This is the World Famous TelemarkTalk / TelemarkTips / Telemark Francais Forum, by far the most dynamic telemark and backcountry skiing discussion board on the world wide web since 1998. East, West, North, South, Canada, US or Europe, Backcountry or not.
This is the World Famous TelemarkTalk / TelemarkTips / Telemark Francais Forum, by far the most dynamic telemark and backcountry skiing discussion board on the world wide web since 1998. East, West, North, South, Canada, US or Europe, Backcountry or not.
Real reviews by real skiers. What a concept! Add your own today. Reviews only please, questions can be posted as replies but new threads looking for opinions should be posted to the main Telemark Talk Forum.
That was Krakus. Im thinking to give the Alfas a go. I've had pretty good luck so far with sizing online. The 1600s were tolerable, but I think I could actually fit into a 44 if they were wider which tends to cause issues with improper creasing I think.
*edit: according to Alfa's charts I'm still a 45. (I rechecked my foot measurement and actually I'm 27.5 so that puts me solidly in the size 45 bracket, especially with the added 1.5 cm.) Anyway I apologize for the thread drift.
Peope with large-volume feet often have an instep measurement that is longer than their foot length, and should use their instep length when sizing footwear.
My instep circumference is equal or slightly larger than foot lenght, so that is rather towards large volume? In there any page about footwear sizing that considers these aspects, worth reading? Anyway, that points to 43 Alaskas?
That was Krakus. Im thinking to give the Alfas a go. I've had pretty good luck so far with sizing online. The 1600s were tolerable, but I think I could actually fit into a 44 if they were wider which tends to cause issues with improper creasing I think.
*edit: according to Alfa's charts I'm still a 45. (I rechecked my foot measurement and actually I'm 27.5 so that puts me solidly in the size 45 bracket, especially with the added 1.5 cm.) Anyway I apologize for the thread drift.
Sorry about my confusion!
What size are you in the 1600?
Cross-country AND down-hill skiing in the backcountry.
Unashamed to be a "cross-country type" and love skiing down-hill.
Peope with large-volume feet often have an instep measurement that is longer than their foot length, and should use their instep length when sizing footwear.
My instep circumference is equal or slightly larger than foot lenght, so that is rather towards large volume? In there any page about footwear sizing that considers these aspects, worth reading? Anyway, that points to 43 Alaskas?
Yes- I think you would be more comfortable in a size 43 Alaska-
you can add a thicker insole if you end up with too much volume in the forefoot.
My instep measurement is shorter than my foot length- I have a small-volume foot (don't know if this corelation is universal....)
My wife's foot is large-volume- her instep measurement is longer than her foot measurement-
she would fit in a size 40 Alaska in terms of length, but the size 41 is much better due to boot volume.
Cross-country AND down-hill skiing in the backcountry.
Unashamed to be a "cross-country type" and love skiing down-hill.
That was Krakus. Im thinking to give the Alfas a go. I've had pretty good luck so far with sizing online. The 1600s were tolerable, but I think I could actually fit into a 44 if they were wider which tends to cause issues with improper creasing I think.
*edit: according to Alfa's charts I'm still a 45. (I rechecked my foot measurement and actually I'm 27.5 so that puts me solidly in the size 45 bracket, especially with the added 1.5 cm.) Anyway I apologize for the thread drift.
Sorry about my confusion!
What size are you in the 1600?
I'm a 45 in the BC 1600. I was thinking based on others' statements to downsize to a 44 (I actually have a pair of Norwegian military boots made by Alfa in 44, and they have plenty of room), but based on Alfa's chart and my mondo size, I should be in a 45.
Im thinking to give the Alfas a go. I've had pretty good luck so far with sizing online. The 1600s were tolerable, but I think I could actually fit into a 44 if they were wider which tends to cause issues with improper creasing I think.
*edit: according to Alfa's charts I'm still a 45. (I rechecked my foot measurement and actually I'm 27.5 so that puts me solidly in the size 45 bracket, especially with the added 1.5 cm.) Anyway I apologize for the thread drift.
Hmmm...
If you could fit in a 1600 size 44EU- but want/need a size 45 for width- then I would think that a size 44 Alfa Guard would be ideal...
Cross-country AND down-hill skiing in the backcountry.
Unashamed to be a "cross-country type" and love skiing down-hill.
Im thinking to give the Alfas a go. I've had pretty good luck so far with sizing online. The 1600s were tolerable, but I think I could actually fit into a 44 if they were wider which tends to cause issues with improper creasing I think.
*edit: according to Alfa's charts I'm still a 45. (I rechecked my foot measurement and actually I'm 27.5 so that puts me solidly in the size 45 bracket, especially with the added 1.5 cm.) Anyway I apologize for the thread drift.
Hmmm...
If you could fit in a 1600 size 44EU- but want/need a size 45 for width- then I would think that a size 44 Alfa Guard would be ideal...
This seems to be the case. Unfortunately, there's no way to try them first since REI isn't stocking them right now.
My first post here ... and mostly starting my XCD life experience - a shame that I did not discovered it earlier :)
I have wide foot so as I understand alfa boot would fit me better ... but due to availably I went with Alpina Alaska.
In my case, 46 is a good sizing for width (without socks my foot is already slightly larger than insoles), but 45 would be much better for length.
My more general question would be:
with this boots which is relatively stiff and that I guess will not give much in width (as opposed to softer or running shoes) is it better to use thigh shoes in width with a good length or have a proper fit in width but a too long boot ?
My first post here ... and mostly starting my XCD life experience - a shame that I did not discovered it earlier :)
Keep skiing and join us here and tell us of your ski experiences! What ski(s) are you using with your Alaska?
I have wide foot so as I understand alfa boot would fit me better ... but due to availably I went with Alpina Alaska.
In my case, 46 is a good sizing for width (without socks my foot is already slightly larger than insoles), but 45 would be much better for length.
This makes sense and is consistent with my and others' experience with this boot. Are you getting any toe pinch from the longish boot?
My more general question would be:
with this boots which is relatively stiff and that I guess will not give much in width (as opposed to softer or running shoes) is it better to use thigh shoes in width with a good length or have a proper fit in width but a too long boot ?
thanks a lot in advance!
Having a slightly too long boot may be just fine-
Do you have a low-volume or large-volume foot?
If you have a low-volume foot, you might need/want a thicker insole in the longish boot to take up some volume.
Gareth
Cross-country AND down-hill skiing in the backcountry.
Unashamed to be a "cross-country type" and love skiing down-hill.
:)
