Anyone else think one of the biggest cons in the ski industry is stiff ski boots? Of course they are more expensive and I feel like people who ski well sometimes feel the need to buy stiff boots even though it may not match their ski style/preferred terrain or even their personal preference. I’ve skied on both and my preference (except when it gets really warm in the spring) is softer boots. I get the argument of needing stiffer boots if you ski faster, but also the faster you ski the more force terrain can put on your body and shins, which means the more you may benefit from softer boots to absorb those shocks. I’m not talking about lateral stiffness, but forward flex. Seems like an easy way to get people to pay premiums for their boots.
-
Welcome to AlpineZone, the largest online community of skiers and snowboarders in the Northeast!
You may have to REGISTER before you can post. Registering is FREE, gets rid of the majority of advertisements, and lets you participate in giveaways and other AlpineZone events!
Con of stiff ski boots
- Thread starter Lefty4514
- Start date
Not Sure
Well-known member
I don't know about cons? Soft boots are fine for groomers but don't cut it in the bumps. Beginners might be a bit more forgiving and not notice the difference . I like an immediate thought to action response ....soft boot equals a slower sloppy response .
I am skiing on slightly softer boots than I had last year and am thinking about another pair ? To each his own ,if they work for you fine.
I am skiing on slightly softer boots than I had last year and am thinking about another pair ? To each his own ,if they work for you fine.
Respect your opinion but disagree. I think stiff skis and boots in bumps makes things harder. That’s why mogul ski’s tips are softer. If your boots and skis are stiff and not taking some of the energy then more is going to the body/knees.
Last edited:
drjeff
Well-known member
There are certainly some people for whom the combo of their ability/technique and equipment choices have them in boots that are too stiff for their maximum potential.
There are others who's combo of ability/technique and equipment has them in boots that are too soft.
Heck, Lindsey Vonn races on 140 flex boots. Michaela Shiffrin races on 90 flex boots. They both seem to make their equipment work quite well for their own styles!!
I have said it many times, everyone should be in equipment that fits them/works for them properly. Not be in equipment based on some review they read online from someone they've probably never met/skied with or some equipment they bought just because of some great deal they saw....
I have wondered if people actually went through a blind fitting, by reps/techs who know their job inside and out, how many people would at the end of the blind fitting (and that includes both the fit and demo process) end up on the same gear they're currently on, and also likely not see either some improvement in their on hill skills or at least have it be easier to ski than it currently is for them???
Sent from my XT1254 using AlpineZone mobile app
There are others who's combo of ability/technique and equipment has them in boots that are too soft.
Heck, Lindsey Vonn races on 140 flex boots. Michaela Shiffrin races on 90 flex boots. They both seem to make their equipment work quite well for their own styles!!
I have said it many times, everyone should be in equipment that fits them/works for them properly. Not be in equipment based on some review they read online from someone they've probably never met/skied with or some equipment they bought just because of some great deal they saw....
I have wondered if people actually went through a blind fitting, by reps/techs who know their job inside and out, how many people would at the end of the blind fitting (and that includes both the fit and demo process) end up on the same gear they're currently on, and also likely not see either some improvement in their on hill skills or at least have it be easier to ski than it currently is for them???
Sent from my XT1254 using AlpineZone mobile app
Not Sure
Well-known member
This article below is from Pugski and is a really good explanation of the difference the author points out that soft boots can prevent progression . I am in agreement with that point out of personal experience . I bought a set of Scott Superhot boots in the late 70's and they basically had very little flex ,there was a adjustment period but they made a huge difference for me taking my bump skiing to another level .
"It's pretty simple, really. The vitally important flexing-extending movement patterns of skiing are specific to the sport, and they represent a skill that must be learned. Without skis or ski boots--in "normal" shoes--when you bend down low to pick up something off the floor, your heels will lift and your ankles will bend to a degree limited only by their range of motion. Both of these movements (heels lifting and ankles "dorsiflexing") move everything above them forward, compensating for the hips moving back when the knees bend, and allowing you to keep your balance.
With stiff, snug ski boots that limit ankle movement and ski bindings that lock your heels to your skis, the same knee bending movements would move everything back unless you compensate with other forward movements. Those movements can come from the hips, the spine, or the arms (or any combination) bending or reaching forward. They are not particularly difficult, but they are "new" movements specific to skiing. The sooner we learn and adopt these ski-specific flexing and extending movements, the quicker our skiing progress will be.
With stiff, snug boots, beginners typically simply don't flex much--prompting the ubiquitous and time-honored advice to "bend ze knees." They simply cannot bend their knees and keep their balance without learning new movements higher up in the "kinetic chain." And if they hit a bump or something that causes the knees to bend and absorb the impact, the stiff boots throw them quickly into the proverbial "back seat," for the reasons I described above.
"Soft" boots are somewhat more forgiving for beginners because (combined with a typically looser fit), they allow more "normal" ankle movement. They may allow beginners to keep their balance fore-and-aft more easily before they learn their new ski-specific movement patterns. But of course, getting away with errors can hinder learning as well, and even contribute to learning bad habits.
Stiffer boots are critical to skiing for several reasons. Evolved along with our short little feet, ankles are not strong enough to deal with the increased leverage of long skis. We need to regulate the pressure along the full length of the skis--sometimes forward, sometimes back, usually right in the center--maintaining balance throughout a full range of "vertical" motion, even as dramatically varying terrain and speeds constantly conspire to threaten that fore-aft balance. So we need both the added strength and support ski boots give to our ankles, and new, sophisticated combinations of knee, hip, spine, and arm movements. In my opinion, for anyone who wants to learn to ski well, the sooner you get yourself into a high-performance, well-fitted and well-adjusted boot, the quicker you'll learn the new movements without reinforcing bad habits.
That does not mean getting the stiffest race boot you can find! Some ankle flex is necessary, both to forgive the inevitable error and to absorb the small micro-shocks of terrain irregularities, "washboards," and the like, as well as to provide the ultimate precision "fine-tuning" to fore-aft balance. It's notable that downhill racers (highest speed, longest turns, emphasis on gliding speed) typically use somewhat softer boots than slalom and GS racers, because the softer boots allow their skis to glide better and faster.
There is a lot of mythology about ski boots and the role of ankle flex and boot flex in performance skiing. Many skiers still insist that we must be able to flex our ankles deeply as part of creating ski performance. Without getting into too much side-tracking detail, I'll just ask a question I've often asked: How do skis respond to "boot flex"? The answer, of course, is that they don't. They respond to pressure, including fore-aft pressure shifts, and as skiers, the more precisely and accurately we can regulate that pressure, the better. With the right learned skills, we can flex and extend through our full range, manage the dramatic forces of high-performance turns, and absorb large moguls, while maintaining fore-aft balance throughout. This requires the ability to find fore-aft "neutral" in our boot cuffs at all times, regardless of the degree of knee flexion or extension. If I need to "flex my boots" every time I bend my knees, I will be extremely limited in my ability to balance, flex, extend, and regulate fore-aft pressure.
Get good boots and learn the right movements!
Best regards,
Bob Barnes "
"It's pretty simple, really. The vitally important flexing-extending movement patterns of skiing are specific to the sport, and they represent a skill that must be learned. Without skis or ski boots--in "normal" shoes--when you bend down low to pick up something off the floor, your heels will lift and your ankles will bend to a degree limited only by their range of motion. Both of these movements (heels lifting and ankles "dorsiflexing") move everything above them forward, compensating for the hips moving back when the knees bend, and allowing you to keep your balance.
With stiff, snug ski boots that limit ankle movement and ski bindings that lock your heels to your skis, the same knee bending movements would move everything back unless you compensate with other forward movements. Those movements can come from the hips, the spine, or the arms (or any combination) bending or reaching forward. They are not particularly difficult, but they are "new" movements specific to skiing. The sooner we learn and adopt these ski-specific flexing and extending movements, the quicker our skiing progress will be.
With stiff, snug boots, beginners typically simply don't flex much--prompting the ubiquitous and time-honored advice to "bend ze knees." They simply cannot bend their knees and keep their balance without learning new movements higher up in the "kinetic chain." And if they hit a bump or something that causes the knees to bend and absorb the impact, the stiff boots throw them quickly into the proverbial "back seat," for the reasons I described above.
"Soft" boots are somewhat more forgiving for beginners because (combined with a typically looser fit), they allow more "normal" ankle movement. They may allow beginners to keep their balance fore-and-aft more easily before they learn their new ski-specific movement patterns. But of course, getting away with errors can hinder learning as well, and even contribute to learning bad habits.
Stiffer boots are critical to skiing for several reasons. Evolved along with our short little feet, ankles are not strong enough to deal with the increased leverage of long skis. We need to regulate the pressure along the full length of the skis--sometimes forward, sometimes back, usually right in the center--maintaining balance throughout a full range of "vertical" motion, even as dramatically varying terrain and speeds constantly conspire to threaten that fore-aft balance. So we need both the added strength and support ski boots give to our ankles, and new, sophisticated combinations of knee, hip, spine, and arm movements. In my opinion, for anyone who wants to learn to ski well, the sooner you get yourself into a high-performance, well-fitted and well-adjusted boot, the quicker you'll learn the new movements without reinforcing bad habits.
