Page 1 of 3 1 2 3 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 52
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Verbier
    Posts
    148

    Dynafit TLT5 help needed please

    I have finally managed to try these on today, and they are by far the best fit I have ever found in a touring boot for my freakishly narrow feet. Before I buy them I have just a few questions if anybody can help me.

    Firstly are there any issues with blowing out hot spots, I understand the 6th toe is difficult due to the flex zone, but if I needed work around the navicular that should be ok shouldn't it?

    Secondly I have read somewhere that the stiffer tongue that will be available for the TLT6 next season will be retrofittable to the TLT5. Is there anybody out there who could confirm this one way or the other, as it would be nice to know that I can make it stiffer if I need it.

    Also on that note it would be great if anybody had any information about how much stiffer that tongue would be than the stock TLT5 version.

    Thanks for any help.
    Last edited by another skier; 05-25-2013 at 10:41 AM.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    西 雅 圖
    Posts
    3,340
    I punched mine at the first and fifth met heads no problem, as well as in the medial midfoot (below the naivicular, but no real difference in the plastic). It's fairly easy to fuse the black and white plastics at the metatarsal flex zone together if you aren't careful with the heat gun, but the Grilamid takes and holds a punch quite well. I've done some for other people at well. Overall the Grilamid shells are much better to work on than most of the Pebax shells on the market.

    The TLT6P will ship with two sets of tongues, but I'm not sure if the stiffest one is stiffer than the current TLT5P ones or not. I've only seen the TLT6M in person, and the connection looks the same as the TLT5, but I didn't try the tongue in my boot.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    South Lake Tahoe
    Posts
    3,498
    Get someone experienced to punch the grilamid. If they are good they can punch everything including the flex zone (but not the carbon) like a regular boot.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Verbier
    Posts
    148
    Thanks for the replies. Good to know that if I need to punch them it should work.

    I read somewhere that the softer of the 2 tongues with the TLT6 was comparable to the current TLT5 tongue, and that the second tongue was stiffer, but I would love some confirmation.

    I am also very stuck between whether I could get away with the Mountain version. There are a few things like new liners that I would like to get, and the €200 difference in price is slightly intimidating even before the extras. I have read some people who say the difference in stiffness is about 40%, and others who suggest it is not that significant.

    Is there anybody here who has experience of skiing both, and who could add an opinion? I am 6'3", and about 185lbs if that helps.

    Thanks again.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    西 雅 圖
    Posts
    3,340
    The difference in forward stiffness is nowhere near 40%. I would say more like 10%, and there are plenty of big guys skiing in TLT5M's who are perfectly happy with them. If you live in Verbier you should be able to try both of them on. There are some other advantages to the Mountain version as well - the cuff rivets don't tend to loosen up as much, and they don't create a black residue where the carbon cuff wears on the white shell.

    Don't get too caught up in the forward stiffness = downhill performance thing, it is only one factor. People who feel that the TLT5 series boots are inadequate for aggressive downhill skiing are usually put off more by the lack of mass than lack of stiffness.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Verbier
    Posts
    148
    Thanks Greg.

    I tried on the One PX, and the TLT5 Performance today, but there were no TLT5 Mountain in my size. On paper the Mercury was the boot I was hoping would work, but the fit of the One was just too big, and I know the fit is the same on the Mercury. There is part of me still tempted to buy the Mercury, and try and fill the space, but I know that that is a stupid route to go down.

    The TLT5 Performance felt ok flex wise in the shop. It is certainly softer than I would choose ideally, but the fit was so much better than the One. The main thing was that the cuff just felt a little too low, but I am sure with a stiffer, higher liner I can at least go some way to making it feel better.

    Based on what you say I think I may take the plunge on the TLT5 Mountain, and save the extra money for some extra bits and pieces to fine tune it.

    Thanks again for your help.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Zurich, Switzerland
    Posts
    5,626
    If you really want the Mercury, size down and blow it out. If you can get a good fit one shell size down, blowing it out should work. If you have liners, bring them to put in the boots. The stock liners have a good bit of heat moldable density in them and the fit will be a bit off without heat molding them. I know a few bootfitters that have preformed liners they keep in the shop just for this purpose (this goes for Scarpa too).

    My feet are pretty wide, so I did the opposite and sized up with the TLT5 and blew it out a little. In my opinion, if you're not blowing out the shell in places (i.e. length for narrow feet, width for wide feet), you got a boot that is too big for your foot.

    To me, the TLT5s are a quiver touring boot. In Europe, where most touring starts with a lift ride, they'd be even more so. They ski well enough, but I would rather work harder with a beefier boot than have the TLT5 as my only touring boot. If your a rando racer and big vert kind of guy, that might be different. To me, the TLT5 is a big-mission-only kind of boot.

    I actually found the flex to be pretty decent/workable - it's the low cuff height and lack of mass that makes me miss a beefier boot. I haven't tried using a different/taller liner, but I can't imagine that being much more than an incremental improvement.
    Last edited by Lindahl; 05-26-2013 at 07:05 AM.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Boston
    Posts
    1,443
    A note on the TLT5 tongue: I have TLT5Ps, and just recently ordered and installed tongues from the Vulcan- they fit, although it does require cutting a small hole in the tongue for the plastic tab near the toe (see https://www.tetongravity.com/forums/a...?t-259593.html). The tongues can be had for $15/shipped and will stiffen up the boot quite a bit.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Edmonton, AB
    Posts
    247
    Quote Originally Posted by Lindahl View Post
    If you really want the Mercury, size down and blow it out. If you can get a good fit one shell size down, blowing it out should work. If you have liners, bring them to put in the boots. The stock liners have a good bit of heat moldable density in them and the fit will be a bit off without heat molding them. I know a few bootfitters that have preformed liners they keep in the shop just for this purpose (this goes for Scarpa too).

    My feet are pretty wide, so I did the opposite and sized up with the TLT5 and blew it out a little. In my opinion, if you're not blowing out the shell in places (i.e. length for narrow feet, width for wide feet), you got a boot that is too big for your foot.

    To me, the TLT5s are a quiver touring boot. In Europe, where most touring starts with a lift ride, they'd be even more so. They ski well enough, but I would rather work harder with a beefier boot than have the TLT5 as my only touring boot. If your a rando racer and big vert kind of guy, that might be different. To me, the TLT5 is a big-mission-only kind of boot.

    I actually found the flex to be pretty decent/workable - it's the low cuff height and lack of mass that makes me miss a beefier boot. I haven't tried using a different/taller liner, but I can't imagine that being much more than an incremental improvement.
    For reference, I own both the TLT5P and the Mercury and I completely agree with what's said here.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Eburg
    Posts
    13,022
    Quote Originally Posted by gregL View Post
    Don't get too caught up in the forward stiffness = downhill performance thing, it is only one factor. People who feel that the TLT5 series boots are inadequate for aggressive downhill skiing are usually put off more by the lack of mass than lack of stiffness.
    I will confirm this. TLT5 is quite stiff laterally, indeed moreso than some alpine boots. So, if you ski on the balls of your feet with a balanced style, the TLT5 (if it fits) will ski anything fine.

    Of course, the increased ballast of heavier skis and boots helps in some conditions, but, fuck, we're talking about touring gear. Part of the fun of touring is to learn to ski light gear and love it.

    See the discussion on the TLT5 main thread re forward lean. The original stock lean was way too forward for most people. This, especially on the TLT5M, gave the skier virtually no room to flex forward. After I modded my Ms to get them c. 3* more upright, they skied great.
    Last edited by Big Steve; 05-30-2013 at 10:15 AM.

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    northern BC
    Posts
    18,788
    The Mercury liners didnt work for me so I used an old set of heat molded conform'ables liners until I got some intuition's, I did find the mercury wide in the toe box, I never tried the TLT but was under the impression that the fit of the TLT was different (narrower)than the mercury line in the toe area ?

    OP don't forget the TLT can only be used with a dynafit binding
    Lee Lau - xxx-er is the laziest Asian canuck I know

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Zurich, Switzerland
    Posts
    5,626
    Quote Originally Posted by XXX-er View Post
    The Mercury liners didnt work for me so I used an old set of heat molded conform'ables liners until I got some intuition's, I did find the mercury wide in the toe box, I never tried the TLT but was under the impression that the fit of the TLT was different (narrower)than the mercury line in the toe area ?

    OP don't forget the TLT can only be used with a dynafit binding
    The TLT5 has a huge toe box, IMO. Bigger than the Mercury and most other boots I've tried. It's narrow everywhere else though.

