Question on ski boot sizing numbers

[Calbearski]

Internal boot shell dimensions

Is there any standardization in boot sizing for a given mondo-point size? For example, I have a pair of Tecnica Mach 1 LV size 24.5 with a stated sole length of 290mm. When I do a shell sizing I have approximately 2 fingers behind my heel. I also have a pair of Atomic Redster CS size 24.5 with a stated shell length of 285mm. When I do a shell sizing I have approximately 1 finger behind my heel. Due to only having 1 finger of space, I need to have the toe box stretched to work.

So what does the 24.5 mean? Are manufacturers only stating the boot may fit someone who's foot is 24.5 cm long? So boot sizing is as valuable a flex numbers? What am I missing here?

 

[Tricia]

The Atomic Redster CS is a very different volume 24.5 than the Mach 1 LV.
And, there are even some volume differences in different models within a brand.
This is one of the reasons you need a fitter to get you into the right boot for the shape of your foot.
I measure a 24.5 and tend to have a 2 finger fit in most 24.5 boots, but I ski in a 23.5 which is usually a 1 finger fit

 

[Phatboy64]

I have those two same boots and as Tricia states the CS is a tighter fit.

 

[Calbearski]

I am very aware of the fit differences, my question pertains to the internal length of the shell. It’s clear all 24.5 shells (or any other shell lengths) don’t have the same internal length, and I wonder why not? What does the mondo point size really mean?

 

[onenerdykid]

I am very aware of the fit differences, my question pertains to the internal length of the shell. It’s clear all 24.5 shells (or any other shell lengths) don’t have the same internal length, and I wonder why not? What does the mondo point size really mean?

Mondopoint is a sizing scale that is based on the centimeter length of the foot (a mondopoint 24.5 boot is generally intended for a foot that is 24.5cm long). Ultimately the size of the boot is a rough estimate for the foot that should go inside it. The reason internal last lengths are not all the same is because liner constructions are not all the same. Some liners are thinner and take up less space, some liners are thicker and take up more space. But they can all be intended for the same foot size.

Mondopoint sizing, in my opinion, is the most accurate way to size footwear. But you have to bear in mind that shoe size is not always the same thing as your foot size. If you sized your running shoes to the exact size of your foot, it would be miserable to run in. A running shoe must be longer that the foot and have a certain amount of "free space" for comfort reasons. Conversely ski boots are sized to be tighter, to be closer to your foot's size. Either way, sizing is a guideline and the size you end up with is dependent on a multitude of factors and only one of those factors is the actual length of your foot. Some people need to size up due to a much longer heel-to-instep perimeter measurement and some people need to size down due to a smaller heel-to-instep perimeter measurement. Some people need to size up due to a complete inability to tolerate foot compression. Some people need to size down due to a very high tolerance of foot compression.

It's a starting point. Not an inviolable law.

 

[Ivan]

I measure 27.5 (my feet are somewhere between 276 and 278mm long), have both Lange World Cup ZA and RX 130 LV in 26.5. The ZA fits me great (lengthwise and overall), I only needed navicular grinds. In contrast, the RX 130 LV is very tight lengthwise, I needed a toebox grind in order to ski in those. And the ZA is a lower volume boot overall.

 

[Calbearski]

Mondopoint is a sizing scale that is based on the centimeter length of the foot (a mondopoint 24.5 boot is generally intended for a foot that is 24.5cm long). Ultimately the size of the boot is a rough estimate for the foot that should go inside it. The reason internal last lengths are not all the same is because liner constructions are not all the same. Some liners are thinner and take up less space, some liners are thicker and take up more space. But they can all be intended for the same foot size.

Mondopoint sizing, in my opinion, is the most accurate way to size footwear. But you have to bear in mind that shoe size is not always the same thing as your foot size. If you sized your running shoes to the exact size of your foot, it would be miserable to run in. A running shoe must be longer that the foot and have a certain amount of "free space" for comfort reasons. Conversely ski boots are sized to be tighter, to be closer to your foot's size. Either way, sizing is a guideline and the size you end up with is dependent on a multitude of factors and only one of those factors is the actual length of your foot. Some people need to size up due to a much longer heel-to-instep perimeter measurement and some people need to size down due to a smaller heel-to-instep perimeter measurement. Some people need to size up due to a complete inability to tolerate foot compression. Some people need to size down due to a very high tolerance of foot compression.

It's a starting point. Not an inviolable law.

Thank you, that was the most definitive explanation I have ever received. I'm glad I found someone knew what they were talking about.

 

[cem]

now add to this information and think about tolerance to compression, some people do not like anything touching their feet others like a very firm compressive hold think about the bone structure, the soft tissue the muscle tension and everything else that goes in to making up the foot

this year salomon actually made mention of foot length on their boxes, they stated
" a foot length 260mm-269mm should be in a 26.5 boot, a foot 270mm-279mm should be in 27.5" etc etc now this by no means perfect as i have several clients who measure 263mm for example and are happy in a 25,5 boot but these people are happy with a greater fit tension, but it at lease does try to get the point across that just because you measure more than 265mm doesn't mean you have to jump straight to the 27.5 boot something may stores were guilty of doing.... what this might mean (if the store staff read the box at all) is that fewer people get oversized (we live in hope)

we could complicate things further by looking at the volume (fit tension again)

or we could step back in time to when if you measured 265mm and you put your foot into a 26.5 you had pretty close to a 15mm shell fit.... some might consider this boot fit nirvana but it threw up other issues for those who weren't a perfect 265mm foot, over the years the brands have also increased this internal length as consumers were saying that boots came up short or were too tight, as this happened certain brands saw sales increase and others decrease (the ones with longer internals sold more) mostly as the out the box fit was kinder on the toes and people didn't really know any better. we have to remember that vast majority of boots are not "fitted" or even sold by someone professing to be a fitter, the big box stores pile it high sell it cheap and their consumers want instant gratification in terms of a nice fluffy boot where their toes don't hit the front when they slide around between coffee stops.

just because we know what a 1cm /10mm is doesn't mean every size is created equally which is why boot fitting becomes a subject in the first place

 

[François Pugh]

now add to this information and think about tolerance to compression, some people do not like anything touching their feet others like a very firm compressive hold think about the bone structure, the soft tissue the muscle tension and everything else that goes in to making up the foot

this year salomon actually made mention of foot length on their boxes, they stated
" a foot length 260mm-269mm should be in a 26.5 boot, a foot 270mm-279mm should be in 27.5" etc etc now this by no means perfect as i have several clients who measure 263mm for example and are happy in a 25,5 boot but these people are happy with a greater fit tension, but it at lease does try to get the point across that just because you measure more than 265mm doesn't mean you have to jump straight to the 27.5 boot something may stores were guilty of doing.... what this might mean (if the store staff read the box at all) is that fewer people get oversized (we live in hope)

we could complicate things further by looking at the volume (fit tension again)

or we could step back in time to when if you measured 265mm and you put your foot into a 26.5 you had pretty close to a 15mm shell fit.... some might consider this boot fit nirvana but it threw up other issues for those who weren't a perfect 265mm foot, over the years the brands have also increased this internal length as consumers were saying that boots came up short or were too tight, as this happened certain brands saw sales increase and others decrease (the ones with longer internals sold more) mostly as the out the box fit was kinder on the toes and people didn't really know any better. we have to remember that vast majority of boots are not "fitted" or even sold by someone professing to be a fitter, the big box stores pile it high sell it cheap and their consumers want instant gratification in terms of a nice fluffy boot where their toes don't hit the front when they slide around between coffee stops.

just because we know what a 1cm /10mm is doesn't mean every size is created equally which is why boot fitting becomes a subject in the first place

Thanks for that. I was thinking the number was the actual length of the boot that was longest front to back or at the middle of the boot and the difference between boots was how much longer the big toe length was or how much the boot in front of the instep was holding the foot back. Now I see it's just marketing smoke and mirrors, like boot flex. Based on actual fact, but adjusted for sales.

 

[cem]

Thanks for that. I was thinking the number was the actual length of the boot that was longest front to back or at the middle of the boot and the difference between boots was how much longer the big toe length was or how much the boot in front of the instep was holding the foot back. Now I see it's just marketing smoke and mirrors, like boot flex. Based on actual fact, but adjusted for sales.

nope, the size is the size, your tolerance to the size varies based on shape and the materials put around the foot, if we put a restrictive dense material in the liner it feels tighter, put a neoprene toe box in and all of a sudden it feels more comfortable, same with each are of the foot and your tolerance is your tolerance nobody elses. what varies other than your tolerance is the amount of space the manufacturer decides to add to the "fixed" 26.5cm to allow for the liner and toe space, change the liner you will change the fit sometimes for the better sometimes not

the conspiracy theories you guys drag up never cease to amaze me

if you want the full post about how much of a shoe / boot size is actual size i can write that too but i need to do it when i am not quite so up to my neck in boots

 

[James]

Oh lord, I see another inquest and calls for an investigation. Boot sizing has gone awry!

Interestingly, I just went down a shell size. I tried this nearly 10 yrs ago in a lange z and it didn’t work.

Head I guess made the WCR3 interior longer than the old B3 interior. So I went from a 27/315mm to a 26/304mm. I was extremely dubious of doing this due to the last debacle. So far I think the new boot has actually taken less time to get comfortable than the old one. But it’s early. Still, it feels much more like my attached to the ski than my foot in some housing that’s attached to the ski.

 

[François Pugh]

So, if I have a 27.5 shell size, and am making a drawing of my boot shell is there a place on that drawing I can label as 27.5 cm? If so, which length?

 

[Near Nyquist]

So, if I have a 27.5 shell size, and am making a drawing of my boot shell is there a place on that drawing I can label as 27.5 cm? If so, which length?

The outside side of the box the boot came in …..

 

[James]

They should just call them 25,26,27,28…
Save the ink on that .5 business.

 

[skipress]

As I recall [as with Salomon's HIP, tho different numbers] mondo has a serendipitous effect in that the difference between 2 mondo 'full' sizes is 10mm whereas 'imperial' sizes break at just over 8mm*. That means that over a run of adult sizes it is possible to use 1 fewer molds - so less $£.

One accidental benefit in the west might well be that we don't usually buy shoes in mondo so non experts [they're not reading this, don't worry] are way less likely to get into a conversation of no I know I am a size 8 [which type of size 8 would that be sir?]. Instead you measure [obviously].

As @cem says much of this is about personal preferences [and 'needs' - what's the problem you re asking the boot to solve - slide all day from hot chocolate to hot chocolate or 55-75 arcs with an accuracy of +/- 2cm on bulletproof surfaces at speed].

I measure @ just under 28, so ski a 27/27.5 but when i was young, fit and beautiful i could cram my foot into a modded 25 shell with a paper thin liner and a replaced toe box [think sock thickness there]. However trips to S and M establishments have never been to my taste so when I could slide in something rather more benign I did so.

*If you re super curious, I know, you re not, 'imperial' shoe sizes were based on the barleycorn an archaic unit of around 1/3 of an inch

 

[Yarecki]

I measure 28 and ski in 27.5 boots (all my boots are LV, one step down from a plug - think Raptor WCR 140, Lange RS LV, Fischer RC4 Pro LV). I tried a few times over the years to fit into 26.5 boot, but there’s no way I could last skiing all day in a 26.5…

Now that I discovered ZipFits a few years ago, I can have iron-clad heel hold and tight mid-foot, and still have some room to wiggle my toes (although they always touch the front of the toe box, even when flexed). So for me personally downsizing to get all-around tighter fit isn’t necessary any more.

 

[Philpug]

There is little question that boots have gotten more generous in volume especially in the forefoot.

 

[Chessie]

There is little question that boots have gotten more generous in volume especially in the forefoot.

I always wondered about the benefit of crammed toes in everything from ski boots over hockey skates, bicycling shoes to climbing shoes. Salvatore Ferragamo, the great shoemaker who was no stranger to fashionable, pointed shoes, once said something like “the crucial part of making a shoe is that the toes are free”. I believe that performance footwear should allow the big toe to be an extension of the first metatarsal. That gives the best balance in any sport, skiing included. Granted, for generations children have been wearing footwear and elastic socks that have shaped their soft bones into a different anatomy than what we see among peoples that do not wear shoes. That may be why so many ski boots seem to be designed for that foot shape. But we may be more aware of the importance of the big toe for balance nowadays.