I was discussing boots with my ski buddy earlier, when he revealed that his secondhand 78 flex boots were “hardly worn” and “very comfortable really”. When he showed me how much he could flex them, I questioned his sanity, as he’s 186cm tall and I’d guess about 85kg (well built, but not overweight). He likes to do jumps and easy tricks, and would think nothing of dropping a few metres, so my instinct is that someone of that size could break both ankles and ruin their day
Is that likely? I know the flex nos are arbitrary to some degree, but what should he really be using?
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
I would say no lower than 120....but there are those more qualified than myself to answer.
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
Not sure it would break your ankles, it just means there is way too much give and it would affect your skiing.
Not sure it would break your ankles, it just means there is way too much give and it would affect your skiing.
I agree with this. I've done a lot of skiing lately with my boots unbuckled.
The OP's friend is a bit bigger than me (I'm, 177cm and 77kg).
But I regularily ski with 20-30kg on my shoulder and my boots tetnd to give a fiar bit when I hit a big bump and I've not done them up because I've been walking about with all the sticks I'm now carrying.
Breaking ankles in ski boots requires a huge impact, think 50mph into concrete! At 30mph you probably get away with nasty bruises - so just skiing in boots that are unsuportive means you have to ski by feel and grace, not brute force!
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Idris wrote:
Breaking ankles in ski boots requires a huge impact, think 50mph into concrete! At 30mph you probably get away with nasty bruises - so just skiing in boots that are unsuportive means you have to ski by feel and grace, not brute force!
You might want to ask @DB about that! And I’m not sure style and grace are words I would use for my friend either!
@Scarlet, flex numbers are variable between brands and even models within brands, but i am firmly of the belief that no adult male should be in a boot of less than 100 flex, and if he is 85Kg and skis at anything more than a very basic level i would be looking at a 120 flex or there abouts.... the other thing that doesn't make sense is "78 flex boot" no such thing exists or ever has that i am aware of...... wonder if it is an old intersport SMU (they used to get a boot and change the number son it and de spec it , could be a Salomon X wave 780, which which case about 70 flex as it was a cut down X Wave 7)
Then you can post your own questions or snow reports...
Then you can post your own questions or snow reports...
@CEM, I wondered about that too, but it does say on the side “78”, and the reality does seem to correspond to something made out of marshmallow. They didn't look particularly old, but I admit that I wasn't talking a lot of notice of what the model was, just that it was entirely unsuitable! Plain black with no obvious branding, could defo be an “own brand” model as you say.
He aspires to a bit of short-distance touring, so a freeride type boot with inserts is probably the way to go anyway.
After all it is free
After all it is free
When I was getting back into skiing I had some Salomon Performa boots that were quite possibly a store SMU. The marked flex was 70 but I think that was on some bizarre Salomon scale and they were probably 100-110ish in real world. They were soft but they worked ok for what I needed at the time (until mice ate them in the garage)
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
You can find freestyle boots down to 70-90 range for things like Full Tilt or Dalbello.
Ski the Net with snowHeads
Ski the Net with snowHeads
Dave of the Marmottes wrote:
When I was getting back into skiing I had some Salomon Performa boots that were quite possibly a store SMU. The marked flex was 70 but I think that was on some bizarre Salomon scale and they were probably 100-110ish in real world. They were soft but they worked ok for what I needed at the time (until mice ate them in the garage)
There once was a time when some boot manufacturers (i.e. Tecnica) went up to 100 for their stiffest pro racing models. Sensible, when you think about it. But then, well, you got the picture...
Last edited by Ski the Net with snowHeads on Fri 14-01-22 11:37; edited 1 time in total
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
CEM wrote:
and if he is 85Kg and skis at anything more than a very basic level i would be looking at a 120 flex or there abouts....
Would you care to elaborate on the reasoning behind that?
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
Cacciatore wrote:
CEM wrote:
and if he is 85Kg and skis at anything more than a very basic level i would be looking at a 120 flex or there abouts....
Would you care to elaborate on the reasoning behind that?
Still quite interested in hearing your response CEM…
So if you're just off somewhere snowy come back and post a snow report of your own and we'll all love you very much
So if you're just off somewhere snowy come back and post a snow report of your own and we'll all love you very much
Ooh thinks for the bump (though I know it’s not for me @Cacciatore ). You just reminded me that I had a proper look at said boots, and they say “Fischer Hybrid 77+” (so not 78, sorry, though I don’t know if that’s any more meaningful). They have a walk mode, but no inserts not sure what the point of that is.
Anyhoo, I think that because he’s thinking of buying new skis, I’ve convinced him that new boots are a good idea “they heat mould them?!” and have explained what a footbed is
You know it makes sense.
You know it makes sense.
@Scarlet, my first boots had a “walk” mode - a lever on the back of the boot. Never managed to figure out if it made any difference . I probably skied a few times with walk mode on (clearly forgetting to switch it to ski mode)….not sure I ever noticed
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
aiui, @Cacciatore, a too soft boot doesn't give you the leverage to appropriately pressure the ski. There's also a degree of personal preference.
Poster: A snowHead
Poster: A snowHead
@under a new name, yes, I understand that, or at least the mechanics of that.
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
@Cacciatore, So I don't understand your question then?
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
@under a new name, the specific bit around a 120 boot flex for an 85kg male skier for anyone other than a very basic level. Racers, I believe, ski on 130-140 flex. 120 sounds (to me) stiff for a 1-2 weeks recreational male skier who may be beginner to early intermediate and who weighs only a little more than 13 stone (hardly heavy).
@under a new name, the specific bit around a 120 boot flex for an 85kg male skier for anyone other than a very basic level. Racers, I believe, ski on 130-140 flex. 120 sounds (to me) stiff for a 1-2 weeks recreational male skier who may be beginner to early intermediate and who weighs only a little more than 13 stone (hardly heavy).
I would say if you're out of a snow plough then you should be looking towards stiffer boots if you want to get the best out of them, but then not everybody does and is happier with the lower performance "more comfy" option.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
@Cacciatore, Race boots go up to 170 but they also use much thicker plastic so flex differently anyway. Putting any adult male in 120 flex recreational boots seems fine to me.
@under a new name, the specific bit around a 120 boot flex for an 85kg male skier for anyone other than a very basic level. Racers, I believe, ski on 130-140 flex. 120 sounds (to me) stiff for a 1-2 weeks recreational male skier who may be beginner to early intermediate and who weighs only a little more than 13 stone (hardly heavy).
I would say if you're out of a snow plough then you should be looking towards stiffer boots if you want to get the best out of them, but then not everybody does and is happier with the lower performance "more comfy" option.
Surely, best out of their skis?
I take your point about skiers possibly deciding on a lower flex boot as the compromise between performance and comfort, especially as the vast majority of 1-2 weeks per year recreational skier quite probably wouldn’t appreciate the benefit.
However, let’s just suppose that your average skier, new to the sport (i.e. a beginner) rents boots for the first time (probably likely). Now, not running a resort boot hire shop, I’ve no idea what a typical hire boot flex is. 90? 100? Without disappearing down the rabbit hole of differing flex numbers meaning different things on different makes (so how can one make any sensible comparison), if typical boot flex for a hire boot is 90/100, then isn’t it a bit of a leap to 120, when that first time skier buys his first pair for his second ski trip, having fallen in love with the sport? He may be still at the beginner, moving to early intermediate stage, or, quite possibly not.
To paint this another way….I’m 84kg, 176cm. I ski on 177cm, Redster G9s - a relatively stiff ski that you can’t “fall asleep” on. I can happily carve (long and shorter radius) red runs, in control (not as a passenger) with my upper body well inside both downhill and uphill skis (I hope that makes sense).
My boots are 110 flex. I’ve owned them for 8/9 years and for the last 5 years have improved my piste skiing, probably quite dramatically (dramatically improved fitness has played a part). Now, if I can achieve that (skiing level), plus take on a more demanding ski, you can maybe see why I question why a 120 flex boot for anyone other than a complete beginner is appropriate.
Anyway, when all is said and done, as I begin to consider changing boots, I have been considering 120 flex….and struggling to determine whether to ‘stick or twist’….
Then you can post your own questions or snow reports...
Then you can post your own questions or snow reports...
How do boots know how good a skier is?
Is it not about physics and mechanics; a tall and heavy skier, regardless of experience, is likely to have a longer lower leg and has a greater mass to 'flex', so would require a stiffer boot.
Levers, innit.
After all it is free
After all it is free
@big_ben, levers indeed. But also, personal preference. Mrs U and I happen to ski in nominal 130s, cos we've "always" skied quite stiff boots. I would be less happy in a less rigid boot. Mrs U's sis, who is extremely similar in shape and weight likes her (I think) 120s, maybe 110s but you couldn't tell the difference watching them ski.
A very long time ago at Uni, a chum, ex-Olympian downhiller, specifically ordered very soft boots as that's what he liked. Couldn't really argue.
Actually, another (much, much older) ex.Olympian skied (in his 70s) on very soft skis (just like what he was used to in 1967), soft boots (not like leather but close enough) and unreleasable early Look turntables (circa 1967 ??) as there was too much "elasticity" in these modern "safety"bindings.
To a degree, horses for courses.
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
Now, a lot of the flex has to do with the weight and height of the skier, but it also has to do with the ability level. Most men’s boots will range from a 90 flex to a 130 flex, and most women’s boots will range from a 60 flex, to a 120 flex. This is unfortunately the least standardized figure from ski boot manufacturers, meaning that a 100 flex in a pair of boots from Rossignol and a 100 flex from Head will not always feel identical. That being said, it’s a great way to ballpark things.
