Non-Weight Bearing and Semi-Weight Bearing

[dingbat]

I spoke with a bootfiter recently who said they offered non-weight bearing and semi-weight bearing footbeds. They also said the non-weight bearing would be more appropriate for a snowboard boot (they were aware it's for a hard boot.) Does anyone have experience regarding the difference between the two types?

[yyzcanuck]

I'm not a boot fitter so... take this advice with all due skepticism.

A quick check for the type of footbed you need can be done at home. Measure your foot length & width bearing full body weight (standing on one foot).

Now measure sitting down with only your leg weight on your foot.

If you have substantial differences between the two measured conditions, you may want to go for the non-weight bearing footbed. This will (a) provide proper (better?) support for your ol' dogs and (b) likely allow you to run a small shell size.

If I'm not mistaken, MikeT is a fine example of the gains that can be made with a custom, non-weight bearing footbed. Mike? Any comments.

[Mike T]

Here's where I had mine done: Footform Performance Orthotics here in Bend, OR: http://www.footform.com/technology.htm

The molds are taken as you are taking a step, so that would be weight bearing if I understand the terminology properly. Whatever I've got, they rock... On many days, I literally find that my feet miss my boots when I take them off.

[Dr D]

non weightbearing orthotics will make your foot shorter since the arch is higher but they aren't the best choice. we often hit over 2 G's in this sport this significantly works the three arches. a weightbearing or semi orthotic is going to be more representative of the arch height under this kind of load. A high arch orthotic is uncomfortable skating and boarding because of the extra gforce.

On another front we don't like to see nonweightbearing orthotics especially ridged ones because they don't let the arches flex properly. I would recomend a semi ridgid weightbearing orthotic. for your spine health as well as for comfort.

[dingbat]

So am I understanding corectly that the difference between the two has more to do with the shape of the footbed than anything elese?

[Dr D]

the finished shape yes. an unweighted foot can appear normal when in fact the arches collapse upon standing. so ideally you would get molded while standing so that the full extent of your deficiencies can be addressed. an unweighted mold could make the arches larger/higher than comfort would allow.

[dingbat]

Cool, Thanks man, and thanks to all you guys.

.....so that the full extent of your deficiencies can be addressed.

Don't know why, but this made me laugh like mad.:D

[Dr D]

why ? :lol: do you have other deficiencies that need addressed?:lol:

[dingbat]

:rolleyes:I'm sure some would say so, but I'm content being fat, dumb, and happy.

[zoltan]

A lot of it really depends on the person using the footbed. Personally, a non-weight bearing bed is the most comfortable thing to me, while a weight bearing one can cause foot pain in the right circumstances.

Also, if one of the reasons you want a footbed is to fit a smaller boot, then a non-weight bearing one is your best bet as it keep your foot in a more compact shape.

[Dr D]

thats what we covered earlier in the thread. A higher arch will create a shorter foot. There really is a lot more to it than we are discussing here. how hard or soft an orthotic is makes a difference to. I lean more toward harder materials for skiing and boarding because of the support necessary and the G's experienced. a hard orthotic is not great in a normal shoe. so it depends on what you are using them for and what your goals are.