on snow to find the best set-up for you. I am going to do the same thing but i want to know what is your opinion on a negative delta angle under the boot. I will put a lifter under the toe piece to get the delta down to zero. But, what happens if i put a thicker lifter and my delta is negative? What happens if my binding toe piece is 2/3/4mm higher than the heel piece?


Also, do you think that a negative delta would affect the boot-binding connection negatively? I do not think so because this setup is simply the opposite of a positive delta angle.

You said that you have a salomon binding with a low delta angle. With this angle it is easier to achieve a negative delta.

I have a Marker WC Piston Plate w/ Comp 14.0 EPS and without a lifter my heel is 4mm higher than the toe. The Marker Piston Plate is 2mm higher in the toe than in the heel which means that the Comp 14.0 is 6mm higher in the heel than in the toe. If i measure the distance between the boot contact point on the AFD and the boot contact point on the heel piece (i have a UK5 shell) i would have 2+ degrees delta. This is bad because the delta adds to the zeppa angle and i end up with 6 degrees.

I can easily get the binding ramp down to zero with a 4mm lifter (and i will do it) but what happens if i add a thicker lifter? I want to try this because grinding the zeppa will result in more ankle flexion and i do not want this.
IMO a negative delta will have an impact on the zeppa angle which will be flatter without more ankle flexion. What do you think?
I will try this setup on snow but i want to know what to expect.

Thank you very much!
Jamie
Lifting your boot toe a 2,3,4,5 mm higher than heel should not cause a release problem. You could add a couple more shims to the Marker toe piece too.

You are correct that grinding your zeppa heel down will cause more ankle flexion and loosen your fit, and change your ankle position in the shell. I think you have a good understanding of causes and effects of changing angles inside vs. outside the boot. I would be interested in your results and what your thinking is after testing. Without seeing your stance or your skiing it would be difficult to comment on your personal needs. Where do your knees plumb out over your feet? How tall are you? what size boot length boot sole? This will help me paint a picture.


If you get too much negative angle you will feel excessive tongue pressure and begin to bend forward at the waist to balance. Your boots will seem difficult to flex as well. I would experiment first with bontex shims of varying thickness while skiing first to predetermine the position you like, then make the permanent adjustments.

bud
post #48 of 51
Quote:
Originally Posted by bud heishman View Post
You are correct that grinding your zeppa heel down will cause more ankle flexion and loosen your fit, and change your ankle position in the shell.
Wouldn't grinding down teh zeppa heel be the opposite of a heel lift, which is often added to increase available dorsiflexion by opening up the ankle inside the boot?
post #49 of 51
lowering zeppa will cause more ankle flexion

heel lift will allow more ankle flexion

you guys are both right, different wording?
post #50 of 51
Quote:
Originally Posted by mntlion View Post
lowering zeppa will cause more ankle flexion

heel lift will allow more ankle flexion

you guys are both right, different wording?
If you are saying that grinding down the zeppa heel forces the ankle to flex, limiting the amount of further flex available, I agree.
post #51 of 51
Quote:
Originally Posted by bud heishman View Post
Lifting your boot toe a 2,3,4,5 mm higher than heel should not cause a release problem. You could add a couple more shims to the Marker toe piece too.

You are correct that grinding your zeppa heel down will cause more ankle flexion and loosen your fit, and change your ankle position in the shell. I think you have a good understanding of causes and effects of changing angles inside vs. outside the boot. I would be interested in your results and what your thinking is after testing. Without seeing your stance or your skiing it would be difficult to comment on your personal needs. Where do your knees plumb out over your feet? How tall are you? what size boot length boot sole? This will help me paint a picture.


If you get too much negative angle you will feel excessive tongue pressure and begin to bend forward at the waist to balance. Your boots will seem difficult to flex as well. I would experiment first with bontex shims of varying thickness while skiing first to predetermine the position you like, then make the permanent adjustments.

bud
Bud,

I'm 6', 155lbs, have a UK5 HR Top Fuel. 285mm boot sole length. One of the things that i love about this boot is its upright stance.
I need an upright stance or my knees will plumb out over the binding toe piece. I also have a Tecnica Icon XT which has a lot of forward lean. Boots with a lot of forward lean (and even with a moderate amount) will push my knees out over the front of the boot in a natural position.

In the HR, my knee plumbs out half way between the toe dam and the toe piece. This is good for me BUT my shell is a UK5 and has a higher zeppa angle than, say, a UK10. I have a little too much ramp in my boots. Of course i could grind down the zeppa in the heel, but, as you said, it will affect the fit. I will have more room over the instep and the ankle bones may not fit in the ankle pockets. This is bad. I had to come up with something that will flatten the zeppa angle without increasing the ankle flexion.

I am not thinking about anything dramatic. I have 2 mm Marker lifters that come with the plate. If i put 2 lifters under the toe piece the delta angle will be 0. I will try to put 3,4 lifters under the toe piece, and, as a result, it will be 2,4 mm higher than the heel piece. I know this does not sound much, but you said that small modifications have a big impact on our skiing. Hopefully, this will flatten the zeppa angle to suit my needs.

Thank you for your reply.

Jamie
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 › New boot set up methodology