90% of people buy boots that are too stiff

^^ fuck yeah brah

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AZskibum

I'm 150 lbs and an advanced (not expert by any means) skier. I'm still learning to keep my boots flexed (Lange 140 Xt3) and it's a battle in the trees, bumps super steep stuff. But I think it's just a skill thing, because when I adjust I can flex them.. I think.

---

And no offence AZ, but you may be in that 90% the OP was talking about. How did your 150lb, advanced but not expert self end up in a 140? Based on your advice, and of course there are other factors, but it reads like your boots are not doing you any favors.

Could be a limited ankle dorsiflexion thing.
A heel lift might be your friend

What she said,"more tongue!"

Based off this thread I'm buying these, and anyone that doesn't ski these is a PU$$Y:

https://shop.atomic.com/en/products/...ae0001487.html

But really though, almost all flex indexes are pure bullshit. I had a pair of Lange RS 130 LVs that I pulled both rear-cuff screws out of to soften them when they were brand new, then put one screw back in, then both screws back in as they softened. Meanwhile, my next pair was RX 130 LVs that needed no such treatment. They were both 130s? Nah brah. But really though, get the 170 flex Atomics and you'll be fine.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Like a Boss

Based off this thread I'm buying these, and anyone that doesn't ski these is a PU$$Y:

https://shop.atomic.com/en/products/...ae0001487.html

But really though, almost all flex indexes are pure bullshit. I had a pair of Lange RS 130 LVs that I pulled both rear-cuff screws out of to soften them when they were brand new, then put one screw back in, then both screws back in as they softened. Meanwhile, my next pair was RX 130 LVs that needed no such treatment. They were both 130s? Nah brah. But really though, get the 170 flex Atomics and you'll be fine.

---

That’s because of the flex engagement range. RS engages faster so it feels stiffer then the rx. Also your liner is very different between those two boots stock and the liner tongue and lace up makes the rs act stiffer as well.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SoVT Joey

That’s because of the flex engagement range. RS engages faster so it feels stiffer then the rx. Also your liner is very different between those two boots stock and the liner tongue and lace up makes the rs act stiffer as well.

---

they are also made of different plastic (RX is a PE lower, the RS is a PU lower).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Marshal Olson

they are also made of different plastic (RX is a PE lower, the RS is a PU lower).

---

I really wish Lange would stop abbreviating their plastics this way. It doesn't make things more clear, it just muddies the waters and adds to the amount of confusion in ski boots.

Polyurethane is a general group of plastics that is abbreviated PU.

PUs are available as Polyurethane-ether (also referred to as polyether), which is the super good stuff; or Polyurethane-ester (also referred to polyester), which is pretty good stuff. Both can easily and confusingly be abbreviated as PE. There is further confusion since low-end Polyethylene (shitty plastic) is also abbreviated as PE.

And when Lange refers to an RS shell as PE, I can safely assume it is not polyethylene but I don't know if they mean ether or ester material. And then what does that mean for what they call "PU"?

If a brand is going to distinguish between the different PUs, the best way would be as PU-ether or PU-ester.

Sorry for the rant. Maybe I should just shoot Thor a text haha

Stiff boots give you an On/Off touch when you are weighting the front of your skis. Instant response but almost no feel. A good 3-piece Cabrio shell like a Full Tilt or Dalbello with initially soft and then progressively stiffer flex as you lean into it gives you a much more nuanced feel of the ski and snow but feels sloppy to someone coming off a stiff boot. It is an acquired taste. I liked the way I could hang on the front of my old Flexons and then Kryptons and the flex would act as a shock absorber in funky snow. Some people like point and shoot stiffness to attack the slope while others prefer a soft touch for making love to the mountain. Dealer's choice.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by onenerdykid

Sorry for the rant. Maybe I should just shoot Thor a text haha

---

Make sure you tell him "Red is always faster" ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by onenerdykid

If a brand is going to distinguish between the different PUs, the best way would be as PU-ether or PU-ester.

---

Pretty sure Thor and other product managers would agree, it's the marketing and copywriting people who are clueless. First get them to stop calling Titanal "Titanium."

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AZskibum

I'm 150 lbs and an advanced (not expert by any means) skier. I'm still learning to keep my boots flexed (Lange 140 Xt3) and it's a battle in the trees, bumps super steep stuff. But I think it's just a skill thing, because when I adjust I can flex them.. I think.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FlimFlamvanHam

^^ fuck yeah brah



And no offence AZ, but you may be in that 90% the OP was talking about. How did your 150lb, advanced but not expert self end up in a 140? Based on your advice, and of course there are other factors, but it reads like your boots are not doing you any favors.

---

Yup. AZ, your boots are too stiff. You should probably be in a Lange 120 flex, it would suit you better. I wouldn't guess that you'll ever need more than a 130. When trying to load a stiff boot, the boot will resist and put you back more than any advantage you're gaining with a really stiff boot. That's why you're battling those conditions.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mudfoot

Stiff boots give you an On/Off touch when you are weighting the front of your skis. Instant response but almost no feel. A good 3-piece Cabrio shell like a Full Tilt or Dalbello with initially soft and then progressively stiffer flex as you lean into it gives you a much more nuanced feel of the ski and snow but feels sloppy to someone coming off a stiff boot. It is an acquired taste. I liked the way I could hang on the front of my old Flexons and then Kryptons and the flex would act as a shock absorber in funky snow. Some people like point and shoot stiffness to attack the slope while others prefer a soft touch for making love to the mountain. Dealer's choice.

---

I was a Krypton guy for awhile. Went through a couple pairs. They were a 130 flex I believe but I never liked the way they skied with the stiff tongue. I would always dumb them down by using the softer flex one. Fast forward a few years. Moved away from Dalbello and back into Lange's. Yeah I got the blue ones! I am day two into my second pair of Lange RS 130W. I absolutely love that boot. I have an easy foot to fit I guess. Never had to do any modes. Put in a different mid-sole, replace with a real booster strap good to go.

Those red Atomic 170's look pretty bad ass. I can't imagine what those must feel like especially on a cold day..I am not worthy!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gregL

Pretty sure Thor and other product managers would agree, it's the marketing and copywriting people who are clueless. First get them to stop calling Titanal "Titanium."

---

This gets me too, I think it's a hang-up coming from the German to English.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gregL

Pretty sure Thor and other product managers would agree, it's the marketing and copywriting people who are clueless. First get them to stop calling Titanal "Titanium."

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by onenerdykid

This gets me too, I think it's a hang-up coming from the German to English.

---

No, it's not a language thing, it's a metallurgy thing. Titanal is a high strength aluminum alloy with zinc, magnesium, and copper. It's a product of AMAG Austria Metall AG. It's their marketing people who deceivingly tagged it Titanal thereby confusing it with titanium. There is no titanium in Titanal and any ski marketing group who calls is titanium is wrongly misleading the buyer.

Tit-anal


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by detrusor

Tit-anal


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

---

With MBT.

Motor boating technology

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GoldMember

No, it's not a language thing, it's a metallurgy thing. Titanal is a high strength aluminum alloy with zinc, magnesium, and copper. It's a product of AMAG Austria Metall AG. It's their marketing people who deceivingly tagged it Titanal thereby confusing it with titanium. There is no titanium in Titanal and any ski marketing group who calls is titanium is wrongly misleading the buyer.

---

I believe I've read somewhere that Titanal is (almost) the same as 7068. I might be wrong though.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by aanev

I believe I've read somewhere that Titanal is (almost) the same as 7068. I might be wrong though.

---

Similar, it's a 7000 series aluminum with zinc, copper and magnesium (no titanium) with zirconium added. It's pricy because AMAG Rolling (Austria Metall AG) has a monopoly.

my ski bud who in spite of being a learned professional able to pronounce all kinds of big words is still in touch with his inner 10y old and delights in pronouncing it

Tit anal

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TahoeJ

I actually agree with this. 12-13 years ago I was fitted this way and would cram my foot into a 25.5 for a "racer" fit, but I was constantly losing toenails. Finally said fuck it and went up a size and wished I had done so sooner. Especially since I have a high instep.

---

back to boots.

Was in chopstick shell fit for too long and other than big toes getting demolished the rest of the fit was sublime. Went size up as I just couldn't take it any more. I too wished I'd done it sooner as I don't know if I can even recognize a performance difference (maybe in another 100 days on the liners?) but the warmer toes was an added bonus.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by margotron

what about cherry red vs. ruby red. also asking for a friend

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cstefanic

Dog-dick red = best red

---

Technically, that's Red Rocket red.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by pfluffenmeister

Technically, that's Red Rocket red.

---

And obviously anything that contains rocket in the color name is the fastest. Only thing faster I believe is lil-rocket-Man Red.

Speaking of colored plastic--which color makes the best helmet for shock absorption. And don't give me that red BS. That's exactly the wrong thing for a helmet.

I'm an "advanced" skier, so worse than most here. 5"10 180lbs. Went from a 100 flex to 130 boot this year. I was worried at first, but the shop were confident putting me in the 130.

Overall it's been a game changer. More stable and supportive in the rough stuff, on landings, and when I do fuck up. Can still flex them in a turn fine.

So much better than 100s. My old boots allowed me to get forward a little more easily, but I think part of that was 15 degree forward lean, vs 12 in my new ones.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AintEZbeingSteezy

I'm an "advanced" skier, so worse than most here. 5"10 180lbs. Went from a 100 flex to 130 boot this year. I was worried at first, but the shop were confident putting me in the 130.

Overall it's been a game changer. More stable and supportive in the rough stuff, on landings, and when I do fuck up. Can still flex them in a turn fine.

So much better than 100s. My old boots allowed me to get forward a little more easily, but I think part of that was 15 degree forward lean, vs 12 in my new ones.

---

Depends a bit on your anatomy, but more forward lean in a boot causes you to stick your butt out to compensate, so not forward really.

Sent from my Redmi Note 8 Pro using Tapatalk

130 is the new 120


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AintEZbeingSteezy

I'm an "advanced" skier, so worse than most here. 5"10 180lbs. Went from a 100 flex to 130 boot this year. I was worried at first, but the shop were confident putting me in the 130.

Overall it's been a game changer. More stable and supportive in the rough stuff, on landings, and when I do fuck up. Can still flex them in a turn fine.

So much better than 100s. My old boots allowed me to get forward a little more easily, but I think part of that was 15 degree forward lean, vs 12 in my new ones.

---

you could just change the binding delta and make it perfect.....

again you shouldnt have to flex you boots to be in balance. There is no objective reason that boot has to flex to transfer power, and seeking power transfer IMO is doing it wrong. the reality is the ski and boot are pressing into you, and you are just resisting that force.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by old goat

Speaking of colored plastic--which color makes the best helmet for shock absorption. And don't give me that red BS. That's exactly the wrong thing for a helmet.

---

I'd go with purple...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Timberridge

I know this is tongue in cheek, but if you've ever actually had a pair of Atomic boots there would be more truth to this question than you think. The Redsters with the faux carbon cuff were among the worst boots I ever owned.

---

So that's why you gave them to me :eek:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SoVT Joey

That’s because of the flex engagement range. RS engages faster so it feels stiffer then the rx. Also your liner is very different between those two boots stock and the liner tongue and lace up makes the rs act stiffer as well.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Marshal Olson

they are also made of different plastic (RX is a PE lower, the RS is a PU lower).

---

Huh!

Regular RS and RX liners are a little different but not all that significantly so - you don’t get laces/cork liner until you’re in the World Cup RS Z boots

And according to lange website both current RS and RX 130s are “polyether dual core” shell and cuff (and switch to “polyurethane dual core” in rx120 and rs110)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AintEZbeingSteezy

I'm an "advanced" skier, so worse than most here. 5"10 180lbs. Went from a 100 flex to 130 boot this year. I was worried at first, but the shop were confident putting me in the 130.

Overall it's been a game changer. More stable and supportive in the rough stuff, on landings, and when I do fuck up. Can still flex them in a turn fine.

So much better than 100s. My old boots allowed me to get forward a little more easily, but I think part of that was 15 degree forward lean, vs 12 in my new ones.

---

You can easily put a forward lean spoiler (or 2) in your boot to get more forward lean. Test it out. See if your boots forward lean is correct for you.
You can also try a booster strap if you have a "fixed" or non-elastic power strap on your boots. That may give you slightly softer forward flex and/or more range of motion.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dcpnz

Regular RS and RX liners are a little different but not all that significantly so - you don’t get laces/cork liner until you’re in the World Cup RS Z boots ...

---

The RS 140 came with the/a WC lace up + cork liner, which must have added the extra "10" because it's the same shell as the 130, but I don't believe they offer the RS 140 any more?

Having skied soft boots, free heel (negative 130 flex, soft fore and aft) and real boots. I prefer a stiffy for alpine. Nothing like being locked down and dialed in.

This is an interesting discussion. Does the firmer flex and ability to drive weight toward the tip matter and when? A lot of good technical skiers ride more upright and IMO rely on good footbeds / properly fitted boots. Personally, I like the front of a ski and stance is often low & forward. My Head Vantage 105's skied pretty good for a lighter flex but I never pushed the tongues that hard. With good fitment and insoles, it felt like getting tip sensitivity was more about distributing weight, not how hard I pressure the tips via stiffer cuff. Different ski's and desires at the higher end of things change this. I had a guide once out of Blackcomb that duct taped his boots (broken buckles) & did fine but it was a foot of pow so maybe tennis shoes would have worked? My conclusion is stiffness may not be as essential as some think. If you're a hard skier though, firm flex wins every time because of the moments you really want it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GoldMember

Yup. AZ, your boots are too stiff. You should probably be in a Lange 120 flex, it would suit you better. I wouldn't guess that you'll ever need more than a 130. When trying to load a stiff boot, the boot will resist and put you back more than any advantage you're gaining with a really stiff boot. That's why you're battling those conditions.

