remember Hanson boots?
TxSkier
think) in the seventies.....whatever happened to them after Daiwa bought
them out in the early 80's?
Dan
TxS...@aol.com
Daniel Warren
I had 2 pairs. Skied in them for better than 10 years. Several years ago I
was told they nolonger met DIN standards since they were 2 half shells
joined together down the middle. After sitting in my garage for several
years I chucked them.
SkipSunRvr
>Does anyone out there remember Hanson boots (the first rear entry boot, I
>think) in the seventies.....whatever happened to them after Daiwa bought
>them out in the early 80's?
I believe that the boot continued for quite a while in Japan (for all I
know, it's still being used there). But it hasn't appeared in the US
market for over a decade. Much better stuff available now, anyway.
I had a pair.. arguably the most comfortable ski boot I ever had (until I
had them waxed the second time). But the WORST to ski. Almost impossible
to have a good neutral stance on them, which is how they taught a
generation of skiers to ski with their weight on their tails. The boot was
damned heavy, too. .
I was working as a patroller when I had them (mid-'70's), and I *will*
say they had one major virtue: It was the easiest boot to remove from a
skier with a lower leg fracture, because you could literally take them
apart down the middle with a phillips head screwdriver and an allen
wrench. Lots easier than removing conventional overlap boots... other
than that, good riddance.
Skip King
Sunday River Ski Resort
Bjgruber
rubber liners disintegrated with time may have contributed to their
demise.
Ron Drobes
which came with them in order to "slide" them on my feet.
They were probably "ahead" of their time, which contributed to their demise
Bjgruber (bjgr...@aol.com) wrote:
: I remember them fondly but can't answer your question. The fact the foam
: rubber liners disintegrated with time may have contributed to their
: demise.
--
Dennis Summerbell
(SkipSunRvr) wrote:
> On 29 June, txskier@ aol.com wrote:
>
> >Does anyone out there remember Hanson boots (the first rear entry boot, I
> >think) in the seventies.....whatever happened to them after Daiwa bought
> >them out in the early 80's?
>
>
> I had a pair.. arguably the most comfortable ski boot I ever had (until I
> had them waxed the second time). But the WORST to ski. Almost impossible
> to have a good neutral stance on them, which is how they taught a
> generation of skiers to ski with their weight on their tails. The boot was
> damned heavy, too. .
>
> I was working as a patroller when I had them (mid-'70's), and I *will*
> say they had one major virtue: It was the easiest boot to remove from a
> skier with a lower leg fracture, because you could literally take them
> apart down the middle with a phillips head screwdriver and an allen
> wrench. Lots easier than removing conventional overlap boots... other
Sorry, but my wife is still skiing in Hansons. She spent two or three
years after thay had officially disappeared begging left-over odds and
ends from any ski shop we encountered. periodically I had to re-engineer a
customised model from the bits. The sole and boot on the later models does
match the DIN standard, its identical to and has the same guide markings
as my Salomons. This is very useful for us as we can change skiis quickly
without adjustment to anything except the main release settings.
Alas this winter was probably the Hanson's last season, I've run out of
pairs of bits. Anyone any recommendations on a similarly comfortable boot?
Dennis
David Rhoades
> Does anyone out there remember Hanson boots (the first rear entry boot, I
> think) in the seventies.....whatever happened to them after Daiwa bought
> them out in the early 80's?
> TxS...@aol.com
GOT me, they really felt great BUT, their weight distribution wasn't too
keen.
Almost all owners skied out of their tails. Not enough forward lean.
BEEN there< DONE that,
Skied last weekend and it was FANTASTIC
Next week- Vacation 4 hour to go
dave
Dan Ford
My wife left her pair at the ski patrol hut at Les Grandes Montets in
Argentiere. The year before, the patrollers replaced a buckle she'd lost
from their supply of spare parts. Then she discovered Saloman (Salaman?
Sa, oh forget it) boots and bought a pair in the local shop for about
half what they cost here. She took the Hansons to the patrol hut next
day, and they said they'd keep them for her in case she ever changed her
mind. Tell them Sally sent you.
- Dan
dan....@unh.edu ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ http://pubpages.unh.edu/~df
Daniel Warren
>I too had a pair. What I remember the most was the can of Silicon spray
>which came with them in order to "slide" them on my feet.
>They were probably "ahead" of their time, which contributed to their demise
I remeber skiing barefoot in them. Built up such a suction from the sweat
that the liner came out when I took them off. Sounds strange, but I used to
wear women's jnee high stockings with them.
Daniel Warren
>Alas this winter was probably the Hanson's last season, I've run out of
>pairs of bits. Anyone any recommendations on a similarly comfortable boot?
I've been using Soloman SX-92's for the last 6 or 7 years and find them
nearly as comfortable as the Hanson's.
SKling7822
less) they are technologically obsolete. If anyone is still skiing on
them I have some Rossi Strato and K2 4's (red white & blue stripes) I'll
be glad to sell you.
Like all other rear entry boots, they are garbage. Remeber people in rear
entry boots ski funny. Worse than most rear entry models, Hanson had that
crazy vinal non-absorbant liner for most of their existence -- wonderful
feature.
Make a planter out of them. Should be a great conversation piece for the
yard.
Olddogger
Actually the Hanson Company was purchaced by the Dawa Company of
Japan, in about 1986(?), with production moved to Japan at about the same
time. The last boot I saw from the was called the VF 101, not a bad boot
as
rear entry boots go, but how far does a rear entry boot go on a good
skier, not
far.
Since the subject of Hanson boots is up again, I'll ask my
everpresent question, does anyone out there have a pair of Experimental
One's, or Moose River Hummers to sell, I'd love to add a pair to my
personal museum. Drop me a line at ric...@netway.net if you do. If you've
ever seen a pair you know just what I'm looking for,"Mr Vader, your ski
boots"!!!
rickyg d.b.a. "olddogger"
see-ya
Snow Ranger
(SKling7822) wrote:
=> Who cares??? Like any other piece of skiing equip that 15 yrs old (more or
=> less) they are technologically obsolete. If anyone is still skiing on
=> them I have some Rossi Strato and K2 4's (red white & blue stripes) I'll
=> be glad to sell you.
=>
=> Like all other rear entry boots, they are garbage. Remeber people in rear
=> entry boots ski funny. Worse than most rear entry models, Hanson had that
=> crazy vinal non-absorbant liner for most of their existence -- wonderful
=> feature.
=>
=> Make a planter out of them. Should be a great conversation piece for the
=> yard.
You're no romantic, dude! It's nostalgia. People on this newsgroup are so
into the sport, that we like to remember the good 'ol days. So what if my
Hanson Stilettos cracked over the arch and I'd occasionally explode right
out of the boot after jamming a bump? I still have fond memories of those
super comfy Darth Vader boots, that made me look so cool, even if they
didn't perform like a 4 buckle Lange.
My next boot, the Caber Azzurro, was an ill-fitting trad-buckle torture
chamber, which used to jam my toes after landing a jump. I can tell you
they really made me miss those Stilettos. After the Azzurros, I went back
to a rear-entry, Salomon SX-92 Equipe Race. Great boot! I recommend the
SX-95 for anyone longing for a performance rear-entry, similar to the
SX-92 ER, although they are somewhat rare and discontinued at the end of
this past season.
I really disagree when people insist all rear-entry boots suck. It is
total bullsh*t that your casual skier needs a 4 buckle boot, just because
Tomba and Girardelli are using one. This decree that all rear-entry boots
are garbage is a marketing conspiracy to get people to buy new boots. Take
a look at the reviews, year after year. Those Salomons were always getting
gold stars. Don't be a sucker!
Ok, explain how Scot Schmidt can manage to do what he does in those
"crappy" Salomon Force 9 rear-entry boots? Do you think you need more
control than the premier extreme skier? And don't give me that crap that
he only uses them because he gets them for free or they pay him. If you're
life is on the line, you're not going to use an inferior boot. Also, a
friend of his told me that he may wear the new Integral boot for promo
shots, but he still uses the Force 9, if he has his choice.
J.
--
...or at least, so would he have believed.
Dennis Summerbell
(SKling7822) wrote:
>
> Like all other rear entry boots, they are garbage. Remeber people in rear
Is this an informed comment or a pejorative assertion?
Did you ski in Hansons and reject them in favour of an orthodox boot?
Did you ski in a different rear entry boot and reject it in favour of an
orthodox boot?
I guess that if one were a professional skier or someone who raced
seriously then a rear entry might not be the best choice. For recreational
skiers the call is much closer. Remember MOST people ski funny. (Most
people don't ski the way I do).
Dennis
SKling7822
being garbage comes from expreience of 26 years as a ski instructor. The
basic problems are rear entry boots are a fixed volume boot and they do
not get tight enough. Even the Salamons with their wires and cams don't
get tight enough. Enerty goes to compressing soft forgiving liner or
flexing the wires and cams, and thus energy does not go to directly to the
ski. The other principal problem with rear entry boots is that they do
not flex appropriately for modern skis, and ankle flex is key to modern
skiing. Most rear entries have a poor foreward lean angle as well, but
this just poor design, not an inherent flaw.
While it may be true that most people ski funny, good skiers ski funny in
rear entry boots, and novice/intermediates cannot become experts in rear
entry boots. Its easy to make an inexpensive rear entry boot that's
comfortable, its just not smart to buy one... in skiing like everything
else, you get what you pay for.
Steve Kling
Dennis Summerbell
(SKling7822) wrote:
> My comments on rear entry boots generally, and Hanson's in particular
> being garbage comes from expreience of 26 years as a ski instructor. The
> basic problems are rear entry boots are a fixed volume boot and they do
> not get tight enough.
But you can take this argument to extremes. What's the first thing every
racer does on reaching the bottom? Slackens off the boots and THEN
fulfills the contract by displaying the manufacturers ski logo. Do you
recommend your ski class to similarly tighten up there boots for the
tricky section through the bumps then wait while they slacken them off
again two minutes later?
> Even the Salamons with their wires and cams don't
> get tight enough. Enerty goes to compressing soft forgiving liner or
> flexing the wires and cams, and thus energy does not go to directly to the
> ski. The other principal problem with rear entry boots is that they do
> not flex appropriately for modern skis, and ankle flex is key to modern
> skiing.
Presumably you would commend Salomon for there simple, elegant and
understandable flex control, a feature that comes naturally out of the
rear entry design.
> Most rear entries have a poor foreward lean angle as well, but
> this just poor design, not an inherent flaw.
>
> While it may be true that most people ski funny, good skiers ski funny in
> rear entry boots, and novice/intermediates cannot become experts in rear
> entry boots.
Most novice/intermediates will NEVER become expert. For the few that do,
it will take many years of skiing and probably several pairs of boots.
They should buy boots appropriate to their abilities and not something
appropriate to a downhill racer. Once they become expert they'll have
enough experience to make up their own minds what's garbage.
> Its easy to make an inexpensive rear entry boot that's
> comfortable, its just not smart to buy one... in skiing like everything
> else, you get what you pay for.
I think that your missing the most important point here. Your willing to
sacrifice comfort for precision. For a pro skier thats commendable, but
for the great majority of skiers its not. Its more important to have boots
that fit and are comfortable and give adequate performance than to have
boots that give ultimate performance but kill your feet and your one
annual ski holiday after two days of torture. Screw a beginner into a four
buckle gin trap and you've lost a customer for life. Pop them into a pair
of medium priced Salomon rear entry rentals and they'll swear that your
the best teacher on the mountain and you'll still teach them to ski
despite them loosing two hundredths on that tight gate near the top
because of lack of edge control :-).
Dennis
TxSkier
fitting pair of ski boots for my strange shaped foot......No need to bad
mouth the Hanson boots....
They were good boots in their day for most people....something better
usually comes along as far as ski equipment goes....and then again,
something might come along that the buying public doesn't like for one or
two seasons!!!!
Dan Simpson
TxS...@aol.com
Bruno Melli
: This decree that all rear-entry boots are garbage is a marketing
: year after year. Those Salomons were always getting
: gold stars. Don't be a sucker!
That's kind of poetic justice. When Salomon enters a new market they
always seem to come up with a product different from what's on the market.
They seem to have enough marketing clout to make it work so that others
companies then have to copy them. Rear entry, cap skis...
I think that rear entry boots work great if they fit pretty closely to
your foot. That's true of most boots but it is even more so with rear entry.
If they don't fit close you are out of luck because all the little
gizmo levers and tweeking mechanism to prevent your foot from moving
around don't make the shell smaller and closer to your feet so you
lose some of the feel for the snow.
bruno.
Fernando Pereira
> In article <3tmttr$l...@newsbf02.news.aol.com>, sklin...@aol.com
> (SKling7822) wrote:
> > Most rear entries have a poor foreward lean angle as well, but
> > this just poor design, not an inherent flaw.
> >
> > While it may be true that most people ski funny, good skiers ski funny in
> > rear entry boots, and novice/intermediates cannot become experts in rear
> > entry boots.
> Most novice/intermediates will NEVER become expert. For the few that do,
> it will take many years of skiing and probably several pairs of boots.
> They should buy boots appropriate to their abilities and not something
> appropriate to a downhill racer. Once they become expert they'll have
> enough experience to make up their own minds what's garbage.
boot and one ``appropriate to a downhill racer,'' there are many other
possibilities, mostly high-performance rec models, which make a *big*
difference to recreational skiers that want to improve and work hard
at it. From personal experience, I believe in buying equipment for the
skier I want to become, not for the skier I am. Of course, one can go
too far (stiff race boots and GS skis for a beginner), but I certainly
have been able to improve my skiing by combining higher-performace
equipment, lessons and a lot of skiing in different conditions. I
still remember when I moved from rear-entry boots (pretty good ones at
the time) to the front-entry Nordica 972's I have been skiing on for
the last four years. Yes, it took a while to get used to them and sort
out the fit, and they were certainly too much boot for me to start
with. But the ultimate improvement in fine control was well worth it.
--
Fernando Pereira
2B-441, AT&T Bell Laboratories
600 Mountain Ave, Murray Hill, NJ 07974-0636
per...@research.att.com
Dan Warren
>Like all other rear entry boots, they are garbage. Remeber people in rear
>entry boots ski funny. Worse than most rear entry models, Hanson had that
>crazy vinal non-absorbant liner for most of their existence -- wonderful
>feature.
>
I started skiing back in '63 when the norm was diuble lace leather boots. In
the latter 60's I "upgraded" to leather Nordica's and Lange's. All where
torture to the foot. Yes Hanson's didn't give you a great feel for the snow,
but I could ski without pain while wearing Hanson's. When I skied without
pain, I skied a whole lot better, no matter how the boots handled. The
Hanson's were the 1st boot I was able to ski well with.
Of course, compared to todays boots they are a piece of ****, but back in the
early 70's, the search for a boot that was not a torture chamber did spawn
some strange boots. Do you remeber Rosemont and Scott boots?
Dennis Summerbell
> They were good boots in their day for most people....something better
> usually comes along as far as ski equipment goes....and then again,
> something might come along that the buying public doesn't like for one or
> two seasons!!!!
Hanson's were an excellent boot in their day. They, along with Scott's
changed the markets perception of boots. Up until then you had two
choices: slippers with solid planks glued to the sole, or 5 kilogram
coffins that would have had mediaeval manufacturers of iron maidens
drooling with envy. Hanson and Scott proved that you could make a
comfortable boot with decent adjustments and good performance. The other
manufacturers then had to get their act together, which they did, and now
everyone skis on better boots.
Scott's? Now that was a bad boot, and the statistics prove it. But nobody
should knock Hansons.
Dennis
Dennis Summerbell
per...@research.att.com wrote:
> In article <d-summer-100...@nimac72.nimr.mrc.ac.uk>
d-su...@nimr.mrc.ac.uk (Dennis Summerbell) writes:
> > Most novice/intermediates will NEVER become expert. For the few that do,
> > it will take many years of skiing and probably several pairs of boots.
> > They should buy boots appropriate to their abilities and not something
> > appropriate to a downhill racer. Once they become expert they'll have
> > enough experience to make up their own minds what's garbage.
> You are fighting a straw(snow?)man.
> Between the typical rear-entry
> boot and one ``appropriate to a downhill racer,'' there are many other
> possibilities, mostly high-performance rec models, which make a *big*
> difference to recreational skiers that want to improve and work hard
> at it.
IF I'm fighting a straw(snow?)man, you must be standing right next to me.
I don't read you as disagreeing with anything that I said. Apart from
never having skied Nordica boots I agree with everything that you say. But
what you say is a far cry from the original thread leader... quote "all
rear-entries are garbage".
Would you agree that buying boots involves compromise with a number of
factors: performance, cost, comfort, weight, colour, fashion, whether your
favourite racer (allegedly) wears them. Performance is only one factor and
the weight given to it will vary from individual to individual and will
change with time. Even performance is not a cohesive concept that can be
marked as a single 9/10 score. It might be more constructive to discuss
details rather than sweepingly generalise.
For example: I STRONGLY agreed with an earlier statement that insufficient
emphasis is given to adequate ankle flex. Its quite a common exercise in
Europe to get intermediate classes to ski with their boots unbuckled.
Perversely I guess that I would argue that this is one of the few purely
technical areas where rear-entries have the edge. Hanson made the first
serious attempt to engineer this into their boots with an adjustable
forward flex control (I don't think that it worked well). The Salomon
mechanism is much better (particularly the double sided version). I think
that its more difficult issue for a conventional boot to address.
The real straw-man in this argument has been to compare Hansons (designed
1975?) with modern 4-buckles. The majority of 4-buckles back in '75 were
garbage with enough assorted iron-mongery on the so-called tecnical boots
to make sure that the boots alone cost you excess baggage on your holiday
flight. Hansons changed all that by showing that you could have good
recreational level performance AND comfort and lead to a general
improvement in boot design.
(Thats slightly distorting the picture. The disastrous Scotts were the
real technical innovation that broke the ice.)
Dennis
--
Dr Dennis Summerbell, NIMR, The Ridgeway, Mill Hill, London NW7 1AA.
email: d-su...@nimr.mrc.ac.uk
Tel: +181 959 3666 X2366
Fax: +181 959
Olddogger
What are those "statistics" that condemed Scott Boots to a burning
hell with the Alsop Binding???? The only design flaw I found after years
of skiing in them was the "Lexan" uppers were to suseptable to breaking
in the cold, and UV radiation seamed to make them more brital also. I
really liked the way it skied, espesiallly when mated to a Spademan
binding, and a THE SKI, or RBL. I should note my personal boot was the
Super Hot w/the softer rubber calf surround. By the way does any body have
any of the original Super Hots??? I'd love to find a pair for the personal
museum.
Personal opinon time, NO BOOT HAS TO HURT!!! Take the time to find a
boot with an appropriate match to your own foot volume, and then have a
trained boot fitter post you in the boot appropriatly with a orthotic, and
then move on to making sure you get a shell that gets you closer to the
skiing grail, the well controlled carved turn. Hear I go again, but
everyone who hasn't yet, must go out and purchace a copy of "How the Ski
Racer Skis", and "The Athletic Skier", both by Warren Witheral. The man
has it right!!! Now the titles make it sound like these book are aimed
just at racers, not so. I'd like to consider myself a fairly good bump
skier, with a back round as a freestyle coach at Winter Park, and I can
take almost everything Warren says to either Frenchman, or Hughs equally
well. Look at either World Cup Freestyle or Alpine to get a since of how
they use, not abuse, the technology in there equipment. Either Tamba, or
Jean-luc, Donna, or Tamara, are first putting the ski on edge, and then
applying leverage, not the other way around. As I always say, physics if
a wonderful thing, it's very consistant!!
By the way I was at A-Basin just yesterday 7/13/95, boy it felt good
to get my XR-9's back on, till later - see ya!!!!
Rick Glesner a.k.a. "olddogger"
r
Rajeev Gupta
(Olddogger) wrote:
> What are those "statistics" that condemed Scott Boots to a burning
> hell with the Alsop Binding????
Above average incidence of tibial fractures.
> really liked the way it skied, espesiallly when mated to a Spademan
> binding, and a THE SKI, or RBL.
I'd forgotten about THE SKI, I couldn't afford it at the time. Eventually
did get some cheap (cosmetic change) K2 255 long softs that together with
my Hanson Boots totally transformed my skiing.
> Personal opinon time, NO BOOT HAS TO HURT!!! Take the time to find a
> boot with an appropriate match to your own foot volume, and then have a
> trained boot fitter post you in the boot appropriatly with a orthotic, and
> then move on to making sure you get a shell that gets you closer to the
> skiing grail, the well controlled carved turn.
I think that Scotts and Hansons were particularly good when they first
appeared because they were the first mass market boots to make a serious
effort to ensure that everyone received propper fitting. The cost included
intial and retrospective fitting work. It changed the way that people
thought about boots and eventually led to an all-round improvement that we
now all benefit from whether we finish up with rear-, mid-, or orthodox
entry boots.
Dennis
--
Dr R.Gupta, NIMR, The Ridgeway, Mill Hill, London NW7 1AA.
email: r-g...@nimr.mrc.ac.uk
Rajeev Gupta
> In article <3t0uun$j...@tzlink.j51.com>, r...@j51.com says...
> >
>
>
> how much did those things weigh?
Boots suitable for intermediate and advanced skiers were much lighter than
equivalent orthodox boots, (in the case of Scotts, VERY much lighter). It
was a big sales point. Later they tended to push up the weight in advanced
and expert boots as they tried to extract that extra bit of performance,
but I would GUESS that they were still lighter than equivalent orthodox
boots. I always regard weight as a very significant factor when
recreational skiers are choosing a boot.
Karen Kornegay
comfortable, snug enough for good intermediate skiing, affordable and free
of hot spots. I traded them in for a pair of Lange boots, complete with
four-buckle racer fit, and my feet have never forgiven me. (My skiing
hasn't improved, either.)
Dennis Summerbell
Kornegay <kkornega@wtcc-gw> wrote:
Damn the technicalities, this is the authentic voice of 98% of
recreational skiers.
:-)
Dennis
Dr D. Summerbell, NIMR, The Ridgeway, Mill Hill, London NW7 1AA.
email: d-su...@nimr.mrc.ac.uk
Tel: +181 959 3666 X2366
Fax: +181 913 8527
bossma...@gmail.com
lal_truckee
> Never owned a pair cause they didn't make My size but loved the white boot.
>
Worn by the original Darth Fader, I think?
Look cool, ski crappy.
Really really crappy. I can't stress how crappy.
Scott Abraham
ajl...@sympatico.ca
Used to ski deep powder so weight on the tails was where it was at.
Always kept a spare buckle in my pocket too!
Had Scotts before but kept breaking them
Harvard Horvath
of toilet paper.
-------------------------------------------------------------
This signature is now the ultimate power in the Universe
Horvath
Scott Abraham
> On Sat, 17 Nov 2018 17:39:47 -0800 (PST), ajl...@sympatico.ca wrote:
>
> >I had a pair of Navy blue Avanti Hansens and loved them.
> >Used to ski deep powder so weight on the tails was where it was at.
> >Always kept a spare buckle in my pocket too!
> >Had Scotts before but kept breaking them
>
> The only Scotts we know around here is used to wipe your ass, a brand
> of toilet paper.
john...@gmail.com
> Does anyone out there remember Hanson boots (the first rear entry boot, I
> think) in the seventies.....whatever happened to them after Daiwa bought
> them out in the early 80's?
> Dan
> TxS...@aol.com
I was never a skier so I don't know how they performed. I did however work there from 1977 to 1980 when they went out of business. I worked in a couple of the departments and know exactly how they were made. Bad financial choices led to their demise. Put over 300 people out of work. Japan had a large market for Hanson Boots through Seiko (of Seiko watches). Great product and was a great place to work. Met people from all over America since Boulder,Co. seem to big a big melting pot back in the late seventies.
brain...@directbox.de
> think) in the seventies.....whatever happened to them after Daiwa bought
> them out in the early 80's?
> Dan
> TxS...@aol.com
With these boots and a ski from Kneissel and a binding from BURT (LANGE) I have made the first carving curves (in 1996!). Perhaps I am the first person who have used the carving technology. At the time it was only possible to do carving with this equipement.
crazy...@gmail.com
vat...@vathcave.com
>I had a pair of Hanson Moose River Hummers in the 70's.
I listened to Jimi Hendrix on AM radio. So what?
Scott Abraham
Hey, read about Beetch Hobbs getting caught going to a Zoom AA meeting. Too bad they didn't have Zoom when you were forced to go.
ps: how was your two weeks in jail?
carl valloric
Thanks