If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#71
|
|||
|
|||
why hardboots?
|
Ads |
#72
|
|||
|
|||
why hardboots?
Rolling you ankles is probably not going to be an issue. Jamming your
ankles because you landed on a flat. Or twisting your ankles because you crashed and landed funny or possible, but specifically rolling your ankles will probably not happen. Hardbooters will protect your ankles a bit more that softboots. I can attest to this after my recent ankle injury. I went off somewhere between an 8 and 12 foot drop that I didn't see because of pretty much zero visibility and landed totally flat. (Totally my fault)My ankle did not roll but it did twist and it did get jammed. Hard. 2nd degree sprain, and needed an excellent job by an excellent chiropractor to make it so I could take a semi-normal step without crutches. (Sprain is still healing, foot is taped up). I shudder to think what that impact would have been like were I in soft boots though. I suspect I would have dislocated the ankle, which would be an even longer recovery. Not to mention having to cut the boot away from my foot! Mike T |
#73
|
|||
|
|||
why hardboots?
Rolling you ankles is probably not going to be an issue. Jamming your
ankles because you landed on a flat. Or twisting your ankles because Maybe rolling isn't the right word. I've done it a few times now, hyper extended my ankle joint laterally against the binding heelcup. Actually, the last few months have been the first time in a year that my ankles havent hurt every day, so I think it may finally be healed. I don't intend to do it again tho, and my ankle problems were one thing that got me interested to give hardboots a solid try. slide out. Is that what you meant when you said "missing the landing a spin and digging the board"? Trying a spin or the like and over/under rotating or not getting back on axis for the landing, then digging in the nose, tail or some other part of the board while still in the high speed tumble. I do get the feeling that if it was voilent enough, the hardboots might save my ankle at the price of snapping my lower leg. Here, check out http://classic.mountainzone.com/olym...animation.html and imagine doing a tumble like that after botching a jump... imagine what would happen if you tumbled directly onto the nose or tail hard... and imagine doing it with stiff cuffs around your shins. As for facing forwards, you are facing forwards - with your head. Turning your shoulders perpendicular to the hill while in the air, which leads to the board turning perpendicular as well - is a bad habit maybe novice park riders have. However, with your learning curve, I'm sure you should be able to get use to it after only a few days. I suck at jumps, but of course I know that much . In both softboots and hardboots my "home" position is with my shoulders/hips perpendicular to the long axis of my front foot. So with softboots I'm mostly looking around my shoulder, whereas with hardboots I'm closer to just facing forward. I like facing forward more, and while I haven't hit a table on the hardboots yet, visualizing it in my head, I can tell I'd like the more forward stance (for straight airs). around 1990. But people like Jason tell me that it hasn't changed so much that I'm tempted to go back. Hey, Jason do you really think that softboots and bindings haven't changed that much in the past 15 years? Neil, I would say that softbooters have come a long way since then... you still might not like them... but I think the level develop seems to be faster than hardboots... at least with the Raichle model designs I've seen (I own a pair of SB224s). That was an opinion Niel infered for himself based on my post, not something I said. I wasn't snowboarding more than 2 years ago, let alone 15 ;P. I like my softboots, I think they're a really well designed product. And now that I've tried a stiff pair of the flows, I really like those too. I think the equipments pretty good, and it looks to me like it'll keep getting better at a pretty fast pace. I imagine a sort of hybrid boot with rigid plastic inserts sewn into a soft boot... that's what I picture a freeride snowboard boot looking like in say 4 years. I suspect if I could find a pair of clicker boots narrow enough I'd like those too. I'm underwhelmed by the Raichle boots. My new ones are 423's, which I imagine are almost the same as your 224's. They strike me as very bulky, heavy and awkward... and the rachet buckles suck. I also don't like how the entire shell deforms when you flex the ankle. I mean, pick up a pair of Alpine Touring boots and see the difference... they're designed to flex forward too (in walk mode) but they have proper buckles, real soles with some tread, and are amazingly lightweight. If I stick with hardboots I'm pretty sure I'll end up trying pairs of UPS and Head boots just as alternatives. I had a chance to try on a pair of UPS boots for a few seconds... they were much lighter, and I remember liking how they fit. I would have bought them this season if I could have gotten my hands on em. Same goes for the softer versions of the head boot... but the sellers only had the stiff race version :/. I have an old pair of Raichle 123 shells, and there's no fundamental difference between them and the 423's... makes me think that the basic Raichle SB boot design hasn't had much improvement in a decade. If they made an AF boot soft enough for me, maybe I'd like that. |
#74
|
|||
|
|||
why hardboots?
Jason Watkins wrote:
Hey, Jason do you really think that softboots and bindings haven't changed that much in the past 15 years? Neil, I would say that softbooters have come a long way since then... you still might not like them... but I think the level develop seems to be faster than hardboots... at least with the Raichle model designs I've seen (I own a pair of SB224s). That was an opinion Niel infered for himself based on my post, not something I said. I didn't mean they hadn't changed, I meant that despite the changes they still had some of the same problems - not responsive enough, strap pain, heel lift. They've gotten better but not enough better to inspire me to spend the money to try them out. I think the soft boot/binding interface is fundamentally flawed but at least work continues on making it better. It might need some real innovation to inspire me to change - the Flows are a good start. The hard boot/binding interface is a much better design, but the problem is no progression on the boot end. Tons of improvement for bindings though. Have a look at the latest Catek and Bomber bindings, they're a world away from anything Burton has ever sold. The boards are getting much better too, as anyone with skill, a press and some riders for feedback can do a ton of development work for only cost of materials and their time. Whereas boot molds are a whole different thing, money-wise. With the market so small, the major players have stopped improving their designs and the smaller players can't afford to get into it. Raichle's SB series has had the odd update but I don't think there's a ton of difference between a 123 and whatever they're calling them now (Lemans?). I like my 224s though. Neil |
#75
|
|||
|
|||
why hardboots?
At Chamonix the average skier standard appears to be much better than
the average snowboarder. Skiers get down more stuff without sliding down it on their arses. It's not that most boarders can't "carve" in the sense of "extreme carving", they simply can't turn their boards. It's that bad. I'm saying that a stiffer setup and more forward angles would help most people ride better for what they do. Hard or soft doesn't matter to me, I just don't buy a freestyle board, flexy boots and duck stance for the recreational rider. There's no reason to ride straight stances unless you want to ride switch. All they do for recreational riders is make it easier to skid down the hill on their heels. Absolutely, 100%. I don't believe that people ride crap gear (hard or soft) with unsuitable stances because they want to sideslip. I think they do it because the marketing pushes them to that gear, it teaches them that it's ok to ride badly, and they don't think anything better's attainable. I would guess they'll get bored pretty quickly though: how are board sales these days? Why does it matter? I'm not sure. Perhaps I just don't want my friends to think I'm athletically crap just because I snowboard ;-) |
#77
|
|||
|
|||
why hardboots?
Neil Gendzwill wrote in message ...
Jason Watkins wrote: Hey, Jason do you really think that softboots and bindings haven't changed that much in the past 15 years? Neil, I would say that softbooters have come a long way since then... you still might not like them... but I think the level develop seems to be faster than hardboots... at least with the Raichle model designs I've seen (I own a pair of SB224s). I didn't mean they hadn't changed, I meant that despite the changes they still had some of the same problems - not responsive enough, strap pain, heel lift. They've gotten better but not enough better to inspire me to spend the money to try them out. I think the soft boot/binding interface is fundamentally flawed but at least work continues on making it better. It might need some real innovation to inspire me to change - the Flows are a good start. I see. I agree that with your bias towards carving performance, the softboots aren't going to be what you want. In particular for softboot carving you have to rely much more on the strength of your legs to increase you edge angle (inclination of the board) whereas with hardboots you can use the stiffness of the hardboots to tip over the board - which is much quicker and powerful. However, responsiveness isn't the only factor and in fact too much responsiveness maybe less than ideal. I believe that it is a matter of preference. As such I respectfully disagree with your claim that softboots/binding interface as fundamentally flawed in general (although I don't question that hardboots/plate bindings are better for hard carving). Strap pain and heel lift occur because about poor boot/binding fit. If you find a good fitting pair of boots and bindings they won't occur. For me, I've had more buckle pain (equivalent to strap pain as the boot/binding feature roles as slightly shifted) and heel lift in my hardboots, also due to a poor boot fit. I believe if you pump all the time and money people put into getting their hardbooters to fit right, the heat moldable liners, the boot fitting, the adjusting and tweaks... I think you will likely have a well fitting pair of boot regardless of soft or hardboots. The hard boot/binding interface is a much better design, but the problem is no progression on the boot end. Tons of improvement for bindings though. Have a look at the latest Catek and Bomber bindings, they're a world away from anything Burton has ever sold. I agree with the most recent Catek and Bomber bindings look extremely well designed and manufactured, and the older Burton bindings don't look very sturdy - makes me wonder how crazy you guys were to ride plate bindings years ago cost of materials and their time. Whereas boot molds are a whole different thing, money-wise. With the market so small, the major players have stopped improving their designs and the smaller players can't afford to get into it. Raichle's SB series has had the odd update but I don't think there's a ton of difference between a 123 and whatever they're calling them now (Lemans?). I like my 224s though. I agree that boards are getting much better in general (freestyle, freeride, alpine, etc). I can also see why innovation in boot design has stagnated due to the lack of economies of scale in hardboot production. However, even without changing the shell mold... I feel like there could have been several upgrades to the boot materials - that heavy plastic is like a decade old and it's not like that aren't using new stuff in their ski boots. I have trouble believeing that the same new materials cannot be used in the existing boot molds. Especially buckle and cant design. To put it mildly, the Raichle buckles are *horrible* any ski boot or even a rollerblade boot have much newer and better working buckles. It shouldn't be that expensive to buy a different buckle and attach to the exist shell, does it? Same with the cant adjusters... those should be relatively cheap and easy to redesign and insert into the exist shell design. I think this is mainly Raichle's fault, but the lack of customers is not reason enough for the lack of improvements. I too have the SB224s and personally I think they are an unimpressive sign and extremely outdated. Even if they were designed back in 1997, they still feel 5-10 years behind ski boot designs... and looking at the latest Raichle designs, things still haven't changed. I just got a pair of Oxygen boots, which appears to use much newer light materials and better buckles... don't know about the shell design until I use it, but I'm cautiously optimistic. |
#78
|
|||
|
|||
why hardboots?
On 18 Mar 2004 00:20:06 -0800, Jason Watkins said (and I quote):
I'm underwhelmed by the Raichle boots. My new ones are 423's, which I imagine are almost the same as your 224's. They strike me as very bulky, heavy and awkward... and the rachet buckles suck. I also don't like how the entire shell deforms when you flex the ankle. I mean, pick up a pair of Alpine Touring boots and see the difference... they're designed to flex forward too (in walk mode) but they have proper buckles, real soles with some tread, and are amazingly lightweight. If I stick with hardboots I'm pretty sure I'll end up trying pairs of UPS and Head boots just as alternatives. I had a chance to try on a pair of UPS boots for a few seconds... they were much lighter, and I remember liking how they fit. I would have bought them this season if I could have gotten my hands on em. Same goes for the softer versions of the head boot... but the sellers only had the stiff race version :/. Just as a counterpoint, I've recently switched from the Blax/Head Stratos to the Raichle 423. To wear out a very worn cliche, these took-my-riding-to-a-new-level. Really, they are just so much more responsive that when I went back to the Stratos for a day I ended up cursing myself for having let myself be held back by them for 3 seasons. It's not a fit issue, 'cos the Stratos actually fit better, even compared to the Thermofit liners in the Raichles. The Stratos are too soft laterally (perhaps the Stratos Pro are significantly stiffer in this regard, but somehow I doubt it). They're also not as tall. Both these things make it easier to initiate turns, but harder to control the turn at speed. The Stratos are much better suited to shallower angles, where the lateral flex will be more of an advantage than a disadvantage. They'd be good boots for a wider powder or all-mountain board. Also, the Raichles are much lighter! I do like the spring system on the back of the Stratos though. The 5-position lean adjustor on the Raichles is a dumb design - when it's locked, the cuff can't move at all, making the boots really stiff, but when it's unlocked, it moves too freely, making the boots too soft. A spring is the way to go, but from most people's reports the spring on the AF700/Indy is too stiff and doesn't have a wide enough range of forward lean adjustment. I want something like this: http://www.carver.cc/gallery/photo.p...9&exhibition=3 I've realised even moreso how hard it is to buy boots. The things that really matter to you when riding are almost impossible to judge when trying them on in the shop. For instance, the lateral stiffness issue can't be felt in the shop. You really have to ride them to know whether you'll like them. -- A: Top-posters. Q: What's the most annoying thing on usenet? |
#79
|
|||
|
|||
why hardboots?
On Tue, 16 Mar 2004 05:02:14 GMT
"Dmitry" wrote: anyways... many resorts groomed steeps by having their Snowcats lowered down with a winch. It's kind scary to think about it, but I've seen it done. Ouch. I'd pay just to see that!! Not even talking about riding that. What resort? I saw them preparing pistes that way in Livigno (Italy neuro |
#80
|
|||
|
|||
why hardboots?
I'm underwhelmed by the Raichle boots. My new ones are 423's, which I
imagine are almost the same as your 224's. They strike me as very bulky, heavy and awkward... and the rachet buckles suck. I also don't like how the entire shell deforms when you flex the ankle. I mean, pick up a pair of Alpine Touring boots and see the difference... they're designed to flex forward too (in walk mode) but they have proper buckles, real soles with some tread, and are amazingly lightweight. If I stick with hardboots I'm pretty sure I'll end up trying pairs of UPS and Head boots just as alternatives. I had a chance to try on a pair of UPS boots for a few seconds... they were much lighter, and I remember liking how they fit. I would have bought them this season if I could have gotten my hands on em. Same goes for the softer versions of the head boot... but the sellers only had the stiff race version :/. The Raichle boots are certainly not without their faults! I continue to use them mostly because they fit my narrow feet with skinny ankles, and also because replacement parts are readily available. (And I've needed them - specially the cant adjusters whcih break almost immediately if you're heavier like I am) The UPS 5-buckle model that wasn't available for purchase this year looks intruiging to me and I just might have to try a pair on sometime. However I'm also cautious about switching boot models because it always takes me a number of riding days to get used to any new boot model... and usually I have to rebake the liners more than once in order to make up for some shortcoming! I have an old pair of Raichle 123 shells, and there's no fundamental difference between them and the 423's... makes me think that the basic Raichle SB boot design hasn't had much improvement in a decade. If they made an AF boot soft enough for me, maybe I'd like that. Yep, it's pretty much been the same design since the 100 series, whenever that came out. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Beginner - Starting off with soft boots? | Guy Lux | Snowboarding | 7 | January 22nd 04 07:45 PM |
difference between hard and soft boots | Brendon | Snowboarding | 11 | September 17th 03 08:27 AM |