The advantage of a softer boot is for beginner skiers. The boot is more forgiving at slow speeds, and requires less energy to flex when making turns and navigating terrain. Additionally, for smaller skiers, a softer boot will be easier to maneuver because you will need less leverage to flex the boot.
The advantage of a stiffer boot is for advanced skiers. A stiff boot will provide more rebound when flexed, meaning that higher impact turns, landings, and maneuvers will take less energy out of your legs. You will also feel more support in technical terrain.
Ski the Net with snowHeads
Ski the Net with snowHeads
Cacciatore wrote:
Cacciatore wrote:
CEM wrote:
and if he is 85Kg and skis at anything more than a very basic level i would be looking at a 120 flex or there abouts....
Would you care to elaborate on the reasoning behind that?
Still quite interested in hearing your response CEM…
apologies for not coming back sooner, been stuck in a trade show buying next years kit for 3 days
three basic things affect boot flex selection body weight, level length and skier level, the most important of this is body weight, and at 85 kg anything much softer than 120 (now remember flex numbers are not an exact science they are different boot to boot brand to brand, so it might be a 110 flex ion one brand feels stiffer than the 130 in another) will not give adequate support, soft spongy boots cause excessive flexion and normally that results in burning quads
interesting chat i had with the MD of the distributor of Rossignol in the Uk at the trade show, he is 6'1" probably about 85kg, fit and a ski instructor (but now 60 years old) always used to be in a 130 flex boot but a couple of years ago he decided we were all wrong and he was going to go into a 110 flex as he "was getting older" he admitted yesterday that he did it for 2 weeks holiday and then went straight back to his 130 flex boot as the 110 gave no support and his legs ached for days after he finished skiing
the key is available range of ankle joint motion AND that the boot fits correctly and snug around the leg, a boot which is too big or ill fitting around the leg will not flex properly and give a false sensation
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
@CEM, no apology required - we all have to make a living.
Thanks for the response.
Personally, this appears confusing. I stated, above, my skiing level, weight, height and current boot flex.
I expect to make a decision, either this or early next season, on new boots (3rd pair in 20 years). Making a decision on random flex ‘ability’ across different makes, when factoring in boot volume/fit etc seems, to me quite hit and miss. Manufacturer boot options/choices aren’t endless in most places, which potentially limits choices offered/for sale.
Recommendations through the ‘minefield’?
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
big_ben wrote:
How do boots know how good a skier is?
Is it not about physics and mechanics; a tall and heavy skier, regardless of experience, is likely to have a longer lower leg and has a greater mass to 'flex', so would require a stiffer boot.
Levers, innit.
This is the most useful piece of information written here in years.
So if you're just off somewhere snowy come back and post a snow report of your own and we'll all love you very much
So if you're just off somewhere snowy come back and post a snow report of your own and we'll all love you very much
Does stance have a bearing in flex choice as well as ankle flex? I have quite pronounced dorsiflexion and, therefore, quite a lot of forward lean. I also find that I need a stiff boot otherwise I put too much pressure on the shell and it folds if I got a bump with any degree of force.
I ski 120 flex in Atomic Redster Pro with a WC booster strap. The strap has really helped with evening the flex out and stopped the boot from folding. I have just upgraded to Redster CS130 which for much the same but seem to have thicker plastic and a more rigid tongue. Looking forward to skiing them.
In terms of fit and flex, I know what does I'm looking for based on experience and, after trying a few boots and liners on, I knew that the Redsters were the best fit. They felt pretty much spot on out of the box but a bit tight. Once heated and fitted they felt 99% right. I know they'll be great inside a few days with no further adjustment.
You know it makes sense.
You know it makes sense.
@Klamm Franzer, the 120 flex Atomics…is the WC booster strap integral or a separate addition?
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
@Cacciatore, I put it on afterwards, to replace the original rigid strap.
Interestingly, the new-fangled 3-part strap on the new boots is pretty similar. I need to play with the adjustment more for a better opinion though. Boots are packing out a bit more and the fit is progressively better so I'll try a few options on the strap to see if it makes a difference. If anyone else has this strap combo on a bit let me know!
Poster: A snowHead
Poster: A snowHead
I needed to replace my Salomon X-Pro 100 boots a couple of weeks ago. I ended up choosing a pair of S-Pro 120s, which were fitted by a knowledgeable guy here. Apart from the fact that the new ones fit a lot better than the packed-out X-Pros, I can't say I've actually noticed any difference from the increase in flex. Put boots on - ski - enjoy!
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
@Klamm Franzer, my current Head boots have a 3-part strap. Much better, IMO.
FAQ
Poster: A snowHead
). You just reminded me that I had a proper look at said boots, and they say “Fischer Hybrid 77+” (so not 78, sorry, though I don’t know if that’s any more meaningful). They have a walk mode, but no inserts 
not sure what the point of that is.
