Salomon Quest Tech inserts failure thread

[lynchdogger]

Fact: Salomon released a flawed product into the market. Some may say the lack of QC/QA in place for this product could be described as negligent (I would).

Fact: It caused a crash to someone who purchased the said flawed product, and that crash led to serious injury, loss of income, and a shitbucket full of pain to an innocent user of said flawed product.

Fact: Salomon/Amer has not claimed responsibility for this injury, flawed product, or the shitbucket full of pain inflicted upon an innocent user of flawed product.

Fact: (sad fact) is that the legal system in the states (and in some respects canada too) will cause this to be a protracted to and fro of emails and letters between legaltypes that do this crap for a living.

Fact: I sometimes live in a utopian dreamworld where I thought that maybe, just maybe salomon would have the balls to man up and take responsibility for their flawed product. Sadly when I woke up, the world had not changed and big business will do what big business will do - hide behind lawyers.

Fact: To express my displeasure with salomon not manning up I will boycott
all of their (and Amer's) product line, this will include gear for my kid, my fiance and any of my friends who mention that they are either thinking of buying new gear or want some advice in buying new gear.

Lynch mob, methinks not. Just some guys who think a fellow ski fanatic got fucked over by a shitty product, issued by a company that should've known better. Some guys who want to make a statement that what was done here is not acceptable, and the only real weapon we have is our wallets.

Well said. I also fully agree and plan the same (not that I really ever liked their products anyway). Shameful behavior. Good luck to TC and his family.

[weasel1]

No, you should not infer that any product would be safe to use under any and all conditions.

However, I do expect it to be safe to be used for the conditions it was designed for

...whether you ski like a pussy or stick every 100' cliff you huck isn't the point.

i'd like to hear how many pairs of boots/bindings/skis you have dissected so that you can examine their internal structure and determine whether or not the engineering involved with the design is up to the task.

no shame if the answer is zero (i've never done it either).
but don't you think that you're taking the caveat emptor thing a little too far?

unless you're designing and building all of your own equipment, at some point you are going to have to invest a little trust and hope that the product will perform as advertised.

you drive over bridges and what not, no? w/o doing a walk around right? that's because you trust those stuctures to perform as they are supposed to and not collapse under your car as you cross.

Exactly Pfluff....

Wooley, this is the same reason you would be pissed if your brand new plasma tv suddenly developed a shitty picture, or your new Corolla looked great in your driveway but never started. There is an expectation, backed by principle in law, that a product sold will be fit for its intended purpose. TC's use was not even remotely pushing the design limits here.

It's not like he mounted Dynafits to the top of his buddy's rodder Impala, clicked in and hung on for the 1/4 mile. TC was SKIING IN HIS SKI BOOT.

Forgive me if it seems reasonable that his expectation was that the materials used were suitable to allow him to SKI IN HIS SKI BOOT.

Wooley, to extend your pilot analogy, pilots doing their walk around may catch an obvious mechanical flaw or material failure after the fact, but they aren't going to catch a substandard bolt alloy before it fails and the wing shears off. They depend upon, indeed, bet their lives on the notion that the bolt manufacturer cares enough about their safety and the company's own reputation to use an alloy for their bolts that is up to the task.

I am all for personal responsibility. When I eat french fries, I know it's bad for me. If I crash my car, I am not going to sue the state for building a road. Sure, TC took a calculated risk in getting out of bed, driving to NH, climbing the mountain and skiing down. The issue was not his preparation, it was that he had no way to know that his calculations of risk were totally blown by faulty product.

Sorry, but your argument just doesn't hold here. Post your thoughts on the thread about the sledders high-marking in extreme avy conditions, and we might be a little closer philosophically.

[Jonathan S.]

Salomon says:

"When it comes to free ski innovation, Salomon knows no boundaries and with the Quest Pro, they’ve opened up the whole mountain for your sheer pleasure. Free skiing is all about exploration, an endless search for the best lines and best unused track. The Quest Pro gives you the freedom to explore every part of the mountain and offers downhill skiing performance never previously possible with this type of boot. Developed in conjunction with Salomon athletes and mountain guides, this boot has been tested to perfection. The Quest Pro, is one of the lightest freeride boot available. Nigel Shepherd, International Mountain Guide has been testing these boots for the last couple of seasons.
“I have all day comfort everyday of the season, my feet stay warm during the coldest part of the season [...]"

Does that include the part when you're waiting for the helicopter extrication after the "Tech" interface deforms like the flimsy piece of unreinforced metal that it was designed to be? (I always thought that despite the horribly pained look on TC's face, you could tell that even though his leg was in excruciating pain, his toesies were nice & toasty!)

Sarcasm aside, I get Woolsey's point in general, but I don't think it applies to this particular case. I mean, for example, you shouldn't expect to take a feather-light rando race setup and start hucking on it:
http://slc-samurai.blogspot.com/2009...ater-gear.html
"I saw all kinds of broken gear, including broken Crazy skis, broken DNA World Cup skis, and several Trabs like this one. I don't think it matters what the brand is -- racing is tough on light gear."

But you should expect that *any* "Tech"-compatible boot has a steel connector bar that will not deform: we're not talking about some complicated moving part or mechanism, or some black-box device that's difficult to reverse engineer, but rather a simple piece of metal that can be obtained even just by stopping by a consignment shop (I know of a fine pair of $75 boots if anyone is interested) or cruising Craiglist (not the part that just got censored), and then easily copied. (Maybe figuring out the correct alloy and/or hardening is tricky, but the copying the shape is not.)
Furthermore, as all the embarrassing promotional material now emphasized, this was supposed to be a super-burly boot, so designing the most critical part in a negligent manner is utterly baffling (as well as horribly dangerous).
In an odd coincidence, I know one of the testers. Ironically (with hindsight), I kept badgering him during the 2008-09 season to ditch the Diamirs for Dynafits. I had finally convinced him by Fall 2009, but then a bad road bike crash took him out for the season -- might have been all for the better given what the boots were about to do him.

[marshalolson]

Marshall, your .02 carries great weight with me, but really???

dude, settle down for a minute.

it matters TO ME (not from a purchasing stadnpoint, i would not buy from them regardless, but ethically overall) an to THE COURT when and what testing was done, and what changes were made after this "testing", and if the design was the same as the outputted product.

i know exactly how salomon works, i have met the people that probably designed the boot, the product manager that was responsible for launching, the athletes that tested, etc. i would like to know WHERE in the design phase the failure occurred, and weather it was a materials issue, an inherent design issue (ie no matter what material was selected, it was not robust enough) or what. the insert appears to be a stamped steel. perhaps a CNC or forged piece would have held? my guess is that a forged piece WOULD have held, and my other guess is that it was tested with a forged piece in there.

finally, TC escalated this to a legal claim (rightly), so HE must wait for due process. that is how it works. he put the onus of settling in the legal system, and as such, the legal system is responsible for determining the settlement. out of court settlements for something such as this would not surprise me to take a year more, and an actual court case would be years away.

what exactly are you expecting salomon to do? you are demanding very loudly that they NEED TO DO SOMETHING FOR TC... but what? no legal counsel in the world will allow them to admit fault at this point. i mean, that is naive beyond words to expect. so WHAT should they do?

it clearly is a shitty situation, and my thoughts go to TC without question. but you present not answers or solutions, only anger. and that most certainly does not help anyone.

if you can determine the answers to my questions above, then TC is armed with a tool at his disposal to leverage a bigger/better/quicker settlement. so if you actually were is friend, you would channel your anger into gaining him these tools, instead of going on and on about nothing. not trying to be harsh, just calling it as i see it.

[Jonathan S.]

what exactly are you expecting salomon to do?

Not blame the lack of a standard/norm.

[GeezerSteve]

Marshal, your lucid call for more information, thoughtful analysis and due process has no place on TGR.

[marshalolson]

Not blame the lack of a standard/norm.

agreed that the marketing/PR end really missed the boat on that.

[DoWork]

dude, settle down for a minute.

it matters TO ME (not from a purchasing stadnpoint, i would not buy from them regardless, but ethically overall) an to THE COURT when and what testing was done, and what changes were made after this "testing", and if the design was the same as the outputted product.

i know exactly how salomon works, i have met the people that probably designed the boot, the product manager that was responsible for launching, the athletes that tested, etc. i would like to know WHERE in the design phase the failure occurred, and weather it was a materials issue, an inherent design issue (ie no matter what material was selected, it was not robust enough) or what. the insert appears to be a stamped steel. perhaps a CNC or forged piece would have held? my guess is that a forged piece WOULD have held, and my other guess is that it was tested with a forged piece in there.

