ski boot flex numbers - much difference?

A snowHead

Hi

I currently have a pair of salomon xwave 110s which are 8yrs old. Liners are worn and shell is probably past its best so I went to a well known boot fitter for a new pair a few weeks ago.

ski ability I am probably advanced/expert by most "tourist" skier standards - comfortable on black runs, regularly ski off piste with mountain guides etc.
I've also done a bit of amateur race training.

I told the fitter I was after something with a bit less flex than my current boot (e,g around 120ish) as I have improved quite a bit in last 8 yrs and am ok to sacrifice a bit of comfort for improved performance ....within reason Smile

The fitter produced a few pairs of boots with 100 flex, of which the salomon xmax 100 was the best fit. Not surprising given I have got on v well with my current salomons.

However I mentioned I was concerned about going "down" a level in flex when compared with my existing 110s, and when I asked to try on some stiffer boots I was told that the "numbers don't make much difference".

The xmax100s felt great so I nearly bought them. However when I "insisted" on trying a stiffer boot to compare I was told they didn't have any in stock and it would take a while to order some for me. So I said "ok, i'm happy to wait for the stiffer ones", but I've not heard back so think they are having trouble getting hold of them

So my questions are -
1. Should I go for the 100s given they felt ok?
2. Does the number make that much difference? I am still improving/looking to get better etc.

Thanks!

p.s I am 80kg male.

A snowHead

I am 75 kg and use 130 flex Atomic Redsters, love them both on and off piste. I have some softer flexing touring boots but find that they offer nowhere near the same level of control at speed or on rough terrain. It is true that the numbers vary from manufacturer to manufacturer and often cannot be directly compared, but your fitter sounds as if he is just trying to rush you into a sale of existing stock. The lack of discussion of the effects coupled with the absence of other stock seem pretty telling.

Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?

Wot @Scarpa said.

The numbers are indicative, so he was either lying or doesn't know what he's talking about. From your description I'd say 110 is too soft for you, all else being equal. So 120 or 130 would be more appropriate.

And it's entirely trivial to find them, maybe just not in his shop!

Caveat, I am not a bootfitter and I would at least assert that I am not mad.

You need to Login to know who's really who.

Remember though that for off piste skiing a softer flexing boot may be preferable as it allows for more subtle movements and ski control on varying terrain.

Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.

Thanks for replies, seem to confirm what I thought.

You'll need to Register first of course.

@alex99, Look for a boot with a soft switch/setting. My old WC Heads (with new liners) have them, though I am not sure whether this feature still exists. I am 73kg and have them set up on 105 which seems perfect esp in powder. Also I was told that Salomon boots are slightly stiffer than the rating suggests.

Then you can post your own questions or snow reports...

@Scarpa, disagree I'm afraid, softer boots just don't transmit subtler movements.

I'm in the "as stiff as you can ski" camp.

After all it is free

Agree with under a new name, on piste the stiffer the better my boots at present are mainly old Lange X9 Race ( pre flex index but around the 140, the boots I am moving to are Head Raptor 150's with a flex index upto 160 at present on 140 but just a fraction stiffer than the Lange Just need a new footbed for them first. I have some Rossi Radical WC flex 120 for lazy easy day skiing as they fit exactly the same as the Langes ).

I weigh 95kg and driving a SL or GS ski on piste would not want less than the 140 flex it would feel sloppy and not transmit as much input to a ski that demands precise input. which is exactly what the softer Rossi's are like even at CFe. They provide enough input transmission for my type of taking it easy but still give a fit just short of full on race.

I would say a 120 flex is about right but equally even a 130 on piste may work well for you but you do need to try as it does take a bit to get used to a stiff flexing boot. Have a look round the other shops see what makes like the Head Raptors offer variable flex ( done via having 1,2 or 3 bolts in the back of the boot ) you can then start with say 120 flex but have the ability to increase it if you want to.

Head do a softer flexing Raptor which is 120-130-140 flex. Think they are the B1 B2 and B3 models now not the middle flex number.

We have different skis for different conditions but so few have boots for different conditions unless piste and touring.

Flex numbers between manufacturers can be hit and miss so yes 120 in one make may be almost as stiff as a 130 in another and close to a 110 in yet another make but I would expect the flex numbers to be more indicative within one make or even one group ie like Lange/Rossi.

You have different flex for different styles of skiing ie SL you want ultra stiff but DH you want something that though an ultra tight race fit, has just a bit more forgivness in the flex.
Scarpa, has it right that softer is normally better for off-piste but not because it allows for more subtle movements but because it allows the skier to move their position over the skis more freely than an ultra stiff boot but I would still want a very tight race or almost race fit even for off-piste to transmit every single movement that I input through the boot to the skis. ( forgot to add unless Scarpa, means subltle position changes over the skis in which case his comment was right ) Doing a big jump off-piste on 160 flex is for the ultra tough or ultra stupid brigade much better to do that with 120-130 flex and for some even less.

Last point Flex is not the only thing to consider as I said fit is important if you are advanced and keen to continue improving you want either a race fit or close to a race fit that allows for the precise transmission of inputs so a 130 boot like the Lange XT130 ? ( might need to check model number ) would not give as good a feedback as their race/WC boot with a softer 120 flex.

Yup, I didn't explain myself too well there. The Redsters are a pretty stiff boot especially laterally with the carbon cuff and sometimes in bumpy cut up forest conditions I find myself being thrown fore and aft instead of my ankle movement absorbing the rapid changes.
But generally I prefer a stiff boot, when I am doing longer hikes on the Dynafits (approx 90 flex) I find that on the downhill runs I am skiing very cautiously and gently as I can't really blast with a decent level of control especially on big skis Toofy Grin

*Ski* the Net with snowHeads

@speed098, totally agree about the fitting. I went for an injected foam liner as I have very narrow heels, for a performance boot they have been fantastically comfortable and the level of control has been very welcome. Taking advantage of a highly recommended WC circuit fitter was a bonus. If a boot does not fit well you may not be able to flex it simply because you are not transmitting the pressure in the right areas.

PS I don't do big jumps myself Laughing

I leave those to my friends and stick to the little ones.

snowHeads are a friendly bunch.

sounds like they didn't want to order you anything in just in case you didn't buy it and they were left with a boot they can't sell, however salomon have got no X Max 120 left in the UK , i tried to order some a few weeks ago and the cupboard is bare so that coule be the reason (but you would think a phone call might be forthcoming)

snow reports

you can always soften most boots easily so ere on the stiffer side. Most race boots have bolts in the back and CEM could correct me but afaik typically reduce flex by 10% if you remove one

thanks for all the useful info/replies

Glad I didn't purchase the 100s as 120/130 would appear to be much more suitable.

I have narrow heels, thin ankles and a medium/narrow forefoot, UK size 11. Are Lange & Head normally ok for that sort of shape?

You know it makes sense.

depends on the last, 92 95 mm etc Lange used to be the only game in town years ago for narrow feet but that has changed atomic have narrow lasts as well as head andlange

Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:

@skimottaret, yup, the Redsters come in either a 98mm last or a very stiff 95mm.

A snowHead

head make a 893, 56, 101, 102 mm lasts lange make 92, 97, 100, 102mm so you need to make sure you are in the correct oen for your foot shape.... whose measurements are in size 26 so get bigger as the shell gets bigger

atomic rester is 95mm or 98mm the 95mm is available in flexes from 70-170 although they stop at size 27.5 for everything below the 130 flex

pretty sure i have an x max 130 in a close size but not seen your feet

A snowHead

And, the new k2 boots are available in various lasts per model so may be worth a look.

@Scarpa, what foam liner did you go for and how did you find the process/results. I suffer from having one foot in a different shell size from the other... Pita

Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?

Fischer and Rossignol do a 92mm boot as well. The new Rossi heros come in a 92mm a 92mm+ and then a 97mm and a 100mm.

@skimottaret,
Yes removing bolts does reduce the flex/stiffness ( not sure if it is by 10% though ) the Head raptors it reduces it by 10 so the Raptor 150 can with all 3 bolts in be 160 flex but with just one bolt it is 140 flex etc. Dynafit also used to be pretty narrow on the old 3f comp boots back in the late 80's early 90's.

You need to Login to know who's really who.

@shoogly, I found it made a hell of a difference. The liners are really in the shape of my ankles, and as I have one slightly larger than the other due to a motorbike crash in a field many years ago that is useful. They are just the standard Atomic foam injection liners, I had them done at the place that most of the local racers use. I am just hitting my 24th week in them and they are beginning to pack down a bit. I still have the original liners but will buy another pair of foam fit ones in a month or two.

With the Redsters you need to take the shell off first before the liners, same in reverse putting them on. A spray of silicon or a wipe with Zardoz on the liner helps a lot.

Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.

The process is basically just taping a couple of pads to the boney joints of the feet, get into the boots and stand on a frame with the fitter adjusting your position. As the foam is injected you need to pull down on the hand rails and hold the position for five minutes. Simple and easy.

You'll need to Register first of course.

@Scarpa, 24 weeks = 144 days?

I would think they would be packing down a bit too snowHead

If. If. I was in the market for new race style boots, I am loving the look of the Sidas Black Project... Twisted Evil

Then you can post your own questions or snow reports...

@alex99

I don't know if this is any help but I have Atomic Hawx 100 with PU Transfoam injected liners which are just perfect. But what I wasn't aware of at the time I had the liners done but have since been told, is that the PU liners effectively take the flex up to about 120. Assuming my memory is correct, this would be a way if keeping your old shells, getting new liners, AND increasing the flex value.

After all it is free

@alex99, FWIW i'm much the same sort of skier as you and have a new pair of x-max 100's that I love.

Fit me like a glove (which is of course the main thing) and only cost £160.

It was so cold on my recent trip to Arosa that they didn't feel like they flexed at all! Might be different in the hot spring sunshine though

@irie,

My existing shells are 8yrs old though so I would have thought time to replace anyway?

Also with PU Foam doesn't that mean the liners are specific to the shell? So if I just got the liners you recommended then even if I kept the shell I would have to ditch the liners when the shell is finally knackered ....(probably v soon)? Or maybe not?

*Ski* the Net with snowHeads

@red 27,

snowHeads are a friendly bunch.

@alex99, Yes I see what you're saying...

My previous boots were Sally Falcon's and (ignoring their near 45 degree forward lean Shocked

) they were 110 flex, but as I took the rear bolts out to make them softer the x-max's feel a bit firmer, especially as they also feel a bit taller

snow reports

@under a new name, I actually ski about 5 days a week so its not quite that high in days. Also I sometimes go touring in different boots. Guess I'm probably about 120 days in, they are getting gfairly packed but I'm still only 3/4s down the buckles.

@alex99, Yes you'd have to ditch the liners.

You know it makes sense.

@red 27, Good point anything below -5/10 I get minimal flex and its noticeable.

Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:

Has anyone gone the other way and got a bolt added to the shell to increase flex? and how much would it increase flex by roughly?

I have heard this is possible and thinking of getting it done to my one year old Head Adapt Edge's which have a flex rating of 100-110. Unfortunately it seem boot manufactures don't like making wide boots with high flex.

Thanks.

A snowHead

@Downhill21, for next season you will be able to get

head adapt edge 125 and Atomic Hawx magna 130 two wide fitting boots in stiffer flexes

adding a bolt/rivet or two can stiffen a boot to an extent, but it depends on the placement of the bolt and the construction /material the boot is made of as to how much you can change

Help!!

ski boot flex numbers - much difference?

snowHeads Forum Index >>> Equipment Reviews/Questions