Thermoflex liners too soft?

[Aracan]

The liners of my UPZ boots are pretty much shot, to the point where the tongue has rubbed down so far that the stiff outside creates pressure points on my shin. I was about to replace them with heat-moldable liners. But now I read on the homepage of Mr Beckmann that those liners are "not appropriate for performance riding" because they are "softer, more vibration-opaque" and therefore provide insufficient feedback.

I have used TF liners before, and I recall that they were noticeably firmer than the stock liners I was used to. The comfort came not from their softness but from their having conformed to my foot. (Note that I am referring not to the outside of the liner, but to the cushioning material.)

So I am unsure. Any insights are welcome.

[lowrider]

Not a performance rider but i am in my boots for upwards  to 6-7 hours at a time. Too soft hasn't been an issue for me but my rule is " fussy feet need a boot fitter."

[Corey]

Going out on a limb, but I'd guess that 90% of alpine riders I've encountered are using thermo-molded foam liners.  The next most common are the injected liners, and then there are the full custom liners.  Thermo liners are simpler to do if you don't have access to a great bootfitter.  

Race car drivers complain when they can't feel every surface change on a road, but most people don't want/need that level of feedback in their commute to work.  It comes down to what you want. 

Also note that there are varying stiffnesses of foam liners.  http://bomberonline.3dcartstores.com/Thermo-Flex-Liners-DCL-131_p_90.html vs. http://bomberonline.3dcartstores.com/Thermo-Flex-Liners-DEL-141_p_179.html

[Eric Brammer aka PSR]

Mold them up in your UPZ's.. Just do it. Worse case scenario, they won't work as well as you hoped. BUT, they can still be remolded. Thus, they can also be re-sold. It's a win-win.

[nigelc]

The intuition liners are considerably stiffer/harder than the thermoflex liners that come with the deeluxe boots. I believe that these are made by Palau. My understanding is that Erik doesn't like the thermo liners because of the foam underfoot which can compromise stability. Intuition now have a liner with no foam under the sole so your footbed effectively sits directly on the  boots zepper.

[michael.a]

You can use the stiffness of the liner to customize boot flex besides the usual mods of adding a spring system, cutting plastic, changing tongues, etc. I own two pairs of liners at the opposite ends of the spectrum that I swap out depending on terrain, condition, and riding style. 

 

6 hours ago, nigelc said:

 Intuition now have a liner with no foam under the sole so your footbed effectively sits directly on the  boots zepper.

Share a link, cause Im not coming up with anything

[Ernie00]

I've been riding scarpa liners in my UPZ for years now and they are significantly softer than the stock one.    Good or bad.. it all depends on what you like... I've gotten used to them but took a while.     You could offset it with stiffer tongues. 

[nigelc]

http://intuitionliners.com/thestore/pro-wrap/

[Aracan]

Thank you all for your replies! I will just give it a try based on past experience and also on the fact that thermo liners are definitely the least risky option, financially speaking.

[Beckmann AG]

On 10/12/2016 at 11:18 AM, Jim Callen said:

Whether or not my liners are "vibration-opaque" doesn't matter to me, and shouldn't matter to 99% of the riders out there.  What's more important, the minute performance gain that comes from an uncomfortable liner, or the ability to have long, full days because your feet are comfortable.  When molded properly, liners fit your feet like a glove, allowing for controlled response and feedback.  We encourage proper footbeds, of course.  The stock material isn't ideal, that I agree with.

Bear in mind that 99% of the snowboard market has no need for hard boots, or anything else in the Bomber warehouse.

If a rider can tell the difference between metal and glass board construction, they’re in a position to appreciate differences in liners. So your percentage is probably off just a bit. 

Further,  I’m commenting on material characteristics, not on what people should or should not use.

On 10/12/2016 at 11:18 AM, Jim Callen said:

Why would we sell and ride them in all our boots if we didn't believe in the performance advantage of comfy feet?

 

If 'comfy' feet delivered sufficient performance for this niche market, you'd be selling softies.

Stock or aftermarket, moldable liners are a gold mine for the retailer. The short ‘time to yield’ improves the turnover rate, so more boots can be tried on and sold in a given time frame. The molding process is forgiving, the buyer will immediately feel warm and comfy, and the associated cost is favorable for both parties. 

