Carving with ski hard boots?

[BlueB]

Pat (and everyone), please do not ride with the cuff buckles undone! It is a great way to injure yourself.

[KingCrimson]

Don't use them with TD1/2s. Probably not 3s either. Same for Cateks, but I don't like Catek bindings anyway. Gonna be too stiff.

Haven't tried the Sidewinder, but I use F2s (and anyone else I've seen with ski boots have been on F2s or Burtons as well) without a plate and the Krypton Pros were a good fit on my Coiler VSR.

I've never been happy with the Deeluxe fit, and I've heard terrible things about the UPZ liners. Liners seem to be the deal-breaker in general, and I'm not about to spend $500+ just to get a good custom-fitter liner; that's just criminal. I enjoy the Dalbello Gold liner so far.

greg

I disagree with the binding choice..Sometimes I carve in my ski boots just because I always ride better after mixing it up (especially if I change something for the worse) but I end up SUPER sensitive to cant issues, whereas in my Suzukas I'm generally very happy anywhere because they are so soft for me.

The lost lateral flex means highly variable cant/lift is super critical. TD1s are understandably inappropriate for any metal board (in addition to lacking the wide range of cant/lift options), but TD2s and TD3s have such a large footprint I don't understand the issue.

I carpet carved a little tonight playing with stance on my TD2s and I couldn't, for the life of me, figure out if I'm flexing the bindings or the board until I looked in the mirror. Lo and behold I could torsionally flex the board no problem! I certainly would not want an incorrect setup on bindings with limited cant options in ski boots..Think of all the twist you induce on the board!

Riding with your buckles undone sucks..It rips up your liners with all the sliding!

[Steve Prokopiw]

is precisely why I like riding w/skiboots.I use flexible bindings (snopros)for the lateral movment they allow and skiboots for the rigidity of the soles,which allow me to more aggressively work the board torsionally.My Freezones are just 324s with a skiboot sole,so they are the best of both worlds for my taste and fit.That said,I would like a pair of Sidewinders to complete the picture.

[ShortcutToMoncton]

I disagree with the binding choice..Sometimes I carve in my ski boots just because I always ride better after mixing it up (especially if I change something for the worse) but I end up SUPER sensitive to cant issues, whereas in my Suzukas I'm generally very happy anywhere because they are so soft for me.

The lost lateral flex means highly variable cant/lift is super critical. TD1s are understandably inappropriate for any metal board (in addition to lacking the wide range of cant/lift options), but TD2s and TD3s have such a large footprint I don't understand the issue.

I carpet carved a little tonight playing with stance on my TD2s and I couldn't, for the life of me, figure out if I'm flexing the bindings or the board until I looked in the mirror. Lo and behold I could torsionally flex the board no problem! I certainly would not want an incorrect setup on bindings with limited cant options in ski boots..Think of all the twist you induce on the board!

Riding with your buckles undone sucks..It rips up your liners with all the sliding!

I'm not sure what you mean about "footprint." I don't have any concerns about breaking the board; I'm sure Sean knows what he's talking about but I haven't heard anything about ski boots resulting in a higher rate of board failures (more like a higher rate of boot failure and/or rider injury, but that's something else). Sean, have you been seeing a correlation between board failures and boot type, or was that just a common-sense conjecture?

I guess what I meant to say is that the ski boots I see people riding tend to be stiff. "Stiff" seems to be the way snowboard boots are going nowadays (see UPZ) but ski boots have even more lateral stiffness. Well, the key to the "stiff boots" setup is, I think, a flexy binding. Now that's just my opinion and I can't say that it's the be-all, but that certainly seems to be how snowboard racing and riders "in the loop" have gone.

And Trench Digger bindings have been just... stiff, in general. Too stiff for stiff boots, I think. I went from Burton Race plates to the TD1 and hated myself for a year; I went back to the Burtons for a while before trying the TD2 only because the yellow dampener seemed promising, but still was not a fan, and went back to the Burton plates before getting F2s. The amount of gushing praise on here over the Sidewinder is pretty telling IMO: binding flex has been badly, badly needed in the TD line.

(On that note I always have to bite my tongue when people recommend to newbies that they should pick up a cheap pair of TD1s or TD2s. Arrgh. ;) )

Now I don't want to turn this into a binding war, so getting back to ski boots: they specifically don't have much lateral flex. And I think when you pair them with Catek/TD bindings, you'll end up getting a system that's simply way too stiff, unless all you ride on is hero cord.

greg

[Michelle]

It's all about what works for you and your individual style.

This says it all, it's all about what works for you and your preferences!

[Donek]

Sean, have you been seeing a correlation between board failures and boot type, or was that just a common-sense conjecture?

Now I don't want to turn this into a binding war, so getting back to ski boots: they specifically don't have much lateral flex. And I think when you pair them with Catek/TD bindings, you'll end up getting a system that's simply way too stiff, unless all you ride on is hero cord.

greg

There has to be give somewhere in the system. If the interface is too stiff, you wind up generating give in the board that was not designed to be there and simply break the board. Boards are not indestructible. Poor choice of a boot and interface will make that abundantly clear.

[KingCrimson]

I'm not sure what you mean about "footprint." I don't have any concerns about breaking the board; I'm sure Sean knows what he's talking about but I haven't heard anything about ski boots resulting in a higher rate of board failures (more like a higher rate of boot failure and/or rider injury, but that's something else). Sean, have you been seeing a correlation between board failures and boot type, or was that just a common-sense conjecture?

I guess what I meant to say is that the ski boots I see people riding tend to be stiff. "Stiff" seems to be the way snowboard boots are going nowadays (see UPZ) but ski boots have even more lateral stiffness. Well, the key to the "stiff boots" setup is, I think, a flexy binding. Now that's just my opinion and I can't say that it's the be-all, but that certainly seems to be how snowboard racing and riders "in the loop" have gone.

And Trench Digger bindings have been just... stiff, in general. Too stiff for stiff boots, I think. I went from Burton Race plates to the TD1 and hated myself for a year; I went back to the Burtons for a while before trying the TD2 only because the yellow dampener seemed promising, but still was not a fan, and went back to the Burton plates before getting F2s. The amount of gushing praise on here over the Sidewinder is pretty telling IMO: binding flex has been badly, badly needed in the TD line.

(On that note I always have to bite my tongue when people recommend to newbies that they should pick up a cheap pair of TD1s or TD2s. Arrgh. ;) )

Now I don't want to turn this into a binding war, so getting back to ski boots: they specifically don't have much lateral flex. And I think when you pair them with Catek/TD bindings, you'll end up getting a system that's simply way too stiff, unless all you ride on is hero cord.

greg

My mistake, it was very poorly organized. I was speaking more to board breakage when I mentioned footprint.

Boot stiffness is questionable, lots of people are using BTS and running very little preload on the springs. I'm willing to bet a small amount of my limited credibility to say a survey would show most people on BOL use their BTS with blue springs and minimal preload, and if not, they like it better than their current (stiffer) setup after giving it a fair try.

My primary point was ALL the plastic bindings lacked the necessary cant/lift settings for ski boots, unless you happen to be within a narrow band where the stances work.

I don't disagree that TD2s are very stiff BUT you can get the stance correct so that you are not twisting the board in getting your COG and body where it should be. Burtons definitely do not offer much choice in lift/cant (realistically the 7* wedge is the only popular Burton cant) and F2s are still not as good as TDs.

Personally I'd rather have a "too-stiff" setup that's anatomically correct than a softer setup with plenty of flex in the binding that I must use to get comfy. I have other issues as well..including bottoming out the binding and digging holes in the topsheet, I have that problem with my raceplates even without ski boots!

I fail to see any benefits to ski boots that outweigh the numerous problems, even when factoring in switching between skis and board.

[JakeW.]

The benefits to ski boots, or more specifically a stiff setup, are primarily power and responsiveness. A stiff interface will respond to your body movements faster than an interface with a lot of flex. A stiff interface will also deliver more power to your board. I can understand why some people would not like riding in super stiff boots, but the reason I started using Bomber bindings to begin with was the stiffness, and I still use the TD1 for the same reason. I understand that something has to give at some point, but I would much rather have the board give than the binding give. Binding failure crashes are usually much more unexpected and painful than board failure crashes.

[KingCrimson]

The benefits to ski boots, or more specifically a stiff setup, are primarily power and responsiveness. A stiff interface will respond to your body movements faster than an interface with a lot of flex. A stiff interface will also deliver more power to your board. I can understand why some people would not like riding in super stiff boots, but the reason I started using Bomber bindings to begin with was the stiffness, and I still use the TD1 for the same reason. I understand that something has to give at some point, but I would much rather have the board give than the binding give. Binding failure crashes are usually much more unexpected and painful than board failure crashes.

In saying "The benefits to ski boots, or more specifically a stiff setup," you are implying all stiff setups use ski boots, this is not the case. I as much as I hate to bring semantics into this, (actually I don't, but I know few things are more annoying) you still didn't present a single benefit to ski boots. You just listed the benefits in using stiff setup, of which ski boots are not a required part.

Beckmann has mentioned the soles of ski boots being of uniform material, but I can't see this is of huge benefit, simply because Fin would have figured out a long time ago he could sell pads of different durometer.

[JakeW.]

*The benefits to ski boots, or more specifically ANY stiff setup...*

(I think I just remembered why I stopped posting here 8 years ago)

[ShortcutToMoncton]

My Dalbellos flex a little differently and are far more responsive than the standard Deeluxe boots I've tried. I like that. It's a benefit to me, at least. To be honest I don't really care about people on BOL who use certain coloured BTS, because everyone on here seems to have some opinion of "what works best for them," but when I watch professional alpine racers they're never using BTS (ever) and almost always seem to be wearing the same type of ski boots; and when they're actually wearing snowboard boots that I can buy (e.g. JJA on Deeluxes), they're heavily modified and/or have incredibly expensive custom liners. I think those people must be on to something. :lol:

(But even on this board, the general trend seems to be towards the UPZ boot, which by most accounts is the stiffest of the bunch.)

There's lots of cant and/or lift options on the F2; not as easy or convenient as the TD2 (or especially TD3), but still quite possible to do pretty much anything. Personally I would take an F2 binding over any TD binding except the new Sidewinder, which I have not tried. Apparently every snowboard racer I've ever seen agrees with that assessment to some extent. I have no idea why you think it's impossible to get an "anatomically correct" setup with a non-TD binding; that seems like a stupid theory to me, sorry.

And I'd never ride my Dalbellos, at least, on the TD2. Apparently JakeW might like that setup but by any conceivable measure I can think of it sounds absolutely terrible. I like responsive power from my boot, but a binding that lets me respond to how I'm getting thrown around. When I rode the TD2 I was wearing AF700s with a thermo liner, and like I said I did not enjoy it at all. The Dalbellos would be even worse.

greg

[KingCrimson]

My Dalbellos flex a little differently and are far more responsive than the standard Deeluxe boots I've tried. I like that. It's a benefit to me, at least. To be honest I don't really care about people on BOL who use certain coloured BTS, because everyone on here seems to have some opinion of "what works best for them," but when I watch professional alpine racers they're never using BTS (ever) and almost always seem to be wearing the same type of ski boots; and when they're actually wearing snowboard boots that I can buy (e.g. JJA on Deeluxes), they're heavily modified and/or have incredibly expensive custom liners. I think those people must be on to something. :lol:

(But even on this board, the general trend seems to be towards the UPZ boot, which by most accounts is the stiffest of the bunch.)

There's lots of cant and/or lift options on the F2; not as easy or convenient as the TD2 (or especially TD3), but still quite possible to do pretty much anything. Personally I would take an F2 binding over any TD binding except the new Sidewinder, which I have not tried. Apparently every snowboard racer I've ever seen agrees with that assessment to some extent. I have no idea why you think it's impossible to get an "anatomically correct" setup with a non-TD binding; that seems like a stupid theory to me, sorry.

And I'd never ride my Dalbellos, at least, on the TD2. Apparently JakeW might like that setup but by any conceivable measure I can think of it sounds absolutely terrible. I like responsive power from my boot, but a binding that lets me respond to how I'm getting thrown around. When I rode the TD2 I was wearing AF700s with a thermo liner, and like I said I did not enjoy it at all. The Dalbellos would be even worse.

greg

I disagree about what racers are using. Here is a WC race from 3 days ago. There is ONE racer that might be using ski boots in this album. The rest are Northwave .950s and Deeluxe Indys and T325s

http://www.universalsports.com/photos/galleryid=459099.html#world+cup+valmalenco+parallel+gs

The most surprising thing I see is the number of racers using RAB(!) on their boots. No "heavy" mods at least that I can see.

I have no clue on boot trends are on BOL. As far as UPZ being the most common, (regardless of whether that is true or not) I think it's a moot point as we're talking about racers now, very few of whom use UPZ.

As far as my theory being stupid, I respect your opinion completely. I'm not Palmer, I didn't set up people's boards, and it's entirely possible (read: likely) I'm wrong in everything I've said.

What I DO find is F2s do not offer 6 degrees of pure cant, or 6 degrees of pure lift or whatever mix you want. (If I'm wrong with this statement, I will fully admit to being a complete idiot) I PERSONALLY find such versatility in a binding to be extra critical when using boots with a MUCH narrower flex arc, regardless of the binding flex.

I'm young, I'm dumb, and I'm in great shape. Consequently, my riding is quite a bit more about power than finesse. I would much rather have the travel in my system be in boot flex, as if I were jumping and falling in bare feet, my ankles would be travelling; it's the most natural. What gives ME the most control is a binding to take the edge off what my feet can't, and boots that adequately transfer my inputs. With lift under my toe, I don't really have to lean on my cuffs to drive the nose, I just stand on the ball of my foot. The rest of the story is obvious. I think it's obvious why I'm against the theory of stiff bots on soft bindings now..But I do ride raceplates because I play in moguls, trees, and steeps where forgiving gear is king.

The hidden meaning in all of this? I'm still not convinced ski boots have any normal use in snowboarding. I'd love for that not to be the case!

Jake- I generally play nice. Sorry if I came off otherwise, I was mostly giving you a hard time. Welcome back to BOL.

[ShortcutToMoncton]

Yeah, you know you are right about the boots: a lot of men are on Northwaves. However those are supposed to be stiff boots from what I've told (I've never tried a pair myself).

I'm not sure why you think F2 bindings can't do 6 degrees of lift. Just add a large lift block, no? Mine are about 6 degrees in the rear and a couple degrees on the toe. That's actually one of the areas I find F2 has more versatility than some other bindings - you don't need discrete amounts of lift (e.g.p 3, 6, 7 degrees etc.). You can just add or subtract as needed and depending on what feels best. (Of course it's a pain in the ass to do so but that's another story.)

greg

[bobdea]

*The benefits to ski boots, or more specifically ANY stiff setup...*

(I think I just remembered why I stopped posting here 8 years ago)

thin skinned you are, you're talking to a 16 year old kid who's got good intentions

IMO what you're saying is about where I was a decade ago, riding the stiffest boots and bindings I could get. the same bindings and boots I used to use assuming they would not pull a newer wider board apart would not be anything I'd want to ride now on a modern board anyway.

I always like mega stiff boots when I was riding really narrow boards, once I went wider I dropped stiff boots pretty fast.

[JakeW.]

I rode pretty much the same setup a decade ago that I ride now. The only major difference is that I ride stiffer ski boots than I used to ride. For me personally, I'm not concerned with cant or lift because I ride (23in wide) flat front and rear and I don't like wider boards because with high stance angles you don't need extra width. I'm well aware that most people would not like this setup at all, but I've stuck with it because I do like it.

[bobdea]

I rode pretty much the same setup a decade ago that I ride now. The only major difference is that I ride stiffer ski boots than I used to ride. For me personally, I'm not concerned with cant or lift because I ride (23in wide) flat front and rear and I don't like wider boards because with high stance angles you don't need extra width. I'm well aware that most people would not like this setup at all, but I've stuck with it because I do like it.

makes sense, if I went back to 18 and 19 cm wide boards and angles over 60 I'd really be for a stiffer interface too.

[KingCrimson]

Yeah, you know you are right about the boots: a lot of men are on Northwaves. However those are supposed to be stiff boots from what I've told (I've never tried a pair myself).

I'm not sure why you think F2 bindings can't do 6 degrees of lift. Just add a large lift block, no? Mine are about 6 degrees in the rear and a couple degrees on the toe. That's actually one of the areas I find F2 has more versatility than some other bindings - you don't need discrete amounts of lift (e.g.p 3, 6, 7 degrees etc.). You can just add or subtract as needed and depending on what feels best. (Of course it's a pain in the ass to do so but that's another story.)

greg

Perhaps I was misinformed on how F2 bindings worked. I was told the hardware had constraints around 4.5 degrees in any direction. I appreciate you correcting me! :)

Northwaves, from what I understand, have the beauty of a wide flex range. They had a spring system (very similar to BTS in fact, just not as pretty) but most importantly the pivot was low on the boot, and actually mirrored your ankle. If anything this speaks volumes about why ski boots aren't appropriate, as they do not pivot at all. EC guys all talk about keeping a soft setup, and they love their Northwave .900 and .950s.

Jake- How tall are you?? I'm about 6 foot 2 and I can't go over 22" (I'm around 21 normally) and even get my boot in without loosening buckles to get heel lift.

[BlueB]

...why ski boots aren't appropriate, as they do not pivot at all.

All ski boots that work good for snowboard DO pivot very well. Example:

[BlueB]

The only major difference is that I ride stiffer ski boots than I used to ride. For me personally, I'm not concerned with cant or lift because I ride (23in wide) flat front and rear and I don't like wider boards because with high stance angles...

Stiff boots, high angles, flat/flat... I'd really like to see this. Care to post few pics for us, just standing in your relaxed stance, clipped onto the board, on the carpet? Side and frontal view would be great.

[KingCrimson]

All ski boots that work good for snowboard DO pivot very well. Example:

Yeah..I'm not very careful with my words. Obviously the shells from which hardboots were adapted pivot well.

[Erik J]

makes sense, if I went back to 18 and 19 cm wide boards and angles over 60 I'd really be for a stiffer interface too.

In demoing wider boards at ECES, I actually found that I wanted stiffer boots (or at least much stiffer BTS springs) at angles below the mid 50 deg range. I'm on Suzukas with yellow BTS and felt a lot more lateral flex in my boots than I was used to.

Still figuring out this new-fangled tech.

[bobdea]

In demoing wider boards at ECES, I actually found that I wanted stiffer boots (or at least much stiffer BTS springs) at angles below the mid 50 deg range. I'm on Suzukas with yellow BTS and felt a lot more lateral flex in my boots than I was used to.

Still figuring out this new-fangled tech.

yeah, I can see that too. I mean side to side though. so at really high angles the input is still there.

[tenorman]

There has to be give somewhere in the system.

hi JAKE W. and KING CRIMSON

i think you two are both correct but are butting heads because one is talking about stiff narrow boards with high binding angles while the other is talking about wider boards at lower angles?

usually the narrow board, high angles guys (myself included) get their stiffness from the boot and the flex from the binding. fortunately, i have burton FURNACE boots (stiff like burton FIRES with the added stiffness of a one piece sole) so i don't have to rely on ski boots. when my FURNACES give out either my upz rc10 (with grey tongues) or FIRES will probably be a good substitute. probably if JAKE W. had a pair of FURNACE snowboard boots he would like them also.

laterally stiff ski boots probably would be of benefit to people riding old school boards (stiff and narrow) with high (60plus) binding angles. probably also benefiting people who board more with their hips than their feet.

usually guys need a little bit of flex or you end up breaking the least stiffest/strongest link in the system be it the board, bindings, boot or even worse-part of your body.

most of the previous posters with stiff boots have relied on flexier bindings but here's an interesting case of using softer/flexier boots with stiffer bindings. below is a pic from an old 15 year old SNOWBOARD CANADA magazine showing JASEY JAY ANDERSON riding a stiff narrow burton raceboard mounted with BOMBER BINDINGS and wearing soft (his definition of "soft") LANGE X08 ski boots.

can anyone chime in about the X08 boots? i am only familiar with the X09 series as i had the X09 REGULAR model boots which i found way too stiff for snowboarding. the stiffest LANGES (I think) at the time was the X09 RACE model which had the same plastic as mine but had a plastic spoiler at the back (to increase stiffness?) were the X08 boots a lot softer?

in the text accompanying the photo, mr. ANDERSON claimed he got his flex from his relatively soft LANGE X08 ski boots. guess he meant soft relative to the stiff BOMBER BINDINGS and stiff narrow custom race stock BURTON factory prime.

[BlueB]

I've got a pair of older Lange XTi in nice condition. You can try them if you wish. A bit narrow for me. I think one could remove the flipable lean set-plate and get free flex. Might be too soft that way...

[BlueB]

Latest reincarnation is called Axion. Ancle strap is a cable now (Jack's wish).

They do not seem to be BTSable, but one still could tune the flex (irreversibly) by cutting the inner wings.

Pics: