EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Ski Gear Discussion › Straightening BOOT Backs to Degrees ?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Straightening BOOT Backs to Degrees ? - Page 3

post #61 of 76
So, the choice is upright and pain, or flexed and less support.
post #62 of 76
Well, no. Pain is not an option. A calf can be so big that the cuff holds the foot completely off the boot board. This is what I expect would be the case if the cuff was painful. That has to be fixed, so cutting may be required. However, it does not have to be painful for the forward pressure on the calf to make a difference.
post #63 of 76
WOW......this is all very interesting.

I've spent alot of time playing around with the foward lean on my flexons. While I still have the original plastic forward lean spacers, I have plastic shanks on the calf area of the liner, and on the tounges, and have removed the rear spoiler peice. This effectively kicks me back a few degrees. Also, I typically set up my bindings with nearly zero ramp angle, unless it's a ski I want to be more forward on in general.

Overall, this seems to work pretty well - the neutral position is very neutral. I can stand and ski upright with little strain on my quads. But due to the flex of the flexon, I can get weight far forward if I need to, and I can also weight back as needed. Very modern stance for modern skiing, and it's biased a bit more towards carving. The big thing is that you can heavily pressure the outside ski, in the center, without having to bend your knee much at all, thus avoiding the need to use much muscle for high angle carving.

I can see how this is an 'experts only' mod, and will probably not work for most people who are not in command of their skis. It does give you a big backseat feeling, and will allow some damn serious backseat/tail weighting of the ski if you so choose. It does force you more upright, and I have to conciously get myself lower sometimes in certain snow - getting my sholders lower, bending at the hips, and sticking out the butt. Check out these pics from my classic MA thread.....might give some insight as to why I can ski the way I ski, and why I like it.....










http://forums.epicski.com/showthread...highway+s tar
post #64 of 76
HS:

In the first pic it looks like some serious tailgunning! Then, on the other hand, those other pics show you bending and carving the ski very well. So, I guess it's pretty hard to say anything 100% sure about these things. If your comfortable that way and like it I guess it must be just about right.(btw. I, for example, hated Diamir FR's for their reutral/negative ramp angle at first)

I did some serious video and picture analyzing of myself...the result, I might benefit a bit more upright boot but mostly it's all about the technique, see here:

First time quinea pigging straight air, tense, back seated, hesitating, thus bending at the waist --> the result, sucky, backseated and scary flight:



Setting a 360 after few trys, standing over the CoM, more upright and balanced,not bending at the waist, all well:



It's easy to blame equipment, 99% of the times it's still pilot error anyways... (Still, next time when I'm buying boots I'll consider some more upright ones)

Some videos of the said 360's (slightly off topic but some self promotion, heh):

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dXcugFVuQnc

Below, A friend of mine. Pretty good for 33year old daddy of two, whatcha think?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TBTxk5Stp7g

He's standing even better on the ski, letting the kicker shoot to its natural trajectory, resulting a slightly corked spin!
post #65 of 76
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jiehkevarri View Post
HS:

In the first pic it looks like some serious tailgunning!

As was beaten to death in the MA thread, I'm in 2 feet of melting untracked mank with thin cover at high speed, and am heavily back to avoid being tossed over the bars. Being able to put all you weight on the last 2 feet of the ski can be very handy some times, if you're skiing rough/unusual terrain and snow.....but people who mostly ski groomers don't usually understand this...
post #66 of 76
Quote:
Originally Posted by Highway Star View Post
As was beaten to death in the MA thread, I'm in 2 feet of melting untracked mank with thin cover at high speed, and am heavily back to avoid being tossed over the bars. Being able to put all you weight on the last 2 feet of the ski can be very handy some times, if you're skiing rough/unusual terrain and snow.....but people who mostly ski groomers don't usually understand this...
I'll see and somehow remember that thread. And I agree to that last 2 feet technique - as long as you're strong/skilled enough to somehow make it back forward when it's time to start the next turn (think Bode Miller). I've used similar form many times on rotten snow (heavy slush).

Btw. You are obvioysly a very good skier, so i'm not trying to give any tips here (for you), that was just an observation.

(Yeah, and let's not start THAT beaten to death discussion again here...)
post #67 of 76
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jiehkevarri View Post
I'll see and somehow remember that thread. And I agree to that last 2 feet technique - as long as you're strong/skilled enough to somehow make it back forward when it's time to start the next turn (think Bode Miller). I've used similar form many times on rotten snow (heavy slush).

