Cuff alignment

[AmyPJ]

I'm not a bootfitter but I have spent too many days in ski boots. Yes, remove your custom footbed from your liner & set it centered in the shell without the liner. I believe the other removable part you are referring to is called the Zeppa or Boot Board which also plays a role in proper boot balancing.

I need to do this, too. Check how centered I am with the footbed in.

 

[Uncle-A]

I'm not a bootfitter but I have spent too many days in ski boots. Yes, remove your custom footbed from your liner & set it centered in the shell without the liner. I believe the other removable part you are referring to is called the Zeppa or Boot Board which also plays a role in proper boot balancing.

I have to think the placement of the foot bed in the shell would tricky, you would have to center it perfectly in the shell not only side to side but front to back.. No custom foot bed yet just OTC foot bed but still would be the same.

 

[MRT]

Assuming your heel is in the back of the heel pocket in the shell, I think you would want to place the footbed
only as far forward as the heel pocket in the liner would push it. Keep in mind the back of the liner, at the back of the heel pocket
can be very thin once the liner is broken in. This position may not be centered back to front.

Uncle-A
I haven't seen an over the counter footbed that positions the ankle joint in the same position as a custom
footbed that is posted correctly---therefore you may get different results as to where the leg centers in the upper shell .

Mike
Master bootfitter/Cped.

 

[Ross Biff]

What's the point in the video of measuring her iliac crest width and then having her boot centers at the same width? If one doesn't ski at hip width, there's no point or worse.
_I would object to improper word use - having to move the screws "paradoxically". Otherwise, good video.

I also wonder about the width the boots are placed apart when aligning cuffs. Is there a sorta- standard recognized stance width? Does it vary from brand to brand? How do boots with " duckfooted " geometry affect what is done alignment wise? I apologize in advance if this has been covered elsewhere. I'm new in the neighborhood.

 

[Near Nyquist]

I also wonder about the width the boots are placed apart when aligning cuffs. Is there a sorta- standard recognized stance width? Does it vary from brand to brand? How do boots with " duckfooted " geometry affect what is done alignment wise? I apologize in advance if this has been covered elsewhere. I'm new in the neighborhood.

It was covered by the video at the start of this thread.
Measure the distance of the illiac crests
And use this distance to place the boot centerline. I find you have to adjust this distance somewhat but it's a good starting point

 

[Ross Biff]

It was covered by the video at the start of this thread.
Measure the distance of the illiac crests
And use this distance to place the boot centerline. I find you have to adjust this distance somewhat but it's a good starting point

I get the iliac crest idea but when you say adjust it somewhat from that point, what are we aiming for and do soma-tec type boots need other considerations?

 

[Near Nyquist]

I get the iliac crest idea but when you say adjust it somewhat from that point, what are we aiming for and do soma-tec type boots need other considerations?

It’s a starting point some skiers may find it’s not their natural stance wider or narrower It depends on what their body feels
But the center seam mark is still the boot reference point we base it all off of

 

[Rod9301]

I wonder why stance width is important for cuff alignment, when most of the time skiing is spent on the outside ski (ie one ski only)?

I think the checking the cuff alignment is better done by balancing on one foot, in the boot without the liner.

Works well for me.

 

[Ross Biff]

I wonder why stance width is important for cuff alignment, when most of the time skiing is spent on the outside ski (ie one ski only)?

I think the checking the cuff alignment is better done by balancing on one foot, in the boot without the liner.

Works well for me.

Interesting.........

 

[Monster]

Just came across this video from team Gut. Thought this was an appropriate thread to link it.

Oh no! Look at that horrible, nasty, mean old a-frame. It's really holding her back.

Seriously though, adjusting cuff angle and canting by planing the sole of a boot are really different. Setting a cuff radically in one direction or the other puts a sideways bend in the ankle joint that can be tricky for comfort and strength perception. I think you want to find the optimal relationship of foot to lower leg angle for an individual and honor that with the cuff setting. For a lot of people, that's very close to straight up, especially if their footbed is good and resolves any pronation issues. If you need to put more or less heat on an edge for feel or to compensate for anatomy, planing the sole can do something but you can only go so far without risking binding function impairment. The same effect can be achieved and can go farther safely with canted shims between plates and bindings. I've messed with all of these options quite a lot over the years on my own gear just to see how it would feel. But because I'm such a square, I've always come back to dead flat.

Fore/aft angle produced by various means (boot forward lean, shims under binding heels or toe pieces, e.g.), delta, pitch, whatever the jargon, is another interesting topic. Some skiers want their toes up, some down, some flat. . . Most boots and bindings have built-in forward pitch (taller under the heels). Lots of pretty strong opinion on what's best skier to skier.

 

[Uncle-A]

Oh no! Look at that horrible, nasty, mean old a-frame. It's really holding her back.

Seriously though, adjusting cuff angle and canting by planing the sole of a boot are really different. Setting a cuff radically in one direction or the other puts a sideways bend in the ankle joint that can be tricky for comfort and strength perception. I think you want to find the optimal relationship of foot to lower leg angle for an individual and honor that with the cuff setting. For a lot of people, that's very close to straight up, especially if their footbed is good and resolves any pronation issues. If you need to put more or less heat on an edge for feel or to compensate for anatomy, planing the sole can do something but you can only go so far without risking binding function impairment. The same effect can be achieved and can go farther safely with canted shims between plates and bindings. I've messed with all of these options quite a lot over the years on my own gear just to see how it would feel. But because I'm such a square, I've always come back to dead flat.

Fore/aft angle produced by various means (boot forward lean, shims under binding heels or toe pieces, e.g.), delta, pitch, whatever the jargon, is another interesting topic. Some skiers want their toes up, some down, some flat. . . Most boots and bindings have built-in forward pitch (taller under the heels). Lots of pretty strong opinion on what's best skier to skier.

Many years back I also used canting wedges between my ski and binding and they did give me a level base that corrected any imperfections in my feet and legs. That was a time before cuff alignment. Aside from the mounting issues and have binding manufactures recommend not doing it, I have also returned to flat ski binding connection. Like I said that was before mounting tracks or other modern devices. I have also used pads between the liner and the shell and pads attached to the bottom of the OEM foot bed and inside the liner. Now I use only cuff alignment and an OTC foot bed, not sure if it works as well but I have also had additional issues with my feet.

 

[Ross Biff]

Many years back I also used canting wedges between my ski and binding and they did give me a level base that corrected any imperfections in my feet and legs. That was a time before cuff alignment. Aside from the mounting issues and have binding manufactures recommend not doing it, I have also returned to flat ski binding connection. Like I said that was before mounting tracks or other modern devices. I have also used pads between the liner and the shell and pads attached to the bottom of the OEM foot bed and inside the liner. Now I use only cuff alignment and an OTC foot bed, not sure if it works as well but I have also had additional issues with my feet.

I'm interested in the different feelings you perceived using binding canting shims before the days of cuff alignment and what you feel now using no shims but cuff alignment as the accepted wisdom says that these are two completely different procedures to sort different issues. I'm playing with my cuff alignment at the moment between two different pairs of boots but I feel more differences between the boots rather than the alignments.

 

[Monster]

Many years back I also used canting wedges between my ski and binding and they did give me a level base that corrected any imperfections in my feet and legs. That was a time before cuff alignment. Aside from the mounting issues and have binding manufactures recommend not doing it, I have also returned to flat ski binding connection. Like I said that was before mounting tracks or other modern devices. I have also used pads between the liner and the shell and pads attached to the bottom of the OEM foot bed and inside the liner. Now I use only cuff alignment and an OTC foot bed, not sure if it works as well but I have also had additional issues with my feet.

Even though I make my own footbeds, because I don't need to, I haven't tried planing the bottom of the F/B to alter foot or leg to ski angle. One certainly could. I can imagine that in combination with a cuff adjustment might work well and achieve the desired result without articulating the ankle sideways. Also, changing how the foot sits in the boot might well create it's own demands for shaping the shell to accommodate; however, within reason, that's certainly doable as well. Not a really good option with and OTC F/B though.

 

[Uncle-A]

I'm interested in the different feelings you perceived using binding canting shims before the days of cuff alignment and what you feel now using no shims but cuff alignment as the accepted wisdom says that these are two completely different procedures to sort different issues. I'm playing with my cuff alignment at the moment between two different pairs of boots but I feel more differences between the boots rather than the alignments.

When learning to ski over 50 years ago skiing straight was gliding with the ski flat. If you have some foot issues it made it difficult to keep the ski flat. The boots were made to keep the foot level and you had to adjust your stance to keep the ski flat. Some time in the mid seventies boot manufactures put a half of a degree cant locked into the boot. Not long after people first started putting cant wedges between the ski and binding. The shop I worked used a machine that had two plates to stand on when you had your boot on and it used a set of lights that would show you what size cant to place between the boot and the plate. You would shift your knees back and forth than stand like you are skiing straight, the lights combined with the wedges would eventually show skiing flat. As it turned out I needed a number two cant under one foot and a three cant under the other with the thick side on the cant on the arch side of my foot. That showed that I walked on the outside of my feet and the ware on my shoes would agree. The first time I skied with the cants it was a slight adjustment because I had learned to compensate for that issue but after a few runs I was hooked on cants. They made my skiing smooth and I had to use less effort to keep the ski straight or turn, also the skies had the groove in the bottom back than and that helped the ski track straight. Add to the fact that back than we used a zero - zero grind on the bottom and side edge. The groove also added drag to the ski when sliding the ski sideward, that you would have to overcome when swiveling the ski. Move forward to 1983 and I had a ladder accident and shattered both my heels with enlarged ankle mortice and no cushioning flesh remaining between the heel and ankle. Surgery on the right foot to screw the heel parts back together using 9 screws and two steel plates. The left foot had so many little parts that they just had to just soft cast it and hope for the best. Now the feet are not the same as before the accident so no cants, the shop I worked has closed and the new shop did not have the canting machine so no way of checking except by eye. I do cuff alignment myself on my new boots and use an OTC foot bed. Of course my skiing has never been the same, plus my age over 70 does not lend to a performance skiing. Using new skis with no grove and a one - three grind is not a fair comparison because of the ease of skiing the new equipment. Now I just ski for the basic pleasure of being on the mountain.

 

[Uncle-A]

Even though I make my own footbeds and could, because I don't need to, I haven't tried planing the bottom of the F/B to alter foot or leg to ski angle. One certainly could. I can imagine that in combination with a cuff adjustment might work well and achieve the desired result without articulating the ankle sideways. Also, changing how the foot sits in the boot might well create it's own demands for shaping the shell to accommodate; however, within reason, that's certainly doable as well. Not a really good option with and OTC F/B though.

I would like to know your process and materials for making your own foot bed? If you care to share that information with the community, photos would be great.

 

[markojp]

... planing the sole can do something but you can only go so far without risking binding function impairment.

Aren't you using a router on the toe and heal lugs after planing to keep everything in DIN tolerance?

 

[Monster]

Aren't you using a router on the toe and heal lugs after planing to keep everything in DIN tolerance?

No, I've never used a router, but I don't plane boot soles anything but square either, and only plugs that require it. That's one I haven't needed or wanted to try. Didn't mean to imply I had. I meant you only have so much sole to work with. . .

 

[Monster]

I would like to know your process and materials for making your own foot bed? If you care to share that information with the community, photos would be great.

Ok - I'll try to put some images up as time permits.

In a nutshell, I use bio-foam like chiropractors to take the foot impression, cast that with plaster of paris, use the positive on a vacuum form to mold kydex, cut out to fit liner and shell, add support underneath with short-strand glass reinforced Bondo, shape to final, and top with 2mm neoprene. It's taken some time to refine my techniques and still tweaking, but am now pretty happy with the results.

 

[Monster]

Here are some DIY footbed build pics. Not a pro - just a hobbyist ;-)

 

[markojp]

No, I've never used a router, but I don't plane boot soles anything but square either, and only plugs that require it. That's one I haven't needed or wanted to try. Didn't mean to imply I had. I meant you only have so much sole to work with. . .

If you are removing material from the boot sole, you'll need to add a lifter communsurate in height to the material removed to return it to DIN clearance. If you add a lifter to actually lift, you'll still need to route the toe and heel lugs to maintain DIN tolerances. You're correct that many plug boots will need to be planed (flat) down to meet DIN tolerance and FIS height standards. For anyone reading, if you don't have access to the proper tools, then take your boots to someone/someplace that does. Your deductable with thank you.