Michael Pukas

Hey Valsam! Any advice I give is just f/ my own experience, and my opinions may change at any unforseeable point depending on how my riding is going! :p Here's what I think... Measure your foot w/ a very thin sock or no sock at all. Many ways to do it - I suggest trying a couple to compare; take a ruler that has the end @ '0', put it against a wall and stand on it w/ your heel against the wall - measure to the longest toe; stand on a peice of paper and have someone trace the outline of you foot while standing upright and measure the outline on the paper; find someone w/ a mondo point measuring device. Chances are you're foot may be just slightly smaller than what your'e measuring it to be. Be careful about rounding it up - that's (1) mm, and (1) mm can make a big difference. When I measure my foot w/ an imperial ruler, I can take 10 1/4" = 26.0mp or 10 3/16" = 25.9mp. When Fin measured my foot w/ his little measuring stick, it was under 26.0. To properly do a shell fit, someone else has to put their hand in the boot behind you heel. Take the liner out, have on a very thin sock, put your foot in the boot with the longest toe just touching the front, and flex forward. Someone else needs to put their had in the boot behind your foot to verify the space - it's very difficult to do yourself w/ out your foot moving around and throwing off the measurement. Boot companies size boots differntly - some break on the whole size {30.0-30.5} and some break on the half size {30.5-31.0}. Sounds like your Burton's are half size break and the 325's are whole size break. If you go w/ a 31.0 in the 325, that'll be a bigger shell. Again, boot half sizes are going to be just in the liner. A 31.5 is still a 31.0 shell w/ a slightly higher volume/bigger liner. If you foot measures 29.9 you're right on the cusp, like I am w/ my foot being a 25.9-26.0. I tried a 26.0 and was too big, so I went down to a 25.0. I think you're choice in shell size is either a 29.0 or a 30.0; a 31.0 is probably too big. As on Fin's boot fitting page, a 29.0 shell is for feet sized 29.0-29.9 and a 30.0 shell is for 30.0-30.9. The boot fitter I just say yesterday told me he can work w/ a smaller shell size to make room, but he can't do anything w/ a shell size too big to take up room. Stock liner vs thermo liner - I have found you can get away w/ a bigger shell size w/ a stock liner than w/ a thermo liner. Thermo liners are not as thick - lower volume. The fabric around the foam is very thin to allow for maximum contact of the foam w/ the outside of your foot and the inside of the shell. It's the foam that does all the work. Stock liners can be higher volume and have thicker fabric/material around the foam core, and are usually quite a bit stiffer. They're designed to fit everyone's foot - they may or may not fit yours. I find the stock liners in the 700's to be junk - won't even try to ride them, but I'm sure some people love them; I found the UPZ RC10 liners pretty good, and would give them a try if I had them. They're all differnt. Here's an unanswered question that I've had for a while re: mondo point sizing and boots... what does the mp boot size really mean? Does it mean that's how long the the inside of the bottom of the boot is? Does the size of the boot have a tolerance/allowance built in? i.e. - does a mp30.0 (for foot size 30.0-30.9) have an extra 1mm and really measure a 31.1 to allow that person w/ a 30.9 to fit into it? Is there a standard - are all boots that are labeled a 30.0 the same length inside? Not to make things any more confusing than they need to be... Now, do I dare risk giving you my opinion on which shell size to get? hmmmm... If you want a performance fit, get the 29.0. If you want a comfort fit, get the 30.0. If you plan on using a thermo liner, the 29.0 is probably best. If you plan on using the stock liner the 30.0 may be ok. Unfortunately, you're going to have to shell fit to really see what size is right, and I understand you're predicament ordering over the internets. Worst case is you buy one, shell fit it, and have to return it. One scenario is buy one, shell fit it, if you don't like it order another size while you're sending the first pair back for a credit. That's assuming you're buying f/ a dealer... if you're buying f/ an individual, or have no return options, then that's gonna be tough. :(