Btw. You are obvioysly a very good skier, so i'm not trying to give any tips here (for you), that was just an observation.

(Yeah, and let's not start THAT beaten to death discussion again here...)
The comment was not directed at you.....I was hoping to avoid re-starting the discussion.
post #68 of 76
HS, were you at Stowe on monday, skiing big Daddy's w/ FKS bindings?
post #69 of 76
Quote:
Originally Posted by Captain_Strato View Post
Just one small addition to this "Snowcovers" rant.

While I refused to allow Snowcovers to chop my boots, as they did my wife's, they did convince me to have the soles of my new Nordica boots ground - to achieve "real" canting.

Big mistake.

After grinding the soles, they had to epoxy the toe and heel lugs of the boots, in order to make them level again (the angle becomes askew after grinding, rendering binding contact unstable).

First time out, the epoxy immediately began chipping away, causing my boots to slip in my bindings. When I brought them back, they simply re-epoxied the toe and heel lugs - which again chipped away. The boots could no longer be secured to the binding for a reliable fit. No matter how often they "fixed" the epoxy, it continued to chip away.

Ultimately, they also refunded this $250 charge. But, my new $500 boots were ruined. When I showed the ruined boots to my local ski shop, (where I had purchased the boots a few weeks earlier), the manager said he'd seen this issue a number of times.

I was lucky to acquire new Nordica shells from the Canadian distributor, for several hundred dollars more. An expensive education.

Moral: Do NOT allow Snowcovers to mess with your boots. Both my, and my wife's boots, were destroyed in the process.
I just thought I would chime in here. I have had nothing but great experience's at Snowcovers Vancouver & Whistler. Both my wife and daughters boots were planed and the epoxy has held up great for over two years?

My advice is to go to Snowcovers and decide for yourself, if they are as bad as they are portayed (sp) here then they would probably be out of business by now.

coup
post #70 of 76
Quote:
Originally Posted by coupdevill View Post
I just thought I would chime in here. I have had nothing but great experience's at Snowcovers Vancouver & Whistler. Both my wife and daughters boots were planed and the epoxy has held up great for over two years?

My advice is to go to Snowcovers and decide for yourself, if they are as bad as they are portayed (sp) here then they would probably be out of business by now.

coup
According to pros who've seen my boots after the epoxy job, this is an unsound approach (see previous posts on this thread by others).

I'm not sure why all contact points on my boots chipped, through several epoxy applications, while your's didn't. Congratulations! You were fortunate.

3 different shop pro shops, in Bellingham, Whistler and Park City, who saw this work, rolled their eyes. 2 of the 3 said they'd seen it before with Snowcover mods.

The failure of the boot-grinding and epoxy, destroying my boots, and the failure of the $1,250 chop on my wife's boots aren't the core issue.

What stunned me was their iron-fisted refusal to make good on their guarantees. It took us almost a year, and 6 trips to Vancouver, to finally have them honor it. And then, it was in the most begrudging manner imaginable.

They do NOT want to give back funds. I've never encountered such unsound craftsmanship (twice), combined with unsound business judgement.

I'm glad you had a good experience, coupdeville. They're sunny folks when everything is peachy. But, that's easy. If your toe lugs ever begin chipping, good luck on achieving restitution.
post #71 of 76
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skidude72 View Post
Hmmm.....you might need to straighten then....I had room in the upper cuff to do it.
OK. It's not science, but:

I got some thick rubber 'eliminator' pads to stuff down in-front of the tongue. I tried it on a couple different pairs of skis. The eliminator tongues were probably too long, so they would fit under the lower shell a wee bit. They were not glued. Internal boot boards are down 2 mm at heel. 332 mm boot sole. All skis were 165 cm.

With eliminators:

1) Binding delta (Heel above toe): 4mm, very stiff ski. VERY small sweet spot (race stock). Skied days 1 and 2.

Result with: Very back seated. At first, I felt like I was standing on my toes, and being held upright.

Since the pads were not glued, they would work free. Once the pads worked above the lower shell, I could get more forwards, but it was still work. Skied like this for a couple days. Eventually got used to the effort required to stay forward in the tiny sweet spot -- skiing a lot taller was key, as expected. Fwd pressure could be controlled well. Another improvement happened when the buckles were tightened as far as I could, and the boot stiffened. Stiff ski, stiff boot, pretty upright makes a nice carving/racing setup.

Result without: Forward pressure was difficult to control. The fwd lean and boot softness together with ski stiffness made shovel pressure an "on-off" proposition. Turning the feet was more difficult too - over flexed I think.