finally, TC escalated this to a legal claim (rightly), so HE must wait for due process. that is how it works. he put the onus of settling in the legal system, and as such, the legal system is responsible for determining the settlement. out of court settlements for something such as this would not surprise me to take a year more, and an actual court case would be years away.

what exactly are you expecting salomon to do? you are demanding very loudly that they NEED TO DO SOMETHING FOR TC... but what? no legal counsel in the world will allow them to admit fault at this point. i mean, that is naive beyond words to expect. so WHAT should they do?
it clearly is a shitty situation, and my thoughts go to TC without question. but you present not answers or solutions, only anger. and that most certainly does not help anyone.

if you can determine the answers to my questions above, then TC is armed with a tool at his disposal to leverage a bigger/better/quicker settlement. so if you actually were is friend, you would channel your anger into gaining him these tools, instead of going on and on about nothing. not trying to be harsh, just calling it as i see it.

First, sorry for the harshing on you and I am glad you responded as yes, I do have to work on my argumenative technique when it involves something I'm very passionate about. My apologies to you and I'm working on it.

Second- in response to the first bold statement, being an ASME-spec QC Manager and lifelong fabricator in the metal industry they appear to be castings. I can't comment on their chemical makeup for obvious reasons but it's the stress value of the metal, not so much how it's made. i.e. Aluminum has a lower stress value than say Stainless Steel (omitting grades for the purpose of simplification) etc. So whether they were forged or cast really wouldn't matter all that much (save for maybe a heat treating/hardening process), it's the overall structure and subsequent stress redistribution across the whole piece and THAT structure's ability to hold that stress without deforming that matters most. They could have made it out of tin if it had the structure to back it up.

For the Bold and Italicized part, that's simple. I'd love for Salomon to stop bullshitting us. I understand the premise that PR will relay what the lawyers come up with, and that's expected- but there have been several instances where the information they have given us was either misleading or outright false. If they could NOT blow smoke up our asses when they relay things to us, that would be a start since they have been going through the trouble of telling us stuff anyways, why not go the rest of the way?

Basically the end product I'm looking for is honesty from Salomon. I want to know how this happened and more importantly what's being done to ensure that it NEVER happens again. Judging by their responses so far, we won't be seeing that. Ever. I mean, they will most likely be settling with D out of court and keeping hush-hush as not to make themselves look bad. IMHO, by remaining tight-lipped they basically are saying to all of us- at least in my personal opinion- that we don't deserve answers nor are we entitled to them. I feel this is bullshit. That's why you'll see a change in me. I'm focusing my efforts as we speak to compile all the pertinent information and their sources RIGHT NOW so we can have it all together for peoples' perusal, and with a clear message to Salomon: We want answers, and we're not giving up or buying your products until we get them. You owe us ALL (not just TC) a serious explanation and I will spread this information to the ends of the earth until we get some real honesty out of them, not posturing and bs from the legal and PR departments like we've seen up to this point. I demand more- as TC's friend, as a skier, as a member of this community and as a buyer of lots and lots of gear I stand by the assertion that the regular corporate culture responses reek of disingenuousness and we all deserve better than that, to hell with what is commonplace or expected.

My aim is twofold but basically I want what you want. I want to know when and how the hell this happened and exactly what's being done to ensure this NEVER happens again. I'm just loading up the wagons because I know better than to think Sally will get dirt on their face without being forced to do so. Sorry if that means feelings have to get hurt, arguments will be had and points will be debated ad nauseum but I feel that they are going to have to make a BP-CEO-like apology in order to recoup once people really see what happened in this case. IMHO, simply by going with the facts at hand- namely them failing in testing AND in their finished form- they owe us all a very heartfelt explanation. They won't? Fine, plenty of other companies out there to buy from.

The second aim of my agument- which I haven't even mentioned out of the sheer complications of doing so- is to help create a standard for tech fittings construction in the future. I'm not an engineer, but I do understand a lot about how things are conceptualized, created and tested and I'd like to instill the help of the collective to standardize a baseline for what these toe pieces should stand up to. This can be determined by destructive testing and the like, but the scope of this task seems almost impossible currently by myself. I have a lot of equipment at my shop and can build pretty much any testing rig you could come up with so if any mags have an idea for this I'd love to hear it.

Is this unlikely? Of course. Just read my sig and you might get it a bit more. Only by rocking the boat can we expect to turn its course in this case, as I feel there had to be many factors leading into this situation and all of them are a product of overexuberance, piss poor planning and execution, and shitty ideology which needs to change. I hope this makes sense and again, sorry for letting my emotions get the best of me, this is tough to articulate on the bad days but it took me coming to this point to realize I need to change tactics to accomplish my goals so thank you.

