Page 36 of 37 FirstFirst ... 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 LastLast
Results 876 to 900 of 916
  1. #876
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Movin' On
    Posts
    2,578
    Hello mags. Seeking advice on the ZeroG line. Apologies if some of these questions have been covered.

    I'm 5'11'', 190 lbs. I ski Cochise 130s as my inbounds and sidecountry boot. I'm an 11 US street shoe and size down to a 26.5 and punch/grind keep a tight fit because I have a really narrow heal.

    I'm in need of a long distance touring/ skimo boot.

    Couple questions-
    -For anyone with Cochise experience, did you size up in the ZeroG? I'm thinking it is a no brainer to go up to 27.5 so that I can keep my toenails.
    -How is the forward lean? I prefer a more upright boot that can be flexed into rather than being stuck in a forward position.
    -Is there any reason to consider the Tour Scout? Better walkability? Easier on long days?
    -What other boots in the category (narrow last dedicated touring/ ski mo) should I consider? I'm also intrigued by the S Lab MTN, but perhaps it is worth saving a couple hundred grams in the ZeroG?

    Thanks all.

  2. #877
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    西 雅 圖
    Posts
    3,759
    Quote Originally Posted by Kevo View Post
    -For anyone with Cochise experience, did you size up in the ZeroG? I'm thinking it is a no brainer to go up to 27.5 so that I can keep my toenails.
    -How is the forward lean? I prefer a more upright boot that can be flexed into rather than being stuck in a forward position.
    -Is there any reason to consider the Tour Scout? Better walkability? Easier on long days?
    -What other boots in the category (narrow last dedicated touring/ ski mo) should I consider? I'm also intrigued by the S Lab MTN, but perhaps it is worth saving a couple hundred grams in the ZeroG?
    The sizing and last are nominally the same for the Cochise (assuming it's fairly recent) and the Zero G lineup (99mm). The Zero G actually feels a little looser on my foot due to a thinner liner. If you have a really narrow heel/ankle, going to a 27.5 will mean the boot is 2mm wider in the forefoot and a bit wider everywhere else as well, not exactly what you want. I would lean toward finding a bootfitter who can punch the toe to give you some extra length (assuming you are using a tech binding).

    Forward lean should be the same as the Cochise, 13 degrees. The Tour Scout is the same boot mechanically, so identical range of motion, just a tad softer as a result of no carbon reinforcement in the cuff and a tad heavier. IMO the only reason(s) to go with the Scout are availability (Tour Pro is pretty much sold out everywhere already, we just sold our last 26.5 today) and/or to save $100.

    S/Lab MTN is only relatively narrow at the forward end of the toebox, it's very roomy in the ankle and heel.

    Hope that helps.

    PS I wear a 10.5 US street shoe and use the 26.5 ZG Tour Pro with no length enhancement.

  3. #878
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    PNW
    Posts
    5,738
    One anecdote re. Scout:

    I found Scouts on sale last spring for like 2/3 the price of Pros. And since I knew I was putting aftermarket liners in them no matter what, I didn't worry over the small difference in shells since the liners would make them lighter and stiffer.

    I've wondered if the shells of the Scouts might actually have a smoother flex than the carbonated ones of the Pro...?

    6ft 2in / 185lb, ski fast and bend skis, and the Scouts have been great.
    life ain't guaranteed, love your people while you can

  4. #879
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    panhandle locdog
    Posts
    6,935
    Chiming in to echo Norse, I also have the Zero G Scout, and have in no way wished for a stiffer boot. They ski circles around pretty much every touring boot I've owned and if not for the light liners (and maybe just general durability concerns, with the really lightweight buckles and such) I could see myself skiing them inbounds, especially in Europe or something. I find the flex plenty stiff and wouldn't want to go stiffer personally.

    5'10, 185lbs, ski almost as fast as Norse but slower on the uphill.

  5. #880
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    voting in seattle
    Posts
    4,384
    I think the scout has a smoother flex.
    Pro is stiffer for sure, also stiffer than a Cochise 130.

