My Hobbit feet need a proper AT boot; WWMD?

[Eluder]

The mobe doesn't exactly have a tight heel pocket. Not that great of a touring boot either.

My feet are like yours up front but I have a normal heel. Instep hight is my biggest problem. The older scarpa last worked for me but like said don't really tour that great. The waymakers fit my foot amazingly but I don't have any touring feedback or experience with the 110 tour's

[Bobcat Sig]

The mobe doesn't exactly have a tight heel pocket. Not that great of a touring boot either.

My feet are like yours up front but I have a normal heel. Instep hight is my biggest problem. The older scarpa last worked for me but like said don't really tour that great. The waymakers fit my foot amazingly but I don't have any touring feedback or experience with the 110 tour's

Good points. After some cursory interwebbing, I find that it's heavier than my Cochise and not nearly as available as the Maestrale RS. Plus, with a large heel pocket, es no bueno.

I'm shying away from boots like the Waymaker. If I"m going to drop the coin on a new set of shoes; they should be fully capable AT slippers. Though I will keep the Waymakers in mind.

[Meathelmet]

...Hobbit feet...neither fit my high instep. Too much pressure. ...

Paging in.

24.5...so hobbit foot.

- skinny ankle = skinny...ish...
- high and bony instep = yup
- wide forefoot and midfoot = YUP! 103mm if I remember right
- high arch = high, but not super high


Basically, the only boot that fit properly (2 seasons ago) was Black Diamond Quadrant.
Fits like a glove, worlds apart from anything else, like a blissful dream after suffering from illfitting boots for several years.
Skins okish with intuition wraparounds, skis extremely well with the liners+booster straps.

Just to give you a heads up if you are running short of options. Havent tested the new boots that have come up in the last year, so cant compare to
them.

[kc_7777]

I"ve though about that AT Pro, but the narrow last is a recipe for disaster with my high volume feet. Couple that with their high volume ankle pocket and I don't think it will work. I can check it out again, but I retain the limited ROM from my current Cochise.
I'll check out the boiling method. Might be worth a shot to suck up the ankle volume.

In other news, has anyone had any success with a tongue liner with laces? I'm wondering if locking in my ankle to the liner and having the liner rub might be a better option ...

The Cochise AT Pro lists shell width as 100mm, but I swear it is wider? 102mm?

The Palau liner has the laces, I like them, I don't overtighten them, but they do snug your heel in nicely when skiiing.. I have only done three short hikes in these (1/2 hr - 1 hr) and kept the laces done up, but not that tight. ROM seems fine.

Good luck with the search.....messed up feet suck. I am glad my sons both got my wifes feet.

K

[Bobcat Sig]

Paging in.

24.5...so hobbit foot.

- skinny ankle = skinny...ish...
- high and bony instep = yup
- wide forefoot and midfoot = YUP! 103mm if I remember right
- high arch = high, but not super high


Basically, the only boot that fit properly (2 seasons ago) was Black Diamond Quadrant.
Fits like a glove, worlds apart from anything else, like a blissful dream after suffering from illfitting boots for several years.
Skins okish with intuition wraparounds, skis extremely well with the liners+booster straps.

Just to give you a heads up if you are running short of options. Havent tested the new boots that have come up in the last year, so cant compare to
them.

I can't find a BD dealer around here, so they aren't an option at the moment. Otherwise, they look to be an option.

The Cochise AT Pro lists shell width as 100mm, but I swear it is wider? 102mm?

The Palau liner has the laces, I like them, I don't overtighten them, but they do snug your heel in nicely when skiiing.. I have only done three short hikes in these (1/2 hr - 1 hr) and kept the laces done up, but not that tight. ROM seems fine.

Good luck with the search.....messed up feet suck. I am glad my sons both got my wifes feet.

K

I'm quite sure you're thinking of the standard Cochise, which has a 102mm last. The Cochise Pro has a 97 or 98mm last, hence why I haven't tried it. That, and it doesn't save a ton of weight over my current pair of Cochise and the ROM is still not quite as good. Plus, the heel pockets on those Tecnicas just aren't going to hold down my ankles, even with an Intuition Power Wrap and stick-on butterfly ankle wraps.


To update the situation, I went back to a shop locally that had a size run of RSs and originally, they had me in a 28.5. I was swimming. Not gonna work. Asked for the 27.5 and they fit much, much better. So I popped for those and will hold on to them until this same dealer gets in their run of Scott (formerly Garmont) Cosmos boots and try those.

[kc_7777]

No,

Cochise 120 and Cochise Pro AT Light (120 flex) both have a 100mm last (which feels wider and is the boot I have)

Cochise Pro 130 has the skinny 98mm last.

Just checked at bc.com and took this quote from the forum posts on the Cochise boot line:

Apparently the Cochise Pro 130 uses the Bodacious lower, so shell-fitting a Pro 130 won't be 100% identical to the Cochise Light, Cochise 120 or Cochise 110, which all use the Demon lower. The Bodacious/Cochise Pro 130 is a 98mm last, and other Cochise/Demon lowers are 100mm.

Weird that two Cochise boots have different last widths. It's alll in the Cochise boot post forum...somewhere.

[Bobcat Sig]

No,

Cochise 120 and Cochise Pro AT Light (120 flex) both have a 100mm last (which feels wider and is the boot I have)

Cochise Pro 130 has the skinny 98mm last.

Just checked at bc.com and took this quote from the forum posts on the Cochise boot line:

Apparently the Cochise Pro 130 uses the Bodacious lower, so shell-fitting a Pro 130 won't be 100% identical to the Cochise Light, Cochise 120 or Cochise 110, which all use the Demon lower. The Bodacious/Cochise Pro 130 is a 98mm last, and other Cochise/Demon lowers are 100mm.

Weird that two Cochise boots have different last widths. It's alll in the Cochise boot post forum...somewhere.

Welp, there you go. I didn't know that Tecnica came out with a 120 AT version. Seems like model overlap to me.

In any case, still doesn't cut any weight, give me more range of motion or solve the heel problem. Even with a narrower last, I'm still in a Tecnica with their big ass heel pockets. But good to know that Tecnica went big with the Cochise line.

[onenerdykid]

I'm shying away from boots like the Waymaker. If I"m going to drop the coin on a new set of shoes; they should be fully capable AT slippers. Though I will keep the Waymakers in mind.

For what it's worth, Pollard, Benchetler, Sage, and Dana ski non-modified (read: not special weird one-offs) Waymaker Carbon 130s and Tour 110s, depending on what they are doing on a certain day. If you have a wider foot and are looking for a boot that has the ability to work with alpine and TLT bindings and offer a decent range of motion, give these a look. Benchetler's hobbbit feet had just about given up on finding a comfortable & warm ski boot that had the features he was looking for.

[Meathelmet]

... they had me in a 28.5. I was swimming. Not gonna work. Asked for the 27.5 and they fit much, much better....

Jeesusmotherfucker!
You said you had "hobbit feet"??! 27 or something are not fucking hobbit, they are normal frigging feet!
In that size range you have all the fucking boots in the world to fit you, you lucky sod! And as a bonus, you dont have to struggle
with the downscaling of the width either.
BD boots are apparently one of the few (the only?) that dont scale down the width lineary as the size goes down. For example Garmonts at 24.5 start
to be about 95mm wide...no punching will remedy the situation.

[onenerdykid]

BD boots are apparently one of the few (the only?) that dont scale down the width lineary as the size goes down. For example Garmonts at 24.5 start
to be about 95mm wide...no punching will remedy the situation.

I would be surprised if BD did not scale their last width per size. Width (A, B, C, D, etc) is dependent on length, so if you want to have a boot that fits a "C" foot in every size, then you have to scale the last width accordingly. If a boot is always 100mm across the ball of the foot, then it will be super super wide for short feet and incredibly narrow for long feet.

[Meathelmet]

I would be surprised if BD did not scale their last width per size. Width (A, B, C, D, etc) is dependent on length, so if you want to have a boot that fits a "C" foot in every size, then you have to scale the last width accordingly. If a boot is always 100mm across the ball of the foot, then it will be super super wide for short feet and incredibly narrow for long feet.

Yep. Or nope... Just stating my "observations". I tried out about 20 pairs of different rando boots 2 years ago.
Basically none fit my short (24.5) and wide (102-103mm on the floor) feet.
All the brands, dynafit, garmont, scarpa etc...felt that they scaled down proportionally.
Dynafits felt ok in forefoot at size 27, but at 24.5 I almost could not fit my foot without a liner. Same with garmont. Scarpa was a tad better.

Of all the boots, Quadrants width (should have last of 103mm in 26.5?) felt about the same in larger size and the size 24.5.
So, if BD scales down the width of the boots, it seems they dont do it as agressively as other manufacturers?

Just my 0.2€.

[Bobcat Sig]

For what it's worth, Pollard, Benchetler, Sage, and Dana ski non-modified (read: not special weird one-offs) Waymaker Carbon 130s and Tour 110s, depending on what they are doing on a certain day. If you have a wider foot and are looking for a boot that has the ability to work with alpine and TLT bindings and offer a decent range of motion, give these a look. Benchetler's hobbbit feet had just about given up on finding a comfortable & warm ski boot that had the features he was looking for.

That's good to know. Admittedly, I'm probably focusing too much on specs here, but the Waymakers might be nice, they are heavier than the RS and the ROM isn't much better than my Cochise. If for some reason the RS just doesn't work, I'll look at the Waymakers. The Tour 110 did look pretty sweet.

Jeesusmotherfucker!
You said you had "hobbit feet"??! 27 or something are not fucking hobbit, they are normal frigging feet!
In that size range you have all the fucking boots in the world to fit you, you lucky sod! And as a bonus, you dont have to struggle
with the downscaling of the width either.
BD boots are apparently one of the few (the only?) that dont scale down the width lineary as the size goes down. For example Garmonts at 24.5 start
to be about 95mm wide...no punching will remedy the situation.

Like you, my feet are short at wide (that's what she said!).
The real kicker is my uber high and bony instep. Most alpine boots with a tongue liner absolutely crush my instep; hence my adherence to Intuitions over the last decade. The Scarpa RS seems fit my wide fee correctly in the midfoot and provides enough instep room. The same was true for the Cochise, just a huge heel pocket.

[skinipenem]

might have misread earlier but... hopefully this is helpful for you.

the technica cochise pro 130 may be specced at 98mm or whatever narrow last but they fit my wide ass feet with just a bit of punching and stretching. And when I mean wide ass forefoot I mean wide ass like wearing EEE width street and dress shoes. The heel pocket is a bit too roomy, but I'm working on that.

I'll hate myself later when I finally get around to selling the mobes in my closet, but they ski like shit compared to the technica cochise pro 130. the mobes have so much less lateral stiffness.

as for blisters while skinning have you tried different socks or pretreating your skin with some sort of boundary layer (mole skin, callus, talc, anti-perspirant... I don't know something..)?