Difficulty adjusting to new setup, delta difference?

I just bought first new alpine boots in about 20 years, Mach 1s. I tour most of the time, ski in Zero G Tour Pros with ATK Raiders I have some Bent Chetlers with Wardens on them for the resorts. For some reason in the Mach ones I feel like I'm sitting on my heels, and I can't initiate turns, like I'm stuck on the tails of my skis. I was thinking it might be a difference in the delta of the bindings since tech bindings typically have a lot of delta but at least the way I'm measuring it the delta in my touring setups compared to my Bent Chetlers with Mach 1s is almost identical. I'm using calipers and measuring from the ski top sheet to the top of the toe/heel lug. On my touring set up the delta is 13 mm, its actually 14 on my Bent Chetlers (could be about the same, the calipers wont actually reach the lugs so I'm eyeballing it). I'm I doing this measurement wrong? Is there a big difference on internal ramp angle within the boots between the Mach one and Zero G? I haven't tried the Mach 1s on any other skis...

The Warden delta is only 3.5-mm…

I don’t really care what you’re measuring, I’m pretty sure it’s the delta for your Raiders, put a plate under the Raider toe.

Pull liners out of the boots and click them into the skis. Put the skis flat on a work bench. Now use an inclinometer app on your phone to measure the actual angle of the boot board inside each of the boots. That'll give you an actual number to compare. If it's significantly different, do some shimming under the bindings to make everything the same.

Try adding a spoiler to the alpine boot. It will give you a bit more forward lean and should make it feel like you're more engaged with the ski versus on the tails. Or just ski them for a while and you'll likely get used to it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by toast2266

Pull liners out of the boots and click them into the skis. Put the skis flat on a work bench. Now use an inclinometer app on your phone to measure the actual angle of the boot board inside each of the boots. That'll give you an actual number to compare. If it's significantly different, do some shimming under the bindings to make everything the same.

---

The idea of an inclinometer is good, But….
Binding delta and boot ramp are different variables and need to be measured separately. Additionally rockered soles/heels add another level of difficulty.

I suggest first measuring boot ramp angle on a flat surface and equalizing that first, then measuring the boot in the binding and equalizing that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by turnfarmer

Binding delta and boot ramp are different variables and need to be measured separately.

---

Why? Any time I'm skiing, I'm using both boot and binding. When I want to check the delta on a particular combination, the phone app on the bootboard is a pretty good indicator (although the bootboards aren't totally flat, so you have to figure out where to place the phone). OP is trying to figure out if two distinct boot/binding combinations are different, not trying to use a single boot in five different binding models.

Warden 13 delta is 5mm (sole to topsheet, ISO 5355 planed plug boot sole), but you can't measure to the bottom of a 9523 sole and get an accurate comparison - hence the level app. (Published delta on a Raider/Freeraider is 11.5mm, but that's center-of-pin heights, not sole to ski).

OP is measuring in one of the most accurate ways that he can. There is no point in measuring separately. Most boot's boot board's heel is level with the top of the heel lug and the toe is pretty close to the top of the toe lug. The issue wit the ZGPT is that there is so much rocker in the boot board that the ball of your foot is quite low compare to many other boots, therefore giving you more ramp. The ZGPT boot board makes it feel like I am standing on something round.

You can try the cell phone angle finder. The best way that I have done this is with a small framing square or something similar. Put boot in binding with no liner. Put framing square on the boot board with vertical part coming out the cuff (this will bridge the curved boot board and the part coming out the cuff will be easier to measure.

All the listed deltas of tech bindings aren't comparable to alpine bindings because they measure different parts of the boot. Going forward, I wish they would all measure from top of toe and heel lugs.

However, the first thing you should do is put your ZGPT into your wardens and see how you like that. Then you can start identifying which individual aspect of the system you dislike.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GoldenBC

The best way that I have done this is with a small framing square or something similar. Put boot in binding with no liner. Put framing square on the boot board with vertical part coming out the cuff (this will bridge the curved boot board and the part coming out the cuff will be easier to measure.

---

A new sheet of 2mm or 3mm Bontex works pretty well, too.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by plugboots

I don’t really care what you’re measuring, I’m pretty sure it’s the delta for your Raiders, put a plate under the Raider toe.

---

I know lots of people do this, but I'm kind of the opposite. I've been skiing in Raiders (or other similar) tech bindings for years, this is what I'm comfortable with and I dont really want to change it. I've actually been considering putting a shim under the heel of my Wardens. I'm on the tech setup about 80% of the time, so I'd rather change the Wardens to match them.

Thanks for all the tips on measuring the boot board angle, I'll check that out

The Mach1 has more forward lean the the Zero G, and combined with a much stiffer flex it powers the front of the ski significantly more. The front of the bentchetlers are very soft and so you are skiing them on your heels to compensate.

Moving the bindings back -1.5 cm will probably make it much more balanced with the mach 1s. I wouldn’t mess with binding shims and overthinking this with changing ramp angles

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gregL

Why? Any time I'm skiing, I'm using both boot and binding. When I want to check the delta on a particular combination, the phone app on the bootboard is a pretty good indicator (although the bootboards aren't totally flat, so you have to figure out where to place the phone). OP is trying to figure out if two distinct boot/binding combinations are different, not trying to use a single boot in five different binding models.

Warden 13 delta is 5mm (sole to topsheet, ISO 5355 planed plug boot sole), but you can't measure to the bottom of a 9523 sole and get an accurate comparison - hence the level app. (Published delta on a Raider/Freeraider is 11.5mm, but that's center-of-pin heights, not sole to ski).

---

I guess we will agree to disagree here.

Boot ramp angle and forward lean need to match ankle dorsiflexion.

Binding Delta needs to match body proportions above the ankle.

People with out of norm tibia length to femur length ratios are the ones who are most affected by binding delta mismatches.

For instance if your tibia is proportionally longer than your femur, a high delta binding the knee and puts the skier in the backseat.


The long femur to tibia ratio has the opposite binding delta needs.
Flatter binding delta puts this body type in the backseat. Think of Bode’s body position to visualize this.

In the boot address foot/ankle. Outside the boot addresses the biomechanics above the ankle.

It’s the same with canting. In the boot varus/valgus posting and cuff adjustments affect the foot and ankle. canting affects mostly the knee and is done for bow legged/ knock kneed body types.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GoldenBC

OP is measuring in one of the most accurate ways that he can. There is no point in measuring separately. Most boot's boot board's heel is level with the top of the heel lug and the toe is pretty close to the top of the toe lug. The issue wit the ZGPT is that there is so much rocker in the boot board that the ball of your foot is quite low compare to many other boots, therefore giving you more ramp. The ZGPT boot board makes it feel like I am standing on something round.

You can try the cell phone angle finder. The best way that I have done this is with a small framing square or something similar. Put boot in binding with no liner. Put framing square on the boot board with vertical part coming out the cuff (this will bridge the curved boot board and the part coming out the cuff will be easier to measure.

All the listed deltas of tech bindings aren't comparable to alpine bindings because they measure different parts of the boot. Going forward, I wish they would all measure from top of toe and heel lugs.

However, the first thing you should do is put your ZGPT into your wardens and see how you like that. Then you can start identifying which individual aspect of the system you dislike.

---

The issue wit the ZGPT is that there is so much rocker in the boot board that the ball of your foot is quite low compare to many other boots, therefore giving you more ramp. The ZGPT boot board makes it feel like I am standing on something round.

That’s why OP needs to measure separately, he may need a heel lift to match Zero G ramp angle.

All the listed deltas of tech bindings aren't comparable to alpine bindings because they measure different parts of the boot. Going forward, I wish they would all measure from top of toe and heel lugs.

Yes, that make the whole thing way more complicated.

However, the first thing you should do is put your ZGPT into your wardens and see how you like that. Then you can start identifying which individual aspect of the system you dislike.

Agree with this, but sometimes when putting an AT Boot in an alpine binding, the heel of the AT sole can act like the binding has a higher delta angle. As does lowering the AFD on the Warden to accommodate the rocketed sole.

New boots are too upright for me. I add heel lifts under the liners. YMMV.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by wilcox510

I know lots of people do this, but I'm kind of the opposite. I've been skiing in Raiders (or other similar) tech bindings for years, this is what I'm comfortable with and I dont really want to change it. I've actually been considering putting a shim under the heel of my Wardens. I'm on the tech setup about 80% of the time, so I'd rather change the Wardens to match them.

---

Do that then.

I realize forward lean and boot board & binding delta are all different things, but as another post above suggested, i'd add a spoiler between back of liner and boot cuff just to see if that feels better. It'll certainly get you pointed in the right direction if so and it's dead simple.

I'd be more curious what your forward lean is clicked into the alpine vs clicked into the AT setup. Easy to measure (much easier than trying to measure rhe effective delta).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tenB

The Mach1 has more forward lean the the Zero G, and combined with a much stiffer flex it powers the front of the ski significantly more. The front of the bentchetlers are very soft and so you are skiing them on your heels to compensate.

Moving the bindings back -1.5 cm will probably make it much more balanced with the mach 1s. I wouldn’t mess with binding shims and overthinking this with changing ramp angles

---

This comment got skipped over and it probably shouldn't have been. I was going to offer the same thought - it may simply be stiffer boots making you feel backseat. Not sure I agree that moving the bindings back on the bents is the solution (not sure I DON'T agree either to be clear) but the angle that matters is the angle you have when flexing them, not the static one. Stiffer boots move forward less, and yes, they drive the front of the skis more, which can force you to be more upright then you are used to - and presto, you feel backseat. What stiffness boots, old vs new (also the older boot may have lost stiffness)?

^ ya but lifting the toes on a binding involves cutting a $4 cutting board and using longer screws vs drilling 16 holes in your skis. Changing the ramp and foreword lean on a boot will change where you pressure the ski. Both our points are right, one is easier to test out.

[QUOTE=turnfarmer;
That’s why OP needs to measure separately, he may need a heel lift to match Zero G ramp angle.

Yes, that make the whole thing way more complicated.

Agree with this, but sometimes when putting an AT Boot in an alpine binding, the heel of the AT sole can act like the binding has a higher delta angle. As does lowering the AFD on the Warden to accommodate the rocketed sole.[/QUOTE]

1. Measuring together will give you the final combination that you like. It doesn’t matter what the boot is doing, it matters what the boot and binding are doing. Then copy that final angle onto a different boot and binding.

2. It doesn’t make it complicated. He’s working with bindings he has. Measure them how he is already measuring them and then make changes accordingly. Shopping for new bindings would be another story.

3. The warden AFD doesn’t lower. The top of the binding raises. But more importantly, this is irrelevant. He is trying to match one boot and binding combo to another boot and binding combo.

Or, you could buy the softer T-drive that controls the boot spine making it flex closer to your Zero Gs.

Where did you mount your bentchetlers?

Whoops, mixed up Wardens with Royals.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tenB

The Mach1 has more forward lean the the Zero G, and combined with a much stiffer flex it powers the front of the ski significantly more. The front of the bentchetlers are very soft and so you are skiing them on your heels to compensate.

Moving the bindings back -1.5 cm will probably make it much more balanced with the mach 1s. I wouldn’t mess with binding shims and overthinking this with changing ramp angles

---

Whoops, I didn't read good. This is the answer here. A lot of skis and boots are made for that more centered stance, and that includes a more forward mount. With stiffer boots with more forward lean, there's a good chance you need to move the mount back 1 or 2cm. I know I do.

YMMV but forward lean affects me the most

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tenB

The Mach1 has more forward lean the the Zero G, and combined with a much stiffer flex it powers the front of the ski significantly more. The front of the bentchetlers are very soft and so you are skiing them on your heels to compensate.

---

Not saying your conclusion is wrong, but according to Tecnica some of your data is wrong.

https://www.blizzard-tecnica.com/us/...1-lv-130-td-gw - 12,5 degree lean

https://www.blizzard-tecnica.com/us/...o-g-tour-pro-2 - 12-13 degree lean

Mach has slightly more ramp angle. Not sure how much 0,5 degrees matters

You can't go just on the forward lean numbers supplied by the manufacturers - the line from your heel to the back of your calf is not a straight line, someone has to pick where to "average" it out to figure out forward lean. You would think the same person figures it out for the 2 Tecnica boots, but that's not guaranteed. In my experience, I can ski a Mach 1 LV with no calf shim or a very thin one fine, I need a thicker shim (Lange WC or K2 shim) to feel about the same in the ZGTP even with the chip flipped.