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Eburg
    Posts
    13,022
    Quote Originally Posted by Lindahl View Post
    The TLT5 has a huge toe box, IMO. Bigger than the Mercury. . . .
    This is not my experience. I had to blow out my TLT5s but not my Ones (same last as Mercury).

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Verbier
    Posts
    148
    Wow, thank you all, lots of good information, and food for thought. My main concern with the feeling of the TLT5 in the shop was the cuff height. Being very tall I just felt a lack of security, but then I am coming off having used 130-150 flex 95mm lasted race boots for everything for a number of years.

    I have read both the TLT thread, and the Vulcan/Mercury thread and both are clearly fantastic boots for what they are made for.

    Lindahl et al thanks for the comparison between skiing in the Mercury/One and the TLT5. It does reinforce the feelings I had that the Mercury would be a much better boot for the kind of skiing I want it for. Also a few people mention the need to ski the TLT from a fairly central stance, which may also be an issue, as I tend to ski on the fronts of my boots quite a lot.

    I think I will pop down with my Inuition liners, and foot beds tomorrow and try them both on again to see whether I can make the Mercury work with a thicker liner. I don't want to end up with a boot that is too big, but I do not want to end up with a boot that I do not feel secure in.

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Zurich, Switzerland
    Posts
    5,626
    Quote Originally Posted by Big Steve View Post
    This is not my experience. I had to blow out my TLT5s but not my Ones (same last as Mercury).
    Might be a liner difference then. I did not use heat molded liners for my feet when trying on a Mercury. I tried it with someone else's molded liners, and the stock, unmolded liners. The toe box on the TLT5 is still very wide (maybe you meant long/high?) compared to most other boots I've tried. I'd have to punch the toe-box width in every boot I've ever tried. With the TLT5, I can ALMOST get away with not doing this.

    Quote Originally Posted by another skier View Post
    I think I will pop down with my Inuition liners, and foot beds tomorrow and try them both on again to see whether I can make the Mercury work with a thicker liner. I don't want to end up with a boot that is too big, but I do not want to end up with a boot that I do not feel secure in.
    Three things to keep in mind:
    1) The TLT5 liner is very low density. It sounds like you do have a low volume foot, so it's possible the Intuition liners will be too high volume for the TLT5 and your foot.
    2) Don't forget to try a shell size down in the Mercury. Ignore toe crunch, since you can easily punch out a toe box one shell size in length.
    3) There are more touring boots coming next season. If you can wait till then, it might be worth it to get a beefier boot that will fit your foot.

  16. #16
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    西 雅 圖
    Posts
    3,340
    The problem with sizing down in the Mercury will most likely be instep height; they take a length punch well but are tight over the instep and it's hard to adjust. I also think the Mercury toe box is bigger (I own both boots) - slightly wider and way taller. For a boot I'd wear most days in Verbier or Cham, not just for touring, the Mercury would definitely be the choice.

  17. #17
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Zurich, Switzerland
    Posts
    5,626
    Quote Originally Posted by gregL View Post
    The problem with sizing down in the Mercury will most likely be instep height; they take a length punch well but are tight over the instep and it's hard to adjust. I also think the Mercury toe box is bigger (I own both boots) - slightly wider and way taller. For a boot I'd wear most days in Verbier or Cham, not just for touring, the Mercury would definitely be the choice.
    gregL - I've read that the instep height issue is due to the liner, and not the shell? If he has his own Intuitions, that problem might be avoided. If not, perhaps you could sculpt out the liner foam a bit. (see the thread about the Vulcan - pretty sure it was in there)

  18. #18
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    西 雅 圖
    Posts
    3,340
    Quote Originally Posted by Lindahl View Post
    There are more touring boots coming next season. If you can wait till then, it might be worth it to get a beefier boot that will fit your foot.
    Unfortunately most of them are not low volume boots, unless you're thinking of the Lupo or maybe the 97mm K2 Pinnacle, both too heavy for serious touring IMO.

  19. #19
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Zurich, Switzerland
    Posts
    5,626
    Quote Originally Posted by gregL View Post
    Unfortunately most of them are not low volume boots, unless you're thinking of the Lupo or maybe the 97mm K2 Pinnacle, both too heavy for serious touring IMO.
    What about the La Sportiva Spectre? They're footwear has been on the low volume side, in my experience. The last width is reportedly high, but I've found that last width really doesn't mean much. (The Cochise Pro is definitely not 98mm)

    Also, what about the Sherpa that's currently on the market? I remember that being an insanely low volume boot. It was too painful on my foot to really get a good idea of the walk mode or flex. It seemed like a pretty decent middle-of-the-road boot.

