Page 8 of 10 FirstFirst ... 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 LastLast
Results 176 to 200 of 226
  1. #176
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Truckee & Sonoma
    Posts
    12,586
    Quote Originally Posted by detrusor View Post
    Tit-anal


    Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums
    With MBT.

    Motor boating technology
    I ski 135 degree chutes switch to the road.

  2. #177
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Posts
    159
    Quote Originally Posted by GoldMember View Post
    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.

  3. #178
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    西 雅 圖
    Posts
    4,239
    Quote Originally Posted by aanev View Post
    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.

  4. #179
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    northern BC
    Posts
    23,098
    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
    Lee Lau - xxx-er is the laziest Asian canuck I know

  5. #180
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    North Vancouver
    Posts
    1,106
    Quote Originally Posted by TahoeJ View Post
    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.

  6. #181
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    monument
    Posts
    5,885
    Quote Originally Posted by margotron View Post
    what about cherry red vs. ruby red. also asking for a friend
    Quote Originally Posted by cstefanic View Post
    Dog-dick red = best red
    Technically, that's Red Rocket red.

  7. #182
    Join Date
    Jan 2020
    Posts
    737
    Quote Originally Posted by pfluffenmeister View Post
    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.

  8. #183
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    truckee
    Posts
    16,512
    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.

  9. #184
    Join Date
    Jan 2020
    Posts
    23
    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.

  10. #185
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Squaw valley
    Posts
    3,308
    Quote Originally Posted by AintEZbeingSteezy View Post
    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

  11. #186
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Wasatch
    Posts
    6,342
    130 is the new 120


    Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums
    I need to go to Utah.
    Utah?
    Yeah, Utah. It's wedged in between Wyoming and Nevada. You've seen pictures of it, right?

    So after 15 years we finally made it to Utah.....


    Thanks BCSAR and POWMOW Ski Patrol for rescues

    8, 17, 13, 18, 16, 18, 20, 19, 16, 24, 32

    2020/2021 (20/24)

  12. #187
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Hyde Park, Vt
    Posts
    336
    Quote Originally Posted by AintEZbeingSteezy View Post
    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.

  13. #188
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Inside the Circle
    Posts
    2,386
    Quote Originally Posted by old goat View Post
    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...

  14. #189
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Inside the Circle
    Posts
    2,386
    Quote Originally Posted by Timberridge View Post
    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

  15. #190
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    982

    90% of people buy boots that are too stiff

    Quote Originally Posted by SoVT Joey View Post
    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 View Post
    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)
    Last edited by dcpnz; 03-03-2021 at 09:53 AM.

  16. #191
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    PNW
    Posts
    224
    Quote Originally Posted by AintEZbeingSteezy View Post
    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.

  17. #192
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    location location location
    Posts
    634
    Quote Originally Posted by dcpnz View Post
    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?
    Who cares how the crow flies

  18. #193
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Dystopia
    Posts
    12,781
    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.
    “Life has become immeasurably better since I have been forced to stop taking it seriously.”
    Hunter S. Thompson

    “I got the degree of Stamp-licker from the Bezuzus Mail-order University”
    Babbitt, by Sinclair Lewis

  19. #194
    Join Date
    Sep 2018
    Posts
    208
    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.

  20. #195
    Join Date
    Jan 2018
    Posts
    13
    Quote Originally Posted by GoldMember View Post
    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?
    Last edited by oceans; 04-05-2021 at 01:52 AM.

  21. #196
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Golden
    Posts
    389
    Quote Originally Posted by auvgeek View Post
    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.

  22. #197
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Golden
    Posts
    389
    Quote Originally Posted by Bushwacka View Post
    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.

  23. #198
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Rossland BC
    Posts
    1,405
    Quote Originally Posted by GoldenBC View Post
    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.

  24. #199
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Location
    Tahoe>Missoula>Fort Collins
    Posts
    1,619
    Quote Originally Posted by kootenayskier View Post
    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.


  25. #200
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Bottom feeding
    Posts
    8,867
    Quote Originally Posted by margotron View Post
    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.
    Well maybe I'm the faggot America
    I'm not a part of a redneck agenda

Posting Permissions

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