Conclusion: Preferred with eliminator -- more control, and more fun.

2) binding delta: 2.5 mm, medium flex ski. Medium sweet spot. skied 4.5 days.

result: Much less back-seated than stiff ski and the 4mm delta with eliminators. Required much less attention to stay forwards. (Note: By this point, I was already standing up.) Less ski stiffness may be a factor here in that I could get more forward and be lower without promoting a big reaction by the ski. However, the stance felt much stronger.

There was a "gas pedal" like feel to this ramp. Excellent forwards pressure could be generated - the tips could be pressed down assertively and progressively during extension in a mogul field. Carving railed turns was excellent, with great control over turn radius via shovel pressure. Pivotting was dead easy.

result without: Less back seated than with the pads, so staying forwards was easier, but shovel pressure control was sacrificed -- excessive forwards movement of the CM was needed to strongly engage the tips, making moguls/short turns more difficult. Also, had more difficulty modulating radius of carved turns and pivotting - stance generally felt "weak". IMO, over flexed knees.

Conclusion: This combo of delta w/eliminator on this ski was preferred over all for a daily ride.

3) binding delta 7 mm (same ski as in 2) Skied 1 year.

not tested with eliminator

without eliminator: Back seated with much less shovel pressure control than with 2.5 mm delta. Very weak feeling stance.

Conclusion: did not like this combo. In fact, skied it very rarely this year - it's the reason for the experiment.

4) binding delta 7mm, very soft ski Skied 1/2 day.

With eliminator: Stance felt very weak - eversion via extension was difficult, pivotting was harder. Knees were well past toes. Not good. Did not feel back seated, but the softness of the ski could mask that.

Observations:

The lowest ramp angle was preferred by far -- this would hold the cuff in the most upright position. I cannot believe how much difference 1.5 mm made to the extension!

Extension was best with the lower ramp. The foot would evert earlier, more easily and quite automatically as the leg was extended.

The eliminator free setting was never preferred, probably because the initial knee position was too far past the toes, and the ankle already too closed and knee overflexed. This made extension driven eversion more difficult to realize, fighting against the cuff. Pivotting was also more difficult.

The eliminator provided the quickest response to fore and aft movements -- saving 1 cm or so of shin leverage generated as the ankle closes, which is a LOT of fowards movement of the CM. Since the cuff was very tight with the eliminator, the boot felt stiffer. This is most of the cause. The other being more the upright cuff, promoting the more upright stance, which made it easier to manage the position of the CM.

IMO, the combination of increased stiffness and more upright cuff is a huge improvement. I think a more upright cuff demands a lower ramp.

I'll either have them glued to the tongues or buy a stiffer and more upright boot.
post #72 of 76
I'd like to get the cuff on my boots flared out in back because of my large calf muscle. Are any particular boots well suited to being flaredout in back, and are any particularly poorly suited? Is there anything I should watch out for? Is the traslucent palstic better or worse for flaring out? I think I'd like to try something in the new fischer line with the offset sole angle. Are any of those boots well or poorly suited? I am especially interested in the new Fischer boot, which name I forget, that has the red translucent shell.
post #73 of 76
post #74 of 76
Thanks comprex, but i really have had my boots worked over. Right now I am in Nordica Beasts with 2.5 seasons on them. I have heel lifts inside the boots to open the ankles, and raise the calfs, and toe lifts under the front of the boot to bring me more upright, and the boot has a low cuff to beginwith. nevertheless my shins stilllean too far forward. I have really big calf muscles, so there seems to be no answer but to flare the cuff. I need to know how bestto do that, and decided this was a handy thread very close to on-topic. I am sure if I had started a new thread this one would have been linked anyway.
post #75 of 76
FOG: if you feel like it PM me and I can give you some info to DIY for the boot cuff adjustment that you want.

1) bend the cuff more upright

2) re grind the cuff so it stands more upright.

This is assuming that you can do the boot up over your calfs, but once it is done up you are pushed too far forward, and the buckles are not just too tight. That the problem is the angle, not the cuff volume.
post #76 of 76
The epoxy method has been around for MANY years and was the best alternative for people who had moderate to severe canting needs.

Current technology has addressed the problem by planing the soles of the boots then screwing on a lift usually between 3mm and 5mm. Then the top of the sole lugs are milled off using a router to bring the boot back to DIN standards.

One big advantage of this method is that sole wear from walking does not affect the canting as it does when you use the urethane method because the "cut" is protected by the lift.
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 › Straightening BOOT Backs to Degrees ?