 Poster: A snowHead
|
So its 'off season', and there appear to be some pretty good deals floating around on boots at present. I might well take the opportunity to change my Tecnica s to something new.
Are manufacturers flex ratings harmonised across the industry?
What is the flex rating for my current Tecnica Diablo maqgnesiums?
How good is The Atomic burner as an all mountain boot?
Am I better off keeping my existing shells and fitting new liners?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
|
Grabs popcorn. My 2p really don't change comfortable and functional boots unless there's an objective reason.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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?
|
|
trendier colours schemes??
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
|
I do tend nowadays to be constantly tightening the buckles, not really sure if its cos' the liners are compressed, my feet are shrinking, or what ever..
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
got to agree with ^^^^^ although that boot is getting on a bit (guess it depends on amount of usage)
and in answer to your question, nope they are all different
no real listed flex rating for the boot you have (somewhere around 110-120 ISH )
Burner is a great boot if it fits your foot
if the shell is in good order and the correct size then no reason not to just put in a liner, if using zip fit for example then they can be moved to a new shell when required
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
|
I'm sure I have read from various sources that the test/rating is the same in all cases at the factory and that fit and shop temperature make them seem different.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CH2O, fit and temperature can and will make boots feel different, but although talk of standardized tests has been ongoing for years, as yet there is nothing in place, in fact often there is a difference between two different models in the same flex from the same brand
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CEM, Seems very strange there is no reference point. I meen did one day somebody decide ah, we'll start with a max of 10 and work from that, then make it 100? It makes no sense at all.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
CH2O, a lot of it comes from manufacturers not wanting to tell each other what they are doing which is not surprising
there is a "standard" so to speak but all plastics are different and react differently, not only to temperature and fit but to the way the boot is engineered and how much of a certain durometer (plastic hardness) you inject into the mould..then of course you have pigmentation which changes the way the plastic reacts at different temperatures, then it comes to how the standard is interpreted as to the results, which is why they are all pretty similar but never identical
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Also isn't it correct that the flex number doesn't necessarily encompass how progressive the flex might be?
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
| bobmcstuff wrote: |
| Also isn't it correct that the flex number doesn't necessarily encompass how progressive the flex might be? |
that is purely down to how the boot is engineered
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
| Quote: |
how much of a certain durometer (plastic hardness) you inject into the mould
|
that doesn't seem to make sense, however I think I understand what you mean, albeit I think you mean (surely! hehe) shore, durometer is the device used and shore being the scale.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CH2O, yep, we tend to talk in durometer rather than shore.. plastics Shore "D" rather than softer A, B or C, no idea why just seems to have evolved and is spoken of the wrong way round so to speak, yet i remember back to the late 90's when we talked "correctly" about Shore D plastics
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
|
CEM, the shore D scale has pretty much been replaced by the rockwell scale and sits more conveniently for the kind of values being used in the ski boot business.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
|
CH2O, OT I know, but I'm most intrigued with the 'formaldehyde' name - are you in the biological preservation industry by any chance - museum curator maybe?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
Megamum, 
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
The difficulty with a standard stiffness scale is what does it measure?
Does it measure the force required to initiate flex in the boot? Does it take into account the range of motion allowed by the flex? Does it deal with changes in stiffness throughout the range of flex?
|
|
|
|
|
|
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?
|
|
feef, could add one to that that no boot manufacturer could control...... the range of motion of the ankle joint of the user.... somone with limited flexion at their ankle cannot bend a soft or stiff boot
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ
