Rear entry ski boots... why not?

[heroshmero]

Forgive the ignorance, but I'd really like to know... why are rear entry ski boots a bad idea?

I've read a number of comments from people saying they were a stupid idea but I just don't know anything about that (I've been a soft booter for the last 16 years and a hard booter for 3).

[skategoat]

They just don't have the fit of a three-piece, especially in the heel hold department. The front piece of a rear-entry is basically one big piece of plastic and the rear piece is just pushing the foot against it, like a clamshell. To keep the heel down, the mfgs resorted to all sorts of strange cable and strap contraptions.

Back in the day, I owned top-of-the-line Salomon Equipe SX92s and after the first season, I had to ride with my toes clenched in order to fill the void in the forefoot area. That resulted in tension through my calves and pretty much my whole lower body. It was tiring and restricted mobility in my ankles and knees.

[Alaskan Rover]

I remember my mom used to have those white Hanson boots with the totally rubber liner and odd-looking front joint that were all the rage amongst the fashion conscious back in the day. Oddly enough, those same Hansons ended up in the movie 'Waterworld', if I remember correctly. My dad at the time thought they were ridiculous and said fashion should be left at the ski lodge where it belonged. He much preferred a bullet-proof pair of steel-buckled orange Langs, as he thought they were much more common-sense...and he was probably right.

While I never owned a pair, I was always intrigued by the Scott rear-entry boots. I thought they were very eclectic, and I guess, in there own way, they were the Saab 900 of ski boots. I may be wrong, but weren't those Billy Kidd's boot of choice?

Gravity IS Life.

[skategoat]

The Salomons and Hansons were actually pretty good. The Hanson's had a split shell and you controlled flex by moving the clamp that kept the shell together. Resulted in nice, smooth flex. Problem was, the split was right in the front so snow would enter and melt inside your boot. By the end of the day, your foot was squishing around in a half cup of water.

The Salomons had a sliding flex adjuster that worked well. When new, they wee a nice fit but when they packed out, there was really no good way to adjust the fit. The original orange SX90s were used quite a bit in World Cup so they couldn't have been that bad.

This was the first rear entry boot I ever owned. They met their demise when I landed hard off a jump and blew those aluminum rivets right out of the plastic. One thing I'll say about them - they were warm.

[heroshmero]

They just don't have the fit of a three-piece, especially in the heel hold department.

I'm beginning to understand. So, a three-piece wraps around the ankle better and holds the heel down better?

Just to confim, the three pieces of a three-piece are the lower shell, the upper shell (or cuff) and the tongue?

How is the forward lean support better in a three-piece? Is it because you can anchor the back of the cuff to the lower shell better than a rear entry design?

Thanks for the info.

[Kent]

Simple....

B/c they hinge backward and have the resistance in front.

That is the opposite of want you want in a boot (resistance in back, hinge front)

[skategoat]

I'm beginning to understand. So, a three-piece wraps around the ankle better and holds the heel down better?

Just to confim, the three pieces of a three-piece are the lower shell, the upper shell (or cuff) and the tongue?

How is the forward lean support better in a three-piece? Is it because you can anchor the back of the cuff to the lower shell better than a rear entry design?

Thanks for the info.

A three-piece just wraps around the foot better. When you buckle it, the shell actually reduces in volume. A rear entry doesn't do that. Any volume deduction is done with straps and cables and little tweaky gadgets. See the black knob on the side of the boot in my photo? That was Salomon's solution to reducing volume in the forefoot area. You turn the knob and it squeezes around the liner. Not a really good way to make a boot conform.

Don't know about the forward lean. BTW, why you asking? Did you Mom offer you her old boots or something?

[heroshmero]

BTW, why you asking? Did you Mom offer you her old boots or something?

No reason. Just curious. I get that way sometimes. :)

[b0ardski]

I loved my solomon sx 91 equipes, :1luvu:on & off like bedroom slippers, they fit great for a couple years before they packed out.

I used them on the K2 TX in '89 with strap binders modified to use hardboots. They were too stiff in every direction for the old skool stance of 45*f / 10* r.

I learned the hard way when I wrapped my front knee around a tree on a steep powder run:smashfrea

[murphy12]

Most rear-entry type boots were what used to be known as a constant-volume shell. Meaning that when you tightened the various cables, you were only tightening the liner, which could then move inside the shell. An overlap two-piece, or three-piece Cabriolet shell design is much more effective at holding the foot securely and transfering energy to the ski or board.

Yes, I am a boot fitter.

[heroshmero]

I was looking at people's rear entry boots when I was up on the hill today and thinking about what you guys have told me.

I definitely have a better picture now of their disadvantages.

And now I have a better understanding of my own three piece snowboard boot. I had never really thought about the design much but now I can see how it wraps around the foot and compresses the whole liner at once.

Thanks for the info guys!

[Dr D]

I started hardbooting in 1989 with raichle rear entry skiboots. The first Burton hardboots were out that year if my memory serves me. They worked just fine although the bindings were the old rail style 5 hole burtons. Lots of lateral flex in the bindings to accomadate the lack of lateral flex in the boots. I would not suggest riding them with a modern stiff binding like trenchdigger or catek. on an ibex or f2 they might work just fine.

its really a boot, binding, rider style combo thing more than any one piece of equipment