Start w/ Fin's page on boot sizing - measure your foot to get your mondo size and go f/ there. check the shell fit on your Burton's to see if that MP is a performance fit {1+ finger} or comfort fit {2+ fingers or more.} Keep in mind that shell sizes are only available in whole sizes i.e. 30.0-30.5; 31.0-31.5, etc. Half sizes are done in the liner with either a lower or higher volume. It's most important to get the shell size correct. I bought a pair of SB 325's in a 25.0 a few years ago - they were down sized f/ the previous Burton's I was wearing. they were supposedly the "proper" shell size for me w/ 1+ fingers behind the heel. that boot didn't work for me at all. I bought new 700's in a 26.0 this year, but they ended up being too big and had too many foot problems. So I just got a pair of 25.0, and am waiting to see how these go - I have high hopes for them! Good luck! mpp

It is indeed good to see some advancements in our small sports boots - everything you've mentioned is IMHO good news; power strap - good to add; however, the upper cuff and tongue are not designed to incorporate a strap - it's an after thought add-on. The top f the cuff and tongue need to be reconfigured to better accept a power/booster strap. Deeluxe should just go ahead and put on a booster strap and do away w/ the Velcro thingy. standard liner - good improvements heat moldable liner - looks like big improvements! I have to honestly say that the current "Speed" liner that is offered is junk. I have Intuition liners f/ my new Scapra tele boots, and I find them far superior in terms of stiffness, moldability, durability, material, construction and overall quality. I also have an set of Deeluxe thermo fit liner I bought f/ Fin about 4 yrs ago - the gray ones w/ the seam down the center of the foot. These were made in France by Palau - the current ones are made in China - same comparison as w/ the intuitions - the older France made liners are much better quality. I'm currently using them in my latest 700 25.0's. cuff pivot - replaceable parts - good thing! half-moon - stronger material for durability - good thing! buckles w/ screws - replacability - good thing! I find the current buckle quality pretty good, but not as good as some ski boot buckles that are currently being used. But now w/ screws attachments, you could customize your boots w/ all that extra stimulus cash flowing your way w/ some really trick light weight magnesium buckles! stiffer plastic - horeses for courses here, stiff vs not so stiff; what's most important is a plastic that maintains consistent flex properties over temperature variations. Aesthetics - that's personal, but I think they're hideous! Looks like they just took some leftover uppers f/ 08's and bolted them to some left over 07's. What's wrong with one color? I haven't ridden a UPZ boot, but obvious changes I suggest for them are; buckles - better quality; the current ones seem pretty cheap, and I've heard about them breaking. buckle alignment - when I tried on the RC10, I found that as I buckles the boot, the buckles were not evenly tightening the boot - buckles #1 & #2 were similar, but #3 was really tight, and when buckles down, made #1 & #2 loose. T-nut the toe and heel blocks - wood screws into a plastic bore in just not safe for long term reliability! Upper cuff and tongue design for a strap - it's better than 700; at least the shell at eh back has been designed to accommodate a strap, but the tongue doesn't. Still a lot of room for improvement. It is good to see UPZ making changes in their boots as well - having at least two companies seriously making boots for us makes them compete for better product development, and that benefits us all. Now if Head would take some of their latest innovations f/ their own ski boots and overhaul the SP, then we'd have three serious competitors. The ski boot industry - alpine, A/T & tele - is loaded w/ heavy hitters, and their boot quality, fit, design and economy due to competition, and industry size of course, really shows in their products over the last few years.

My foot measures just under a mp26.0, and about a 9 on a regular foot measuring device. I have about 2+ fingers behind my heel in the mp26 700's; about 1+ finger behind my heel in the mp25's.

For sale: $30 obo + shipping Deeluxe's Track 700 standard "Semi Thermo Fit" liner. Used once. I can e-mail additional pics. Thanks for looking! mpp

For sale: $300 obo + shipping 08-09 Deeluxe Track 700's mp26. Lightly used about 7-8 days. Including Fin-Tec step-in heels - with brand new heel pads!!! - and Speed thermo liners - molded only once. Note: I had a boot fitter do some work on the shells - in the outer toe area - he ground out a small amount of plastic on the inside to make additional room for the "6th toe" area (you may some white plastic dust in the shell or on the liner), and yes it does make a noticeable difference. Also, there is a foam pad on the tongue of the liner to aid in keeping your foot back and down in the shell to alleviate toe smash. If you don't like/want it, it can easily be peeled off. Current sale price as listed on Bomber for this setup would be: demo 700's w/ Fin-tech $295 Speed thermo liner $106.20 total $401.20 You'LL save $101.20 over current BOL sale price! WOW!!! These shells are too big for me, and I just bought a smaller shell size, so I'm looking to recoup some costs. I can e-mail pics. Let me know if you have any questions. Thanks for looking! mpp

I've had the same problem, and I up sized my boots - I should be in a 25 and am in a 26 - 700's. Now I still have smashed toes, plus heel lift, foot movement, instep bang, and overall foot pain. I thought upsizing the shell was a good idea, now I'm not sure... I'm considering downsizing again... there are more problems w/ a shell too big than too small heel lift instep bang excessive foot movement in the shell the shell not flexing w/ the foot toe bang - if the shell is too big and can't hold the heel down snuggly, it results in the foot sliding forward and smashed toes. A good boot fitter can address all these issues w/ a shell too big, but they are all work-arounds - mainly with adding extra padding around the liner to take up additional space and hold the foot down and back. He can also work w/ a performance shell fit by grinding the shell to give you a little extra space where needed, and tweaking the liner to get the heel to stay back and down. W/ out a walk mode smushed toes when standing up is almost a by-product.

I bought the 700's a week or so before the SES, 'cuz that's what Fin rides and he's cool. I'm having some fitting issues, and am considering getting a smaller shell size, or possibly the RC10's. I checked out the RC10's yesterday - I've looked at them before, but never tried them on. So I did... The RC10's are nice - much nicer than I thought they'd be - quite a boot really. And, oddly enough, I found much more similarities with the 700 than I expected - basic lower & upper shell and tongue concept. But there the similarities end... I found them much stiffer out of the box than the 700's - like really stiff - like the walk mode being on or off didn't make much difference; but at least there is a walk mode. And extremely difficult to get into - partly due to my sock friction against the liner. The stock liner is not junk - I'd give it try - it's got a lots of interesting features and customizable parts - the tongue is attached w/ Velcro and is movable; there's rigid plastic on the tongue for more stiffness; there are pads that can be Velcro-ed on to adjust the fit - why not just buy a moldable liner? <O:p I think the 5 buckles actually work - they do spread out the tongue pressure very evenly over the top of the foot, and have tremendous heel hold down. But I think the buckles themselves are junky - the 700's have much better buckles. The upper cuff buckles have those silly little retention wires in the teeth - pointless to me on a carving boot - check out Garmont's Easy-Lock buckles on their Radium A/T and Prophet tele boots - a retention mechanism that works - there's a spring loaded bar that runs the length of the tooth bed that is depressed w/ a button for in and out. That's real boot technology and design. And halle****inlujah Deeluxe/Raichle finally got rid of the zippers and started using real buckles - how many years has it been since man started walking upright? <O:pOne big issue for me is the fact that the sole blocks are not t-nutted onto the shell. They're just wood screws into the plastic bores. It's easy enough to change them out to t-nuts though. The sole blocks are made of hard slippery plastic, not grippy at all on a hard surface - may be good to dig in and get grip on snow, but I think borderline dangerous walking on ice. The toe block wraps up the front of the boot and become the ledge for the toe bail/clip - whereas the 700's have the ledge built into the shell and the toe blocks are completely under foot. That takes all the pressure of the toe bail/clip off of the boot shell and puts in on the toe block attachment - all the more reason to t-nut. And I'm not sure about the whole concept of the boot being able to be used as a ski boot by changing the sole blocks - I've often thought about trying ski boots for carving, but I think an alpine snowboard boot has to do things differently enough that it warrants a different design. <O:p</O:p <O:p</O:p The RC10's are made of a lightweight plastic - if you put a thermo liner in, you'd have a very light boots. The plastic is also supposed to remain constant in flex as temperatures change. I've heard that many times before... <O:p</O:p <O:p</O:p I like the RC10's enough that I'd like to try them - not sure I'd pay full retail for them at this point as I have a brand new pair of 700's, but if I could score them on sale - or better yet find a place to demo them - I'm very curious to see how they ride. The main turn off for me was how stiff they felt in the shop, and how painful and awkward it was just to walk in them - but that's not being used to them, and not a basis for performance on-hill. I've never been a fan of Raichle/Deeluxe boots - mainly the old SB design - but if you like it and it works for you then great! I threw down for the 700's because that design has been around for about 10 years now - unchanged except for the buckles and goofy color schemes each year. It seems to be the go-to boot. I have to say I'm not thrilled with it, but as I said earlier I'm having some fit issues - foot pain so bad I have to stop riding. It's most likely due to the shell size being too big (No, I didn't listen to Fin, I thought I knew better and could get away w/a comfort-fit shell). As I ride the boot more, I'm starting to appreciate it more - it is a very nice boot. <O:p</O:p <O:p</O:p I like the old Burton Fire boots - besides fitting my feet, I liked they way they rode. It's hard for to explain why - but mainly it's the shell design - it's more of a wrap around design that relies less on a tongue for resistance - similar to a wrap shell ski boot. Great boot - now if someone would dig up the molds for that boot, make it w/ the RC10 plastic and incorporate a walk mode w/ Fin's BTS, that'd be a boot! <O:p</O:p <O:p</O:p Both are very nice boots that do things a little bit differently. Alpine snowboard boot companies - Deeluxe, UPZ, Head - really need to take a look at the developments in alpine skiing, ski mountaineering and freestyle skiing boots over the last couple of years - there are new boot designs, materials and technologies that are light years ahead of alpine snowboard boot design. that's it. :AR15firin:AR15firinmpp

thanks bro - love to try it! I've been eyeing the SG's @ Bola shop, and have been wanting to check one of them out for some time.

I need a one-day lift ticket. Can't wait! Cheers! :biggthumpmpp

After being out of the carving scene for a few years, it was really eye opening to ride some of the new boards @ the SES '09. The new shapes and construction are awesome! I was really impressed w/ Prior's 183 WCRM and Coiler's 185x20 Monster. :D It's clear to me that when designed properly, the metal sheets have made carving boards perform on a higher level than previous boards - maybe I should say more forgiving and easier to ride well. But are there drawbacks? I'm a bit concerned about the delicacy of this new generation of metal boards - Prior's red demo board got kinked by *someone* @ the SES, and there are a few threads around here documenting damaged boards. And it seems once they are damaged, they are forever wall art. How much do the new shapes - hammer head nose, taper, rounded turned up tail - contribute to the way the new boards ride? I wonder how a 185 Monster w/out the metal would compare to the same shape metal board (adjusting the construction so the flex patterns where similar)? So what do you think? Is it worth throwing down the extra cash for a better performing, but more delicate board? I can see me justifying it for a strickly groomer board, but for an all mtn board that would see some trees and other dicey conditions... not sure.

I just had my boards tuned @ Venture Sports in Avon - they are across f/ City Market, next to Columbine Bakery. They claim to have the best machine in the valley, and do tunes for over 10 local shops. I had the full base grind and structure, but they'll do just wax and edges. They did a great job. If you drop you board off in the afternoon, they'll have it ready by 8:00 AM the next morning. mpp

I'm in. :lol: Kress - we need to get Rella there too. May get him to dust off the pogo later this week. mpp