Aracan

I have been done for over a month now. The season was a combination of very little snow and bad timing. I got all of two days (albeit perfect ones).

I use a Ruroc and generally like it. But in my next helmet/visor combo I'll be looking for something that has wider vertical vision. I find the field of vision through the Ruroc goggles rather limited. Lateral is alright, but vertical could be better.

That is exactly what I did

No. Basically I re-molded that spot: Padded my foot in the appropriate area, heated the spot with a heatgun (carefully!), then put on the liner and boot and let cool. Cutting off a bit would have been my next step, but it was not necessary.

I loved the Flo liners. Somewhere I found the info to wear them around the house before riding them, which I did. They felt great, they just did not last very long and are expensive to replace.

I wouldn't know. Since 1) the moldable liner (Palau, not UPZ) was thick enough in that spot to take care of the problem and 2) I could do it myself as opposed to taking the boot to a bootfitter I don't see why one shouldn't first tweak the liner and see if the problem goes away. High-end ski boot manufacturers like Strolz make a lot of their liners and don't touch the shells unless necessary.

In my experience it is the other way round: The UPZ heel is decidedly narrower, the toe box somewhat wider. In the area on the side of the foot where you have a pressure point there is probably not much difference. I, too, had a bit of sore spot there in the UPZs (only one, as opposed to multiple spots in Deeluxe). A heat gun to the moldable liner took care of that.

I wasn't aware that Deeluxe is Austrian, as they used to be Raichle, which was Swiss. Maybe it's just their pied-a-terre in the EU. Anyway, UPZ is actually Austrian, and there cant assembly is far more robust.

It seems that you, like me, prefer a boot with lots of fore/aft flex. The UPZ boots can be softened admirably if you use softer tongues (the softest ones used to be red) and a soft aftermarket spring system such as the DGSS. I also find they offer good heel hold and enough wiggle room for my toes, while the symmetrical Deeluxe shell (such as the 325) was a painful opposite.

I use a small backpack with a bladder that holds about 1200 ml. I find that's small enough to hardly notice on the chair.

a) male b) 181 cm / 5'9" c) 86 cm / 34" d) 51.5 cm / 20 1/4" e) 62° F/ 41° R f) front 3° lift, rear 3° inward canting g) UPZ RX8 red tongues, DGSS w/ soft springs

I more or less adhere to the Pureboarding style. Accordingly I ride a wide board (24 cm waist) with more splay than most people here, about 62/41°.

Thanks for the pictures. I haven't been out this season yet, and it looks more than doubtful if I will. Seems like another forgettable season here in the Eastern Alps. 55°F this morning in Vienna.

I am about the same weight, although taller. I also wanted more flex. After installing the DGSS I found the (black) tongues to be the limiting factor. I exchanged them for the super-soft red ones, happy now.

I ride Drupi's DGSS, because I found the boot too stiff. Installing the system is a breeze, it uses the original holes and you can use different springs. But if you want to go stiffer still, RCR may be the way to go.

The 297 mm refer to the length of the DIN sole. By definition this has to extend beyond the toes and heel to work properly, otherwise the leverage would be all wrong for ski bindings. Dedicated hardboots can have a shorter footprint, as the bindings are non-releasing. I wouldn't want to upsize if you have the proper liner for your foot length. Better get the appropriate liner (26 or 26.5 at most) and see a bootfitter.

Good idea to sort out boot cuffs first. They sometimes come at the strangest angles. Also +1 for getting everything aligned correctly. And +1 for adjusting the rear binding at the lowest angle that still avoids overhang. As for the front binding: Some will tell you 3° steeper, others will recommend 33°. It's a matter of technique and personal preference. Note that the steeper the angles, the more important lift tends to become. Conversely, cant will come into play more with lower angles. And finally, note that (unfortunately) the ramp angle ("inbuilt lift) differs very much between different hardboot models.

I was hit from above only once. It was a low-viz day and there was literally nobody else on the mountain except me and the missus. Or so I thought. After passing over an edge into the steeps, it turned out that there was at least one other person, a young skier, who was also convinced that he had the mountain to himself. Of course he took advantage of that and the edge at speed. It was a loud crash, and I am still surprised that no one got hurt and nothing got destroyed.

I waved goodbye to that illusion two years ago. I came down a narrow, winding part of the run - a groomed forest road, really, just a connector to the lift. I turned a corner, and in the middle of that run, where it was maybe 15' wide at most, there stood four members of a lokal skiclub, handily identified by their identical outfits, side by side. I have stopped wondering about people.

So much this. There is a huge demographic out there that can watch you carve across the fall line six times, and the seventh will take them completely by surprise.

I am not familiar with the system, but it seems you need more nuts: https://www.donek.com/product/f-plate-bar-nuts/

I find it counterintuitive to consider stiffer bindings for a powder board than for a groomer board, but that may be just me (and I use bail bindings exclusively anyway).

Angles and boots are important factors here. With lower angles canting tends to make more sense than lift and vice versa. And different boots come with different ramp angles, or, if you will, inbuilt lift. A real-life example: I ride UPZ with a high front and low rear angle. Since the UPZs come with a lot of ramp, I can just get away with only inward canting on the rear. On the front I use toe lift to compensate for the ramp angle.

For a depressing in-depth look at not just the global cooling narrative, but also the "there's no proof secondhand smoke is bad" and a few others see "The Merchants of Doubt".

It also, as indicated by Jack M, depends on the actual angles. If you look at a typical Pureboarding setup, it will have a lot more splay than is usually recommended here - 20° or even 25° and more, depending on how low you can go on your rear foot. On such a setup some inward cant on the rear foot may make more sense than with your typical 54-59° setup.