That’s about the same as my experience having skied both those boots for a few years. Flex on the mach1 130 lv felt like a true stiff and damp 130. The ZG felt more like a 100-110 especially deeper into the flex.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gregL

You can't go just on the forward lean numbers supplied by the manufacturers - the line from your heel to the back of your calf is not a straight line, someone has to pick where to "average" it out to figure out forward lean. You would think the same person figures it out for the 2 Tecnica boots, but that's not guaranteed. In my experience, I can ski a Mach 1 LV with no calf shim or a very thin one fine, I need a thicker shim (Lange WC or K2 shim) to feel about the same in the ZGTP even with the chip flipped.

---

Ok, thanks. I’ve only been on the ZGTP and Cochise. The ZGTP is too upright for me, the Cochise is fine - but that is with a thick Surefoot spoiler.

Since you have experience with both, can you put the Cochise 130 in comparison to the two others?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sf

Ok, thanks. I’ve only been on the ZGTP and Cochise. The ZGTP is too upright for me, the Cochise is fine - but that is with a thick Surefoot spoiler.

Since you have experience with both, can you put the Cochise 130 in comparison to the two others?

---

I haven't owned a Cochise in a long time. If in doubt, the best thing is to stick several shims of varying thickness in your pocket and try each in turn on the same hill(s). You should be able to figure out which you prefer with a few runs on each setup.

So I tried to figure out the exact ramp angle of the boot board of the Zero G and the Mach 1 while in the Wardens. To deal with the high arch in the Zero G boot board (which is actually slightly present in the Mach 1 too) I made the little device seen below, so its measuring the overall angle from the heel to the toe of the boot board. I placed my phone on that while the boots were in the bindings and used a level app. To my surprise the ramp angle is almost the same, actually slightly higher in the Mach 1, about 4.5 degrees in the Mach 1 and 4.0 degrees in the Zero G.

So I'm kind of at a loss as to what my issue is. Maybe it has absolutely nothing to do with ramp angle or delta. I don't ski the resort much, so haven't tried the skis with the Zero Gs again, but actually do recall that the last time I skied the Bent Chetlers with the Zero Gs (before buying the Mach 1s) I felt this sensation a tiny bit, but just thought I was having a bad day. Maybe I've just become a shittier skier... Too much backcountry powder skiing...

Attachment 456277

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by wilcox510

So I tried to figure out the exact ramp angle of the boot board of the Zero G and the Mach 1 while in the Wardens. To deal with the high arch in the Zero G boot board (which is actually slightly present in the Mach 1 too) I made the little device seen below, so its measuring the overall angle from the heel to the toe of the boot board. I placed my phone on that while the boots were in the bindings and used a level app. To my surprise the ramp angle is almost the same, actually slightly higher in the Mach 1, about 4.5 degrees in the Mach 1 and 4.0 degrees in the Zero G.

So I'm kind of at a loss as to what my issue is. Maybe it has absolutely nothing to do with ramp angle or delta. I don't ski the resort much, so haven't tried the skis with the Zero Gs again, but actually do recall that the last time I skied the Bent Chetlers with the Zero Gs (before buying the Mach 1s) I felt this sensation a tiny bit, but just thought I was having a bad day. Maybe I've just become a shittier skier... Too much backcountry powder skiing...

Attachment 456277

---

have all your skis ground and the bevels set back to the stock bevels of the skis you like. Then report back. And I’m still on the fence about the delta in your clamps. I can’t ski a thing with delta that’s less the 8 or 9 and the boots make zero difference as long as they fit well. I’m 0% in the camp that changing your lean in your boot can compensate bindings. Physiologically that doesn’t make any sense. I can Jack the shit out of your heel inside a boot and it still doesn’t change your interface, just your balance to compensate and how much you have to compensate. Beaters that ski up right and with feet close together are a complete outlier. If you actually understand how to initiate a turn and engage a edge there is zero need for low delta. In fact it’s the complete opposite of how skiing is supposed to be taught

also probably why most of the bindings that are sold used on this site are beat to shit on the sides of heal pieces. Bunch of turn sliding idiots.