CCM custom skate scan process

[SolarWind 23]

does anyone know why CCM went from scanning feet in a seated position with feet on the special angled transparent ‘bench’ (for the lack of a better word, see image below for reference) to scanning simply standing on the floor?

The reason I ask is because my arch completely collapses when standing, making feet longer and flatter than when seated. So since the skates have some natural arch support built in wouldn’t it be more reasonable to do the scanning the old way?

Edited October 1, 2021 by SolarWind

[VegasHockey 1280]

On 10/1/2021 at 12:03 AM, SolarWind said:

does anyone know why CCM went from scanning feet in a seated position with feet on the special angled transparent ‘bench’ (for the lack of a better word, see image below for reference) to scanning simply standing on the floor?

The reason I ask is because my arch completely collapses when standing, making feet longer and flatter than when seated. So since the skates have some natural arch support built in wouldn’t it be more reasonable to do the scanning the old way?

Because taking a scan with your body weight pushing down on your feet in a hockey stance is more accurate than scanning you with your feet in the air. CCM custom skates dont' really do anything with your arch, hence why they include Orthomove insoles with the custom skates.

 

Edited October 2, 2021 by PBH

[SolarWind 23]

3 hours ago, PBH said:

Because taking a scan with your body weight pushing down on your feet in a hockey stance is more accurate than scanning you with your feet in the air. CCM custom skates dont' really do anything with your arch, hence why they induce Orthomove insoles with the custom skates.

 

Conceptually it makes sense, however what about folks like myself who's arch is collapsing without support, making standing barefoot scans completely different than non-weighted seated scans?

I did an experiment and pulled out insoles from 2 different skates that I fit very comfortably in both length & width wise (toes just brushing the toe cap, insole is custom cut and tight fitting end-to-end), and when I stand on the insoles my toes hang a good 1/2" off the end because my arch completely flattens outside the skate?!
Skates do provide a lot of side to side support plus some arch support. It seems to be fixing the natural pronation I have, and as a result the foot position inside the skate is corrected, making it shorter but more voluminous.

It feels like the barefoot free standing scan would produce highly misleading results for me would it not? 
It might explain why CCM scanner recommends size 10.5 tapered size skate for me, which is my shoe size, but I haven't worn skates bigger than 8.5D size for decades.

Edited October 1, 2021 by SolarWind

[yk15 9]

I guess your option is to measure your feet on paper when seating and when standing. Add this to your scan results together with some pictures. That’s in case you go custom.

[VegasHockey 1280]

On 10/1/2021 at 11:54 AM, SolarWind said:

Conceptually it makes sense, however what about folks like myself who's arch is collapsing without support, making standing barefoot scans completely different than non-weighted seated scans?

I did an experiment and pulled out insoles from 2 different skates that I fit very comfortably in both length & width wise (toes just brushing the toe cap, insole is custom cut and tight fitting end-to-end), and when I stand on the insoles my toes hang a good 1/2" off the end because my arch completely flattens outside the skate?!
Skates do provide a lot of side to side support plus some arch support. It seems to be fixing the natural pronation I have, and as a result the foot position inside the skate is corrected, making it shorter but more voluminous.

It feels like the barefoot free standing scan would produce highly misleading results for me would it not? 
It might explain why CCM scanner recommends size 10.5 tapered size skate for me, which is my shoe size, but I haven't worn skates bigger than 8.5D size for decades.

A scanner is not judge and jury. You should never base your size solely on the scan itself.

Any good CCM retailer would recommend you try on multiple pairs of skates to find the right size and fit. The custom option then takes that to the next level. I have had the scanner recommend size 10 wide skates to players who wear a 7.5 regular.

[Vet88 674]

On 10/2/2021 at 7:54 AM, SolarWind said:

It might explain why CCM scanner recommends size 10.5 tapered size skate for me, which is my shoe size, but I haven't worn skates bigger than 8.5D size for decades.

Its why any half decent fitter should put you in a Brannock first and manually measure your feet and then use this as a check against the scan.

[SolarWind 23]

4 hours ago, PBH said:

A scanner is not judge and jury. You should never base your size solely on the scan itself.

Any good CCM retailer would recommend you try on multiple pairs of skates to find the right size and fit. The custom option then takes that to the next level. I have had the scanner recommend size 10 wide skates to players who wear a 7.5 regular.

Makes total sense and completely agree with the need to try retail skates on first to find the closest match.

My concern is: how is the 3d mold, that CCM makes based on the scan, going to be any useful for custom thermo forming, if the actual volume of the foot in the skate would be totally different from the scan?!

It’s not a theoretical question since I recently gone through the customs process and what came back was a complete miss volume wise (length/width was good). So I’m curious what to do next to improve the result?!

Edited October 3, 2021 by SolarWind

[Larry54 243]

I think there would have to be a way to get a scan of the foot while supporting the body weight but with even pressure on the sole unlike a flat surface. When making Graf/Sidas heat-molded footbeds, the casting process does that. I remember how great those footbeds felt. If it could somehow be incorporated into the scanning, I think it would produce the best representation of the foot under load.