2012 Tecnica Bodacious Boot will change the sidecountry game forever

[Hollywood]

Tried this new boot on tonight and lets just say that its retardedly light, fits really well, and has a hike/skin mode that allows the boot to flex in a way that you could run in it. Cant wait to see the production version in a few months! They asked me not to take a picture. Sorry Guys.

[TheDon]

Awesome! Three buckle or four?

[Hollywood]

the 2 102mm width models have 3 and a huge strap that also has a buckle type closure. the 98mm shell model has 4 buckles if I remember right.

[mntlion]

made by/for/ with lowa again?

[MarcusBrody]

I take it by your description of it as a sidecountry boot that it is relatively stiff and set up for DIN bindings (or at least it's possible to make it so)?

[ROCKS]

Hmmmm.... sounds promising, will be looking forward to the detailed info on it.

AT boots (or some sorta hybrid) might be on the menu in the future here at my household.

[wasatchback]

made by/for/ with lowa again?

No... Manufactured by Tecnica not a rebranded X-Alp by Lowa

[mntlion]

what makes it better then the agent BC? (replaceable toe and heel, dynafit, 100mm, 120+ flex)
that seemed to be a great option, wondering how to improve?

[ZomblibulaX]

what makes it better then the agent BC? (replaceable toe and heel, dynafit, 100mm, 120+ flex)
that seemed to be a great option, wondering how to improve?

98mm last. At least, that's an improvement for me.:biggrin:

[wasatchback]

what makes it better then the agent BC? (replaceable toe and heel, dynafit, 100mm, 120+ flex)
that seemed to be a great option, wondering how to improve?

A lot could be better... PE Plastic that can actually be ground, 98 last,
much improved walk/tour mode, DIN sole interchangeability. The Agent
BC is decent but it's a bit of a bucket, and that 120 Flex might be a
stretch.

[skifreaknhut]

I agree, I skied the Agent and thought the 120 flex was a stretch. I also swam in it with my skinny foot, I quickly got rid of them and have been looking for something narrow with not much luck.

[Hollywood]

They have both DIN and Vibram Soles, with Dynafit inserts. 3 different models and flexes. 110, 120, 130 if I remember right.

Made in Italy at the Tecnica Factory. The plastic felt like traditional ski boot plastic, not that AT boot crappy flimsy stuff.

The best part about this boot is the way it flexes when in touring/walking mode. You can literally run in them. No awkwardness.

Really hoping these make it midseason this year...

[wasatchback]

Just talked to my buddy who works at one of the local shops who got to see a little preview. Two "Big Mountain" boots. 98mm last 130 and 110 flex. No Cuff Mobility on these two but they do have interchangeable DIN and/or Tech Compatible soles. Four 100mm options (same external lower just a different internal plug) 120, 110, 100 and Women's 100 flexes. When locked in they flex and ski like an alpine boot but when the cuff is unlocked it has a large range of mobility. 3 buckle design with the power strap acting like a 4th buckle (looks really cool). He said they looked really cool. All except the 110 Flex "Big Mountain" boot would be using this new light plastic.

Anyone have any pics?

[Nevada29er]

what makes it better then the agent BC? (replaceable toe and heel, dynafit, 100mm, 120+ flex)
that seemed to be a great option, wondering how to improve?

Uh, the Agent BC is 102 last, maybe thats why its so big.

[Pallepuder]

http://www.freeride.se/img/c/4882_500.jpg

[squirrelmurphy]

So the 4 buckle models don't have a walk mode? Kinda badass...

[willmtbike4food]

Looks like the "booster strap" on the 3 buckle boots can be tightened with a buckle/latch mechanism. Same thing on the 4 buckle boots?

Also looks like 2 of the 5 are Dynafit compatible - I'm assuming the blocks are removable, but do the lower 3 boots in the picture also have interchangeable blocks to work with Dynafit? Maybe just the middle two?

[PhiberAwptik]

The Technica 100 last fits me real well. I'm pretty stoked for to see these out there. I might have to look into a pair.

[wasatchback]

Looks like the "booster strap" on the 3 buckle boots can be tightened with a buckle/latch mechanism. Same thing on the 4 buckle boots?

Also looks like 2 of the 5 are Dynafit compatible - I'm assuming the blocks are removable, but do the lower 3 boots in the picture also have interchangeable blocks to work with Dynafit? Maybe just the middle two?