  20. #20
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    西 雅 圖
    Posts
    3,340
    Quote Originally Posted by Lindahl View Post
    gregL - I've read that the instep height issue is due to the liner, and not the shell? If he has his own Intuitions, that problem might be avoided. If not, perhaps you could sculpt out the liner foam a bit.
    The foam in the stock liner tongue isn't that thick - I compressed it on a boot punch and ground material off the arch of my footbeds and it is still pretty tight. No zeppa to play with either.

  21. #21
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    西 雅 圖
    Posts
    3,340
    Quote Originally Posted by Lindahl View Post
    What about the La Sportiva Spectre? They're footwear has been on the low volume side, in my experience. The last width is reportedly high, but I've found that last width really doesn't mean much. (The Cochise Pro is definitely not 98mm)

    Also, what about the Sherpa that's currently on the market? I remember that being an insanely low volume boot. It was too painful on my foot to really get a good idea of the walk mode or flex. It seemed like a pretty decent middle-of-the-road boot.
    I haven't tried on any of the La Sportiva boots. The Sherpa isn't insanely low volume like the KR2; I was able to put it on and buckle it for 5 minutes or so, but it's a bit overly complicated and doesn't offer the performance/weight ratio of the Dynafits. Looks like Dalbello is discontinuing the 7/3 this year, at least it doesn't appear in the literature.

  22. #22
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Verbier
    Posts
    148
    I will try on a 29 as well as the 30 and see how it feels. My reservation with that is that I tried to go for a slightly smaller plug boot this winter, and it really messed up my season as I was in so much pain. That was in a very tight toe box though, so maybe the much higher volume of the toe box in the Mercury may make it more forgiving. My instep is very low so that would not be an issue if I downsized, in fact that is where I need the reduced volume the most.

    I certainly would like something lighter than the Lupo or the K2. Also I would really like something Dynafit compatible and I have still not seen proof that the Lupo will be.

    As for the Sherpa I have tried it on, and the fit around the foot was ok, but the fit around the leg needed a more bulk than I can provide.

    I will look into the La Sportiva, and then see how things go on Tuesday (I have just discovered the shop is shut tomorrow).

  23. #23
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Eburg
    Posts
    13,022
    Quote Originally Posted by gregL View Post
    The problem with sizing down in the Mercury will most likely be instep height; they take a length punch well but are tight over the instep and it's hard to adjust. I also think the Mercury toe box is bigger (I own both boots) - slightly wider and way taller.
    I agree with all these points. Lindahl, I don't know where you are getting the TLT5 toe box as "very wide." I can speak only for the 30-30.5 shells, at which size the stock TLT5 is substantially narrower than my Ones. Indeed, my TLT5s are the only touring boots where I needed the toe box blown out. And that wasn't enough so I got low volume liners. My TLT5 toe boxes, blown out with low volume Dreamliners, are about the same interior width as stock Ones with stock liners. Mercury/Vulcan/One toe box is definitely quite high, i.e., lots of up/down toe wiggle room, an ostensibly weird combination with the tight instep, but it seems to work for me.

    Good luck, another skier. If you can get the TLT5 to fit, it's a fantastic touring boot, although see my prior comments re forward lean.
    Last edited by Big Steve; 05-29-2013 at 03:52 PM.

  24. #24
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Zurich, Switzerland
    Posts
    5,626
    I must have a faulty memory. A couple months ago I tried on some Mercuries along with TLT5s. I felt the TLT5s had a wider toe box - maybe I got that impression mixed up in my head? I'll take your guys' word for it I guess. I own the TLT5s now, but don't have any Mercurys to confirm the comparison.

    Also, surprised to hear there are lower volume aftermarket liners than the TLT5 stock liners - did I hear you right?

  25. #25
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Eburg
    Posts
    13,022
    Quote Originally Posted by Lindahl View Post
    Also, surprised to hear there are lower volume aftermarket liners than the TLT5 stock liners - did I hear you right?
    Yup. Intuition Dreamliner, low volume model. Significantly lower volume than stock TLT5 liner. Mine matched up nicely with my TLT5s, improvement for me over the stock liners, but, hey, it's all a matter of what fits the individual.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •