# Burton FAQs is total crap



## Radialhead (Jan 3, 2018)

Technically they're right, that is what most people do...


----------



## Left-Moment (Jan 17, 2020)

Radialhead said:


> Technically they're right, that is what most people do...


Yes they are but it's bad advice and I think people are looking for some guidance not what others are doing.


----------



## Radialhead (Jan 3, 2018)

Left-Moment said:


> Yes they are but it's bad advice and I think people are looking for some guidance not what others are doing.


Sure, but it's a lost cause. I've tried to explain how boots are supposed to fit in a Facebook group a few times & people just laugh or call me an idiot. <shrug>

I do wonder about Burton sizing though. I've got a pair of 28.0 Burtons & 27.5 Northwaves & they fit the same. Even the footbeds are exactly the same length. The Burtons have maybe 15 days on them & were heat-moulded so it's not just that they haven't packed out. The Northwaves only have a few days. If I was to buy some new Burtons online, I'd start with 28.0 for that reason, even though I know I'm mondo 27.5 (longest foot 273mm).


----------



## Left-Moment (Jan 17, 2020)

Radialhead said:


> Sure, but it's a lost cause. I've tried to explain how boots are supposed to fit in a Facebook group a few times & people just laugh or call me an idiot. <shrug>
> 
> I do wonder about Burton sizing though. I've got a pair of 28.0 Burtons & 27.5 Northwaves & they fit the same. Even the footbeds are exactly the same length. The Burtons have maybe 15 days on them & were heat-moulded so it's not just that they haven't packed out. The Northwaves only have a few days. If I was to buy some new Burtons online, I'd start with 28.0 for that reason, even though I know I'm mondo 27.5 (longest foot 273mm).


Hmmm this is my dilemma at the moment. I need a 2E fitting and so only burton do that but the mondo 30s seem so tight that I'm not convinced that they're not just coming up a bit small. Seems some have said this about burtons in the past. The boot shrinkage tech could be something to do with it, but rather than being tech they've just made the boot a bit smaller. They don't do 30.5 mondo either as then I'd be golden (my feet are 298mm exactly).


----------



## Radialhead (Jan 3, 2018)

Yeah I remember your thread. My view is that if I was desperate to have a specific boot that wasn't available in my size, I'd find out which shell size was the best fit & then use either a thin or thick Imprint liner accordingly. It may not be the technically correct size, but it'll be closer than all the people out there with oversized boots & cranked-down bindings to compensate.


----------



## Left-Moment (Jan 17, 2020)

Radialhead said:


> Yeah I remember your thread. My view is that if I was desperate to have a specific boot that wasn't available in my size, I'd find out which shell size was the best fit & then use either a thin or thick Imprint liner accordingly. It may not be the technically correct size, but it'll be closer than all the people out there with oversized boots & cranked-down bindings to compensate.


That's interesting I might have to go down that route. In fairness wired seems happy with my size in the burton and I haven't heat molded them so that could make a huge difference but I'm just curious about burton and whether they do come up small, because if that's the case I'm never going to fit comfortably. That said, just put my old k2 maysis on and they were pretty damn uncomfortable.


----------



## ridethecliche (Feb 27, 2019)

Think of it this way, if folks have boots that fit their calves/heels well and size it up a full size, they're not going to get toe bang. If they size some of the other stuff wrong a bit, they're going to complain forever because sizing the same means your toes can now contact the front all else equal.

Ask yourself how many days on mountain their core customer gets and if they're sizing shoes the way we tell people here not to... they'll probably never be uncomfortable since the liners aren't even going to fully break in over that time period. They won't stress the ride enough to even slide around in the boots ya know.


----------



## Left-Moment (Jan 17, 2020)

ridethecliche said:


> Think of it this way, if folks have boots that fit their calves/heels well and size it up a full size, they're not going to get toe bang. If they size some of the other stuff wrong a bit, they're going to complain forever because sizing the same means your toes can now contact the front all else equal.
> 
> Ask yourself how many days on mountain their core customer gets and if they're sizing shoes the way we tell people here not to... they'll probably never be uncomfortable since the liners aren't even going to fully break in over that time period. They won't stress the ride enough to even slide around in the boots ya know.


Yeah that is a fair point. A lot of the reviews of their boots mention how "my toes hit the front so I sized up" so I think you have a fair point there but it is still poor advice for anyone who wants a decent fit and good performance.


----------



## lab49232 (Sep 13, 2011)

Teaching misinformation is the reason the whole problem came about in the first place. If the internet was just FULL of proper fitting instructions it would be second nature and we wouldn't have the boot fitting problems we do. Everyone would just know to size down not up and that toes should touch the end of the boot. But when a million sites suggest thick socks and sizing up, including a reputable brand site like Burton, you create this giant industry issue where you reaffirm people's false beliefs and create a false common knowledge. I don't care who you are or what you sell, instructing people to specifically buy your product improperly sized is a ridiculous concept. It kind of belittles anything you say about design specs, tech features, etc


----------



## Left-Moment (Jan 17, 2020)

lab49232 said:


> Teaching misinformation is the reason the whole problem came about in the first place. If the internet was just FULL of proper fitting instructions it would be second nature and we wouldn't have the boot fitting problems we do. Everyone would just know to size down not up and that toes should touch the end of the boot. But when a million sites suggest thick socks and sizing up, including a reputable brand site like Burton, you create this giant industry issue where you reaffirm people's false beliefs and create a false common knowledge. I don't care who you are or what you sell, instructing people to specifically buy your product improperly sized is a ridiculous concept. It kind of belittles anything you say about design specs, tech features, etc


Yeah like shrinktech when you are suggesting people go for a larger boot than they need, "hey these boots have a footprint of a size 10 even though they are a size 11 but we think you should go for a size 12" You're back to where you started but with bad fitting boots! bloody annoying.


----------



## ridethecliche (Feb 27, 2019)

My point is that a large chunk of their customers won't spend the time in the boots to get past the uncomfortable break in, for them the performance fit is out. If their feet hurt the first few days out they may never ride again. 

Hopefully those same folks will get better input when they get into it and start riding more. That's the part I doubt though and that's unfortunate.


----------



## lab49232 (Sep 13, 2011)

ridethecliche said:


> My point is that a large chunk of their customers won't spend the time in the boots to get past the uncomfortable break in, for them the performance fit is out. If their feet hurt the first few days out they may never ride again.
> 
> Hopefully those same folks will get better input when they get into it and start riding more. That's the part I doubt though and that's unfortunate.


100% understand what you're saying, but those people are conditioned to believe snowboard boots should fit loose and comfortable like a shoe because that's the generally accepted principle. Why do people think that, because we let the industry get to that point. If literally all you saw online was "boots should fit snug and tight and will break in" people would absolutely be more accepting of a comfort fit. People didnt just randomly make up the idea of buying bigger boots and a sock added width, they were taught that through things like Burtons FAQ.

The Idea that Burton went "look people don't care about tech fit and proper equipment so we'll purposely tell them to buy the wrong gear to make our life easier" then has to make you go what else did they take that approach on? They think general consumers are idiots so why should any of their tech suggestions, commentary, etc be accepted as fact vs ways to just pump out mass product to the public that isn't actually the correct item.


----------



## f00bar (Mar 6, 2014)

The reality is for most companies a happy customer is one that isn't complaining. Most people complain when their feet hurt, not when they have some slippage they may not even know enough about to question. People in general balk at tight fitting things on their feet, even if they are properly fit. I'd go so far as to say it's easier to get women properly fitting boots because so many of their shoes are so uncomfortable they are used to it.


----------



## Jennifer Crew (Jan 17, 2019)

f00bar said:


> I'd go so far as to say it's easier to get women properly fitting boots because so many of their shoes are so uncomfortable they are used to it.


There is just less women out there snowboarding. And riding puts lot more effort on your feet than walking. 
I am still trying to figure out my boots. When I started long time ago I was in street size boots. No wonder my little toes were being killed. Had to ride with gel wraps on them. Being cheap, and not knowing any better, it was just pure luck, I bought good Flow boots on ebay that were half size smaller than my street shoes, and what a difference they were.


----------



## Seppuccu (Dec 4, 2012)

Jennifer Crew said:


> There is just less women out there snowboarding. And riding puts lot more effort on your feet than walking.


Does that include walking in 4" stiletto heels with a front section shaped like a wedge?


----------



## Jennifer Crew (Jan 17, 2019)

^^yes, even dancing all night in stillettos. 
Climbing stairs in ones is actually good workout for the legs’ snowboarding muscles.


----------



## Seppuccu (Dec 4, 2012)

I might just have to try that. Just need to find a pair in size 11. ^^


----------



## F1EA (Oct 25, 2013)

Not everyone is out there looking to maximize 'performance'. Most people would rather be comfortable.


----------



## lab49232 (Sep 13, 2011)

F1EA said:


> Not everyone is out there looking to maximize 'performance'. Most people would rather be comfortable.


Very true but that doesn't mean you as a tech, progression, and industry-leading brand have your fit page give out not just preference tips but straight lies about how to fit a boot. That's the point. WE ALL GET WHY. None of us need that explained. Why not take board weight out and just tell them to size by chin? When they say their new core is more responsive or lighter or is best for big lines why do I believe that when they already lie about other tech to make customer service easier?

You wanna go "for a relaxed comfort based fit go with A but for designed performance and response use method B" at least then you're not lying to your customer and creating a massive industry wide problem and completely destroying your marketing credibility.


----------



## F1EA (Oct 25, 2013)

lab49232 said:


> Very true but that doesn't mean you as a tech, progression, and industry-leading brand have your fit page give out not just preference tips but straight lies about how to fit a boot. That's the point. WE ALL GET WHY. None of us need that explained. Why not take board weight out and just tell them to size by chin? When they say their new core is more responsive or lighter or is best for big lines why do I believe that when they already lie about other tech to make customer service easier?
> 
> You wanna go "for a relaxed comfort based fit go with A but for designed performance and response use method B" at least then you're not lying to your customer and creating a massive industry wide problem and completely destroying your marketing credibility.


Nah


----------



## Seppuccu (Dec 4, 2012)

While we're at it. Copy-pasted from rossignol website:

"Generally, a snowboard is chosen according to a rider's weight, ability and riding style. A shorter snowboard will be more manageable and easier to maneuver – great for beginners, lighterweight, or more freestyle-oriented riders. A longer snowboard will be faster and more stable – great for heavier, more advanced, or aggressive freeriders.
For more freestyle-oriented performance: size between your shoulder and chin.
For more freeride-oriented performance: size between your chin and nose or above."
?


----------



## Snow Hound (Jul 21, 2012)

Seppuccu said:


> While we're at it. Copy-pasted from rossignol website:
> 
> "Generally, a snowboard is chosen according to a rider's weight, ability and riding style. A shorter snowboard will be more manageable and easier to maneuver – great for beginners, lighterweight, or more freestyle-oriented riders. A longer snowboard will be faster and more stable – great for heavier, more advanced, or aggressive freeriders.
> For more freestyle-oriented performance: size between your shoulder and chin.
> For more freeride-oriented performance: size between your chin and nose or above."


Ha I'm reading this thinking yes this is spot on then...


----------



## F1EA (Oct 25, 2013)

Snow Hound said:


> Ha I'm reading this thinking yes this is spot on then...


My boards all measure between my shoulders and nose.
?


----------



## Seppuccu (Dec 4, 2012)

F1EA said:


> My boards all measure between my shoulders and nose.
> ?


It's because you're such an average Joe, F1EA. 

Mine don't. My short fat goes below my shoulders.  And I haven't owned a single board that's gone above my chin. But then again, I _am_ a #slimjim...


----------



## neni (Dec 24, 2012)

Seppuccu said:


> It's because you're such an average Joe, F1EA.
> 
> Mine don't. My short fat goes below my shoulders.  And I haven't owned a single board that's gone above my chin. But then again, I _am_ a #slimjim...


Mine don't neither. I'm a slimjane and my boards are above nose . Do here we go, there's a left and right of the bell-curve.
However, I agree that the chin-nose shortcut method has its validity, as average joe DOES fit in the weight range of average all-mtn board. The ones far off the bell curve in VMI and preferences will have to find out by trial and error. By time, one will know what one likes ?‍♀


----------



## F1EA (Oct 25, 2013)

Seppuccu said:


> It's because you're such an average Joe, F1EA.
> 
> Mine don't. My short fat goes below my shoulders.  And I haven't owned a single board that's gone above my chin. But then again, I _am_ a #slimjim...


Yup. Average everything. Size M even haha
The downside is I have to buy stuff soon or else things my size sell out...

But even being taller.... if taller than avg, then a board that's a bit longer than what's precisely rated for your weight will be fine too. People say only weight matters... or that 'your snowboard can't tell how tall you are'... that's rubbish. Both are important.


----------



## Seppuccu (Dec 4, 2012)

At the risk of stating the obvious, the snowboard knows neither your weight nor your height. It only knows the forces you exert on it. I think stance width (defines where you push onto the board) and foot size (affects torque) are more important than height. Height will of course also affect the torque a bit, as well as how far you shift your weight back and forth, but not to the same extent as the two other factors.

Anyways, I'm sure this has all been discussed in excruciating detail numerous times before...


----------