There are 3 boots (120, 110, 100 flex) that have a touring mode and two boots (130+ and 110) that have a fixed cuff. Two of the boots with ski/walk or tour mode have a cool power strap that has a buckle on it as well. You can really reef down on this to tighten it around the lower leg but at the same time it's really easy to release both the upper buckles and the powerstrap at the same time while touring to get maximum cuff mobility. The 120 flex (Cochise) comes with a tech compatable AT sole standard but the 110 (Bushwacker) and 100 (Crossfire) come with DIN soles.

The two boots that don't have cuff mobility: Bodacious (130 flex), Bonafide (110 flex) are just 4 buckle 98mm boots that you can put a tech compatable AT sole on. In europe the 130 flex will come with them stock but in the US they both have DIN soles. The 130 flex is also injected in really lightweight plastic. The concept for these came from Arne Backstrom. He was routering the soles off his 150 flex race boots and installing soles from a Factor so he could use a dynafit setup but still ski in stiff high performing boots.

All these boots in this line share the same external mold so they all use the same interchangeable sole design. Tech soles and DIN soles can be swapped out on any of them.

[AKgeoSkier]

Interesting concept, putting the tech inserts on a boot with no touring mode...

[Daywalker]

No 98mm with a walk mode? That would have been so awesome...

Still intrigued by a dynafit version of my Inferno 130 (sounds like the Bodacious) but would have killed for a 98mm last walk-moded A/T boot (even in lesser flexes).

[squirrelmurphy]

To go with the Bodacious, someone needs to make a trekker-like thing that clips into the tech toe inserts. jondrums, you got that?

[rod9301]

the stiff boots (130 flex) are really stupid. The BD Factor has a stiff flex, tours reasonably well (for sure better than any foxed cuff boot could ever tour). So WTF is Tecnica thinking?

[squirrelmurphy]

I think my Ghosts tour better than my Factors ever did. Plus the Technicas shouldn't self destruct like the BD garbage.

[jaobrien6]

the stiff boots (130 flex) are really stupid. The BD Factor has a stiff flex, tours reasonably well (for sure better than any foxed cuff boot could ever tour). So WTF is Tecnica thinking?

Yeah, I don't understand the market for a stiff, fixed-cuff, dynafit boot. I haven't seen people clamoring for that at all. Is there a market for these boots that I'm unaware of? I'm a huge JONG when it comes to BC related stuff, so maybe I'm wrong. But like I said, I don't recall reading about or hearing many people wishing for this.

[rludes025]

Yeah, I don't understand the market for a stiff, fixed-cuff, dynafit boot. I haven't seen people clamoring for that at all. Is there a market for these boots that I'm unaware of? I'm a huge JONG when it comes to BC related stuff, so maybe I'm wrong. But like I said, I don't recall reading about or hearing many people wishing for this.

It just takes a little deduction. Same lower as the touring models just different inner mold. So obviously the AT soles will fit from the said touring boots. At least they put tech fitting in the AT soles. Why produce two different AT soles, one with tech fittings, one without? There is enough dukes and barons out there to justify the need for a burly alpine boots with better hikability no? The baron and duke are side country bindings that many people do light tours with Alpine boots. Why not make that boot scurry across some skree better.

In theory if you could get your hands on the upper cuffs of one of the touring models you could put it on one of the 98mm last boots with no issues. Thats a pretty big if though.

[Utter]

Yeah, I don't understand the market for a stiff, fixed-cuff, dynafit boot. I haven't seen people clamoring for that at all. Is there a market for these boots that I'm unaware of? I'm a huge JONG when it comes to BC related stuff, so maybe I'm wrong. But like I said, I don't recall reading about or hearing many people wishing for this.

It's the same mold as the ones with walk mode. So it's more of an "no real reason to add tech insert soles, but they are compatible, so lets offer it if someone wants them" thing I think.

Anyway, they look great and are light as hell compared to Technicas other boots.

[Flexon Phil]

Played with the boot at SIA, it is the real deal. It is light, and fits fantastic. Right now it is the best option of a boot in this segment. Tecnica/Blizzard is firing on all cylinders right now.

[crank54]

Subscribed. This may be the boot to replace my ill-fated Quest 12. I'm liking the Cochise, seems like the Quest done right.

When is someone gonna be able to ski these?

[grskier]

I was holding a pair last night and the original frankenboot that Arne built... very impressed and I know I'll be in one of the two of those boots next year.

As far as BD, a 120 BD =/= a alpine 120 IMHO

I know about a lot of folks that will have a pair of dynafits on a pair of their skis in the quiver now.

[lynchdogger]

Subscribed. This may be the boot to replace my ill-fated Quest 12. I'm liking the Cochise, seems like the Quest done right.

When is someone gonna be able to ski these?

Called Tecnica USA today and not til next summer/fall. Hope to connect with ec dealer rep sooner than that. If it fits Cochise for me. Feel free to send a pair in a 27.5 (318mm or so) - I promise to put them thru the paces and blog like crazy about how much I love them!

[wilcox510]

anyone have weights on these?

[wasatchback]

All based on a 310mm sole length

Cochise: 4.9lbs per boot
- lightweight thermofit liner available seperately will bring weight closer to 4.2

Bodacious: 4.7 lbs per boot

Buchwacker: 4.11 lbs per boot

[wilcox510]

Is the bushwacker 4.11 pounds with a standard liner or the light weight liner?

[wasatchback]

Is the bushwacker 4.11 pounds with a standard liner or the light weight liner?

4.11 lbs with the standard liner

[crank54]

Just broke my Quest buckle yesterday while skiing Whiteface - it was bound to happen. Now I really need a (better) replacement. Next summer/fall seems awfully far off...

[Njord]

Looks like a great "working" boot... cannot wait to get a pair!

[marshalolson]

In theory if you could get your hands on the upper cuffs of one of the touring models you could put it on one of the 98mm last boots with no issues. Thats a pretty big if though.

anyone taken the upper cuff off the bodacious yet? is this possible? my mental wheels are spinning overdrive.

[Hollywood]

anyone taken the upper cuff off the bodacious yet? is this possible? my mental wheels are spinning overdrive.


Definitely not possible as the upper cuff has a steel shank in it that engages the walk/ski mode. You would have to MacGuyver the F*ck out of it to get it to maybe work.

[marshalolson]

I guess my question is more along the lines of if the lower of the bodacious is really externally the same as the chocise. Can I grind the rivets and bolt on the walk mode and the upper cuff from the Cochise to the bodacios shell? I seriously order both and do this mod without question..... if it was possible????

[wasatchback]

I guess my question is more along the lines of if the lower of the bodacious is really externally the same as the chocise. Can I grind the rivets and bolt on the walk mode and the upper cuff from the Cochise to the bodacios shell? I seriously order both and do this mod without question..... if it was possible????

Technically yes... It wouldn't be that difficult if you had a few spare hinge bolts that fit. Getting the female end of the walk mechanism off the Cochise would be the biggest difficulty. It's riveted on so you would have to drill the rivets out and replace them with some sort of screw/bolt/rivet. Getting the boots apart is no big deal it's just putting them back together with the correct hardware that would be difficult. Externally the lowers are exactly the same on both boots.

[neck beard]

So is the Bodacious a replacement of the Agent BC (and Cochise replacing the AT)?

I tried both AT and BC on last week and in the shop, they had the best walk mode of any boot I have tried on, and felt more like a ski boot than any other AT boot I have tried on. In the shop, I was blown away.

Incredible walk mode for what felt like a skiers boot with tech inserts. Even with most buckles done up it had a better walk mode than most boots I've tried on. Why so little love for these boots in the last season?

If the Cochise runs the same walk mechanism as the seemingly ignored BC and AT.... great times coming.

BC http://www.tecnica.it/collection/skiboots-equipment/freeride/the-agent-bc-10300
http://www.tecnica.it/media/products/skiboots/nuove/m/THE-AGENT-BC.jpg

AT http://www.tecnica.it/collection/skiboots-equipment/freeride/the-agent-at-10310
http://www.tecnica.it/media/products/skiboots/nuove/m/THE-AGENT-AT.jpg

[Brianskis]

So is the Bodacious a replacement of the Agent BC (and Cochise replacing the AT)?

I tried both AT and BC on last week and in the shop, they had the best walk mode of any boot I have tried on, and felt more like a ski boot than any other AT boot I have tried on. In the shop, I was blown away.

Incredible walk mode for what felt like a skiers boot with tech inserts. Even with most buckles done up it had a better walk mode than most boots I've tried on. Why so little love for these boots in the last season?

If the Cochise runs the same walk mechanism as the seemingly ignored BC and AT.... great times coming.

BC http://www.tecnica.it/collection/skiboots-equipment/freeride/the-agent-bc-10300
http://www.tecnica.it/media/products/skiboots/nuove/m/THE-AGENT-BC.jpg

AT http://www.tecnica.it/collection/skiboots-equipment/freeride/the-agent-at-10310
http://www.tecnica.it/media/products/skiboots/nuove/m/THE-AGENT-AT.jpg

New walk mode, as good as the walk function was on the boots you mentioned, the new walk mode is heads and tails above...

[neck beard]

Thanks man. A better walk mode? I'll check that out because the walk on both those pictured boots was very good for forward movemnet and rearward travel (note: in the shop).

I tried them on in Tokyo and was instantly in despair that my local small-town shop for what ever reason decided not to stock that range for the season, and so depriving local backcountry skiers like me of a good boot.

On a totally irrelevant note, the shop with the Tecnica boots in Tokyo also had the only pair of DPS 120's I have ever seen in Japan, or anywhere. One pair. I'd never touched them before. 170,000 yen, which is about $2100! The Japanese imported ski goods market is on drugs.

Anyway, I have a feeling we are going to need a Grand Unifying Blizzard Skis/Tecnica Boots thread for 2011/12.

(Though I'm not so sure it was so clever giving skis and boots the same name)

[sqikunst]

Tried these boots on and Tecnica is the only company that is realyl getting all of the features into a nice clean package. Salomon bombed out on the toe piece and atomics tracker just is not that comfortable. I really wanted to get this boot before heading to NZ this summer but looks like the first delivery date for Europe is end of October. The Bodacious, with PLUM Guides on (Can't Decide yet cause all of the companies are bringing out solid line ups this year; DPS RP112, 191 billygoat!!!). These are definitely going to be sick the only thing I dont like is the liner with the pump. Gonna throw some intuitions in 'em and then they are the perfect touring boot!!!

[Jack Burton]

A real alpine boot with a vibram sole and a tech fitting..... Awesome!!!! That is likely the first piece of ski equipment I am willing to pay retail for.

"So WTF is Tecnica thinking?" That they will sell the walk mode boot to one dude on dynafiddles and the non-walk mode boot to another dude/dudette with dynafiddles, just my guess though. IMHO walk mode is overrated.

I think my Falcons tour better than my Factors ever did. Plus the Technicas shouldn't self destruct like the BD garbage. Check

[khyber.pass]

No 98mm with a walk mode? That would have been so awesome...

Still intrigued by a dynafit version of my Inferno 130 (sounds like the Bodacious) but would have killed for a 98mm last walk-moded A/T boot (even in lesser flexes).

No kidding. Why are we not seeing a 98mm, stiff boot -- like the kind used by many of us here, with a narrow enough shell for mods, rather than a fat shell requiring fill -- with good flex, good intuition liner, Pebax shell, modern lock-out touring buckles, stretch/booster fat strap, tech sole?

You'd think this would be a no-brainer by now.

[stuckathuntermtn]

No kidding. Why are we not seeing a 98mm, stiff boot -- like the kind used by many of us here, with a narrow enough shell for mods, rather than a fat shell requiring fill -- with good flex, good intuition liner, Pebax shell, modern lock-out touring buckles, stretch/booster fat strap, tech sole?

You'd think this would be a no-brainer by now.

Yeah, IDK. Maybe not enough anticipated ROI?

[XavierD]

No kidding. Why are we not seeing a 98mm, stiff boot -- like the kind used by many of us here, with a narrow enough shell for mods, rather than a fat shell requiring fill -- with good flex, good intuition liner, Pebax shell, modern lock-out touring buckles, stretch/booster fat strap, tech sole?

You'd think this would be a no-brainer by now.

Pebax makes for a relatively unresponsive lower shell. Engineering a walk mode into a high performance boot will be detrimental to the progressive flex. Feet will also tend to swell up more if you are touring, and people tend to want a bit more comfort fit when walking/touring. I can see a small part of the population wanting this boot, most of whom will be able to dodge retail prices. In practice I see it as less attractive then it is on paper.
If you are skiing in a way that would call for the performance over comfort of the stiff shelled narrower boots, you should probably not be touring very far to do so, a broken leg becomes pretty serious when you are a two-four hour tour/ski away from the nearest road. It will probably take atleast twice that time for your buddies to get you back. Take in to account the shorter days and you can be in serious trouble pretty quickly.

[My Pet Powder Goat]

Pebax makes for a relatively unresponsive lower shell. Engineering a walk mode into a high performance boot will be detrimental to the progressive flex. Feet will also tend to swell up more if you are touring, and people tend to want a bit more comfort fit when walking/touring. I can see a small part of the population wanting this boot, most of whom will be able to dodge retail prices. In practice I see it as less attractive then it is on paper.
If you are skiing in a way that would call for the performance over comfort of the stiff shelled narrower boots, you should probably not be touring very far to do so, a broken leg becomes pretty serious when you are a two-four hour tour/ski away from the nearest road. It will probably take atleast twice that time for your buddies to get you back. Take in to account the shorter days and you can be in serious trouble pretty quickly.

Whoah,whoah, hold on....whomever said 'common sense' had a place on TGR :wink:

Love the part about BC injury. I think the same thing, when some hotdogger says he's gonna go hudge when we're miles out. I always say half-jokinly that I need to be able to drag my broken ass back in-bounds to go hudge.

Edit: ...and then I go huDge.:biggrin:

[BigHerm]

So I couldn't find a Bodacious or Bonafide to try on today, but I was able to try on an Inferno Blaze (110?). Ideal fit out of the box. Was told by the boot guys that this was the same mold as the above mentioned side country boots. Can anyone comment on this? If so I know what I'm getting.

[werdswerf]

Your boot guy was incorrect. The Inferno Blaze is based on the Inferno last, and the Bodacious/Bonafide is based on the Demon last. They're both 98mm lasts, but I've read that the Demon last is a little roomier in places.

Out of curiosity, what size Inferno Blaze did he put you in?

[BigHerm]

Thanks for the info.

He put me in a 26.5. I ski in a 27.5 Atomic X100 with an Intuition size 10 Powerwrap. I wear a 10.5/11 street shoe.

Going to demo the Inferno later this week most likely. I'll also check out the Demon.

[werdswerf]

Thanks for the info.

He put me in a 26.5. I ski in a 27.5 Atomic X100 with an Intuition size 10 Powerwrap. I wear a 10.5/11 street shoe.

Going to demo the Inferno later this week most likely. I'll also check out the Demon.

Just sent you a PM.

[rob stokes]

Deamon is a tad wider at 100mm Vs the Bodacious 98mm.

[stuckathuntermtn]

It almost seems like an original mold.
The bsl is half a size big. Do any other Tecnicas show a 320mm in a 27.5 that are high end?

[chadeau]

It almost seems like an original mold.
The bsl is half a size big. Do any other Tecnicas show a 320mm in a 27.5 that are high end?

I've got the 27.5 Cochise and they are 320 mm.

[spring corn]

So to be clear, if I get the bodacious and put on the dynafit compatible soles, I can then use those same soles with either my dynafit set up or my lift service skis without swapping them back?

I am assuming this would be the case because swapping the soles out everytime you wanted to go backcountry would kind of make this technology pointless, but wanted to make sure?

[crank54]

So to be clear, if I get the bodacious and put on the dynafit compatible soles, I can then use those same soles with either my dynafit set up or my lift service skis without swapping them back?

I am assuming this would be the case because swapping the soles out everytime you wanted to go backcountry would kind of make this technology pointless, but wanted to make sure?

No. Unless your lift service skis have Dukes/Barons with adjustable toe height and sliding AFD. Solly toes with adjustable toe height can accommodate the taller toe blocks, but they can't guarantee consistent release with the rubber lugged soles (i.e. use at your own risk). Hence two sets of swappable sole blocks.

[srsosbso]

Am I the only person who would love an alpine boot with alpine soles and dynafit/tech fittings? I'd love to be able to flip skis and bindings mid-day without needing to change boots, and I'd give up a vibram sole to get it.

[spring corn]

No. Unless your lift service skis have Dukes/Barons with adjustable toe height and sliding AFD. Solly toes with adjustable toe height can accommodate the taller toe blocks, but they can't guarantee consistent release with the rubber lugged soles (i.e. use at your own risk). Hence two sets of swappable sole blocks.

Well that sucks. Swapping these soles is a pain in the butt, no way am I going to do that every time I want to go skin. You essentially then need a separate pair of boots dedicated to backcountry.

I thought the whole point of this design was the idea of having the ability to use a traditional 4 buckle 130 flex downhill boot in the BC, if so, no doubt you want to also use the same boot for lift access.

How sure are you about this? Because this is just stupid.

[srsosbso]

Apparently it's possible to grind the vibram sole of an AT boot down to fit/work in an alpine binding. My factors have a ridiculous amount of rocker on the sole so I think that would be a challenge, whereas the Tecnica line-up looks a bit flatter, so perhaps more feasible.

[spring corn]

Apparently it's possible to grind the vibram sole of an AT boot down to fit/work in an alpine binding. My factors have a ridiculous amount of rocker on the sole so I think that would be a challenge, whereas the Tecnica line-up looks a bit flatter, so perhaps more feasible.

I don't want to have to custom grind these expensive soles down and hope I get it "right". This should be dialed in out of the box.

Looking at the photos of the sole, there is definitely some kind of non vibram plastic on there. So what is the deal with that?

106143

[srsosbso]

So to be clear, if I get the bodacious and put on the dynafit compatible soles, I can then use those same soles with either my dynafit set up or my lift service skis without swapping them back?
I think it would be fair to say that if this was the case, the boots wouldn't need the alpine sole option at all, ie., there would just be one sole available, rather than the option of swapping.

[lowsparkco]

Well that sucks. Swapping these soles is a pain in the butt, no way am I going to do that every time I want to go skin. You essentially then need a separate pair of boots dedicated to backcountry.

I thought the whole point of this design was the idea of having the ability to use a traditional 4 buckle 130 flex downhill boot in the BC, if so, no doubt you want to also use the same boot for lift access.

How sure are you about this? Because this is just stupid.

Looks like it's seven screws per boot. Am I missing something? Perhaps you should just leave the lift access soles on there and forget about skinning?

I have a friend who keeps two pairs of Customs because he's about 50/50 alpine bindings and Dynafits. He skis 120 days a season so he need a pair of boots every couple of seasons so it's not really costing him anything though.

They certainly wouldn't make a system with two boot soles if you could use either of them in either binding !?!

[spring corn]

Looks like it's seven screws per boot. Am I missing something? Perhaps you should just leave the lift access soles on there and forget about skinning?

I have a friend who keeps two pairs of Customs because he's about 50/50 alpine bindings and Dynafits. He skis 120 days a season so he need a pair of boots every couple of seasons so it's not really costing him anything though.

They certainly wouldn't make a system with two boot soles if you could use either of them in either binding !?!

Well there is no reason why they can't have a DIN and Dynafit compatible sole set. It is ridiculous that they don't.

The beauty of the 130 flex 4 buckle boot that is dynafit compatible is that you can ski the same exact boot in all conditions. That is the point. You don't want to have to set and dial in 2 separate pairs of boots.

[stuckathuntermtn]

I would imagine the height is different between alpine and AT/tech soles. How could the pins line up?

[spring corn]

I would imagine the height is different between alpine and AT/tech soles. How could the pins line up?

Ok so the tech soles have to be taller to accommodate for the pins, but that doesn't mean there shouldn't be a proper AFD pad.

[auvgeek]

that doesn't mean there shouldn't be a proper AFD pad.
Wait, what?

A tech sole is typically slightly rockered (for easier walking) and has lugged rubber for grip. A din sole is flat (in both directions).

If the tech sole was flat with pins, people would be pissed off that it didn't have grippy rubber. Why don't you enlighten us on how you would accomplish both?

[NatEE]

How sure are you about this? Because this is just stupid.

This is pretty well documented at this point. All of the other boots with swappable soles suffer from the same issue (factor,Titan, ect). You'd think that the sidecountry market would be large enough at this point that someone would address it... But I guess Marker more or less has with their bindings. There really isn't a good solution for it on the boot side.

[lowsparkco]

Ok so the tech soles have to be taller to accommodate for the pins, but that doesn't mean there shouldn't be a proper AFD pad.

The only bindings with a big enough toe gap and semi-compatible AFD pad are Dukes / Barons and they aren't "suggested" for use with an AT boot. I think the problem is getting reliable release out of lug soles and a DIN sole to stay in a Dynafit without a spacer under the boot. There's not a lot of point in putting inserts in a DIN boot if it won't work in a tech binding. It would take the alpine binding manufacturer trying to accommodate the bigger lug sole, which the Marker can, but they still say it doesn't release reliably enough to certify. None of this is new or independent to the Tecnicas. Just sayin'

[spring corn]

The only bindings with a big enough toe gap and semi-compatible AFD pad are Dukes / Barons and they aren't "suggested" for use with an AT boot. I think the problem is getting reliable release out of lug soles and a DIN sole to stay in a Dynafit without a spacer under the boot. There's not a lot of point in putting inserts in a DIN boot if it won't work in a tech binding. It would take the alpine binding manufacturer trying to accommodate the bigger lug sole, which the Marker can, but they still say it doesn't release reliably enough to certify. None of this is new or independent to the Tecnicas. Just sayin'

I hear you, it is just very frustrating. THink about it, if you want to lap some groomers in the morning and then skin in the afternoon on your dynafits, then Tecnica actually envisions you swapping out your boot soles in between. Absurd.
I just don't get the lack of foresight of these companies who are suppose to be immersed in ski culture. They are just another company that doesn't actually field test their concepts.

[srsosbso]

Dude, we share your pain, but you should spend some time looking around tech talk, these very issues and frustrations and some potential solutions have been talked about a lot here.

[Ivan Oder]

I just got my tech soles kit for the Bushwacker, and they're the same black and white ones pictured in the thread above. (Not the red/black ones on the Cochise.)

It isn't too hard to swap the soles, it takes only a few minutes, the hardest part is getting the previous soles off, which would probably be easier if sprayed with some silicone lubricant. The tech soles have a more rubbery vibram-like grip pattern on the bottom with a few millimeters of rocker. The tech toes are about 5-6mm higher than the DIN toes.

Only one little annoyance, the plate for the rear tech pins is screwed in with an inch and a half wood screw that goes through the sole and into the shell of boot. This will eventually wear out over multiple swaps and requires a Phillips head screw driver AND a hex key to swap. I will probably replace it with something shorter that doesn't bite into the shell, and possibly stainless steel with a countersunk nut on the other side. I can see why they did this though, it's the only thing holding the inverted tech triangle plate to the boot, which probably sees a lot of force.

[Ivan Oder]

I hear you, it is just very frustrating. THink about it, if you want to lap some groomers in the morning and then skin in the afternoon on your dynafits, then Tecnica actually envisions you swapping out your boot soles in between. Absurd.
I just don't get the lack of foresight of these companies who are suppose to be immersed in ski culture. They are just another company that doesn't actually field test their concepts.

Well the problem is if they made the connection to the boot any less solid / rigid people would be bitching about them breaking off after booting up rocks.

Technica just doesn't want to fuck up like Salomon did with the Quest, and that's evident by the massive metal tech toe fitting and the way the sole screws go through it to the bottom of the shell.

The screws holding these soles on are plentiful and beefy and as much as it is a pain in the ass to swap, you wouldn't want it any other way while skiing them.

[srsosbso]

What would be wrong with an alpine sole with tech fittings? Is there a reason these can't be made? Alpine bindings in the morning, switch to dynafits for a walk in the afternoon. No sole swap. Sounds perfect to me. Only downside is they wouldn't have a vibram walking sole- and frankly I would give that up for a resort/sidecountry boot.

[stuckathuntermtn]

Like I said in the other thread, it seems like it would be difficult to get the pins to line up right. There isn't enough thickness to the sole.
At least, that's my totally uneducated theory.

[srsosbso]

Ah, so the alpine standard for soles would have to change. That isn't gonna happen.

[marshalolson]

the AT sole on the tecnica cochise passes the vermont tester with flying colors in a salomon toe.

with very minimal modification, they are working in a p18 just fine as well.

[srsosbso]

Now that sounds awesome. What sort of modification? Sole grind? I looked at my BD Factors with that in mind. They have a shit load of rocker, at least in my size (25.5), I can't imagine getting them ground down enough to fit. If I did, they'd have a lot of ramp angle.

[LC]

FYI, the Bodacious AT sole doesn't fit safely in a 997 toepiece at maximum height. STH16 is fine.

[spring corn]

The AFD on the marker baron is designed for alpine touring boots. It has a little riser plate in the middle of the afd. You can see it in this video:
http://youtu.be/4mkSRhsnbgk

Might be a solution.
So I wonder if I can swap that afd with the one in my marker jesters?