That does not mean getting the stiffest race boot you can find! Some ankle flex is necessary, both to forgive the inevitable error and to absorb the small micro-shocks of terrain irregularities, "washboards," and the like, as well as to provide the ultimate precision "fine-tuning" to fore-aft balance. It's notable that downhill racers (highest speed, longest turns, emphasis on gliding speed) typically use somewhat softer boots than slalom and GS racers, because the softer boots allow their skis to glide better and faster.
There is a lot of mythology about ski boots and the role of ankle flex and boot flex in performance skiing. Many skiers still insist that we must be able to flex our ankles deeply as part of creating ski performance. Without getting into too much side-tracking detail, I'll just ask a question I've often asked: How do skis respond to "boot flex"? The answer, of course, is that they don't. They respond to pressure, including fore-aft pressure shifts, and as skiers, the more precisely and accurately we can regulate that pressure, the better. With the right learned skills, we can flex and extend through our full range, manage the dramatic forces of high-performance turns, and absorb large moguls, while maintaining fore-aft balance throughout. This requires the ability to find fore-aft "neutral" in our boot cuffs at all times, regardless of the degree of knee flexion or extension. If I need to "flex my boots" every time I bend my knees, I will be extremely limited in my ability to balance, flex, extend, and regulate fore-aft pressure.
Get good boots and learn the right movements!
Best regards,
Bob Barnes "
speden
Active member
- Joined
- Nov 18, 2008
- Messages
- 913
- Points
- 28
Great article. That rings true from my experience. A stiffer boot gives me a better feel for what the edges are doing, and they feel more connected to my body.
I got some new boots this season and the fitter measured the dorsiflexion of my feet and said since I have a lot of flexibility there, I should be in a fairly stiff boot. So I'm in 130 stiffness and liking it.
I got some new boots this season and the fitter measured the dorsiflexion of my feet and said since I have a lot of flexibility there, I should be in a fairly stiff boot. So I'm in 130 stiffness and liking it.
jimk
Well-known member
This is an interesting topic for me. I am in year six of a 90 flex Lange boot and may be about due for new boots next year. I've been skiing for 50 yrs using soft, loose boots all that time. I've made do because I was ignorant and I suppose athletic enough to compensate, but it has probably held me back. The Lange boots have a soft flex, but at least they finally represented a snug fit. I think I will try snug and moderately stiffer boots next time and I'm curious to see how it will feel. However, now that I'm old and not so aggressive I'm not sure how well a stiffer boot will work for me. Most of the time I am happy with my 90 flex boots, but they do feel wimpy sometimes when I have to push skis through deep, chopped up snow, but then again it could be me that's the wimp?
makimono
Member
I remember the exact day and run in 1990 at Attitash that I made my first turns in a brand new pair of race-stiff Lange XRI after 5 years of Salomon SX-91 rear entry comfort. My mind was blown at what a life changing difference a pair of stiff boots could make.
Bumpsis
Well-known member
I'm with Lefty on this one. Well, perhaps I would not call it a con on part of the boot makers, but there there is a definite hint of certain degree of "marketism" which says that you're not skiing in stiff boots you're beginner or lesser skilled skier who will not be capable of skiing all there is. The boot flex index has become a new "macho scale" in ski culture. Just look at the specs for new boots. Anything with a flex of 90 or less is a beginner boot. I think that's just bull s**t. A boot that has flex of 90 is probably a really good balance between comfort and performance, or better, can be a nice combination of these two.
I currently use Full Tilt boots that have a flex of "6" which is the middle of their scale. Yet, I find these boots rather stiff and at the beginning of the past two seasons, including the current one, I know it will take a bit shin bashing before I sort get used to that. This adjustment is not pleasant. I do feel like I carve better in these boots vs my older, softer Salomons (flex of 80), but the performance difference is minimal, while level of discomfort greater. Well fitting, snug, yet comfortable boot that you can flex without trauma to your shins is what I call ideal. With boots that offer serious flex resistance, you are probably giving up some comfort.
In moguls, I definitely prefer softer boots, since shock absorption and knee flex is a huge part of skiing moguls well. I really do think that that a stiffer boot is more likely to throw you in the back seat when hitting moguls. You can't bend the knees (absorb a mogul) without forward flex of your boots. If you bend the knees without pushing your shins forward, you'll be lowering your ass behind you - classic backseat.
As to the article on this subject quote by siliconebob*, i find it to be full of bs especially this:
"If I need to "flex my boots" every time I bend my knees, I will be extremely limited in my ability to balance, flex, extend, and regulate fore-aft pressure."
Jully
Active member
Lateral flex is a heck of a lot more important than forward flex. For the performance of most skiers, including advanced ones, the flex scale is relatively meaningless. You'll perform way better in a 100 or 110 flex boot with proper fit, especially laterally, than a 130 flex box a lot of people ski with. That's not to say there aren't some awesome 130 boots out there AND people who perform best in that boot, but I agree that a lot of it is marketing.
bdfreetuna
New member
I went from some old Rossignol 90-rated boots that were getting beat to Dalbello Panterra 120 ID this year.
On the same pair of skis I can say the Dalbello 120s do give more precise turn initiation. Otherwise I don't notice any big difference in the "performance" department.
I'm not sure if stiffer boots are better or worse on moguls yet as I haven't done much bump skiing yet this season.
On the same pair of skis I can say the Dalbello 120s do give more precise turn initiation. Otherwise I don't notice any big difference in the "performance" department.
I'm not sure if stiffer boots are better or worse on moguls yet as I haven't done much bump skiing yet this season.
I agree. If there’s a snow condition where stiffer forward flex would be useful it’s heavy wet inconsistent clumpy snow. When I buy my next boots I really hope the full tilt fit me well because the ability to change the tongue to match the conditions that day seems invaluable.
I can’t think of why you would ever want your boot to flex laterally and am assuming most boots (no matter the stated flex) are plenty stiff enough in that regard, but I may be wrong as it’s hard to demo different boots.
x10003q
Active member
We need to remember that 120 flex from one boot company will not match 120 flex from a different boot company. There is no universal measuring standard. The boots also react differently to temps. It is really hard to put a handle on forward flex without actually testing the boots while actually skiing - something that is almost impossible.
bigbog
Active member
Ditto x10003q's....and for those of us with limited dorsiflexion...some stiffness helps as we simply can't flex as deep as other skiers...
Last edited:
machski
Well-known member
130 Flex for me. I can tell the difference in the shop of softer boots. Stiff gives excellent feel and immediate reaction to the slightest pressure changes. You need that in bumps and steep or tight lines. Some may enjoy a softer flex, and if you are super light weight, softer may be better.
As to Dr. Jeff's Lindsay-Michaela comparison, two different bodies altogether. Lindsay is very tall and is one of the few women who ski men's DH skis as well. 140's are probably needed to control those monsters and her height probably makes those work for her. Michaela is much shorter and lighter, and given her more all around focus vs just speed, 90 Flex probably works ok for her (though I would not be surprised if she has dialed her flex up this season a bit). It's all relative to some extent.
Sent from my XT1650 using AlpineZone mobile app
As to Dr. Jeff's Lindsay-Michaela comparison, two different bodies altogether. Lindsay is very tall and is one of the few women who ski men's DH skis as well. 140's are probably needed to control those monsters and her height probably makes those work for her. Michaela is much shorter and lighter, and given her more all around focus vs just speed, 90 Flex probably works ok for her (though I would not be surprised if she has dialed her flex up this season a bit). It's all relative to some extent.
Sent from my XT1650 using AlpineZone mobile app
I'm 6'2" and about 195.
I keep my Panterra 120's on the softer 110 flex.
Being taller with a higher center of gravity makes soft ankles much more of a priority for me. I too have never heard of a lateral flex measure and assume it would be best at 0.
I keep my Panterra 120's on the softer 110 flex.
Being taller with a higher center of gravity makes soft ankles much more of a priority for me. I too have never heard of a lateral flex measure and assume it would be best at 0.
drjeff
Well-known member
This!!!We need to remember that 120 flex from one boot company will not match 120 flex from a different boot company. There is no universal measuring standard. The boots also react differently to temps. It is really hard to put a handle on forward flex without actually testing the boots while actually skiing - something that is almost impossible.
Sent from my XT1254 using AlpineZone mobile app
We need to remember that 120 flex from one boot company will not match 120 flex from a different boot company. There is no universal measuring standard. The boots also react differently to temps. It is really hard to put a handle on forward flex without actually testing the boots while actually skiing - something that is almost impossible.
Definitely agree with this. Buying ski boots is like buying a matress. Impossible to compare models and you don’t really find out if you like them until months later. All part of the marketing con....
Scruffy
Active member
There is so much variation in people's anatomy, strength, and skill level to go into the decision of what flex within a product line one should choose that any casual conversation about it is meaningless. There is no "con". Of the same boot, the right flex for you may not be the right flex for me. Ego has no room in the decision.
bdfreetuna
New member
I'm a couple inches shorter and a couple pounds heavier. Forgot the Panterras have adjustable flex. A lot of other adjustments I haven't messed with yet as well.
Similar threads
