AT Boot Comparative Flex by model (updated)

[LeeLau]

Lee,


I am still interested in the data points. Looks to me like there were some older boots included but not the later version of the Zzero4 Carbon.

•New for 2011/12, the Green Machine features a carbon fiber cuff for added energy transfer and performance during the downhill without increasing weight

My input was for the 2011/2012 version. Which IMO does not rate a 85 or a comparison to a TLT5 Mtn.

Dane I think only you have provided data on the later version of ZZero4. Mine and other data points were on older. Will revise

[Dry]

Gotcha, thanks. Obsolete info now but might help someone down the road.

All this discussion and the newest snow here got me into all my current boots for a re-evaluation. I'd like to change some of my origianl data at from those imporessions. Not so impressed by the numbers here other than to rate the boots stiff to soft. In my stable of current boots this is my hierarchy after looking at them all again last coupel fo days. TLT6 is a lot more ski boot than the TLT5 IMO. Noticably so side by side. I'd bet some are really going to like the ski improvment myself included.

115
110+@ TLT6 P with the CT liner (could be more yet with a Intiuition/Power wrap or another buckle)
110-@ Dynafit Zzero ("Green Machine") CF 4-buckle
105+
105+/- @ Dynafit TLT5 Perf. buckled in tight with the power strap...damn close if not better than a RS IMO
105 -@ Scarpa Maestrale RS al ot of boot but IMO not all that stiff
90+@BD Prime (been two seasons now since I was in this boot so I could be way off here)
90- @Dynafit One PX (great boot but softer than I remembered..all in a good way though, love this boot)
85 @ Dynafit TLT5 Mountain (another really good boot IMO that doesn't reflect the low number while skiing)

Dynafit PDG goes in there some where... bewtween 85 and 90 I suppose.

[auvgeek]

Dane, have you skied the Vulcan? Can you compare Vulcan w.o tongue to TLT6P?

[Lindahl]

Dane, have you skied the Vulcan? Can you compare Vulcan w.o tongue to TLT6P?

My personal opinion is that the higher cuff on the Vulcan will definitely make it ski better, even though it might not necessarily flex stiffer.

[Dry]

Posted by Lindahl in a prevous thread.
"For me, the lack of height is the main difference in skiability of the 5 vs the slightly heavier boots."



Left to Right RS, TLT5, One

TLT6 actually the same height if not a few mm taller cuff than the One/Mercury and think the Vulcan as well. For me the Vulcan feels like a lot more boot however than a TLT6 in every way. Tongue out of the Mercury and tongue in the TLTs? Not so far off. Just no "beef". Vulcan's bottom shell is thicker and cuff is even more solid than the TLT6. Vulcan is a real ski boot. TLT6 is a lwt ski boot now that is still fun to hike in. TLT6 is more of a ski boot than the TLT5 but still a lwt ski-mo boot imo by comparison.

Even the ONE is more of a ski boot imo than the TLT6 although the ONE has a much softer flex. Lot more going on with these boots IMO than just the forward flex.

One and a TLT6 pictured below. You can see where Dynafit saved some weight on the TLT6 by the bigger cut out on the cuff at the cuff back/hinge. Mercury and Vulcan don't have the orange shim either and their cuffs are cut straight across the top.

[Lindahl]

It's not the rear cuff, its the front of the cuff that I'm referring to. Can you show a photo of the fronts? It certainly feels a lot shorter than other boots I've had my feet in. I suppose it could be the forward lean though? I haven't done that mod yet. The sensation while skiing is being pitched more forward when moving through consistencies than when in other boots. There's also a lack of power when pressuring the tongue. For both it doesn't really feel flex related, more like I can't get the power from my entire lower leg onto the tongue.

[auvgeek]

^^I think it's a combo of the FWD lean and the metatarsal flex. Might have something to do with cuff height, but I know what you're talking about and that's my explanation.

Dane: I agree that the way a boot skis is much more than a simple forward flex issue. Thanks for your thoughts.

[Lindahl]

Right on. Looking forward to modding both this year. The blown acl last year made it not worth the effort since I couldn't get a fair comparison in.

[Dry]

It's not the rear cuff, its the front of the cuff that I'm referring to.

same RS, TLT5 and One from the front

Stiffest boot pictured by far is the Maestrale RS and you can see how much shorter the RS is. And why the TLT6 which is a pretty stiff boot and a more even flex (IMO) than the RS. Height makes a difference by adding leverage.

More pictures are here for a comparison:
http://www.dynafit.com/products-winter/boots.html

But it isn't how high the boot is but how the ankle is wrapped by the cuff that gives the support. Even Dynafit does than in several different ways and amounts of coverage. The tongues how ever in Dynafit boots are generally higher than the boot cuff (front or back). If you are just looking at forward flex get a stiffer or softer or no tongue.

Lindahl, from your description sounds like too much forward lean in the boot or in the binding ramp angle. Ramp angle a more likely culprit on a tech binding in my experience. But also one you can easily fix by getting into a more upright stance or shimming the toes. If you are going from tech boot/bindings (too much ramp angle) to alpine boots and bindings (almost no ramp angle) I'd bet binding ramp angle.

Took me a couple of seasons to figure that one out myself.

[Lindahl]

I don't think its ramp angle. Technica Cochises feel fine in tech bindings - I even have heel lifts in them (limited dorsiflexion). Sounds like it's likely a forward lean issue, though that tongue on the TLT6 looks pretty short compared to the One, which I think I remember from trying the Mercury (hence my concern with the TLT short cuff). I haven't tried the RS - can't even close the buckles over the top of my foot.

[Dry]

Lindahl..I'm curious as to what binding set ups you are using with your Cochise?

[Theo-san]

Posted by Lindahl in a prevous thread.
"For me, the lack of height is the main difference in skiability of the 5 vs the slightly heavier boots."



Left to Right RS, TLT5, One

TLT6 actually the same height if not a few mm taller cuff than the One/Mercury and think the Vulcan as well. For me the Vulcan feels like a lot more boot however than a TLT6 in every way. Tongue out of the Mercury and tongue in the TLTs? Not so far off. Just no "beef". Vulcan's bottom shell is thicker and cuff is even more solid than the TLT6. Vulcan is a real ski boot. TLT6 is a lwt ski boot now that is still fun to hike in. TLT6 is more of a ski boot than the TLT5 but still a lwt ski-mo boot imo by comparison.

Even the ONE is more of a ski boot imo than the TLT6 although the ONE has a much softer flex. Lot more going on with these boots IMO than just the forward flex.

One and a TLT6 pictured below. You can see where Dynafit saved some weight on the TLT6 by the bigger cut out on the cuff at the cuff back/hinge. Mercury and Vulcan don't have the orange shim either and their cuffs are cut straight across the top.

This is the wrong thread - but since there are knowledgeable persons here- has anyone added a solid tongue to the Dynafit One yet? Or modded the notched tongue to add more beef?

[Lindahl]

Lindahl..I'm curious as to what binding set ups you are using with your Cochise?

Speed Radicals on older 186 ON3P Billygoats and 180 Blizzard Bushwackers

[marshalolson]

This is the wrong thread - but since there are knowledgeable persons here- has anyone added a solid tongue to the Dynafit One yet? Or modded the notched tongue to add more beef?

one could easily get a drive-plate from an alpine race boot and bolt it on to the ONE.

[Dry]

Speed Radicals on...

Are you using a spacer of any sort under the toe of the Speed Radical?

[Lindahl]

Are you using a spacer of any sort under the toe of the Speed Radical?

No.

It's not so much that my weight feels too forward in a general sense. It's that my legs don't feel like they have much to press on when I get thrown forward from inconsistencies (with the TLT5s) - again, not so much flex, but it feels like the cuff is just too short to provide adequate support for the full lower leg.

[Dry]

The Dynafit Radical toe shim/spacer (6.6mm) will lessen your ramp angle. It is cheap. Your heel lifts make the ramp angle even more. But at least it is consistant between bindings.

Speed Radical no shim is 14.6
Speed Radical with Dynafit Rad shim is 8.0 (and maybe down to 7.0)

Alpine bindings can be net 0

Dynafit:

Speed Superlight is 3 (my bench mark for a "good ramp angle")
Low Tech Race is -1 (another solid dh performer for ramp angle)

Difference between a Speed Radical no shim and a Speed Superlight was very noticable for a couple of us testing skis and boots last Spring. Annoyingly so. Felt a lot like this

"The sensation while skiing is being pitched more forward when moving through consistencies than when in other boots. There's also a lack of power when pressuring the tongue. For both it doesn't really feel flex related, more like I can't get the power from my entire lower leg onto the tongue. "


More here:

http://www.tetongravity.com/forums/s...fit+ramp+angle

I actually went back to the older TLT heel on some of my own skis, mated to a Radical toe piece with the 6.6mm shim. Difference between the two heels is 3.5mm not the 2.6mm suggested on the data chart previous. TLT heel pins being 3.5mm lower. Adding the Dynafit shim will cut your ramp angle almost in half on a Radical Speed.

My bet is a lot of issues, including but not limited to, ski performance, mount point, boot forward lean angle and boot fit issues are actually ramp angle of our feet on the ski. That can be in issue with insoles, boot fitting aids and/or binding ramp. Tech bindings are all over the map on ramp angle. A look at the different Dynafit bindings as an example is educational. Good skiers can get use to anything but having a known place to start (+/-0) is better than just mix and match at where ever is my thought.

[Dry]

Wanta make a boot softer? Add some ramp angle. Make it stiffer...drop some ramp angle.

[Lindahl]

Like I said, it feels fine on the Cochises, not so fine on the TLT5s. The Cochises, if any difference, should have more ramp angle than the TLT5s, due to the heel lift, yet they don't exhibit the problem?

(note, I just added heel lifts to the TLT5s this year, but my observations were based on last year)

I don't think I'm that sensitive to binding ramp angle. I never felt I had problems shifting between Dukes, FKS and Dynafits while in the same boots.

If I can get my hands on some shims, I'll try em out, but I don't really feel like paying $30 for something that seems doubtful (for me). Considering I use inserts, I guess I could just use washers and longer screws to simulate it?

[auvgeek]

I wrote out a whole reply to this earlier, but lost it when I accidentally clicked on the picture link before posting.

I ski with a 6mm spacer under the toe (speed radical toes and plum heels), and I still feel what Lindahl is describing on the TLT5. I attribute it to the metatarsal flex and (to a slightly-lesser extent) the fwd lean. I'll post more later, but I'm convinced these two aspects cause the issues—particularly in inconsistent snow when you're constant trying to maintain fore-aft balance and there's a whole deadspot (like backlash in gears) where your leg is moving for-aft and the boot is flexing cuz of the met-flex but you're not actually flexing the boot.

I prefer my bindings as flat as possible, but after skiing the same ski/binding with the RS and the TLT5, I'm convinced it's the boot not the ramp angle.

But Lindahl: I think the best option is to lock the met-flex, lessen the fwd lean, AND lessen that ramp angle! Think about it: if you dial in your for-aft balance in the boot with heel lifters and changing the forward lean...and then you stand with you heels on a 17 mm, it has to mess with your balance! You may adapt to it (likely by sticking your butt out), but it's messing with your balance for sure. Edit: This is super obvious, but a great way to reduce ramp angle is to just use one of jon's plates...if you happen to have one laying around (or want one for another pair of skis).

[GeezerSteve]

The sensation while skiing is being pitched more forward when moving through consistencies than when in other boots. There's also a lack of power when pressuring the tongue.

That's how my gen1 TLT5Ms felt before I modded them to get less forward lean. I described it as "having so much FL that there wasn't room to go any more forward." Modding the FL fixed this problem. I know Dynafit claimed that original TLT5 had X* of FL, but I think that spec was bullshit.

(Note that I had already shimmed my toes to get less ramp delta.)

I don't think the metatarsal flex has much to do with it. I had a forefoot shim on my spring skis for my (bellowed) F3s, and have skied them with and without the shim, and the difference was minimal.

[Lindahl]

I wrote out a whole reply to this earlier, but lost it when I accidentally clicked on the picture link before posting.

I ski with a 6mm spacer under the toe (speed radical toes and plum heels), and I still feel what Lindahl is describing on the TLT5. I attribute it to the metatarsal flex and (to a slightly-lesser extent) the fwd lean. I'll post more later, but I'm convinced these two aspects cause the issues—particularly in inconsistent snow when you're constant trying to maintain fore-aft balance and there's a whole deadspot (like backlash in gears) where your leg is moving for-aft and the boot is flexing cuz of the met-flex but you're not actually flexing the boot.

I prefer my bindings as flat as possible, but after skiing the same ski/binding with the RS and the TLT5, I'm convinced it's the boot not the ramp angle.

But Lindahl: I think the best option is to lock the met-flex, lessen the fwd lean, AND lessen that ramp angle! Think about it: if you dial in your for-aft balance in the boot with heel lifters and changing the forward lean...and then you stand with you heels on a 17 mm, it has to mess with your balance! You may adapt to it (likely by sticking your butt out), but it's messing with your balance for sure. Edit: This is super obvious, but a great way to reduce ramp angle is to just use one of jon's plates...if you happen to have one laying around (or want one for another pair of skis).

Hmm, I bet I could go buy a cheap cutting board at Walmart and create a couple shims...

Does Dynafit/Salewa still sell that forward lean adjustment replacement part?

Lou Dawson's nail mod to lock out the metatarsal flex would be easy to test that theory.

The heel lift in the Cochise is to better align my lower leg with the forward lean of the boot, not so much to get the balance point just right. The heel lift in the TLT5 was added to move my heel into a wider portion of the boot (square feet and stock TLT5s don't work) - along with significant punching.

[auvgeek]

Hmm, I bet I could go buy a cheap cutting board at Walmart and create a couple shims...

For sure! I've done that myself. Just need to get the longer machine screws from jon.

Gonna try the nail mod myself. As I said earlier in this thread, a buddy said the fwd lean adjustment from dynafit wasn't sufficient for him (or me, but I was on the carpet). Maybe it will work out okay for you, though?

[Dry]

"after skiing the same ski/binding with the RS and the TLT5, I'm convinced it's the boot not the ramp angle."

You are making the same comparison as we were. Same ski and bindings. RS and TLT5 and the ONE boots all the same day switching between runs. IMO RS has a lot more forward lean (and my giuess woudl be more ramp angle as well) than the TLTS or One. Felt like i was standing on my toes in the RS without a shimmed toe by comparison. The position the RS put me in on Speed Radicals (without a toe shim) quickly became uncomfortable and tiring.

[GeezerSteve]

IMO RS has a lot more forward lean (and my guess would be more ramp angle) than the TLTS or One.

I had a very different impression. I have lots of ski days on the gen1 TLT5 and One and only tried on the RS. Of the three, the One seems the most upright (with the lean/lock plate in upright position), the orig gen1 TLT5* the most forward lean, and the RS in between. Most people I know who got the original TLT5 complained about too much FL -- see Wildsnow and TGR Tech Talk posts re people DIY modding them to get more upright. Yet, before Dane, I've never heard anyone with Maestrales (reg or RS) make a similar complaint about too much forward lean.

*Note that gen2 TLT5 come with a lean/lock plate that can be flipped to get two FL positions.

Maybe the lesson here is that individual physiology may be relevant. I have huge calves that push me forward compared to a guy with pencil legs. How much a boot pushes me forward via my calves varies with the design of the boot. I would think other physiological differences might be relevant.