Look for the definitive superpost with all the major details in it soon. I'm working on it in my spare time, but if people could help me find a few things, that would be great

I need:

A link to the quote where they claimed it was a proto boot
A link to the quote where they gave the number of boots sold
A link to the CPSC recall that tells the actual number of boots sold
Anything else you can think of that I'm forgetting as the fax machine and phone go apeshit next to me.

I already have Sick Rick's post, the account of the injury and Lou Dawson's teardown but I'm also working right now and it's taking forever to find this stuff and any help is greatly appreciated. Thanks guys.

[Salomon Freeski]

[QUOTE=DoWork;2970702]
A link to the quote where they claimed it was a proto boot
A link to the quote where they gave the number of boots sold
A link to the CPSC recall that tells the actual number of boots sold
QUOTE]

Hey DW,

Here are a couple of the links you are looking for:

I don't have the link to the proto quote, but I think this word may have been used in error. This Quest Pro, Pebax and touring soles, when available to us in the US, were production ready. These were not proto products. Originally, the word proto may have been used by one of our athletes who truly may have had a proto product, yet used this verbage when talking about the final production of products.

Link to where we gave a number of boots sold:
http://www.wildsnow.com/2899/salomon...-announcement/

Link to the CPSC recall:
http://www.cpsc.gov/cpscpub/prerel/prhtml10/10285.html


To explain the discrepancy in numbers:

The number of total boots/pads the the CPSC stated is factual. This includes all boots and soles that were in the US. This does not reflect the total number that were released into the market. We had seeded product throughout the industry, including media, and even extra inventory in our warehouse.

The number that we stated via Wildsnow was a reflection of boots/pads we made available for retail only. We had additional inventory and allowed a small number of retailers the ability to purchase these boots/pads.

I really appreciate everyones patience and please feel free to shoot me a call or message if you have any other questions.

801-624-7581

Thanks guys,
Nick

[Professor]

I think this is the first time I have ever been called a troll. So to restate my original point, it sounds like we all want answers. However, instead of supporting a boycott prior to getting those answers, I want more answers before I decide to boycott. It is clear that Salomon screwed up, but I want to know where in the process it occurred. If it turns out that Salomon did no testing whatsoever and simply rushed the product to market outside their normal production process, then I would likely join the boycott. But, I have had too many good products from them in the past and tend to believe that it is not something that sinister that caused this product to reach the market. I also recognize that Salomon has given varying and inconsistent answers. I personally believe that is because they are trying hard to figure out how in the hell this happened. Finally I recognize that I am not as personally involved as some of you. I dont know TC personally and I dont even know anyone that bought these boots. But as I have said all along, I fully support some of you guys feeling like a boycott is appropriate right now and I applaud you for taking the stand you feel is necessary. The fact that I see it a bit different has never changed that. The bottom line is we simply disagree on where we as individuals draw the line in the sand and decide to boycott. I am sorry if you saw my posts as trolling, that was never my intention. BTW kudos to whomever fixed the title.

[skifishbum]

Marshal, your lucid call for more information, thoughtful analysis and due process has no place on TGR.

your coming over to this thread and linking or equating a good damn good mag being injured while skiing by a shitty product with some lady who may or may not of fucked up and is suing a ski resort was lame. I got your point in that other thread but your delivery sucked. As is wooleys that TC should have done some preski checklist or xrayed his boots to find this flaw. He put his faith in solomon not releasing a inadequatly tested/ designed product. This wasn't some fly by night new to the industry company and I think that's why a lot of people are pissed and frustrated. profesor and Marshall both raised valid points in strong posts and I don't think professor is trolling. although I don't think we aside from TC will ever know where the ball got dropped and it doesn't really matter so much to me. What matters is this doesn't get swept under a rug. They take care of tc learn from the mistakes and not release any more shit products. I kind of understand how our fucked up legal system works but still believe the more bad publicity/awareness generated isn't going to hurt TC's case and outcome.
I care more about him than solly and if he were to post something to the reguards of thanks for your vibes but please don't boycott solomon I would.
Likewise if Marshall, professor, or any other mag I respect has a better idea on how to help D get what he deserves i'd listen.
do work can be a little over the top in his passions/posts, but it's hard for me to fault someone for that because I think his passion isn't as much solly hate as frustration for a friend.
More vibes TC hope your continuing to heal i was searching for the tr where you whapworth or tele thor where you hiked out of dessert or nebo with a broken leg or ankle to bump that and send ya vibes but i suck at the webz

[DoWork]

I want more answers before I decide to boycott.

ok ok... I kind of felt like the last post I responded to was a troll aimed at me, but maybe I was wrong.

The part I quoted is the only thing I'd like to address, really. It's my stance that we won't really ever know what happened until we start putting people's backs to the wall, as it is common corporate culture NOT to disclose the intricacies of such an incident and they're going to need serious motivation to do so. Nick's latest post is a step in the right direction, but there's still a loooooong way to go. Thank you Nick for connecting the dots in this case, please do your best to clear up any informational discrepancies in the future as they come up because we will certainly notice them.

I am going to do everything in my power to get you your answers. I hope in all honesty that we get some honest and heartfelt information from Salomon in regards to how this actually was allowed to transpire in a company with such vast resources and knowledge, as well as the assurance that new QC measures are being taken and what those are. If Salomon can do this, I will gladly stop boycotting them as well as revise my stance that they can't be trusted. They failed extraordinarily and I feel they should go to extraordinary measures to make it right, not just by the injured party but also by all the skiers rightfully questioning their drive and adherence to a personally-assigned safety standard. Common sense will tell you that there need not be a standard to put out a quality product, and several companies can serve as examples. To use this excuse is, well, inexcusable.

I have to tell you that it does bother me that you're waiting to hear from Salomon, though. It's hard for me to swallow that if perhaps they just ignored it from here on out you'd go on buying their products for lack of infromation given on their side. THAT is what has been getting to me about your posts fyi.


Oh guys, I also need a link to the story about when the tester's boots gave out on him in AK. Very important.

[Professor]

I have to tell you that it does bother me that you're waiting to hear from Salomon, though. It's hard for me to swallow that if perhaps they just ignored it from here on out you'd go on buying their products for lack of infromation given on their side. THAT is what has been getting to me about your posts fyi.

I am sorry that bothers you, but from my personal side, I have had great luck with Salomon products. I cant state it any more simply. I fully believe in this case, they screwed up and will have to pay for their mistake. But I dont believe this mistake carries over to them as an entire company and product line. Again, we just differ on the approach that needs to be taken. I wish you all the luck in getting the answers you seek and I will continue to look for the answers that matter most to me. Again, sorry if anyone really thought I was trolling. That was never my intention.

[SiSt]

There are some links in the comments here by Jonathan S: http://www.wildsnow.com/2852/salomon...tings-failure/

[Salomon Freeski]

[quote=Salomon Freeski;2970746]

A link to the quote where they claimed it was a proto boot
A link to the quote where they gave the number of boots sold
A link to the CPSC recall that tells the actual number of boots sold
QUOTE]

Hey DW,

Here are a couple of the links you are looking for:

I don't have the link to the proto quote, but I think this word may have been used in error. This Quest Pro, Pebax and touring soles, when available to us in the US, were production ready. These were not proto products. Originally, the word proto may have been used by one of our athletes who truly may have had a proto product, yet used this verbage when talking about the final production of products.

Link to where we gave a number of boots sold:
http://www.wildsnow.com/2899/salomon...-announcement/

Link to the CPSC recall:
http://www.cpsc.gov/cpscpub/prerel/prhtml10/10285.html


To explain the discrepancy in numbers:

The number of total boots/pads the the CPSC stated is factual. This includes all boots and soles that were in the US. This does not reflect the total number that were released into the market. We had seeded product throughout the industry, including media, and even extra inventory in our warehouse.

The number that we stated via Wildsnow was a reflection of boots/pads we made available for retail only. We had additional inventory and allowed a small number of retailers the ability to purchase these boots/pads.

I really appreciate everyones patience and please feel free to shoot me a call or message if you have any other questions.

801-624-7581

Thanks guys,
Nick

Just want to bump this quick to make sure you guys saw it

Thanks,
Nick

[GeezerSteve]

your coming over to this thread and linking or equating a good damn good mag being injured while skiing by a shitty product with some lady. . . .

I didn't equate anything with anything. That's your projection, and it's a faulty one. I'm merely commenting on the tendency of some TGR maggots to eschew the desire to get more information and conduct a thoughtful analysis before jumping to conclusions.

More information about Salomon's process will only help TC and his attorney in the prosecution of his claim.

Was Salomon's tech insert a flimsy POS? Well, it certainly looks that way to me. But a consensus among TGR maggots does not constitute an investigation of the facts, nor is it binding on the court nor the CPSC. Like others, I'd like to know what happened. Where did the system break down? Was it a failure of testing, a material failure, a design failure, a rush to the market or some combination thereof?

I sincerely hope TC the best. I have from the start. I PMed back and forth with TC soon after his accident, answering his questions about the legal process. AFAICT, he's in the hand of a very fine law firm, and I'm confident that he'll be adequately compensated.

Why the fear of having more information, a thoughtful analysis and due process? In the end, more information will not only help TC, but it will result in safer products for the rest of us.

[Beyond]

The biggest mob mentality is that the old days were grand, everyone was nice and friendly, all discussions were cordial, no cliques, and no one ever hated anyone

I'm kinda new here, but started lurking around 2005. And this thread is civilized compared to a lot I remember.

Mainly, think it's disingenuous to label this a "lynch mob." If the "hold back and wait for more evidence" folks here with senior standing are arguing for rational detachment, then they're also rational enough to realize the obvious emotional involvement of some of TC's friends. They should make allowances for some language instead of getting huffy.

I've never met TC, but reading between the lines, his family is facing financial ruin right now. And he has children. So his friends, as in people who actually interact with him, are probably stressed about that. Get the difference between that concern and a lynch mob?

... However, instead of supporting a boycott prior to getting those answers, I want more answers before I decide to boycott. It is clear that Salomon screwed up, but I want to know where in the process it occurred...

I posed this earlier, remain interested in a direct response: WHAT IF YOU NEVER RECEIVE THOSE ANSWERS?

[Professor]

I posed this earlier, remain interested in a direct response: What if you never receive those answers?

I honestly dont know. As I have said, I have always had good luck with Salomon products, so I do have some loyalty. But it sure would be nice if the whole process was more transparent. I do know that is a pipe dream, but it would still be nice. I do believe that at some point, Salomon will have to disclose where the error occurred, whether manufacturing, design, or somewhere else. Even if they dont do it in court, mandatory product recalls from the CPSC are not usually just left alone to ultimately disappear.

[The Dad]

What Marshal said. Except...

what exactly are you expecting salomon to do? you are demanding very loudly that they NEED TO DO SOMETHING FOR TC... but what? no legal counsel in the world will allow them to admit fault at this point.

Actually, quite the contrary.

Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 68 provides for an Offer of Judgment. The defendant offers to let judgment be entered against it (i.e., to be found liable) for a certain amount of money, and optionally, for non-monetary terms -- anything from gear to medical care to an apology -- as well.

If the plaintiff accepts it, judgment is entered on those terms. If the plaintiff rejects it and later recovers less through the court than was offered by the defendant, the plaintiff has to pay the defendant's costs (which usually exclude attorneys' fees, but include most everything the defendant's attorneys have to pay for, from photocopying to expert witnesses).

The purpose of the rule is to encourage early settlement, and to give the plaintiff some skin in the game.

Most of my clients are defendants. And I rarely fail to make a Rule 68 offer.

I don't know whether TC sued in state or federal court, but most state courts have similar procedures.

[GeezerSteve]

Yeah, but an FRCP 68 offer of judgment and an admission by a speaking agent are apples vs. oranges because the former is not admissible at trial while the latter is admissible.

[toast2266]

Offer of judgment is a great strategic tool to put the pressure on a Plaintiff, which I don't think is what Marshall is advocating.

I don't even know if TC has actually filed suit yet (?)

[ex-powderbroker]

Came across some fucking marketing / sales bullshit for the Salomon Quest experience in the Alps and had to leave a review of the boot on Backcountry.

Even if TGR can't agree on a coherent boycott I intend to let as many people know what happened as possible and hope they look elsewhere for AT boots with real dynafit compatibility, and not a promise of some other bullshit in the future.

Quest 12 for sale here.

[Conundrum]

Anyone catch the ad on the back of this year's Backcountry Buyer's Guide?

BD is now flaunting their testing process for boots. Coincidental timing with the Quest issue going on? Zing.

[njfreeskier]

i think it's a coincidence, but zing indeed!

[huckster989]

I love that the guru photo on BC.com for this boot is TC injured in the BC getting medical attention. way to go mags