80s boot (SX92) sizing question?

[mdf]

If I had a knee that was already torn up, the last thing I would do is risk it with old boots that could break at any time. I had a pair of 91E's that I loved...one day on an easy slope with my kids the rear buckle broke. I was actually able to get new replacements from Salomon (even though they were probably 15 years old at that point) but I "got the memo" and bought new boots before the next season.

I think they did improve the cables over the years. The cable on my 1st SX90's rusted out and failed (in the middle of STH at Snowbird!) when they were only a year old. I've never seen any cracking in the plastic on any of my SX's. But still...

I am skiing on old boots, but I have replaced them several times with almost-new old stock several times. The pair I'm skiing have only seen about 5 years of active use. I have been very careful to dry them and then keep them dry in storage.
The bolts that hold the cuff to the clog can loosen up too. I had one fall out, fortunately in the locker room and someone noticed. Make sure they are tight.

I don't think I'd use my "old" old boots either.

 

[johnnyvw]

My last pair (Tecnicas), which I finally abandoned last year, were 18 years old. Some example I set....

 

[Philpug]

I couldn't get a picture but there were a pair of SX90's the hill yesterday.

 

[rmplum]

Went ALL IN today, the SX92s, some old 87 K2 KVCs, etc.

Pretty rewarding to ski the old sticks - you earn every turn in them for sure and they HATE to go slow.

It was my daughter's first time on skis in 3-4 years so we did easy Blue stuff all day - took the first few runs pretty easy and then carved hard the last few hours.

BTW, last time I'll ever use these skis. They are too short and the bindings are toast.

 

[Johan]

Yeah those HFs are neat. I'd never take these old things on anything serious though. My days of 3x per week skiing are far far behind me (if I get out 5x per year its a BIG year) and with a torn up knee from a dog collision they'd never see any sort of extreme action anymore anyway.

Can anyone elaborate on the difference between the base SX92 and the equipe model? Was the equipe version just a stiffer flex?

Ever since the first Equipe (SX90) they’ve indeed ”just” been a stiffer SX90/91/92 (I don’t think there was an Equipe model of the 93 generation).

 

[AlpsSkidad]

I ran into a guy at the base of the gondola today sporting these SX91s. He said he’s been skiing in the same pair since 1984. He had newer shaped skis though, just loved his old boots.

 

[mdf]

Ever since the first Equipe (SX90) they’ve indeed ”just” been a stiffer SX90/91/92 (I don’t think there was an Equipe model of the 93 generation).

Not sure where the "Force" names fit into this scheme...

 

[skiJ]

two things -

to the OP's question about 93 v. 93equipe ,

I believe the equipes had a separate cuff closure buckle, while the 93s and the 92s before them had a single closure system with the rear buckle/latch ;

to the issue of the color, I believe the Black and violet boot was a European distributed boot ;
in north america, the 93 was the black-and-orange boot; the 92 was mostly a White shell with black ( and blue and pink) accents -

the comments about HIP fit are spot-on - it was a tricky fit for my 11C young foot...

an innovative boot - perhaps ahead of it's Time...
cheaper models and other rear-entry boots did not ski well ( and ultimately got blamed for issues that I believe were poor technique, and boot fit issues... )

the durability of thirty year old plastic IS a genuine, Real concern !
use 'em for days of gentle cruising on gradual slopes. . .

Enjoy ! !! skiJ

 

[Tydog96]

I've got the sx91 Equipe since new - miles of smiles. Tried them out last week and boy do I still love those boots. Funny, I was at the Olympic ski museum at Park City two years ago and the had a rotating wall display of significant boot progress for racers - imagine my surprise when the red 91e came around the corner. Date on card says 1984. I wish I could get the sole bottoms redone, I would wear them. I don't think there is any plastic fatigue or cable risks for frontside skiing.

 

[RetroSkier]

This thread is what convinced me to sign up with SkiTalk, especially after picking up a vintage pair of SX92 Equipe boots.

Biggest difference I can see is a more customizable fit for the equipe with spacers for the footbed, spacers around the shin, heel spacer ? and a load distributor that the instructions didn’t even mention… oh! and a 4 position arch support.

SX92 looks similar with the combo closure, adjustable flex and I’m guessing adjustable forward lean.

Only place I’ve seen HIP fit mentioned but still not sure how to do the measurement. My boot fits comfortably and snug so mainly just curious what my measurement would be.

I am curious about what HPC and HTC stand for.

Thanks for posting, it’s led to a surprise crash course in skiing gear for me.

 

[cantunamunch]

Only place I’ve seen HIP fit mentioned but still not sure how to do the measurement. My boot fits comfortably and snug so mainly just curious what my measurement would be.

Around the instep at the bend, under the ankle bones and around the rearmost part of the heel. If you put the tape around the part of the heel that sticks out back the most, you'll get fairly consistent numbers. If you're seeing large 1cm+ variation your tape probably slipped vertically at the heel.

 

[RetroSkier]

Thank you.

Amazingly I actually had a flexible tape measure.

Now I know why the 72’s just fit. My foot is just at top of the liner range. 330-345

My 92’s without spacers added would appear to have 10mm of play.
Boot is marked 350-355
Insole is marked L 355

Aaand I just saw the size on my SX70 liner, 360 with no spacers or extra padding. 15mm of play. It always did feel a smidge roomy.

I’m right around 345 it turns out.

I’m also starting to understand why heat moulded liners are so popular.