Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 1 2 3
Results 51 to 58 of 58
  1. #51
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    402
    Quote Originally Posted by XXX-er View Post
    what would be the difference if I'm in North Amelica and I can't try/buy them on ?
    XXX-er, in the off-chance you might not be privy to it, some boots marked as “low-cuff,” “junior race” and “women’s” most certainly come in 24.5.

    A retailer based in Spain called “Snowinn” sells boots and ships to NA via express DHL. Uhh, prolly major headache for a return though.

    Amazon has 24.5s a lot bc it’s not a popular size.


    Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

  2. #52
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    A LSD Steakhouse somewhere in the Wasatch
    Posts
    10,792
    Quote Originally Posted by mntlion View Post
    best to buy boot that fit the way YOU want them too and not worry about numbers on a box or on a sizer
    nutshellkissbump
    "When the child was a child it waited patiently for the first snow and it still does"- Van "The Man" Morrison
    "I find I have already had my reward, in the doing of the thing" - Buzz Holmstrom
    "THIS IS WHAT WE DO"-AML -
    ski on in eternal peace

  3. #53
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    northern BC
    Posts
    17,611
    ok ALMOST no retail outlets in North Amelica STOCK mens boots in below a 25

    probably cuz they can't sell them and if they can't sell em I don't blame them

    the point being its not like walking into a ski store on size 27 feet

    yeah I have tried a lange junior race boot and its not my fit and it doesn't address finding an AT boot

    Also I don't want a womens or kids boot made for some one who weighs 40lbs less cuz they aren't stiff enough

    also I don't want to mail order boots from another continent, I have had size 24 feet for as long as I can remember so i know how to deal with it and I got it dialed
    Lee Lau - xxx-er is the laziest Asian canuck I know

  4. #54
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    Eagle River Alaska
    Posts
    10,892
    I measure 28.5 and ski in 28.5 at the resort and 29.5 touring.
    Its not that I suck at spelling, its that I just don't care

  5. #55
    Join Date
    Apr 2018
    Posts
    19
    Close, I measure a little over 28 and ski in a 27.5. The length is good but the heels have a sloppy fit, for my next boots I'm going to a boot-fitter.

    I wear 44.5 in Scarpa Vapor V's (climbing shoes) which have the same problem, narrow heels I guess.

  6. #56
    Join Date
    Jan 2018
    Posts
    374
    measure 29.5, wear a 12.5 street shoe. Ski in 27.5. skied in a high volume 29.5 for about 5 days before I sized down to high volumes 28.5. Then went down to medium volume 28.5. Skied MV 28.5 for a couple season and then went down to LV 27.5. Have to punch out the toe for length, but otherwise I'm finally happy with my boot fit. Still tour in a 28.5 but maybe not much longer.

  7. #57
    Join Date
    Apr 2019
    Location
    MA
    Posts
    44
    Quote Originally Posted by Ted Striker View Post
    I do. My feet are a boot fitter's nightmare: wide forefoot, narrow heel
    I also have wide forefoot and narrow heel, along with toes that do not taper until the pinky toe. Measured 27, wear 27/27.5 in 100mm last boots and even those require extensive punching in the forefoot (at the ball and toes). Bootfitters have told me I could size down but that the toe punches required would be so significant that there's a risk the boots would no longer fit in a binding.

  8. #58
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Hokkaido
    Posts
    1,222
    Having decades of intermittent boot fitting experience I tend to guide people toward the smaller of two sizes as long as their foot is not too wide or high volume. Historically, I have always preferred a performance fit. I measure 27.5 and currently have both 27 (26.5) and 28 (27.5) Scarpa TX-Pros. Remember, boots are not made in half sizes. That is marketing only. In Scarpa the size breaks on the whole size so I could accurately say I ski in a 26.5 but the fact of the matter is that there is no difference between the two sizes beyond the number stamped on the liner and the last the liner is pre-molded to. If you are not going to cook your liners, you will feel the difference but as they pack out you will feel it less and less. So 27s are what I would call a performance fit on me with less than 1 cm in a shell fit. The TX-Pro has a wide forefoot but that shell size with the stock tongue liner is really tight on my thick ankles and lower leg. The 28 is a comfort fit with nearly 2 cm shell fit and as I grow older I must confess I do like the fact that I can ski hard all day in them and my ankles never feel that kind of pressure I get with the 27s. I do need to shim to take up volume in the 28s. A summer project is modifying the 27s with a Rush (3 buckle Maestrale) cuff--that I already have and never use--to shave a little more weight and gain a better ROM for touring. The two biggest problems with the TX-Pro are weight and ROM. So if I want a lighter tele boot, I have the parts to create one out of the 27s. I also have a couple pairs of light, older wrap liners that weigh less than the tongue liners and allow more room for my ankles, so those will go in the 27s as well. For riding lifts or skiing in very cold temperatures, I will default to the 28s. Both sizes work for me.

    I boiled my thermometer, and sure enough, this spot, which purported to be two thousand feet higher than the locality of the hotel, turned out to be nine thousand feet LOWER. Thus the fact was clearly demonstrated that, ABOVE A CERTAIN POINT, THE HIGHER A POINT SEEMS TO BE, THE LOWER IT ACTUALLY IS. Our ascent itself was a great achievement, but this contribution to science was an inconceivably greater matter.

    --MT--

Posting Permissions

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