Geeking out on ramp angle/delta.

I see your logic for ramp angle. But having skied a lot of different forward lean varieties on boots, I can say that more lean helps me stay more aggressive and forward, which I like. This may be more knee and ankle position than anything, which ramp wouldn't affect the same way. Maybe that's just me tho. In both cases I think the ideal position is dictated by personal anatomy and style. I also believe racers are still using at least some ramp (and certainly a lot of forward lean), so it must be good for something at least on hard snow. But I'm straying from the topic bringing boot lean into it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Driver

I see your logic for ramp angle. But having skied a lot of different forward lean varieties on boots, I can say that more lean helps me stay more aggressive and forward, which I like. This may be more knee and ankle position than anything, which ramp wouldn't affect the same way. Maybe that's just me tho. In both cases I think the ideal position is dictated by personal anatomy and style. I also believe racers are still using at least some ramp (and certainly a lot of forward lean), so it must be good for something at least on hard snow. But I'm straying from the topic bringing boot lean into it.

---

I agree with this... Which is why I think it might make a difference for different skis and mount points. Some skis want to be driven from the tip, but I feel like many modern skis that are designed for a more central mount prefer a more balanced and neutral stance instead of driving the tips, and that this type of ski would benefit from a more neutral delta (all other things being equal).

Sent from my SGH-I717D using TGR Forums

Again in general, the more upright the stance the easier it is to use the tips. Excessive Forward lean/ramp leads to shins forward, ass back posture that feels aggressive to some people but it really just makes them smush around on their tails in an unathletic stance. I could speculate that Dynafit uses a large ramp angle because more lightweight touring skis will float better in fresh snow by driving the heel down and pulling the tip up.

Not in my experience. Why do my old race shells have serious forward lean (and why do more intermediate level boots have less)? Agree to disagree I guess. To me Upright is less aggressive in general but it depends a lot on your personal flexibility and anatomy.

The variables are intended to work together, by effectively cancelling each other out.

For instance, true race boots/plug boots have more forward lean than your typical rec boot, and high DIN alpine binders tend to have less delta than their lower DIN counterparts. The race boots help keep you in a compact position, and the lack of delta helps keep your bones "stacked" (to use more geek jargon). If race bindings had high delta, you would have to lean back to compensate (butt out), and wouldn't be able to drive the tips.

Touring boots tend to be more upright, and touring bindings tend to have higher delta - although there are execptions. It's obviously easier to walk in upright boots, so the forward lean is in the binding (to help you get into the correct skiing position). The advantage in soft snow is that it's somewhat easier to keep the tips up (as Steve mentioned).

If you aren't racing or hiking - but somewhere in between, the onus is on you to find the right balance.

Additionally, your boot should match your legs. You might focus on your feet when trying on boots, but a good bootfitter will also look at your ankle flexibility (as mntlion said open/closed or if you really want to geek out plantarflexion/dorsiflexion), and the angles your tibia and femur make while standing in a neutral position. If your butt is already sticking out, binding delta isn't going to help you.

I have put shims under a toe piece to get less forward lean and found skiing was noticably easier/better, my ski tech buddy told me the clue to him that I had too much forward lean was that was my ass was sticking out, these were a pair of womens 8.0 waves so maybe the shortleg/calf thing and short BSL made for alot of forward lean, any how those boots are long gone

In spite of that knowledge for my current FR+ situation I am increasing ramp to make it the same as I had on my alpine binding

I notice all the dynafit skis quote a dual radius which I wondered about, my stokes are very straight in front, more side cut at the back, pressure the tails and they turn tighter , dynafit ski/boot/binding feels very right for the BC IME

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by XXX-er

...my ski tech buddy told me the clue to him that I had too much forward lean was that was my ass was sticking out...

---

Exactly.

Actualy we were not even skiing just messing with my boots in the kitchen and buddy said here put this stack of magazines under your boot toes and stand up, that looks better ...you got too much forward lean cuz yer ass was sticking out

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by XXX-er

I have put shims under a toe piece to get less forward lean

---

Well, actually, per normal usage of the terms ramp angle and forward lean, that reduced your ramp angle

Good comments by pisteoff in post #30

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Big Steve

Well, actually, per normal usage of the terms ramp angle and forward lean, that reduced your ramp angle

---

yup it did, I needed to have less forward lean in that particular boot maybe you could call the less ramp a by product? At the time I don't think I had heard of "ramp" I was just happy to ski better, womens wave 8.0's were totaly the wrong boot

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by pisteoff

The variables are intended to work together, by effectively cancelling each other out.

For instance, true race boots/plug boots have more forward lean than your typical rec boot, and high DIN alpine binders tend to have less delta than their lower DIN counterparts. The race boots help keep you in a compact position, and the lack of delta helps keep your bones "stacked" (to use more geek jargon). If race bindings had high delta, you would have to lean back to compensate (butt out), and wouldn't be able to drive the tips.

Touring boots tend to be more upright, and touring bindings tend to have higher delta - although there are execptions. It's obviously easier to walk in upright boots, so the forward lean is in the binding (to help you get into the correct skiing position). The advantage in soft snow is that it's somewhat easier to keep the tips up (as Steve mentioned).

If you aren't racing or hiking - but somewhere in between, the onus is on you to find the right balance.

Additionally, your boot should match your legs. You might focus on your feet when trying on boots, but a good bootfitter will also look at your ankle flexibility (as mntlion said open/closed or if you really want to geek out plantarflexion/dorsiflexion), and the angles your tibia and femur make while standing in a neutral position. If your butt is already sticking out, binding delta isn't going to help you.

---

Makes a lot of sense, but would note that more lean in your boot changes the position of your lower leg knee down (shin to foot angle) while ramp would put you forward but not change that angle. So the 2 don't seem like a direct offset, though clearly related.

pisteoff is not claiming a direct offest, only a direct relationship. Increasing/descreaing either FL or RA have a similar effect of moving the body's COG fore/aft, but, yeah, each affects lower leg placement differently.

http://www.southernski.com/images/bo...ce-balance.jpg

well you often have a couple of forward lean options in an AT boot and can change that shin to foot angle but in my last 2 pairs of 4buckle alpine boot other than to mess with ramp how do you change forward lean?

IME it was changing the forward lean that was important and whatever the ramp ended up at was whatever it ended up

with the small hAZN feet/short BSL changing the ramp really affects forward lean , also with womens boots being my only option besides the god aweful colors if the bootmaker adressed womens issues with the short legs I got more problems

you can add more F lean with a shim in the back of the liner, or attached to the back of the shell.

to make more upright, you can get a shop to heat and bend the shell more upright. Someone on epic has a store/tool that can do this well too.

yeah I had planned to try (I have a sheet of stick on spenco) a spenco shim on the shell and a new booster strap in my alpines there seems to be a lot of slop in that area anyhow due to chicken legs even with a dalbello powerwrap liner, any tricks as to how I shape it ?

just add foam where it feels loose. this might also be on the tongue of the boot too.

Got to love 8 year bump.

Working overnight and nerding out in my head.
Let’s put aside binding delta/ramp completely for a second
1) is it correct that touring boots tend to have (much) less internal boot board ramp delta (heel height to toe height) than true alpine boots (in my case full tilts- which from what I read have fairly high heel:toe so lots of bootboard ramp- and I love love love them)
2) if so- any touring boots have a high heel to toe ramp delta

I’m going through a little existential crisis with my touring boots and my common thought amongst all touring boots I’ve tried with your typical rockered touring soles is that I feel on my heels, as if my heel pads are in a deep hole relative to my toes

The touring boots I know have more drop between the heel and ball of the foot... im told about 15-17mm.

However this is compared to the sole not the insert. In one modern boot i think the ball of the foot sits about 7 mm below the front insert and the heel about 8mm above the heel.

I know the idea before was that more ramp would be more aggressive and now we want it flat. I guess with this internal drop you have to accept your heel will be higher unless you are using an flatter alpine style boot with inserts then i guess you could even get a negative angle.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Matt D

The touring boots I know have more drop between the heel and ball of the foot... im told about 15-17mm.

However this is compared to the sole not the insert. In one modern boot i think the ball of the foot sits about 7 mm below the front insert and the heel about 8mm above the heel.

I know the idea before was that more ramp would be more aggressive and now we want it flat. I guess with this internal drop you have to accept your heel will be higher unless you are using an flatter alpine style boot with inserts then i guess you could even get a negative angle.

---

hmm then it would seem my understanding/intuition from above is wrong...:confused:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by volklpowdermaniac

Got to love 8 year bump.

Working overnight and nerding out in my head.
Let’s put aside binding delta/ramp completely for a second
1) is it correct that touring boots tend to have (much) less internal boot board ramp delta (heel height to toe height) than true alpine boots (in my case full tilts- which from what I read have fairly high heel:toe so lots of bootboard ramp- and I love love love them)
2) if so- any touring boots have a high heel to toe ramp delta

I’m going through a little existential crisis with my touring boots and my common thought amongst all touring boots I’ve tried with your typical rockered touring soles is that I feel on my heels, as if my heel pads are in a deep hole relative to my toes

---

There’s no answer, just better or worse compromises. I’ve been skiing the same (replacing components as they wear) Raichle/Full Tilt classic hill boots for 34 years now. They fit and ski perfectly, their characteristics (fit, stance, and flex) are what I’ve developed my ski technique around. In that same time I’ve gone through 9 different touring boots (Raichle Concordia, Scarpa Laser, Scarpa Denali, Garmont Radium, Dynafit Titan, Dynafit Titan Ultra, Dynafit Mercury, Salomon S-Lab X/Alp, and my latest Dynafit Hoji Free 110s) searching in vain for something that comes close my hill boots, but nothing does. Even when I get acceptable fit and flex (and tourability), as I have with my current Hoji’s, the stance (lean and ramp angle) is all wrong, as you describe, exacerbated by the varying ramp angles of bindings (those POS Shifts are the worst), and complicated by how these interact with the mount point, rocker profile (particularly with reverse camber skis, which are more sensitive to this) and side cut. I can adapt well enough when skiing powder, which fortunately compromises 90% of their use, but when I occasionally test trying to make technically perfect turns on groomed snow, I feel every inadequacy. As I have with every other touring boot, I’ll keep experimenting with every variable (adding boot spoilers, adding binding shims, changing the bindings, the mount point, my skis), finding incremental improvements, until the next greatest boot is released, and the cycle will continue. I’m going to go and fuck around with my setup right now.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by volklpowdermaniac

Got to love 8 year bump.

Working overnight and nerding out in my head.
Let’s put aside binding delta/ramp completely for a second
1) is it correct that touring boots tend to have (much) less internal boot board ramp delta (heel height to toe height) than true alpine boots (in my case full tilts- which from what I read have fairly high heel:toe so lots of bootboard ramp- and I love love love them)
2) if so- any touring boots have a high heel to toe ramp delta

I’m going through a little existential crisis with my touring boots and my common thought amongst all touring boots I’ve tried with your typical rockered touring soles is that I feel on my heels, as if my heel pads are in a deep hole relative to my toes

---

Did some measurements in my boots. Sold my 2mm ramp pin bindings and bought 10mm ramp. All good now.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CaliBrit

Did some measurements in my boots. Sold my 2mm ramp pin bindings and bought 10mm ramp. All good now.

---

That just shows how delta is such an individual thing as many are doing the opposite.

I’ve found the easiest transition between alpine and touring bindings with the Tectons. I can switch between Sollys and Tectons seamlessly. I do use Lupos as a one boot quiver. I can’t stand the high delta of most traditional pin bindings. I’ve always had to shim them.


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by volklpowdermaniac

Got to love 8 year bump.

Working overnight and nerding out in my head.
Let’s put aside binding delta/ramp completely for a second
1) is it correct that touring boots tend to have (much) less internal boot board ramp delta (heel height to toe height) than true alpine boots (in my case full tilts- which from what I read have fairly high heel:toe so lots of bootboard ramp- and I love love love them)
2) if so- any touring boots have a high heel to toe ramp delta

I’m going through a little existential crisis with my touring boots and my common thought amongst all touring boots I’ve tried with your typical rockered touring soles is that I feel on my heels, as if my heel pads are in a deep hole relative to my toes

---

Not sure if its worth it to you to buy one of these just to compare your boots... but a digital protector could answer your question.

Put it in the boot, zero it, then remove it and place on something flat to find the delta.

Repeat the process in the other boot.https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/202...189046a814.jpg

Sent from my SM-A505W using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kootenayskier

There’s no answer, just better or worse compromises. I’ve been skiing the same (replacing components as they wear) Raichle/Full Tilt classic hill boots for 34 years now. They fit and ski perfectly, their characteristics (fit, stance, and flex) are what I’ve developed my ski technique around. In that same time I’ve gone through 9 different touring boots (Raichle Concordia, Scarpa Laser, Scarpa Denali, Garmont Radium, Dynafit Titan, Dynafit Titan Ultra, Dynafit Mercury, Salomon S-Lab X/Alp, and my latest Dynafit Hoji Free 110s) searching in vain for something that comes close my hill boots, but nothing does. Even when I get acceptable fit and flex (and tourability), as I have with my current Hoji’s, the stance (lean and ramp angle) is all wrong, as you describe, exacerbated by the varying ramp angles of bindings (those POS Shifts are the worst), and complicated by how these interact with the mount point, rocker profile (particularly with reverse camber skis, which are more sensitive to this) and side cut. I can adapt well enough when skiing powder, which fortunately compromises 90% of their use, but when I occasionally test trying to make technically perfect turns on groomed snow, I feel every inadequacy. As I have with every other touring boot, I’ll keep experimenting with every variable (adding boot spoilers, adding binding shims, changing the bindings, the mount point, my skis), finding incremental improvements, until the next greatest boot is released, and the cycle will continue. I’m going to go and fuck around with my setup right now.

---

U get me.


Thanks all. Good stuff