    200lb.

  6. #881
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Movin' On
    Posts
    2,578
    Wow thanks everyone. Great info.

    I don't think I need a boot stiffer than my Cochise Pro 130s. Gives me a lot of confidence to go with the Scout.

    I just spent a little time looking around and there is not a lot of Zero Gs in stock anywhere, so I ordered the Scouts in 26.5 and 27.5. I do have 6th toe issues that required some extensive punching/grinding in my cochise 130s, so maybe the 27.5 will be better for long days??

    Either way, I'll shell fit and go from there. Thanks again, mags.

  7. #882
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    西 雅 圖
    Posts
    3,759
    Quote Originally Posted by Kevo View Post
    Wow thanks everyone. Great info.

    I don't think I need a boot stiffer than my Cochise Pro 130s. Gives me a lot of confidence to go with the Scout.

    I just spent a little time looking around and there is not a lot of Zero Gs in stock anywhere, so I ordered the Scouts in 26.5 and 27.5. I do have 6th toe issues that required some extensive punching/grinding in my cochise 130s, so maybe the 27.5 will be better for long days??

    Either way, I'll shell fit and go from there. Thanks again, mags.
    Well, my friends may be right - I ski the Tour Pro with no power strap to give it a more progressive feel and soften it up a bit. They're all bigger than me and seem happy with the burliness of the Scout.

    I haven't seen your foot, but I doubt your 6th toe issues are worse than mine (114mm wide), so a good bootfitter should be able to get you the extra width no problem in the 26.5 (punch, don't grind, for this shell).

  8. #883
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Movin' On
    Posts
    2,578
    Quote Originally Posted by gregL View Post
    Well, my friends may be right - I ski the Tour Pro with no power strap to give it a more progressive feel and soften it up a bit. They're all bigger than me and seem happy with the burliness of the Scout.

    I haven't seen your foot, but I doubt your 6th toe issues are worse than mine (114mm wide), so a good bootfitter should be able to get you the extra width no problem in the 26.5 (punch, don't grind, for this shell).
    Sweet, thanks! Glad I pulled the trigger on the 26.5. I got the last available pair that I could find substantially below retail. I'm excited to try them on.

  9. #884
    Join Date
    Feb 2016
    Posts
    40
    Quote Originally Posted by Kevo View Post
    Hello mags. Seeking advice on the ZeroG line. Apologies if some of these questions have been covered.

    I'm in need of a long distance touring/ skimo boot.

    Couple questions-
    -For anyone with Cochise experience, did you size up in the ZeroG? I'm thinking it is a no brainer to go up to 27.5 so that I can keep my toenails.
    -How is the forward lean? I prefer a more upright boot that can be flexed into rather than being stuck in a forward position.
    -Is there any reason to consider the Tour Scout? Better walkability? Easier on long days?
    -What other boots in the category (narrow last dedicated touring/ ski mo) should I consider? I'm also intrigued by the S Lab MTN, but perhaps it is worth saving a couple hundred grams in the ZeroG?

    Thanks all.
    I kept the same size, but I had barely any punch in done on my Cochise, and have about 12mm shell fit.
    The toes of the Zero G are much narrower than those of the Cochise. I am taking about the very front of the boot, above the toe lugs.
    if your second or third toe is longer than the others, this wonít matter to you. If your big or pinky toes are relatively long, youíll need much more punching on the Zero G, especially with a short shell.
    heel and forefoot feels roughly similar, havenít tried swapping liners yet to get good compare.

  10. #885
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Location
    Colorado Front Range
    Posts
    3,958
    Quote Originally Posted by gregL View Post
    The sizing and last are nominally the same for the Cochise (assuming it's fairly recent) and the Zero G lineup (99mm). The Zero G actually feels a little looser on my foot due to a thinner liner. If you have a really narrow heel/ankle, going to a 27.5 will mean the boot is 2mm wider in the forefoot and a bit wider everywhere else as well, not exactly what you want. I would lean toward finding a bootfitter who can punch the toe to give you some extra length (assuming you are using a tech binding).

    Forward lean should be the same as the Cochise, 13 degrees. The Tour Scout is the same boot mechanically, so identical range of motion, just a tad softer as a result of no carbon reinforcement in the cuff and a tad heavier. IMO the only reason(s) to go with the Scout are availability (Tour Pro is pretty much sold out everywhere already, we just sold our last 26.5 today) and/or to save $100.

    S/Lab MTN is only relatively narrow at the forward end of the toebox, it's very roomy in the ankle and heel.

    Hope that helps.

    PS I wear a 10.5 US street shoe and use the 26.5 ZG Tour Pro with no length enhancement.
    That's parallel to my sizing - 9.5 on my large foot, 25.5 shell, Tour Wraps.

    Performance fit (about 12mm shell fit), narrow heel, bony ankle.

    5' 9", 165. The Pros don't feel too stiff (flex wise), although I'm sure I'd be fine with a Scout as well.

    ... Thom
    Galibier Design
    crafting technology in service of music

  11. #886
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Movin' On
    Posts
    2,578
    I'm and 11 us street/running shoe. I ski the 26.5 cochise pro 130 with some big toe and 6th toe punches and grinds to make it woork. I have really narrow heal. I'm looking for a touring boot so I ordered 26.5 and 27.5 scouts and tried them on today.

    First impression, I can't believe how light these are. The flex also feels really good. It's super a nice stiffness overall. I'm concerned I'm between sizes though.

    ----26.5-----
    26.5 feels ok flexing forward in ski mode- kinda familiar fit to my cochise. They provide excellent heal hold for me, which I'm very happy about. I def need 6 toe punches and big toe punches. My right big to is scrunched and doesn't sit flat. The boot is painfully tight over my cuneiform bones (top of midfoot) in any mode even when unbuckled. Is that something that would break in over time?

    ----27.5----
    27.5 is actually comfortable to walk in, minus 6th toe pain. 6th toe issues have required a punch in every boot I've had in the past 10 years, so I'm not concerned.

    I can wiggle my toes in this size, which is very nice. I imagine that would be nice for very long tours and bootpacking and touring.

    In ski mode I feel some significant heal lift. I need to buckle the boots so tight to make my heal stay down that I get pressure points in areas that aren't a problem in the 26.5s.

    ----Questions----
    I feel like going with the 26.5s is the way to go if they can be significantly lengthened. How workable is the shell? How much punching could they take?

    And also, how much would molding the boots have an affect on these issues and how much do the liners pack out over time?

  12. #887
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    PNW
    Posts
    5,738
    Most of these fit judgements should be made without the liner, IMO.
    life ain't guaranteed, love your people while you can

  13. #888
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    North Vancouver/Whistler
    Posts
    12,141
    I have punched the forefoot of the ZGTP to 112mm. That's a lot of molding

  14. #889
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    西 雅 圖
    Posts
    3,759
    Quote Originally Posted by LeeLau View Post
    I have punched the forefoot of the ZGTP to 112mm. That's a lot of molding
    Mine is 114mm wide. Toe length punches (if you only plan to use a tech binding) are probably good for 8-9mm in the hands of a good fitter (the punch will hit the toepiece in a non-tech binding, and may knock a tech toe out of "lock" position depending on which toe you need the length in).

  15. #890
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    西 雅 圖
    Posts
    3,759
    Quote Originally Posted by Kevo View Post
    The boot is painfully tight over my cuneiform bones (top of midfoot) in any mode even when unbuckled. Is that something that would break in over time?
    Some. If you really need more instep height, it's a simple matter to grind a few millimeters off the bootboard in the ZG boots.

  16. #891
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    panhandle locdog
    Posts
    6,935
    I personally would take the stock liners of these boots and put them straight in the trash.

  17. #892
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    voting in seattle
    Posts
    4,384
    I don't mind the stock liners, I like my tour wrap more though. Might get some tour pro's for spring day though.

    I'm also not gonna jump in on the fat asian foot fetish going on above. My feet have their own problems, instep being one of them. Be careful grinding the zeppa, not much there. The wrap liner did a lot for my instep issues. This boot is still the best general purpose touring boot on the market right now, and was worth making it work, even if there are a couple boots which fit my foot better.

  18. #893
    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    Location
    SLC
    Posts
    5,599
    Size 11 street and a 26.5 sounds like crazy talk to me. Iím a 9 - 9.5 street and absolutely could not go smaller than my 26.5 shell. I do wear my street shoes on the tight side but geez. With the stock liners baked itís still a process putting these on, and Iím 5í10Ē 150lbs and have skinny chicken legs. I have to have them fully unbuckled to tour in.

    Just if folks are basing sizing info off of the thread.

  19. #894
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    5,847
    ^ Agreed, I'm a 9 street shoe and gave up on 25.5 a couple years ago and bumped up to 26.5 in Tecnica and from 26 to 27 in Scarpa. No regrets, the toes are uncurled and happy. Granted I never had any boot work done (my feet don't have anything weird going on) on the 25.5 other than a mild toe punch that didn't add enough length, but why buy a too-small boot just to blow it out in all directions. I do have to add Bontex shims under the Tecnica liners to take up vertical volume as they pack out, but that's it. Suppose I wouldn't need the shims in a punched 25.5, but no biggie.
    Last edited by 1000-oaks; 10-25-2020 at 11:44 AM.

  20. #895
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Movin' On
    Posts
    2,578
    Hmm, well now I'm contemplating keeping the 27.5 and putting in an intuition pro tour high volume liner to take up some room around my ankles.

    What I really need is a 27.5 length with the heal width of the 26.5.

    For those that have out intuition liners in this boot, should I be looking at the size 28 or 27 intuition liner for the 27.5 Zero G?

  21. #896
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Movin' On
    Posts
    2,578
    Also, I'm open to the idea of not going high volume and maybe going medium volume of the medium pro tour is notably thicker than the stock liner??

  22. #897
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    830
    Iím going this route boot wise too. Iím a 28.5 street shoe and will be getting the 27. Figure itís the same shell as the 27.5 so baking the liners will get me exactly the fit I want.

  23. #898
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    西 雅 圖
    Posts
    3,759
    Quote Originally Posted by 1000-oaks View Post
    . . but why buy a too-small boot just to blow it out in all directions.
    If you only need more space in a few places, buying a smaller boot that has a more precise fit around the midfoot and ankle and punching it as needed skis better. This would certainly apply to a boot like the Scarpa Maestrale that has a fairly roomy ankle to start with, but you need to find the right bootfitter.

  24. #899
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Location
    Colorado Front Range
    Posts
    3,958
    Quote Originally Posted by gregL View Post
    If you only need more space in a few places, buying a smaller boot that has a more precise fit around the midfoot and ankle and punching it as needed skis better. This would certainly apply to a boot like the Scarpa Maestrale that has a fairly roomy ankle to start with, but you need to find the right bootfitter.
    Maybe I'm extra-normal (narrow heel, but average width forefoot), but getting molded with Tour Wraps (using a double toe cap), my 25.5s (for my 9.5 foot) give me ample wiggle room. No, they don't feel like bedroom slippers but I don't feel the front of the boot or the liner, and don't see where extra room would provide any benefit.

    ...Thom
    Galibier Design
    crafting technology in service of music

  25. #900
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    147
    Quote Originally Posted by galibier_numero_un View Post
    Maybe I'm extra-normal (narrow heel, but average width forefoot), but getting molded with Tour Wraps (using a double toe cap), my 25.5s (for my 9.5 foot) give me ample wiggle room.
    This summary makes me think that you have a high arch and a footbed that holds it up. Either that or these boots run really long for their listed BSL.

    And this thread is making me wonder if I need some type of foot-and-lower leg quantitative assessment so that I can match that up with boot lasts and cuff size. The only ski boot that I've ever fit into comfortably and with zero slop is the NTN versions of Scarpa tele boots. I think that that's a one-off last from what I can tell.

    cheers,
    john

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •