• For more information on how to avoid pop-up ads and still support SkiTalk click HERE.

Sizing Down in Boots - The current situation per brand

Wade

Out on the slopes
Skier
SkiTalk Supporter
Joined
Nov 19, 2015
Posts
929
Location
New York
That Fischer app is interesting. I played around with it this morning out of curiosity rather than using it to fit boots, and the measurements appear to be very close.

I’d be interested to hear what some of the experts here think about it and whether the measurements and images that the app spits out give a good sense for the type of foot they may be dealing with.

For example, I think I have a reasonably wide fore-foot, skinny ankles and a high arch. Is that how someone who knows what they’re doing would describe my feet from these scans?

22B8F205-CDA2-43FE-9ED4-AB662F1648D6.png

68ECA44A-E68E-4F2B-9259-69D55D15E4A0.png
 
Thread Starter
TS
chopchop

chopchop

so many skis, so little time
Skier
Joined
Apr 1, 2020
Posts
325
Location
Too far
Hi Phil, great point. To envision how this works, imagine the shell last first (just the inner foot shape of the lower shell) and then add the plastic thickness around that. Adding thicker plastic to the last will produce a shell with a longer external measurement (i.e. boot sole length), thinner plastic will produce a shorter external measurement. This means that a boot can have a shorter BSL in size 26 like the Hawx Ultra at 300mm compared to a boot with a longer BSL, like the Redster at 305mm. The Hawx Ultra at 300mm does not have a shorter last than the Redster at 305mm. In fact, the Ultra has a longer internal last by a couple of mm than the Redster, despite its shorter BSL.

Additionally, this is not the same as "downsizing". BSL and Mondo Point are not directly related to one another, and this proves that. The internal length of a boot does not necessarily correspond to it external length. Another case in point, look at the normal Hawx Ultra vs. the Hawx Ultra XTD. Ultra has a BSL of 300mm and the Ultra XTD has a BSL of 302mm in size 26. The last of the Ultra XTD is not 2mm longer than the normal Ultra, they are 1:1 the same. The extra 2mm of the Ultra XTD is due the addition of the tech insert at the front of the boot. In order to keep the last length the same between the two boots, we need to add length externally to fit the tech insert. If we would have kept the BSL the same, then the last of the Ultra XTD would have been 2mm shorter, which we did not want to do.

*Facts.

Great stuff @onenerdykid. Keep it coming.

One implication of these variable BSLs - They're making me seriously consider demo bindings, which I've never done. If I had a Hawx Ultra in 26.5 (300BSL) for off piste days and, say, a Nordica frontside boot in 27.5 (315mm I would think) for groomer days, there's no way I can make it work on a single pair of skis with conventional bindings. The industry needs to give us more, better options for alpine bindings with both toe and heel adjustability. Tyrolia appears to be on the right....
 

onenerdykid

Product Manager, Atomic Ski Boots
Masterfit Bootfitter
Manufacturer
Joined
Feb 18, 2020
Posts
1,266
Location
Altenmarkt, Austria
*Facts.

Great stuff @onenerdykid. Keep it coming.

One implication of these variable BSLs - They're making me seriously consider demo bindings, which I've never done. If I had a Hawx Ultra in 26.5 (300BSL) for off piste days and, say, a Nordica frontside boot in 27.5 (315mm I would think) for groomer days, there's no way I can make it work on a single pair of skis with conventional bindings. The industry needs to give us more, better options for alpine bindings with both toe and heel adjustability. Tyrolia appears to be on the right....

Atomic/Salomon STH2 and Warden MNC bindings have 30mm of heel adjustment. Granted it is a manual adjustment, but nothing over 5mm of length will be automatically compensated for by any binding (to my knowledge).
 
Thread Starter
TS
chopchop

chopchop

so many skis, so little time
Skier
Joined
Apr 1, 2020
Posts
325
Location
Too far
Atomic/Salomon STH2 and Warden MNC bindings have 30mm of heel adjustment. Granted it is a manual adjustment, but nothing over 5mm of length will be automatically compensated for by any binding (to my knowledge).

Yeah. Manual seems totally fine. It's about having more high-quality options that adjust more than 5-10mm but ski like a traditional mount binding. I know I'm not the first person to see value in this. But hopefully Atomic's BSL-minimizing innovation will stimulate some energy and conversation around this topic.
 

Philpug

Notorious P.U.G.
Admin
SkiTalk Tester
Joined
Nov 1, 2015
Posts
42,624
Location
Reno, eNVy
The Fischer and other scanning machines are again a point of reference. they cannot sensce soft tissue There are many times, on both ends of the spectum where I have a foot that has a lot of fatty tissue, that the foot can be poured into a boot that you would never think it would work in, @Andy Mink is almsot in this category. If we put his foot under the scanner, I am sure the head Raptor,the boot he is is, would not be a choice. On the other end is someone who has a very boney foot and cannot stand the boot touching their foot at all.
 

Philpug

Notorious P.U.G.
Admin
SkiTalk Tester
Joined
Nov 1, 2015
Posts
42,624
Location
Reno, eNVy
Atomic/Salomon STH2 and Warden MNC bindings have 30mm of heel adjustment. Granted it is a manual adjustment, but nothing over 5mm of length will be automatically compensated for by any binding (to my knowledge).
There are some "tab adjustment bindings" that might have close to 5mm from one end of the range to the other. The other is demo or system bindings that you might have that you might be in the correct range. But I would still want to fine tune to make sure it is ideal. I do want to stress this...Not having the correct forward pressure is probabaly a bigger culprit to prerelease than having the settings too light.
 

ScottB

Making fresh tracks
Skier
SkiTalk Supporter
Joined
Oct 29, 2016
Posts
2,166
Location
Gloucester, MA
One implication of these variable BSLs - They're making me seriously consider demo bindings, which I've never done. If I had a Hawx Ultra in 26.5 (300BSL) for off piste days and, say, a Nordica frontside boot in 27.5 (315mm I would think) for groomer days, there's no way I can make it work on a single pair of skis with conventional bindings

I have the exact situation you describe and it's very easy to make it work. I adjust the heel for the boot BSL I am using that day and go ski. No big deal. If you are worried about your midsole mark of the boot being different, with a fixed toe placement, maybe a factor. My two boots are so different, atomic hawk ultra Xtd and Lange rs140, that I don't notice a midsole shift. The BSL difference will be small and your foot location relative to the toe of the boot might be the same? Hard to know exactly since two different model boots. BTW I think my BSL difference is about 6 mm.

There are lots of bindings on the market with moveable toes if you are sure it will be an issue for you. Not all are demo bindings, but most are. Head PRD as an example.
 

SBrown

So much better than a pro
Skier
Contributor
SkiTalk Supporter
Joined
Nov 8, 2015
Posts
7,847
Location
Colorado
I hate hate hate the term "sizing down" or more commonly "downsizing". I prefer right sizing. Right sizing is matching the shape of the foot to the shape of the shell. Now, if you want to talk about "performance fit" that is also more accurate that downsizing.

Another thing to take into consideration is shell material, many of these lighter materials allow for thinner walls in the shell. So a thin walled boot that is 296mm will have more interior length than a similar shell size that is a more traditional PU plastic. We are also seeing brands like Atomic making their shells shorter and more efficient. @onenerdykid can expand more here but a 25.5 Hawks Ultra is 290mm where most other 25.5 shells are 295 to 300mm (yes the Raptor is 293mm).

Yeah I just went into an Atomic boot; have been in 24.5s for the past 7 or 8 years, mostly Lange but some Tecnica in there, but my toenails just can't take it anymore. Even with stretching the toe box, they just weren't staying long enough. The Atomic 25.5 (Ultra XTD 120) gives me the extra toe room but seems pretty similar in the ankle to what I have been in. It's a tad roomy, but no different than anything else that isn't a plug boot. aka, I will probably need new liners after another 20 days. Love the boots so far ... a review is forthcoming, except for the whole season-ending-early thing. But I was happy enough after two days in them that I took them on a three-day cat trip with no backup.
 

Paul Lutes

Making fresh tracks
Skier
Joined
Jun 6, 2016
Posts
2,610
The Fischer and other scanning machines are again a point of reference. they cannot sensce soft tissue There are many times, on both ends of the spectum where I have a foot that has a lot of fatty tissue, that the foot can be poured into a boot that you would never think it would work in, @Andy Mink is almsot in this category. If we put his foot under the scanner, I am sure the head Raptor,the boot he is is, would not be a choice. On the other end is someone who has a very boney foot and cannot stand the boot touching their foot at all.

Ha! Andy is fat-footed!
 

Andy Mink

Everyone loves spring skiing but not in January
Moderator
SkiTalk Tester
SkiTalk Supporter
Joined
Nov 12, 2015
Posts
12,911
Location
Reno
The Fischer and other scanning machines are again a point of reference. they cannot sensce soft tissue There are many times, on both ends of the spectum where I have a foot that has a lot of fatty tissue, that the foot can be poured into a boot that you would never think it would work in, @Andy Mink is almsot in this category. If we put his foot under the scanner, I am sure the head Raptor,the boot he is is, would not be a choice. On the other end is someone who has a very boney foot and cannot stand the boot touching their foot at all.
Just a note, I ski the Raptor in a 27.5. I was able to ski in the Roxa R3 130 in a 26.5 and was pretty comfy. A little more work and it would have been perfect. I was able to get my foot in a Nordica HF110 rear entry in a 25.5. It wasn't too comfy but I could have skied it. The best size is the on that fits well, regardless of what the sticker says.
 
Thread Starter
TS
chopchop

chopchop

so many skis, so little time
Skier
Joined
Apr 1, 2020
Posts
325
Location
Too far
I have the exact situation you describe and it's very easy to make it work. I adjust the heel for the boot BSL I am using that day and go ski. No big deal. If you are worried about your midsole mark of the boot being different, with a fixed toe placement, maybe a factor. My two boots are so different, atomic hawk ultra Xtd and Lange rs140, that I don't notice a midsole shift. The BSL difference will be small and your foot location relative to the toe of the boot might be the same? Hard to know exactly since two different model boots. BTW I think my BSL difference is about 6 mm.

There are lots of bindings on the market with moveable toes if you are sure it will be an issue for you. Not all are demo bindings, but most are. Head PRD as an example.

Thanks @ScottB. My scenario (as described) is a little different. Instead of 6mm BSL diff it's 15mm, which is more adjustability than trad bindings like Griffon and Pivot (my two current bindings) can handle (or so I thought when I was writing this). Was not aware of that Head model - thanks. I'm not super interested in Baron EPF or other models that have too many moving parts, plastic, and or add height (beyond bare min). What interests me would be bombproof and lowest-possible profile metal tracks (both toe and heel) that allow for adjustment at any time for whatever reason (in my scenario, 15mm diff in BSL between boots). This product may exist (or may have in the past). I just haven't seen it, other than Tyrolia attack (which I have never tried). Given Atomic's shrinkage of BSL (a cool thing, overall, at least as far as weight) a binding with these capabilities seems to be more relevant than before. Could also be that this topic is just my personal hobbyhorse :)
 
Last edited:
Thread Starter
TS
chopchop

chopchop

so many skis, so little time
Skier
Joined
Apr 1, 2020
Posts
325
Location
Too far
Just a note, I ski the Raptor in a 27.5. I was able to ski in the Roxa R3 130 in a 26.5 and was pretty comfy. A little more work and it would have been perfect. I was able to get my foot in a Nordica HF110 rear entry in a 25.5. It wasn't too comfy but I could have skied it. The best size is the on that fits well, regardless of what the sticker says.

Totally agree with you, @Andy Mink. As the OP, my original point for posting was to ID those mfgs/models where sizing down (sorry, Phil) is possible/likely without lots of mods and mfgs/models where there's no chance. I'm just trying to order in the boot sizes most likely to fit me for any given model. If I lived in Denver or SLC I probably would not have posted this - I'd be in the shops :) (at least after this CV stuff blows over).

Thanks for sharing these details.
 

Mike Thomas

Whiteroom
Industry Insider
Joined
Nov 12, 2015
Posts
1,194
Thanks @ScottB. My scenario (as described) is a little different. Instead of 6mm BSL diff it's 15mm, which is more adjustability than trad bindings like Griffon and Pivot (my two current bindings) can handle.

It doesn't have to adjust 15mm, mount in the middle- say at 308mm, all you need then is 8mm of adjustment. Even the Pivot can manage that. This isn't as complex as you are making it.
 
Thread Starter
TS
chopchop

chopchop

so many skis, so little time
Skier
Joined
Apr 1, 2020
Posts
325
Location
Too far
It doesn't have to adjust 15mm, mount in the middle- say at 308mm, all you need then is 8mm of adjustment. Even the Pivot can manage that. This isn't as complex as you are making it.

That's very possible @Mike Thomas - I appreciate your directness. Did not realize the Pivot can manage a 15MM (total) adjustment (or +/-7.5mm). Everything I have been reading suggests otherwise.
 

Philpug

Notorious P.U.G.
Admin
SkiTalk Tester
Joined
Nov 1, 2015
Posts
42,624
Location
Reno, eNVy
That's very possible @Mike Thomas - I appreciate your directness. Did not realize the Pivot can manage a 15MM (total) adjustment (or +/-7.5mm). Everything I have been reading suggests otherwise.
No, he said a Pivot can handle 8mm. ;)
 

otto

Out on the slopes
Masterfit Bootfitter
Joined
Sep 17, 2016
Posts
364
Myth, rumor, and innuendo are no way to go through life...

The sole length in mm and the amount of room inside the ski boot do not follow any rules and regulations.
( Including mondopoint, which is a mm measurement that should correlate to the length of the foot against the interior length of the ski boot shell and liner) The comments out here about thin wall, versus normal wall, versus shorter BSL versus longer BSL are not standards or in some cases even real. But it is sure fun to speculate and dream and what if, and just make up your own parameters that you believe the boot manufacturers are actually doing.

Why is it ok to write stuff out here, that is not provable or disprovable on the internet, in a ski shop, with human eyes or computerized scanning eyes. If one more member tells his or her questionable story about what they say they measure and what size boot they ski comfortably in, I am going to pull out all of my hair ( haha, the jokes on you, I am f#*king bald!!! )

Your "downsized", "right sized" boot fits you because it fits you. It does not matter what the box or boot has printed on it, and it does not matter what measured size you think you are!!!!

This brings the argument back to the massive failing of this business or art of boot fitting back to the key premise, which is that there are so few skis shops with a competent boot fitter working there that understands any of what I have written above. And by default, having the knowledge base spewing fiction and speculation into the market is the main reason why so many skiers are skiing in boots that neither match their foot and leg shape, match their ankle range of motion, and match the flex to properly control their skis on the snow.

If it wasn't hard enough to understand this stuff to begin with as an end user that has the boot on your foot, being told half truths by ski shop employees and helpful souls on a ski boot information super highway, like this forum, then does it get any easier when the manufacturers refuse to be realistic about what it takes to build boots that fit properly and could be sold accurately by size, volume, and flex. Using Andy Minks example, does Roxa believe they will leverage themselves into an already chaotic market by building a boot that says it's a 26.5, yet somehow fits him like his 27.5 Head Raptor??? Somewhere between reality and Andy Minks foot lies the truth.

What is my point? My point is that there have been some very interesting comments made out here, and very few points that are made on the factual task of how ski boots are actually designed, manufactured, and delivered into the market. Meaning that there are forces at work in this business that are purely developed on profitability, and gaming the market to increase share.

Other takeaways... There is a very high percentage chance that neither the manufacturer or the ski boot fitter (even with electronic scanning ) is doing anything more than guessing what boot to pull off the shelf and try on your feet. I will go out on a limb and say that there is a higher probability that you are looking at the 20/80 rule versus the 80/20 rule in terms of where this process is being done well. Case in point... The group that is out here on these forums are the aficionado's, the cognoscenti, you are the ones that at some point have made on your own or with the help of your boot fitting spiritual guide the choice to find a ski boot that is the correct size, shape, performance angles and flex to help you be the best skier you can be. You all know how hard it was to get you in the right boot. How many tries? How many grinds and punches? How many after market liners? How many different fitters? How frustrated were you? Now go outside your own experience as an educated seeker of the boot fitting truth, how difficult it must be for the average skier out there that knows a fraction of what you have learned. The way the the suppliers of boots and the hands on fitters of boots treat the average ski consumer is ridiculously low ball and low end, considering how hard it is to perfect the perfect turn in all terrain and all conditions.

Use your feet as the jig, and your mind as the equalizer that gets you off the impossible to fit feet train... and stop obsessing about the what if they only made a boot that does "X" whatever the f@#k "X" is...
 
Last edited:

François Pugh

Skiing the powder
Skier
Joined
Nov 17, 2015
Posts
7,617
Location
Great White North (Eastern side currently)
Myth, rumor, and innuendo are no way to go through life...

The sole length in mm and the amount of room inside the ski boot do not follow any rules and regulations.
( Including mondopoint, which is a mm measurement that should correlate to the length of the foot against the interior length of the ski boot shell and liner) The comments out here about thin wall, versus normal wall, versus shorter BSL versus longer BSL are not standards or in some cases even real. But it is sure fun to speculate and dream and what if, and just make up your own parameters that you believe the boot manufacturers are actually doing.

Why is it ok to write stuff out here, that is not provable or disprovable on the internet, in a ski shop, with human eyes or computerized scanning eyes. If one more member tells his or her questionable story about what they say they measure and what size boot they ski comfortably in, I am going to pull out all of my hair ( haha, the jokes on you, I am f#*king bald!!! )

Your "downsized", "right sized" boot fits you because it fits you. It does not matter what the box or boot has printed on it, and it does not matter what measured size you think you are!!!!

This brings the argument back to the massive failing of this business or art of boot fitting back to the key premise, which is that there are so few skis shops with a competent boot fitter working there that understands any of what I have written above. And by default, having the knowledge base spewing fiction and speculation into the market is the main reason why so many skiers are skiing in boos that neither match their foot and leg shape, match their ankle range of motion, and match the flex to properly control their skis on the snow.

If it wasn't hard enough to understand this stuff to begin with as an end user that has the boot on your foot, being told half truths by ski shop employees and helpful souls on a ski boot information super highway, like this forum, then does it get any easier when the manufacturers refuse to be realistic about what it takes to build boots that fit properly and could be sold accurately by size, volume, and flex. Using Andy Minks example, does Roxa believe they will leverage themselves into an already chaotic market by building a boot that says it's a 26.5, yet somehow fits him like his 27.5 Head Raptor??? Somewhere between reality and Andy Minks foot lies the truth.

What is my point? My point is that there have been some very interesting comments made out here, and very few points that are made on the factual task of how ski boots are actually designed, manufactured, and delivered into the market. Meaning that there are forces at work in this business that are purely developed on profitability, and gaming the market to increase share.

Other takeaways... There is a very high percentage chance that neither the manufacturer or the ski boot fitter (even with electronic scanning ) is doing anything more than guessing what boot to pull off the shelf and try on your feet. I will go out on a limb and say that there is a higher probability that you are looking at the 20/80 rule versus the 80/20 rule in terms of where this process is being done well. Case in point... The group that is out here on these forums are the aficionado's, the cognoscenti, you are the ones that at some point have made on your own or with the help of your boot fitting spiritual guide the choice to find a ski boot that is the correct size, shape, performance angles and flex to help you be the best skier you can be. You all know how hard it was to get you in the right boot. How many tries? How many grinds and punches? How many after market liners? How many different fitters? How frustrated were you? Now go outside your own experience as an educated seeker of the boot fitting truth, how difficult it must be for the average skier out there that knows a fraction of what you have learned. The way the the suppliers of boots and the hands on fitters of boots treat the average ski consumer is ridiculously low ball and low end, considering how hard it is to perfect the perfect turn in all terrain and all conditions.

Use your feet as the jig, and your mind as the equalizer that gets you off the impossible to fit feet train... and stop obsessing about the what if they only made a boot that does "X" whatever the f@#k "X" is...
That's why I've arrived at the conclusion: don't shop for a good ski boot; shop for a good ski boot fitter.
 

ScottB

Making fresh tracks
Skier
SkiTalk Supporter
Joined
Oct 29, 2016
Posts
2,166
Location
Gloucester, MA
Just FYI Otto, one of the posters here is the head of Atomics ski boot division. He has done a series of pod casts on ski boots and I have listened to them all. I am an R&D engineer with lots of plastic design experience and I can guarantee you he knows what he is talking about. I do agree you have to filter all internet information and it helps if you have some subject knowledge to start with.
 

WildBillD

Booting up
Skier
Joined
Oct 21, 2018
Posts
60
question:
I will definetly be looking to get a tighter fit, and will be changing my boot size from 315mm to 305mm(27.5 ->26.5). Can I do this without redrilling my flat mounted skis.? The bindings are head(tyrolia?) all track 14's? and an another older pair with look bindings. We are talking about moving the binding by about 3/8 inch.
I will take skis to a shop, but want to avoid redrilling.
 

Sponsor

Staff online

Top