There a reason the line is forward for lady's skis

[kokomas]

Biomechanical or other, or is that just some sexist shit?

For example the ripsticks seem to be same skis, be it men's or women's version except the recommended line is+2 for the ladies

Sent from my Pixel 7 using Tapatalk

[toast2266]

I would assume it's because, on average, women carry more weight around their hips. So in a normal ski position, their weight would be a little more rearward biased. So moving the mount forward a bit would theoretically yield a similar weight distribution as the men's version.

[Eluder]

Jeannie Thoren is why.

[Cork7 Belly Flop]

Might also be because women's boots/feet tend to be smaller.

[Core Shot]

I would assume it's because, on average, women carry more weight around their hips. So in a normal ski position, their weight would be a little more rearward biased. So moving the mount forward a bit would theoretically yield a similar weight distribution as the men's version.

Yes. This is the why.
Although it does depend on the woman.
Which makes it weird that some skis assume all women have lard ass.
But yeah, sarcasm aside, women’s geometry is different.

Also why ripping women ride Mens skis. At some point, it’s just a ski and you rip

Might also be because women's boots/feet tend to be smaller.

No.
Boot sole center is what equalizes small vs large feet.
Unless you tele. Then you can argue about ball of foot location.

PS. Might need Buttah to chime in about ankle flex

[kokomas]

Jeannie Thoren is why.

Thanks for quickly answering the thread, sir

Sent from my Pixel 7 using Tapatalk

[Cork7 Belly Flop]

No.
Boot sole center is what equalizes small vs large feet.
Unless you tele. Then you can argue about ball of foot location.

I was going off the discussion in the "Progressive vs Traditional Mounts" thread (starting here) talking about how the ball of the foot is a bigger factor for choosing a mount point than the midsole line.

[halliday]

Jeannie Thoren is why.

Nice article. It's good to read stuff like that because if a woman doesn't explain it like it is how the hell would we ever know. Seriously.

[singlesline]

I was going off the discussion in the "Progressive vs Traditional Mounts" thread (starting here) talking about how the ball of the foot is a bigger factor for choosing a mount point than the midsole line.

That logic makes a lot of sense to me. Boot center is easy, but it is not really where the force gets applied. I followed the Hoji formula when mounting my ravens and I'm happy where they ended up. My boots are 4cm longer than his, so he recommends mounting 2cm back

I wouldn't blindly apply the formula to other skis. Hoji has small feet and the intended line is based on his 25.5/284BSL boots. I assume big manufacturers base their lines on more average sized boots--probably something like 27.5 in longer mens skis, so if I were to apply a similar logic with my 28.5 boots, I'd only end up moving the mount something almost imperceptible like 0.5cm.

But if you are jumping to a women's ski and applying that logic, you're going to assume a much shorter BSL on average which would push the mount forwards. Hoji's size is probably pretty typical in women's boots.

[eSock]

That logic makes a lot of sense to me. Boot center is easy, but it is not really where the force gets applied. I followed the Hoji formula when mounting my ravens and I'm happy where they ended up. My boots are 4cm longer than his, so he recommends mounting 2cm back

I wouldn't blindly apply the formula to other skis. Hoji has small feet and the intended line is based on his 25.5/284BSL boots. I assume big manufacturers base their lines on more average sized boots--probably something like 27.5 in longer mens skis, so if I were to apply a similar logic with my 28.5 boots, I'd only end up moving the mount something almost imperceptible like 0.5cm.

But if you are jumping to a women's ski and applying that logic, you're going to assume a much shorter BSL on average which would push the mount forwards. Hoji's size is probably pretty typical in women's boots.

Pretty sure 26.5 is the industry standard "average" ski boot size

[J. Barron DeJong]

That logic makes a lot of sense to me. Boot center is easy, but it is not really where the force gets applied. I followed the Hoji formula when mounting my ravens and I'm happy where they ended up. My boots are 4cm longer than his, so he recommends mounting 2cm back

I wouldn't blindly apply the formula to other skis. Hoji has small feet and the intended line is based on his 25.5/284BSL boots. I assume big manufacturers base their lines on more average sized boots--probably something like 27.5 in longer mens skis, so if I were to apply a similar logic with my 28.5 boots, I'd only end up moving the mount something almost imperceptible like 0.5cm.

But if you are jumping to a women's ski and applying that logic, you're going to assume a much shorter BSL on average which would push the mount forwards. Hoji's size is probably pretty typical in women's boots.

I’ve pointed this out before, but I’ll repeat it: the Hoji formula ends up holding the binding toe piece in the same position regardless of boot size. That doesn’t sound right to me.

[mntlion]

If Hoji has small feet,

and women have small feet.

then Hoji is female???

or Jeannie Thoren is Hoji? or his mom???


Im so confused

[EWG]

I’ve pointed this out before, but I’ll repeat it: the Hoji formula ends up holding the binding toe piece in the same position regardless of boot size. That doesn’t sound right to me.

It's pretty complicated and depends on the type of ski. The recommended line is based on where the manufacturer wants the weight to be on the ski (ski loading point) - and how the ski is mean to be skied. To compare:

Take a progressive ski mean to be skied with a centered stance. The weight is dropping right through the middle of the foot, which should be right on the recommended mount point. So changing the foot size does not change the weight point.

Now take a traditional ski with a rearward mounting point and an assumed aggressive stance. In this case it's assumed the weight is forward - near the ball of the foot. This type of ski would require the boot center to change as boot size changes to keep the weight load point the same on the ski.

BUT - you have to think it through. Compare a 28 boot to a 22 in the second ski - keeping the ball of the foot in the same place is increasing the tail - which is a not big deal if you're driving the ski, but for something like a mantra, if you get it in bumps, that tail could become a real issue for a smaller footed skier. You could be elongating the tail by 4cm - which is quite a bit.

So the further you get from a 26 boot the more you have to consider the impact of the boot size change on the mount point - and the best formula (which sometimes is the least of all evils kind of thing) changes by ski, person, gender, weight, height, etc.

Does that make sense?

[EWG]

Im so confused

Vodka helps.

[toast2266]

Does that make sense?

My takeaway from all of that is that everyone should just ski in a size 26 boot.

[AK47bp]

Boobs

[EWG]

My takeaway from all of that is that everyone should just ski in a size 26 boot.

Perfect.

[J. Barron DeJong]

It's pretty complicated and depends on the type of ski. The recommended line is based on where the manufacturer wants the weight to be on the ski (ski loading point) - and how the ski is mean to be skied. To compare:

Take a progressive ski mean to be skied with a centered stance. The weight is dropping right through the middle of the foot, which should be right on the recommended mount point. So changing the foot size does not change the weight point.

Now take a traditional ski with a rearward mounting point and an assumed aggressive stance. In this case it's assumed the weight is forward - near the ball of the foot. This type of ski would require the boot center to change as boot size changes to keep the weight load point the same on the ski.

BUT - you have to think it through. Compare a 28 boot to a 22 in the second ski - keeping the ball of the foot in the same place is increasing the tail - which is a not big deal if you're driving the ski, but for something like a mantra, if you get it in bumps, that tail could become a real issue for a smaller footed skier. You could be elongating the tail by 4cm - which is quite a bit.

So the further you get from a 26 boot the more you have to consider the impact of the boot size change on the mount point - and the best formula (which sometimes is the least of all evils kind of thing) changes by ski, person, gender, weight, height, etc.

Does that make sense?

Yeah, I get that ski and skier style could both have an effect on how you’d want to change mount point with boot size.

What I struggle with is envisioning a ski/skier style that ends up with the recommendation being to keep the toe piece location fixed regardless of boot size.