 Poster: A snowHead
|
I've just finished my first ski teaching season and had a mare with boots...we get a deal on Salomon boots so ended up getting two sets.had the first set custom fitted locally and it didn't make a difference.second set I got we're back country boots and they didn't fit either,sold them both on the bay.
My main problem is I've got big calves as I've always cycled....I can't get them into salomons...is they're a brand I should try? A couple of instructers have recommended atomic as they're wider at the top...I have normal feet btw just my calves.. 
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
Hi Winnie. It's a common problem but a decent bootfitter will measure your calves and stretch the boot cuff to fit, so the brand of boot isn't too much of an issue.
When will you be getting your boots for this year?
|
|
|
|
|
|
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?
|
|
Sometime thru the summer...no hurry! Thanks...tried getting that done,they just custom moulded the boot which made no difference...where should I go? I'm in scotland btw
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
|
Winnie, Head. Seriously a good boot fitter is the way to go, forget about the money, you won't regret it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
| Winnie wrote: |
| ...tried getting that done,they just custom moulded the boot which made no difference... |
Winnie, heat moulding the boot clog &/or the liners will not sort your problem. The fitter needs to have a proper cuff expending jig into which the shells are clamped. Heat is then applied to the rear off the cuff & the jig is then wound to stretch/flare the rear of the cuff to the require room for your calf. Colin Martin (who's CEM on this forum) at Solutions4Feet in Bicester has the correct kit to do this.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
Bit of a trek Bicester.....I'll look around up here.thanks for all advice!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I'm also in Scotland, I'd recommend head boots as generally wide fitting, I'm a prop forward and they're the only ones I can fit my calves into... and fortunately also a good fit elsewhere. Got them and some custom insoles down at Ellis Brigham at Xscape.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Winnie,
1 make sure the boots are the correct size (do a shell check) and shape for your foot, a lot of people (including instructors) are skiing around in a boot 1 or even 2 sizes too big.... smaller boot = less cuff height = easier to accommodate calf
2 the average ski boot is designed to optimally accept a calf circumference at the top of the shell of 13"-14" for every 1" over this you are being pushed forward 1/3" so someone with a 17" circumference calf is being pushed forward and out of balance by 1"
the tools to do this properly are not common, there are a few in the USA/Canada, 1 here in the UK (in my workshop) and one in France, lots of fitters can do the job and will use a variety of things to do it including american footballs, 1litre wine bottles etc, but the disadvantage of doing this is each boot is done individually meaning you might get close to a pair but cannot guarantee it, the jig we use was designed and built by a fitter in the US and does the boots as a pair, link to a picture of the tool is http://www.southernski.com/toe-jam-spreader-ultimate-cuff-stretcher.html
blatant statements saying head boots or atomic boots are better for a large calf are simply untrue, they may have worked for that person and it may only be one model from the range which works for that person.
as for where to go in Scotland, i would probably avoid the chain stores, most are reasonable at selling a boot but will probably run a mile if you ask them to do something complex like this, you could try Alain Baxter, he has his store in Stirling, but is away most of the summer
lastly what boots have you got from Salomon, if it is the impact then it has a massive amount of forward lean and will exaggerate the problem with the calf severely, they are releasing a boot for next season which is the same forefoot width, but much more upright but you will probably need to drop down a size for a good fit
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
| CEM wrote: |
| lastly what boots have you got from Salomon, if it is the impact then it has a massive amount of forward lean and will exaggerate the problem with the calf severely, they are releasing a boot for next season which is the same forefoot width, but much more upright but you will probably need to drop down a size for a good fit |
Hi Colin, can you expand on these comments a bit and answer a few questions, please?
You've got me thinking about my Impact 10CS from 2009/10 which I changed to from Tecnica Diablo Magnesiums. I seem to recall when they first came out the Impacts were supposed to be more upright (less forward lean) than the previous generation of Salomon boots and that the 2011 version was slightly more upright again? It's a while ago now but I'm pretty sure when I first started using them I thought they had less lean than the Diablos which improved my thigh stamina. They were certainly more comfortable.
I've also read that last year's X-Max range is more upright than both (13.5 degrees compared to 15.5 degrees?) and has less lateral cant built in which should give a stronger inside edge. All these things are of a lot of interest to me - I've been diagnosed with chondromalacia of the patella and I can't help thinking that a more upright boot would put a lot less pressure on the inside of the kneecap, particularly when carving - would you agree?
I was interested in the X-Max but put off by the narrowness of the last and the lack of the replaceable soles. I presume the new boot you're talking about is the X-Pro range which I believe is the same 100-106mm last as the Impacts and does have replaceable din pads on the soles? If so, this could be perfect for my situation.
A few questions:
Is the X-Pro the same lean/cant as the X Max or more upright again? How much more upright than my vintage of Impacts is it? What about the toe box shape compared to my Impacts? Will it give more room for my crushed little toe?
I'm right on the width limit of stretch in my right boot in a 26.5. I've stretched it several times and it's ok and good to ski in but I have both forefoot buckles on the first clip (with the micro adjustment almost all the way out) to maintain circulation while my ankle/shin clips are on 3/4. Both boots are set up the same but there's a bit more width stretch still available on my left boot. I sometimes wish I had a bit more heelhold, particularly on my wider forefoot/narrower heel right foot. The circulation issue is much more to do with instep height than width. Would the X-Pro have more height in the instep? Will the kaprolene expand upwards in that area? Would the new 3D liner address my heelhold issue or is the X-Pro narrower than the Impacts in the heel to start with (which would be preferable)?
I've read that a lot of people size down in the X-Max because the foot sits slightly further back in the shell. Do you expect that to be the same with the X-Pro? I was thinking that as I'm right on the stretch limit of my 26.5s, moving the foot further back in the same size X-Pro might just give me a little more width, more heelgrip and allow me to use tighter forefoot settings? I'm concerned that if I move down a size the reduced instep could cripple me (as once happened when I tried a 26). My normal shoe size is 8.5 so I don't think my current boots are oversized.
Lastly, I've overpowered the Impacts (120 flex) a few times in spring so was thinking of moving to 130's. How do you think the flexes will compare? If I get 130 X-Pros I see there's a 'flex boost' on the back. If I take the bolt out does it reduce it back to 120 or less for when it's freezing?
Sorry for the multitude of questions but I was a customer of yours in your Lockwoods days. Then I joined BASI and started getting things cheap but my knee injury means I've let BASI go, so I'm likely to be back to see you in your own place if these boots would work for me.
I presume you'll be stocking the X-Pros in 120 and 130? Will they be in short supply? When do you expect to get them in?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Winnie, Try Nordica Speedmachine boots........... 102mm last on the feet, top two buckles that can be re-mounted to give extra width on the calf section. Speedmachines go up to 130 stiffness, plus heat mouldable inner boots.
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
CEM, My calf is about 22 inches I think... :\
might have to investigate this further!
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
bobalexander1983 at 22" circumference you are going to need fairly extensive work on any boot to get you balanced and comfortable
Raceplate, trying to get all the points
impact was impact, 15.5 degrees of forward lean from day one, the falcon which then became the X3 series of consumer boots had a a little more at close on 17 degrees
a more upright boot will allow better skeletal stacking which will reduce pressure on the knees and give you a solid starting point for the turn
the X max and the X Pro are both sat at 13.5 degrees, other option may be the Lange RX / RS which is 12.5 degrees and is regarded as what salomon looked at when they were designing the X Max, other option my be an atomic Hawx 130 (new flex for next season) but it all depends on foot shape, and this won't give as good grip in the heel as the X Max / X Pro, if you really want to nail the heel down then a zip fit liner may be a good option, it will not cause any constriction in the toe box as it is simply neoprene in the front end
the toe box on the X Pro/X Max is much rounder than that of the impact so it has a bit more wiggle room, sizing is very generous so we have had to drop a size for a lot of people, i measure just on 29 and the 27.5 shell seems to work just fine.... the whole lower shell (other than the chassis) has kaprolene so it can expand up the way a little, it also has a grindable base board so height can be gained there too
flex wise we are stocking the 100 and the 120 but will be able to get the 130 with not to much of a problem, stock is due to arrive with us in mid august, final point, yes you can take a bolt out the spine of the boot and it will soften the flex but only ever one and it can affect the rebound of the boot as there is not such a stble connection between the lower shell and the collar
hope that helps
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CEM, thanks for your help. Would like to pick your brains a bit more if I may... 
I very much want to stay with Salomon because the Impacts have caused me almost no trouble whereas my previous 3 pairs of boots all saw multiple return visits to various fitters and still were never even remotely as comfortable as the Impacts are. They also fit closer and ski better but of course I would still like an even closer fitting boot if it were possible. I also love the fact that I can remould them at altitude in a sink full of boiling water if necessary - my feet usually swell up a little at altitude so I've done this a couple of times with good results.
I can't get my head round the sizing issue. When you say you measure just on 29 do you mean 29cms length of foot? Therefore mondo size 29 (or maybe 28/28.5 in some boots) would be your 'correct' size?
My feet measure L 265mm x 98mm, R 259mm x 104mm at sea level in the morning. So my right foot is half a size shorter but half a size wider than my left. Also, the widest point is at least 1cm back of the base of my little toe which has caused problems in some of my previous boots.
Theoretically, I think that puts me in a 26/26.5 shell which I think is also the size Salomon use for their default last sizing? So the X-Max 98-104mm last would work for my left foot but is borderline for my right. Given that my feet swell, the X-Pro at 100-106mm seems a safer choice and should have a higher instep too.
Given those foot measurements, what would be the theoretical 'correct' size for me? Would you go with a 26 for the thicker liner and rely on the shell stretch to accommodate the differences in my feet? Or is the heel pocket of an X-Pro sufficiently tighter than an Impact that I could use a 26.5 liner for the extra instep height without losing heel grip? My gut feeling is that a 26 would be better and rely on the kaprolene/base grind to sort the rest out...
Or do you think I would get in a 25.5? I can't help thinking that my left foot is too long for a 25.5, and my right foot is too wide. I know the heel sits 5mm further back in an X-Max/Pro but have Salomon shortened the overall internal length to allow for this? I don't know what the exact internal lengths are but I think the BSL of the X-Max is 2mm less than the corresponding Impact so it could also be shorter internally and I'm not really gaining any length from the new foot position?
Incidentally, if I do a shell check on the Impacts I reckon there's a 15mm heel gap (one finger knuckle exactly) on my left foot and 21mm on my right (one knuckle with wiggle room). I'm sure the traditional recommendation was "one finger (say 15mm) is a good fit, two fingers (say 30mm) is too big but I've seen some recommendations that say a race fit is 5mm and a performance fit should be 5-10mm. This seems a bit extreme to me, not to mention hard to accommodate when your feet are 6mm different in length! What's your view?
BTW, I'm not a racer, just an aggressive advanced/expert with a penchant for carving who likes to ski to last lift rather than first lift. This has caused me problems with previous boots as they've been tolerable at 10am but agony from 3pm onwards as my feet have swollen up during the day.
Lastly, I'm sure the 130 flex is the way to go; quite a lot of X-Max reviews say they ski softer than the stated rating so I presume the X-Pro will too. Also, looking at this pic http://rockymountaingearguide.com/salomon-introduces-x-pro-boot/ the flex adjuster is a different design to the X-Max so maybe it doesn't affect the rebound so much? Looks like a single bolt to remove or maybe keep the bolt in but reverse the metal plate to soften it?
Thanks for your input and do you have a price for the X-Pro 130 yet?
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
Raceplate, each foot sits differently in each shell so guessing a size without a measurement and a shell check would be a bit risky, but from how i measure 29cm long i can get into the 27.5 shell with a 13-15 mm shell check so on what you have said the 25.5 would probably work just fine (but without seeing you in the shell i would be guessing) internally they come up really big compared to most other brands/models
on the flex spine it is as in the link which is a little different to the xmax so has been engineered to not affect rebound badly the 26.0/26.5 thing is going to be interesting, i think (not been confirmed yet) that salomon are only producing one liner to cover this in this series with a shim or a thicker insole to make up the "difference" i.e. it makers not a bit of difference which one you get
price is out there but i can't remember it off hand (think it is £380/£390 or there about) as we are not running it as an inline boot, as i said happy to order a pair in when we know what size we need, or as a gamble would order a 26.0/5 for you and if we needed a smaller one would order that when we confirmed the size
|
|
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
CEM, interesting! Sounds to me like I need to do a shell check on an X-Max 25/25.5 as an indicator if I can find one. I'm fairly sure it will be ok for my right foot, just not sure about the left. Does the kaprolene successfully extend the toe box lengthways in your experience or only widthways? If so, the extra 3mm from that might just make the difference.
Your measurements suggest that the internal length is 25-30mm longer than the notional mondo point length i.e. a 27.5 has 300-305mm internal length which certainly seems a lot and is at least 10mm more than my Impacts. On that basis a 25.5 X-Pro would have an internal length of 280mm which would easily accommodate my feet. Not sure I'll believe it until I see it though! Also means I'm going to lose 12mm on my BSL so I may have to move my bindings 
The liner bit's interesting, too. If it is the same size with a thicker baseboard/shim that could actually suit me really well if its removeable/interchangeable. I could effectively have a size 26.5 on my left foot and a 26 on my right which would be perfect! My right leg's slightly shorter than my left so I certainly won't notice an extra few mm in internal height; might actually help. Do you think they'll supply both with each boot so it can be easily interchanged in resort by myself to experiment with?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
Raceplate, they are long, it depends on your foot as to how it sits in the shell, the toe box can be expanded but the kaprolene struggles to do much in the normal moulding process
as for the shims, not sure how they are being supplied this year, it may be a shim, it may be a thicker insole, but that is not a problem as we have volume reducer shims that we can do the same job with
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ
