Beckmann AG

Yes. Also on originals. Operator error. Easy fix.

MM, Sorry if accidentally denigrated your boots. The overall ranking of the boot in the marketplace has not diminished your pain, and such rankings are largely marketing anyway. Generally, manufacturers only make select models in really large sizes, and those are not often performance models (A freestyle boot is not necessarily built for performance. Top ranked moguls skiers have often used race boots). And I do not mean to imply that you need to spend top dollar on a boot, but you do need a boot that is up to the task at hand. Boot 'fit' does not sell boots. Perceived comfort sell boots. Available inventory often decides, more so than fit, what boots are sold. Take solace in the knowledge that many have gone before you, and many more will follow. Incidentally, the photos I posted were not taken off the internet, they were taken in my shop.

Looks like you may need to go boot shopping. PM me your email and I can send you a document with relevant information. Likely, there are several contributing factors to your discomforts, shell sizing is one of them. (Contour notwithstanding, the lower shell is too long for your foot.) Nordica has a habit of slathering the instep area (that of the red circle) with extra plastic contrivances, and those may be contributing to the problem. That boot appears to be something of an entry level boot, and as such, the plastic will not offer much support, and may simply fold right into your shin. Even if you are not a performance level skier, a man of your weight would benefit from a stiffer plastic. Better quality plastic is easier to mold, which you will probably need to do with a wide foot. They will last longer however, which will offset the initial cost. Unfortunately, with a large foot, you options may be limited. On the other hand, you will likely downsize at least one size, so your odds have already improved. And try to find a shop that actually cares to have your business. (Making more room for your medial ankle bone/navicular area should take less than 30 minutes). The two finger rule is only a guideline. I suspect two of your fingers take up way more space than two of mine. In your case, think more along the lines of 15mm or thereabouts.

But at least in the 'correct' thread. So hold back that ire. You have already identified the problem, here, and in many other posts. You just don't really want to accept the conclusion, as you have too much invested in this pair of shells. A boot that is too large will always feel stiffer and more restrictive than a boot that is correctly sized. You already have sore shins, heel lift, and self doubt. Don't make it worse by spending even more money on a pair of boots that may/will NEVER BE THE RIGHT BOOT FOR YOUR BODY. If you begin cutting, pasting, and BTSing, there is a very good possibility that the boot will not work the way you want it to. And, you will have diminished the resale value. If the boots have not already been hacked, the retailer may take them for credit against the proper size. Most reputable shops have at least some sort of 'fit guarantee', whatever that means... Best to cry only once. (Syphon a little off your dedicated beer fund, and before you know it, you'll have what you need.)

SG, One part of riding steeper angles is coming to terms with the fact that you are using the boot and binding on their collective weak axis, thus, you trade leverage for (presumed) finesse. Perhaps you were looking for something that was not there to begin with. Try again (on easy terrain), but this time, instead of trying to 'tell' the board what to do (based on past experience), 'listen' for what it asks of you. I ride 60f, 63r, 26mp, 180ww, ~45.5c-c. Would not care to go steeper. _______ Not terribly relevant, but... I must not fear. Fear is the mind-killer. Fear is the little-death that brings total obliteration. I will face my fear. I will permit it to pass over me and through me. And when it has gone past I will turn the inner eye to see its path. Where the fear has gone there will be nothing. Only I will remain. (Bene Gesserit litany, Dune.)

A few more.

Big calfs; big cuffs.

I'll post a few photos of one 'big calf' solution, either later tonight or tomorrow.

Post photos of the following: Your bare shin with the affected area clearly marked. viewed head on. A side view of your calf/shin area while standing comfortably in the empty shell (no liner), buckles closed. Boot cuff contouring aside, many shin bang problems originate with erroneous ski instruction. I.e., you should not need to lean on the front of the boot in order to ski well. Making contact is one thing, making hamburger, another.

FSG, Camera angle +large heelbone =exaggerated dimension of ancient bone spur. That spur developed when I began riding hardboots, and began to recede when I got rid of the inward canting on my rear binding. I don't ride in a boot that snug. I ride in a boot that is snugger. I'm just a niche, within a niche, wrapped in darkness and silence. LB, I had always heard that the "Greeks would inherit the earth". Tough to do as only 10%. There is a large amount of misinformation out there on feet, how they work, and what is considered 'normal'. I suspect that back when cobblers built shoes by hand, it was good enough to commission a single symmetric anvil from the local blacksmith. Same thing with wooden lasts. Shoes were leather, and would eventually conform to the foot, so a symmetric toe box was no issue. A symmetric toe box is easier (thus cheaper) to scale when you are cutting shell molds in multiple sizes out of aluminum. Most ski boots are sized 1 to 2 sizes too large. In this situation, the user won't notice the squeeze of the symmetric toe box, and I suspect the average skier is not going to gravitate towards a shell with an apparent tumor where the big toe is supposed to be. Functional shoes are seldom stylish, (or even appealing to the eye), and style is everything, right? So I guess I can say again, "They make it, because 'you' buy it." Maybe not You, but you know, 'you'... Outside of ski boots, mountaineering boots, hockey skates(remember the old black Langes from the '70's?), and perhaps a player to be named later, injection molding of shoe parts represents a fairly small part of the market. (Excepting shoe soles of oriental origin. They all look like they were sqeezed from the same tube of caulk). Why change the traditional, mostly effective, manufacturing process for what, again, represents a niche market? I once asked the former president of Garmont USA why it was so hard to make effective improvements to their telemark boots. He said that the Italians would do things as they saw fit, based on what they had always done; and that, as a hiking boot manufacturer, telemark boots were just an afterthought. Back to toe shapes; the Garmont Voodoo and Prophet both have an asymmetric toe box, with room for the longer first digit of the Egyptian foot. This has been a feature on select hiking boots for a number of years. Consider yourself fortunate not to own a cuboid foot. BD, Not only are 'we' in the minority, 'we' of the Greek foot are alleged to be just a bit smarter...So welcome to the club.

MP, I'm not too surprised that both NTN boots skied alike. I was referring to the Voodoo, which shares the mold with the Prophet, albeit w/duckbill. I have been skiing the triple G/Energy shell since it was introduced, often with one of each at the same time, and the Voodoo is a vast improvement. I'm not sold on the NTN, but then I learned on leather Asolo and Merrill Supercomps, and I really want that smooth articulation on my rear foot. When the boots have gone through one or two more significant design changes, then the NTN will probably work well. Right now finesse has lost out to 'oomph'. I really don't have enough information on the design changes at Lange to make a qualified statement. From what I hear though, the most recent shell (the 'sharknose') has not worked out quite as well as planned, and they may be returning to one of the previous iterations. This may be just rumor. The Voodoo shape falls somewhere between the classic ZR and the baby blue WC 150 from two years ago. Thanks Kent, for starting this one off.

Begin the exit of your previous turn earlier. Perhaps, by the time you feel 'secure' in the previous turn, it is too late to get out clean. Pass through the 'secure zone' on the way out the door. You don't really need 'speed', or 'G-force', you need accurate movement, and the appropriate timing of said movement. If you move large body parts around as a means of changing the angle between board and snow, then you may simply have a distance-rate-time problem. Are you having difficulty on both turns, or just the toeside entry?

For the shell in the photo, the stock Lange Purple Haze liner, circa 199?. After a few visits to the H. Lecter school of razor knife juggling, of course. Presently, the leather lace-up from the Nordica/Tecnica plug boot. (Leather lace-up. That even sounds racy, I mean, fast). With Smartwool liner socks. Black on the left, white on the right. ...because "you" continue to buy them.It is too 'costly' to make anatomically 'correct' shells for a niche market. Far easier to make a generic shape and then make it comfortable with a thermo-fit liner. The niche market seems fairly content with what is available, thus no impetus for change. After, what, 15 years of nasty-flexing, boxy plastic telemark boots, Garmont has forged ahead of Scarpa, Black Diamond, and Crispi, and built a new shell, shaped like (guess what?), a Lange race boot. It skis really well. Go figure. What you want is likely available, it just may cost more than you wish to spend...

Slide foot forward in shell until toes just touch, as in photo 1. Check space behind heel as in photo 2. Clearance shown represents the maximum for a 'proper' recreational fit. Photo 3 illustrates toe clearance with heel back in pocket, and extra space alongside first metatarsal bone. (This is almost enough to sublet for student housing). When the support is uniform around, as well as under, feet tend not to get too cold, as no one part of the foot is constricted in the quest for retention. Get the shell geometry right, and the boots become almost 'invisible'. (I have downsized a bit since these photos). Careful on the toenail trimming; go too short in confined footwear and risk in-growns. On heel retention via C-pads, wraps, etc: Especially on the rear foot, be wary of adding any foam across or impinging upon the achilles tendon. Additional pressure on a loaded tendon can often lead to inflammation, and inflammation can lead to tendon failure; or at the very least, cessation of activity.

TT, With the rear binding gone, there is little incentive to "...just go out and riiide, man...", and thus the job gets done properly. I have also gone out with a sneaker on my rear foot, but then I still have the rear binding to locate against, which, in a way, constitutes cheating... Given the cost of 'snow time', one might as well make a concerted effort without temptation.

I think the last time I taught a 'learn to ride' in softboots, I was on a Performer Elite 150, with a pair of 70s vintage Sorels. I have taught a very large number since then, on the 'wrong' equipment. I used to ponder the effect of my equipment choice on the learning process, and soon realized that it really had no bearing on what the guest was doing, or what they were capable of doing. Correct information at the right time in the right sequence was, and is, far more important. The answer to this question will depend on your audience, but I will often say something to the effect of, "I have a Ducati, and what you have there is a Moped." Alternatives: I have a D-cell, and you have a AAA. You have a Schwinn Varsity, and I have a Colnago C-40. The idea is that each piece of equipment has different capabilities, in terms of handling and/or energy storage/retrieval. Throttle response is a distinct liability for a novice driver, so too for the beginning rider. In other words, "We are each on equipment appropriate for our respective abilities and needs." By the time the guest begins to hobble around with a slippery object attached to their foot, their concerns and anxieties will tend to focus inward. You could be wearing white after Labor day, and they wouldn't notice. As far as demonstrating is concerned, good posture is good posture. Too often instructors get caught up in how body positions influence outcomes. Good posture/positions should be regarded as the byproduct of good outcomes, not the other way around. The posture/movements in use should be somewhat proportional to the task at hand. A beginning rider should not need to make obvious or large movements in order to execute most elementary maneuvers on a gradual pitch. Most of the movements required should be almost invisible. To pretend or demonstrate otherwise is misleading. If large movements are necessary to, say, sideslip, stop, sideslip, then there is something wrong with the boot/binding/board configuration. As far as visual learners are concerned, if they see that you are not doing much to direct your board, they will take note and act accordingly. If you analogize the process of learning to snowboard to that of learning to walk, (which is to say obtaining functional equilibrium while in motion) you might consider that many parents do not actually demonstrate to their toddlers how to move around on their feet. Remaining upright is a process that is hardwired; given the opportunity, the body will determine the most effective way to accomplish this task regardless of context. The hazard for the visual learner is that the most obvious visual cues are not always the movements that should be modeled. In short, if you are providing accurate information in the proper sequence in a way that your client can use it, you can be effective with a pair of swim fins on your feet. Properly waxed, of course.

FHT, From the leverage standpoint, a stiffer boot will be more consistent over a greater range of temperatures, which means that binding and boot 'adjustments' effective on hard snow in December will be valid when you are riding rotten ice late in March. A stiffer boot will also provide more days of use before breaking down. Assuming the plastic formulation is not 'dead', a stiffer boot will provide a better feel for the snow than a softer boot. Much of this feel can be negated, however, with thermofit liners and rubber sole blocks. (The lack of 'snow feel' is one reason why the original Derbyflex was not widely adopted for use by slalom skiers. If you want or need quick and accurate feet, you need a tight feedback loop). I can only speak for myself, but I want to know where my feet are without thinking or looking, and I want the support to remain where I left it. A stiff cuff in the right place at the right time can provide (to the CNS) a wealth of information regarding board behavior and surface contour. Some may want to 'transfer more power' while others seek to 'contain more power'. To (re)state the obvious: If you find that you ride much better with your boots 'loose', you may be at geometric/functional odds with your gear.

You're welcome.

Bobby, This speaks more to the process than to the amount of time required, but: I will remove the rear binding, and head for a pitch that is fairly flat, with even fall line. If I can traverse on each edge, with no real effort, and the board behaves, then the front binding is probably where it belongs. If the board spins out on a heelside traverse, I will move the binding back. When the board feels neutral on both toe and heel edge, then I will begin riding arc to arc (still one foot) on the same pitch. If the board feels nervous or twitchy, I'll move the binding one increment to the tail. If the board feels sluggish, especially on the toeside, the binding goes forward one increment. When I can ride arc to arc one-footed with some depth to the turn, with little or no compensatory effort, then I will replace the rear binding for my preferred width, and find a steeper pitch with some hard snow to check the results. Again, all other inputs remaining consistent, if the board feels nervous on the toeside, move both bindings back. If sluggish, move forward. Bear in mind that the configuration of my boots and bindings has already been established, and as such is not coloring the outcome. I find that the two surface conditions most conducive to accurate 'dial in' are deep snow and/or something really hard and unforgiving. Your results may vary...

My apologies. Should have said that I have overhang, and yet clearance at 87 degrees...

Minor overhang can work with the right combination of binding height, tip, and tail width. Verify your ability to make a timely self arrest should you boot out, particularly if you ride steep terrain with hard snow and exposure. Conventional wisdom indicates that an uncontrolled slide into a fixed object can adversely affect the health of the slider. To the contrary, boot/binding configuration is an exacting science, though practiced most often like a round of darts. The variability of the surface doesn't matter much if you are not trying to anchor yourself to it.

If the hex head strips out, you may be able to use the next size Torx bit. With a little hammer assist, of course.

Not exactly a car, probably not street legal, but suitable for a winter conveyance. You might not have to stop at the parking lot either. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xuZ40L7mmrI&feature=related

Hard to tell from a still photo taken somewhat out of context, but it looks like that jacket has something other than a radial sidecut. I would imagine there has to be at least some metal in the ultrasonically bonded zippers, and it appears that the hood may have a bit of rocker?

Standing backward in his bindings, on a pair of 'straight' VR27s, with only moderate angulation. Quite the specimen.