Just out of curiosity, what does your foot measure, semi weighted in cm and what size shell are you in?
-
For more information on how to avoid pop-up ads and still support SkiTalk click HERE.
What does the right amount of flex supposed to feel/look like when geting new boots?
- Thread starter CraigH
- Start date
Bent-boot balance is not a static balance any more than lateral balance against centrifugal force is. It can totally be a dynamic balance tho.
Dude, you're like 7 miles tall. I can totally see anything else being completely exhausting.
Have you ever tried to do the hip extension move in the shop, with the inside foot up on a fitting stool?
So you want more ways that a ski boot can break/fail?
Suspension elements aren't immune to temperature changes either though. Spring rates change, elastomers change, oil flow rate changes. Your mountain bike's fork and rear shock behave very differently at 0°C vs 25°C
Sorry, but these are just excuses. Do the engineering and make it good. The idea that you as a manufacturer don't think this is a worthy pursuit is exceptionally concerning when this is a real issue with ski boots made of plastic. Hopefully someone else comes along and figures it out...
P.S. - although I don't have the numbers handy, I highly doubt spring rates change drastically over about a 30-40* temperature swing...
I do appreciate your opinion but as a mountain bike connoisseur who knows what happens to suspension in a winter environment, I’m doing everyone a favor by keeping literal suspension off a ski boot. The last thing people need is a blown shock or a leaky seal or oil all over their boots.
A spring with a preload adjuster will only control basic compression and it lacks rebound adjustment. It’s basically a pogo stick.
I think where we are at in terms of current materials, development costs, and what people are willing to pay for a ski boot, adding suspension to a ski boot will cause far more problems than it (currently) will solve. And that’s ultimately why it disappeared from boots. It wasn’t solving people’s needs in an achievable, meaningful and value-added way that made sense for people (or even World Cup athletes for that matter).
So don't do it that way, but please don't tell us that this isn't a problem for ski boots. Please put your best engineers on it. I honestly believe if this problem could be solved, it would change the market completely. And this is for everyone; from every level of recreational skier to the racing elite. How many times do we see racers at the top of the run with their boots buried in the snow to keep the shells stiff enough because the air temp is too warm? Maybe go back to some kind of carbon spine, but do it better this time around. Find some way to make the flex of a boot impervious to the environment.
Wow, you are really on a roll. First Fischer is just cutting costs and now boot engineers are not doing their job. #baselessclaims
If I squint *real hard* I can see a premium CF boot maker like Dodge playing with bringing this idea back but it's exponentially harder to see it paying off with a pricepoint boot?
I mean eventually it might all be electronic but Atomic have to bring the EBM back first
And don't forget: still boot fit-able, with good snow feel, progressive flex, natural suspension/damping, producible, economically viable, sustainably sourced, and recyclable
I am on a roll.
Just callin' 'em like I see 'em... Consumers should demand better, simple as that. The mindset of many manufacturers seems to be "you'll take what we give you and you should be happy no matter what we give you". When products are falling short, do you expect consumers to be quiet about it? Ski boots have barely advanced in 50 years. The changes have been relatively minor, the design stands the same. Is that because ski boots are fantastic? Far from it... you would think the industry would take a more vested interest in fixing this part of ski gear considering it's probably the most difficult and complained about part of downhill skiing.
One of Dodge boots selling points is that they don't change flex with temperature. Yet that doesn't seem to have been, or be, a priority for other brands. I agree it's a need, but like everything else, there are a lot of trades involved - and what sells matters most.I am on a roll.
The Dodge boots unfortunately had a number of other challenges due to the all carbon construction. Just because they failed doesn't mean that it's an unsolvable problem.
Well... they're still around and available.
Sorry, you do not call em like you see them, you shoot first and ask questions later. Remember your soapbox that Gripwalk changed the delta? then Oh...sorry. The industry does listen, Look Pivot 15? hello??? Do you realize how many products that we have direct influenced that are currently on the market, because they were rationional suggestions not shooting from the hip or were so one dimensional in application. Barely no boot advancements in 50 years, seriously?I am on a roll.
Where was my "oh sorry on GW and delta?" I think you're mistaken. For those bindings that use an AFD height adjustment to accommodate GW, they most certainly do change the delta. I know you made the argument that it's about the upper ledge of the toe piece, but it doesn't actually work out that way when you measure that resulting delta from the bottom sole of the boot (where it counts).
And yeah, today's 4-buckle overlap boot design is basically unchanged. Still a plastic boot with some metal buckles. Some changes to the liners, but barely anything I would consider ground breaking since the invention of the plastic ski boot.
Right church, wrong pew. It was your "GripWalk Sucks" thread.
So this thread should really be re-titled as "Some GripWalk boot soles suck".
It's not just how much effort it takes to flex the boot, it's the ability to progressively flex and control the cuff and ultimately the ski. A wimpy boot with a booster strap can feel like a noodle until the strap kicks in - you can adjust to that on-off pattern but I prefer some progressive effort. I just got new boots this year and this is my direct experience.
So your binding delta, your overall boot geometry and your personal anatomy all factor in before the flex dimension and profile can be assessed. Right?
So your binding delta, your overall boot geometry and your personal anatomy all factor in before the flex dimension and profile can be assessed. Right?
I am on a roll.
Oh for sure, absolutely.
One thing that is plainly obvious watching interviews and documentaries with World Cup skiers is that they aren't demanding at all. Like none of them are smart enough to see the connection between Lindsey Vonn's net worth and the possibility of being the first to ride an innovative boot design that would get them their piece of that pie if only they had the competitive fire to demand that of boot engineers.
It's like World Cup racers are ... wet noodles ... or something.
Surely the engineers must realize that the first of their lot to design an innovative boot and capture a disproportionate share of podium glory will get their own ticket punched to the rarified air of professional ski industry wealth and fame too, right?
So there can be only one thing happening here, by gods ...
Every year the oblivious, apathetic World Cup racers inquire passively about possible improvements to boot design based on performance feedback, and every year the boot enginers say "they'll look in to it" but then go out to a big boot engineer dinner party and pinky swear not to consider any innovations for fear of making themselves redundant. They then deliver the heartbreaking news to the racers that no innovations are possible and it will be the same boot as last year that was the same as 10 years ago and will be the same for the forseeable future, and the racers, being the wet noodles they are, just shrug and say "Welp, nothing we can do about it I guess."
And then the rest of us in the recreational market just have to suck on this stagnation and malaise.
Because no one in the ski industry wants to be rich and famous.
That's gotta be it.
You seriously think that the most difficult & complained about part of downhill skiing is how PU plastic changes its feel between cold and warm temps??
If that were the case, then you would see more threads about that rather than "my feet hurt", "anyone else get cold feet?", "what boot-fitter?", etc. But it's not the case. Every forum is clogged with questions about fit, comfort, and warmth - which are the main problems that are being focused on with the vast amount ski boots. And let's not forget about one of the most complained about topics across the globe when it comes to ski boots: "these boots are such a pain in the ass to put on & take off".
Now, I'm not telling you that the effects of temperature on plastic is not a problem. But I am telling you that it doesn't rank very high on the list of problems to immediately solve. Even World Cup racers who cool their boots in the snow will tell you that. It's important but there are more important items on their list.
IMHO The problem isn't making a boot that is better at temperature consistent flex; it's making one that is profitable by being in demand by enough people who are willing to pay enough for it to make the investment in research and development pay off.
In the shop, you only have mg at your disposal. On the slope you also have m V*V/R added in. Too stiff? Ski faster
.
The tendancy of modern boots to have less forward lean impacts flex in that if at the start of the flex your mass is already a bit more forward to begin flexing the boot, the boot will flex easier.
Skiing two boots, both of which fit you, with two different flexes, is a sure way to tell that you ski better in one than the other, but that is a luxury that few people have, and mostly, one that only helps you select a stiffer or softer flex next time.
Problems with not enough flex: delayed response; not enough force transmission at beginning of flex range; needing to have boot flexed a lot in order to get the forces you want on the tip; hitting the stop before satisfactory force transmission occurs; and, boot looks like a squished bulging ball when used in high force turns.
If you just making lazy turns a soft boot will usually do. You need a stiff boot to drive a stiff ski in high-g turns, and you need to adjust for that stiffness. That adjustment usually means more forward leans for a lightweight like me. Stiff boots also come at a cost. Land a jump too far forward and feel the impact on your shins, not smooth in moguls - you'll know right away, no suspension - it's like taking a race car off-roading (not recommended), or more applicable for most people like taking a high end high speed sports car down a bumpy road full of pot holes.
In the shop, you only have mg at your disposal. On the slope you also have m V*V/R added in. Too stiff? Ski faster
. The tendancy of modern boots to have less forward lean impacts flex in that if at the start of the flex your mass is already a bit more forward to begin flexing the boot, the boot will flex easier.
Skiing two boots, both of which fit you, with two different flexes, is a sure way to tell that you ski better in one than the other, but that is a luxury that few people have, and mostly, one that only helps you select a stiffer or softer flex next time.
Problems with not enough flex: delayed response; not enough force transmission at beginning of flex range; needing to have boot flexed a lot in order to get the forces you want on the tip; hitting the stop before satisfactory force transmission occurs; and, boot looks like a squished bulging ball when used in high force turns.
If you just making lazy turns a soft boot will usually do. You need a stiff boot to drive a stiff ski in high-g turns, and you need to adjust for that stiffness. That adjustment usually means more forward leans for a lightweight like me. Stiff boots also come at a cost. Land a jump too far forward and feel the impact on your shins, not smooth in moguls - you'll know right away, no suspension - it's like taking a race car off-roading (not recommended), or more applicable for most people like taking a high end high speed sports car down a bumpy road full of pot holes.
Tell me more about the "Dodge" failure; I am seriously considering it for my next boot. The only reason I didn't go Dodge this time (still a work in progress), is my belief in in-person fitting and COVID travel difficulties.