---

Whats about a booster strap? Can this be solved with a medium one?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by auvgeek

Couple thoughts:

The best skiing solution I've found (thanks to LVS for the idea) is to run Lange plugs (which have a lot of rebound) with an expert booster tight on the liner (under the shell) and then the stock power strap over the shell but not super tight. The booster provides a nice elastic rebound and keeps things snug to your shin, while the power strap helps avoid blowing through the full flex of the boot. As always, YMMV.

---

Why wouldn't you just use a World Cup booster strap? It has the exact same stiffness of elastic as the Expert but after a 1/4" of movement the rigid strap engages. Get two birds stoned with one strap.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bushwacka

I think most people thinking boots are too stiff are either low skilled or the boot is vastly out of alignment.

if you skills arent low and you actually skiing in balance with hip behind feet and shoulders ahead of toes while gliding straight then the boot/binding ramp and forward lean should be set up so its just couple degree more upright than your ideal, letting you flex slightly into a good balance position and if the boot is stiff enough it will not over flex when and outside influence on our ski happens IE small bump or pile of crud or imperfection in the snow. If the boot is too upright it will have to be soft to let the skier flex their ankle into a more "ideal" position. If a boot is set up in a nearly ideal position in the for and aft plane than it can be ran with basically no ability to be flexxed. If a boot has too much forward lean/forward ramp the flex wont matter your quads will burn no matter what.

The correct ramp angle/forward lean assuming a skier knows proper balancing (Weight on heel, toes lifted, ankle closing, knee flexxed, tail tucked shoulder forward spine rounded) is determind by the skiers tib/fib to femur length ratio. A longer Femur to Tib/Fib ratio usually means the skier need the heels higher than average, and a longer tib/fib to femur ration means that the skier need more toe lift. both the boot and binding come into play.

The most sophisticated way of looking at shin contact, which does and should occur is that its an outcome and not a goal. its an outcome of correct alignment and skier moving forward enough in the apex of the turn that the boot and ski push back into them, many skier who think they need to "press" their shin into the front of their boot generally ski aft while accomplishing that "goal" they think should be accomplishing but they are not in balance are going down a fools errand of what balance is.

---

Despite every one always shitting on Bushwacka for personality BS, he is one of the few who actually knows what the hell they are talking about. Boot flex is primarily for shock absorption rather than turning. For turning, the amount of boot movement needed is minimal.

The other thing people don't talk about much is if you bend your ankles too much it gives you a false sense of how a boot should flex. You either think the boot is too stiff because you are constantly trying to bend your ankles and 'get forward' or you are trying to bend your ankles and you just lean on your boots, causing you to overflex your ankles and solely rely on the boot to hold you up, causing you to bottom out the boot.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GoldenBC

Despite every one always shitting on Bushwacka for personality BS, he is one of the few who actually knows what the hell they are talking about. Boot flex is primarily for shock absorption rather than turning. For turning, the amount of boot movement needed is minimal.

The other thing people don't talk about much is if you bend your ankles too much it gives you a false sense of how a boot should flex. You either think the boot is too stiff because you are constantly trying to bend your ankles and 'get forward' or you are trying to bend your ankles and you just lean on your boots, causing you to overflex your ankles and solely rely on the boot to hold you up, causing you to bottom out the boot.

---

Yes, it’s just that without the benefit of working with a high level coach and boot-fitter, or just plain dumb luck, most skiers are never going to experience that combination of personalized boot fit, hinge point, delta, forward lean, cuff alignment, abduction, binding ramp, ski mount-point etc that permits the biomechanics necessary for uncompromised ski technique. Focusing on just boot flex (in which the quality of flex through the range is a more helpful way of thinking about it) is simplistic. I don’t know if BW’s assertions about leg length ratio to ramp angle are actually universals, I suspect it’s more complicated.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kootenayskier

Yes, it’s just that without the benefit of working with a high level coach and boot-fitter, or just plain dumb luck, most skiers are never going to experience that combination of personalized boot fit, hinge point, delta, forward lean, cuff alignment, abduction, binding ramp, ski mount-point etc that permits the biomechanics necessary for uncompromised ski technique. Focusing on just boot flex (in which the quality of flex through the range is a more helpful way of thinking about it) is simplistic. I don’t know if BW’s assertions about leg length ratio to ramp angle are actually universals, I suspect it’s more complicated.

---

anecdotal and n=1, but as a 6'4 guy with short torso and long legs, ramp angle is the #1 predictor for me with #2 being forward lean. Stiffness, 2 piece vs 3 piece, even fit can all be compromised by the skier. For me, balance point cannot. Longer levers (tibia, femur) is real.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by margotron

anecdotal and n=1, but as a 6'4 guy with short torso and long legs, ramp angle is the #1 predictor for me with #2 being forward lean. Stiffness, 2 piece vs 3 piece, even fit can all be compromised by the skier. For me, balance point cannot. Longer levers (tibia, femur) is real.

---

Agree, w/ 36” inseam, I’m super picky about forward lean.