When it comes to boot sales, comfort will always take precedent over fit. When you have only two shell manufacturers, the expedient way to outfit the consumer is to go with an exceptionally generic last, and then fill the gaps with foam.

Outside of household insulation, that’s not, and never will be, a recipe for performance.

Performance is found in the margins. That means regard for materials and operating tolerances.

 

10 hours ago, Aracan said:

Thank you all for your replies! I will just give it a try based on past experience and also on the fact that thermo liners are definitely the least risky option, financially speaking.

As Nigel notes, there are more liner options available than there used to be. No doubt, that trend will continue, as it’s far cheaper for a manufacturer to tweak a liner than to tweak a shell.  

Are they improving?  Yes. 

Are they as ‘good’ as a component liner made of leather, neoprene and Cambrelle?  Not yet.

Regardless, you'll be fine, though the new liners might highlight the need for new shells...

[Aracan]

Quote

the new liners might highlight the need for new shells

I hope not! But time will tell. Of the three hardboot shell shapes available at this point, I have had the best performance experience with UPZ, in the sense that I perform better when I am under less pain ;-/

Thank you for your observations. Though I cannot resist to repeat a question I hinted at in my first post: I take it that the opacity you wrote about is more noticeable with softer, more yielding material. In my (very limited!) experience with thermo liners, the molded liner was decidedly firmer than the stock liner it replaced, and indeed any hardboot stock liner I have tried. At the time, that seemed logical to me, because what would be the point of molding a liner with a lot of "give"? What am I missing there?

[Allee]

13 hours ago, Ernie00 said:

I've been riding scarpa liners in my UPZ for years now and they are significantly softer than the stock one.  

I just ordered a new set of Black Diamond liners for my boots yesterday. I've been using them for the last 3 seasons and love the way they soften up the UPZ's. The current liners are still fine, but my arches have dropped and I've gone up a foot size, so I need some bigger ones. The BD's are thermo, but I never bothered molding them, just put them in and rode them.

And if it's any help to Aracan, I got them off Amazon.com for $29USD. There's a fair range of sizes still available on there ... if you want a cheap experiment.

Edited October 13, 2016 by Allee

[Aracan]

Thanks for the pointer! Unfortunately, it seems the price depends on size. For my feet, they come at USD 180 before shipping.

So I will source some liners locally.

Edited October 13, 2016 by Aracan

[Corey]

Mr. Beckmann, I agree that you can get better performance from a hand-crafted liner in a boot that fits your foot very well.  Just as you can replace all the rubber bushings in your car for ball joints for reduced slop and improved performance.  In both cases, you need to be willing to deal with the initial expense, both in terms of money and time, as well as future adjustments.  

However, sometimes 'close enough' really is close enough for a recreational rider.  If you're looking for tenths of a second or ultimate feedback/precision, then hand-tweaked liners from a craftsman are the clear winner.  But for a portion of the population, hardboot/alpine/snowboarding is more about having fun for 5-10 days a year in relative comfort and laughing with friends than about ultimate precision.  

What I'm trying to say is that there are very good reasons to use a custom liner in a custom shell, just as there are very good reasons to use a thermo foam liner in a stock shell.  Each person has to decide where they want to be along the continuum between the two extremes.  

Personally, I think there are already too many barriers to even try alpine riding to demand that people invest in hours of custom bootfitting before they try an alpine board.  Put squishy liners in stock shells and go ride.  Then adjust as needed.  

[Aracan]

I absolutely agree that boots are of paramount importance. Over the years, I have spent more on boots than on any other part of snowboarding equipment. As I am not, alas, a man of leisure, nor in a position where I get more than 30 days in a really, really good winter (and in some years I am lucky if I get half as many), the total cost still needs to make some sense in the context of my life in general.

Therefore I hesitate to spend a big bundle for results that may or may not turn out to be worth it in enhancing my overall snowboarding experience, especially as I am unsure if bootfitting wisdom for ski boots is completely the same as for SB hardboots, as any bootfitter I am likely to see will be a ski bootfitter.

Edited October 13, 2016 by Aracan

[Neil Gendzwill]

19 minutes ago, corey_dyck said:

Mr. Beckmann, I agree that you can get better performance from a hand-crafted liner in a boot that fits your foot very well.  Just as you can replace all the rubber bushings in your car for ball joints for reduced slop and improved performance.  In both cases, you need to be willing to deal with the initial expense, both in terms of money and time, as well as future adjustments.

And once you do that, your ability to enjoy your car anywhere but on the track is diminished.  The vast majority of us here are recreational riders.

[Beckmann AG]

13 hours ago, Aracan said:

Thank you for your observations. Though I cannot resist to repeat a question I hinted at in my first post: I take it that the opacity you wrote about is more noticeable with softer, more yielding material. In my (very limited!) experience with thermo liners, the molded liner was decidedly firmer than the stock liner it replaced, and indeed any hardboot stock liner I have tried. At the time, that seemed logical to me, because what would be the point of molding a liner with a lot of "give"? What am I missing there?

You're welcome. I'd like to think time spent studying the esoteric might be useful from time to time. 

(BTW, I employed your 'regular/goofy' test quite a bit last season. Fairly consistent.)

The funny thing about the various materials that make up a boot and liner, are that the perceived hardness might not correlate directly to transmissibility.

The Tecnica Icon, for instance had some very hard plastic in the shell, yet you'd get better snow feel through a bowl of dog food. 

For the most part, the 'harder' foam liners perform better than the softer ones. Depending  of course, on how one chooses to define 'perform' and 'performance'.

Worth noting though, that a denser monolithic liner that fills/supports effectively in one area, might be too stiff in another.  To the extent that ankle mobility is lost, and with it, finesse and agility.

A component construction can utilize various materials to their best ends, providing fit and support without compromise to dexterity.

Within reason, the better the match between foot and shell, and the closer the shell is to the foot, the better the feedback loop, and the greater the possibility of riding to a higher level of proficiency.

A lot of ski/snowboard retail depends more on perception than reality. If you have two identical boots, one with 'moldable' liner, one without, the perception will follow that the 'moldable' option is better, simply because the option is there. Molding/personalizing a 'softer' liner might serve no practical purpose, but the consumer will perceive value and make a decision based on that perception. Given the minimal cost to the manufacturer, offering the choice is a smart move.

Edited October 14, 2016 by Beckmann AG
incompl thoug

[Beckmann AG]

7 hours ago, corey_dyck said:

Mr. Beckmann, I agree that you can get better performance from a hand-crafted liner in a boot that fits your foot very well.  Just as you can replace all the rubber bushings in your car for ball joints for reduced slop and improved performance.  In both cases, you need to be willing to deal with the initial expense, both in terms of money and time, as well as future adjustments.  

However, sometimes 'close enough' really is close enough for a recreational rider.  If you're looking for tenths of a second or ultimate feedback/precision, then hand-tweaked liners from a craftsman are the clear winner.  But for a portion of the population, hardboot/alpine/snowboarding is more about having fun for 5-10 days a year in relative comfort and laughing with friends than about ultimate precision.  

What I'm trying to say is that there are very good reasons to use a custom liner in a custom shell, just as there are very good reasons to use a thermo foam liner in a stock shell.  Each person has to decide where they want to be along the continuum between the two extremes.  

Personally, I think there are already too many barriers to even try alpine riding to demand that people invest in hours of custom bootfitting before they try an alpine board.  Put squishy liners in stock shells and go ride.  Then adjust as needed.  

Corey, 

With all due respect, I think you've misunderstood my point.  I'm not talking about Nth degree improvements. To use the automotive analogy, it's like going from rubber bushings to urethane. The ride quality doesn't suffer, yet the driver has a better understanding of how the chassis is interacting with the road. Improving the feedback loop doesn't affect handling per se, it affects the operator's ability to affect handling. Ergo, it's worth the effort if one is so inclined.

And I'm not advocating against the use of moldable liners. Rather, I'm suggesting that there are better options for those interested in pursuing 'higher performance'.

The average 'recreational' rider isn't looking for more performance than what they can find off the shelf. So it should be apparent that I'm not speaking directly to that audience. 

Nor am I speaking to the Novice, who has enough difficulty managing inadequate binding configuration and trying not to run into solid objects.

The most effective means of barrier reduction in alpine snowboarding is attention to, and not disregard for, the details.

Edited October 13, 2016 by Beckmann AG

[Beckmann AG]

7 hours ago, Aracan said:

Therefore I hesitate to spend a big bundle for results that may or may not turn out to be worth it in enhancing my overall snowboarding experience, especially as I am unsure if bootfitting wisdom for ski boots is completely the same as for SB hardboots, as any bootfitter I am likely to see will be a ski bootfitter.

FYI, boot fitting 'wisdom' is generally all over the map, so to speak. You'll find more thoughts on the topic under the 'alpine skiing' header.

[avante]

On 10/12/2016 at 3:18 AM, Aracan said:

The liners of my UPZ boots are pretty much shot, to the point where the tongue has rubbed down so far that the stiff outside creates pressure points on my shin. I was about to replace them with heat-moldable liners. But now I read on the homepage of Mr Beckmann that those liners are "not appropriate for performance riding" because they are "softer, more vibration-opaque" and therefore provide insufficient feedback.

I have used TF liners before, and I recall that they were noticeably firmer than the stock liners I was used to. The comfort came not from their softness but from their having conformed to my foot. (Note that I am referring not to the outside of the liner, but to the cushioning material.)

So I am unsure. Any insights are welcome.

 

Just my 2 cents: at the same point I have just bought a new pair of FLO liners and then got another new pair for the upcoming season. They just work great for me, so why change anything. If your concern is stiffness, then Intuition Power Wrap is your choice - they are stiff, actually I find them too stiff for me.

[Beckmann AG]

8 hours ago, Jim Callen said:

 

13 hours ago, Beckmann AG said:

If 'comfy' feet delivered sufficient performance for this niche market, you'd be selling softies.

I'm not sure how true this is for many people here, but one of the main reasons I initially switched to hard boots was because soft boots were horridly uncomfortable.  I still stand by my statement, and in that it is the policy of Bomber that comfy feet in and of themselves result in better performance.  We've all had the experience of dealing with tired, aching feet from a poor fit/setup.  It sucks.  Heat moldable liners are the best, most accessible way for people to get their feet happy, especially for riders who don't have as much time available to them on snow as others of us do.

13 hours ago, Beckmann AG said:

Performance is found in the margins. That means regard for materials and operating tolerances.

Where performance is found varies considerably for each individual.

 

Jim,

Somewhere along the line you've drawn the wrong conclusion.

It’s important that you understand I’m not criticizing the sale, or use of, moldable liners. 

You should also understand that post censoring is ill-advised, sets a bad precedent, and reflects poorly on management. 

I’ll send additional thoughts under separate cover.

 

Incidentally, Enjoyment of 'performance' is subjective, and is wherever you find it. 'Performance' itself, having to do with the proper function of a mechanism, is objective, therefore is or is not present.

 

[nigelc]

The intuition liners are considerably stiffer than either the thermoflex or non-mouldable stock liners. With a well made footbed on the stroble bottom of a well moulded  intuition liner in a correctly sized boot I believe you should be 95% there. Plus you can do some of it yourself, which means you can adjust as necessary and therefore learn what is good.

Also here in NZ doing it yourself is pretty much the only option.

 

Sheep aside.

[nigelc]

From a comfort point of view I mould the liners so initially they are just slightly too tight around the heel & instep. They seem to loosen up after a couple of days and if I dont do this then they are too big.

[Neil Gendzwill]

3 hours ago, Beckmann AG said:

 

You should also understand that post censoring is ill-advised, sets a bad precedent, and reflects poorly on management. 

Did he censor you? I must have missed it. Seems he responded quite reasonably despite how derogatory your tone was and is. 

Edited October 14, 2016 by Neil Gendzwill

[Aracan]

Quote

Worth noting though, that a denser monolithic liner that fills/supports effectively in one area, might be too stiff in another.  To the extent that ankle mobility is lost, and with it, finesse and agility.

[...]

Within reason, the better the match between foot and shell, and the closer the shell is to the foot, the better the feedback loop, and the greater the possibility of riding to a higher level of proficiency.

That confirms my guesses. I hope that by combining a shell that allows for sufficient ankle mobility with a not-too-rigid liner I will achieve satisfactory results. The proof of the pudding is in the eating, as they say - I will know more by November 7th.

Quote

They [the FLO liners] just work great for me, so why change anything.

I also found the FLO liners quite good while the lasted, apart from that thing where the tongue wouldn't stay where I needed it. But as far as I can make out, they are the most expensive option this side of foam-injected (on my side of the pond, I would have to pay list price, almost EUR 200,- two years ago, probably more now) and I feel that for that price they could have lasted longer.