New Posts All Forums:Forum Nav: Rossignol BC 125: 165 length too short for 5'-11" & 150 pound guy?

This is the World Famous TelemarkTalk / TelemarkTips Forum, by far the most dynamic telemark and backcountry skiing discussion board on the world wide web. We have fun here, come on in and be a part of it.
User avatar
MikeK

Rank: XCD KNIGHT
XCD KNIGHT
Posts: 3516
Joined: Tue Sep 23, 2014 2:12 pm

Re: New Posts All Forums:Forum Nav: Rossignol BC 125: 165 length too short for 5'-11" & 150 pound guy?

Postby MikeK » Tue Feb 07, 2017 9:37 am

1/0

GLB

Rank: XCD Enthusiast
XCD Enthusiast
Posts: 80
Joined: Sat Aug 27, 2016 6:24 pm

Re: New Posts All Forums:Forum Nav: Rossignol BC 125: 165 length too short for 5'-11" & 150 pound guy?

Postby GLB » Wed Feb 08, 2017 6:44 pm

by lowangle al » Mon Feb 06, 2017 5:15 pm

I hope it's still good for you down there GLB, high winds and warm temps put the damper on things here. I took the xc skis out and hit the groomed trails here for lack of a better option. It was fun and I even made a few turns.


It's been clear and cold. No new snow for about two weeks but about 3.5 ft on the ground.

phoenix

Rank: XCD Enthusiast
XCD Enthusiast
Posts: 59
Joined: Mon Jan 02, 2017 6:44 pm

Re: New Posts All Forums:Forum Nav: Rossignol BC 125: 165 length too short for 5'-11" & 150 pound guy?

Postby phoenix » Tue Feb 21, 2017 3:11 am

lilcliffy wrote:
phoenix wrote:When all is said and done... for "transportation"... it probably ain't gonna matter much. Except you'll get a little better grip.

I've skied alongside follks when one was on a ligter fishcale set-up, the other on plastic boots and skins... truth be told: There ain't a whole lot of difference ( on waxless skis).


This is bit of a gross generalisation don't you think? Do you really think a big-mtn heavy plastic kit is going to keep up with a distance-oriented BC-XC kit on the kind of gentle terrain the OP is skiing on? :?:


Certainly a generalisation lilcliffy. There's a page worth of variables and different scenarios which could be compared, and of course a light xc setup would be faster in most cases. I was referring to how, with say a lighter plastic set up, and a middle of the road waxless, when used as "transportation". Which for me brings up those scenarios when the skier is less about kick and glide, and more in a step by step shuffle... more like ski walking.

User avatar
lowangle al

Rank: XCD Guide
XCD Guide
Posts: 613
Joined: Sat Jan 11, 2014 4:36 pm

Re: New Posts All Forums:Forum Nav: Rossignol BC 125: 165 length too short for 5'-11" & 150 pound guy?

Postby lowangle al » Wed Feb 22, 2017 7:26 pm

My experience is that when I'm in leather boots and a wax ski and my wife is in T2s and vector bc I don't have to wait for her anymore than if she was wearing her leather boots with a wax ski. One day last week end I had to catch her.

My leather boots, merril ultras or asolo extremes are much more substantial than your typical xcd boot. I have definately noticed that xcd people have been passing us out lately. Probably due to more to the gear than the 30 year age difference.

Fishnaked

Rank: XCD Enthusiast
XCD Enthusiast
Posts: 46
Joined: Thu Jan 05, 2017 9:55 pm

Re: New Posts All Forums:Forum Nav: Rossignol BC 125: 165 length too short for 5'-11" & 150 pound guy?

Postby Fishnaked » Fri Aug 25, 2017 9:20 am

It's been a while. Since I last posted, I skied into my yurt one more time with the BC 125s and old Alpina 1550s. The boots are size 42 and a touch snug...and they don't keep my feet dry or terribly warm.

For now, my focus is back on transportation, not making turns. I found a pair of lightly used BCX 6s, size 42, I may be able to get for around $50. Thoughts......for that price?
boot.jpg

User avatar
lilcliffy

Rank: XCD KNIGHT
XCD KNIGHT
Posts: 1325
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2015 7:20 pm
Location: Stanley, New Brunswick, Canada

Re: New Posts All Forums:Forum Nav: Rossignol BC 125: 165 length too short for 5'-11" & 150 pound guy?

Postby lilcliffy » Fri Aug 25, 2017 9:36 am

I own this exact boot in a size 43EU.

To date- it is the most supportive XC boot I have ever tested. It is also warm- but it does not breathe at all- I would reluctant to take it on a multi-day trek- I don't know how I would keep them dry...

I cannot use these boots anymore because the tough synthetic material in the metatarsal-flex zone pinches my foot. The first year I owned these boots I put about 60 days of mileage on them- by the end my feet were so sore from being pinched, that it took 3 months for them to properly heal. (Though it did prompt me to invest in my Alpina Alaskas which are so comfortable that they helped my feet heal).

I have read a number of reviews online describing the same painful experience with this generation of BCX6- it seems to be much worse for skiers with low-volume feet...If you have a large-volume foot you might be okay...

Fischer ended up replacing the problem section with leather construction- my close skiing friend has the next generation BCX6 (brown) with the leather base. He too has low-volume feet- the pinching problem was corrected. But- the next generation (brown) has a different lacing system above the ankle and it is not as supportive as this one (grey).

$50 is a very good price- it is an expensive XC boot...If you have a large volume foot they might be perfect.
The pursuit of XCD balance: cross-country AND down-hill skiing in the backcountry

Fishnaked

Rank: XCD Enthusiast
XCD Enthusiast
Posts: 46
Joined: Thu Jan 05, 2017 9:55 pm

Re: New Posts All Forums:Forum Nav: Rossignol BC 125: 165 length too short for 5'-11" & 150 pound guy?

Postby Fishnaked » Fri Aug 25, 2017 10:57 am

Thanks for your thoughtful reply. I'm trying to imagine getting pinched on metatarsal-flex zone. I'm no anatomy expert but isn't that on the bottom of your foot?

I'd never thought of my feet being large volume but I'm not sure. They have widened and become more muscular these last several yrs from going barefoot so much and wearing roomy "barefoot" shoes and sandals. The rest of my frame is slender though...so I'm guessing my feet would be considered that too.

All that said, I have also found a pair of Alaskas for $170, new. Still though, to a penny pincher like me, that's a lot of money, comparatively speaking.

User avatar
lilcliffy

Rank: XCD KNIGHT
XCD KNIGHT
Posts: 1325
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2015 7:20 pm
Location: Stanley, New Brunswick, Canada

Re: New Posts All Forums:Forum Nav: Rossignol BC 125: 165 length too short for 5'-11" & 150 pound guy?

Postby lilcliffy » Fri Aug 25, 2017 11:25 am

I may not be using the correct terminology- but I am referring to the primary flex point on the sole of the foot- the flex point at the "ball-of-foot"- where the metatarsal bones flex at your toes (or "phalanges").

Nordic skiing is fundamentally based on the boot and binding allowing a natural walking flex at the ball-of-foot (or what I called "metatarsal flex" :ugeek: :oops: )- this flex is critical for both XC skiing and performing a telemark turn.

The tough synthetic material of that model of BCX6 will form a crease and literally crush your foot- if your foot does not adequately fill the boot (i.e. is low volume).

I did try a high-volume insole to try and solve the problem, but I had already done too much damage and my feet were too sore...

They remain an excellent boot- I lend them out to friends and family when they ski with us. I have a couple of friends that find this boot to fit very well.

That is a great price on the Alaska.

I can very much relate to limited cash flow...
The pursuit of XCD balance: cross-country AND down-hill skiing in the backcountry

Fishnaked

Rank: XCD Enthusiast
XCD Enthusiast
Posts: 46
Joined: Thu Jan 05, 2017 9:55 pm

Re: New Posts All Forums:Forum Nav: Rossignol BC 125: 165 length too short for 5'-11" & 150 pound guy?

Postby Fishnaked » Fri Aug 25, 2017 5:58 pm

Thanks for the info.

While I have you, or anyone else....as I mentioned before, my Alpina 1550s are size 42 and a bit on the snug side. The Alaskas I can get for $170 are size 43. Theoretically, the fit should be great....but, it seems I read somewhere where the Alaskas are a looser fit which causes me to wonder if the 43 might be too big. I can send them back if the fit isn't right but thought I'd ask for opinions here first.

User avatar
lilcliffy

Rank: XCD KNIGHT
XCD KNIGHT
Posts: 1325
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2015 7:20 pm
Location: Stanley, New Brunswick, Canada

Re: New Posts All Forums:Forum Nav: Rossignol BC 125: 165 length too short for 5'-11" & 150 pound guy?

Postby lilcliffy » Fri Aug 25, 2017 6:46 pm

Where are the 1550s snug- length? Width? Ankles? Calves?
The pursuit of XCD balance: cross-country AND down-hill skiing in the backcountry


Return to “Telemark Talk Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], Google [Bot], lilcliffy and 7 guests