Page 7 of 9 FirstFirst ... 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 LastLast
Results 151 to 175 of 223

Thread: Dyna TLT6

  1. #151
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    verbier, milan, isla de pascua
    Posts
    4,812
    Quote Originally Posted by Dane1 View Post
    Been skiing my TLT 6 recently in what I consider a "lwt alpine mode". Green tongue installed, no power strap, and I switched out parts of both buckles to make the boot more user friendly first and drop a gram or two on weight second. I am very pleased with the performance of the TLT6 set up this way even on a 116mm wide ski under foot while skiing lifts. The SIX is well up to the task.

    Attachment 147050

    Weight of the TLT 6 in a 29 shell as I am skiing it right now is 1480g with a full length Superfoot Cork foot bed installed. Add the Dynafit power strap and the two bolts need to attach the strap and you are up to 1520g.

    The La Sportiva Spectre is a step up on the TLT 6 P in skiing performance. Even if you add the black tongue and the Dynafit power strap and resort to the original buckles in terms of ski boot. The Spectre still has a leg up on the down. Certainly close to the SIX's in walk mode. And for my own technical climbing may be the Spectre is even a better climbing boot than the TLT6. Which is hard to fathom for me at the moment actually. And this from a guy who hates climbing in ski boots!

    Weight of the Spectre in a 28 shell as I am skiing it right now is 1530g with a full length Superfoot Cork foot bed installed. Pull the front two buckles as I am wanting to use them as a climbing boot and you go under 1450g.

    So many really good options these days for the skier who climbs or the climber who needs to ski. Nice to have boots that you can so easily mod to fit your next mission.
    Maestrale RS and TLT6 P ski better than the spectre. This is the final consensus among all the people I know (me included) who have skied the three. I might be biased because skiing the spectre is painful for my feet, but others were not biased as I was.
    Now, the jury is still out on whether the maestrale RS skis better than the TLT6. They're actually pretty close. RS is a bit more progressive for those who likes a progressive flex.

  2. #152
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Eburg
    Posts
    12,899
    I've skied only one day on the TLT6M, many days on my beat-to-shit TLT5Ms. I had my TLT5s punched in the forefoot. TLT6 seems wide enough in the forefoot to avoid a punch, so my foot thinks the TLT6 is indeed a bit wider. Otherwise, the fit seems pretty similar, but I'm not on the margins re volume, as C3000 seems to be.

    Quote Originally Posted by Christopher3000 View Post
    . . . I can't get the tongues in and out without completely unlatching the buckle ladders--a really frustrating extra step in a set-up with more transition steps than anyone should deal with.
    On my TLT5Ms I've had to readjust both bottom and top buckles when going from tongue to tongueless and vice versa. I've avoided the switch during a tour unless I've got good reason, e.g., scramble, long hike or long approach when I want tongues for the downhill. I've done nearly all my spring/summer touring tongueless. Looking forward to seeing how the yellow TLT6 tongue fits into the equation.

    Really loved my TLT5Ps but they are well loved, completely hammered to shit. Hope the TLT6s are a bit more durable.

  3. #153
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    North Vancouver/Whistler
    Posts
    11,307
    Quote Originally Posted by verbier61 View Post
    Maestrale RS and TLT6 P ski better than the spectre. This is the final consensus among all the people I know (me included) who have skied the three. I might be biased because skiing the spectre is painful for my feet, but others were not biased as I was.
    Now, the jury is still out on whether the maestrale RS skis better than the TLT6. They're actually pretty close. RS is a bit more progressive for those who likes a progressive flex.
    Agree with your groups consensus wrt to Spectre vs Maestrale RS. No opinion 're Tlt6

  4. #154
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    whitefish
    Posts
    992
    verbier, Lee, et al,

    How much worse is the spectre? I know this is all subjective, but are you saying the spectre is not even in the same class or or they were fairly close, etc. Lee I believe you skied the Titan UL for a bit, any comparison there? Thanks.

  5. #155
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    North Vancouver/Whistler
    Posts
    11,307
    It's minor and mainly in terms of fore aft flex where the Maestrale RS is better. It's been a while since I owned a Titan. Let me think about that

  6. #156
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    verbier, milan, isla de pascua
    Posts
    4,812
    As Lee said, the spectre is a bit too soft in the fore aft to drive the big skis that the RS and the TLT6P can easy handle

  7. #157
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Kirkland, WA
    Posts
    75
    Just to confirm what another poster alluded to earlier - with the CR version of the TLT6 (Mountain or performance) the only difference between the full and half size up (e.g. 27/27.5) is the thickness of the boot board, correct? Shell is obviously the same, sounds like liner is the same too?

  8. #158
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    2,703
    That's the only difference in the vast majority of boots.

    I swapped the CR liner out for a protour this weekend, even being uncomfortably tight as a result of not molding them first (I know, I know) they were much warmer than they were with the stock liners. Very slightly softer in forward flex, only about 30g lighter per foot, but remarkable how much warmer they are than with the crappy liner Dynafit decreed the US market "needs."
    "It need not be fun to be fun." - Big Steve

    throughpolarizedeyes.com

  9. #159
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    西 雅 圖
    Posts
    3,161
    Quote Originally Posted by cascadescl View Post
    Just to confirm what another poster alluded to earlier - with the CR version of the TLT6 (Mountain or performance) the only difference between the full and half size up (e.g. 27/27.5) is the thickness of the boot board, correct? Shell is obviously the same, sounds like liner is the same too?
    I was told the difference was in the thickness of the foam in the bottom of the liners, which are labelled for half sizes. There isn't a bootboard per se, just a chunk of styrofoam glued in (not full length) with some silvery woven fabric over it.

  10. #160
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Cascadia
    Posts
    525
    Quote Originally Posted by LeeLau View Post
    Agree with your groups consensus wrt to Spectre vs Maestrale RS. No opinion 're Tlt6
    Man are you guys talking nuances or what? I was skiing the RS all last winter. Now the TLT6 and Spectre. I like the simple buckle system and clean profile ofthe TLT6 and have been skiing it the most this winter. Of the three I didn't appreciate the lack of a progessive flex by comparison on the RS. But also ski the TLT6 P with no power strap and a green tongue. So likely no wonder I like the Spectre as well.

    RS isn't in the same ball game for weight or walk mode.

    Any of these boots will turn a fat ski up to a 138 with ease. My go to skis are several in the 115 underfoot range...RPC on the stiff side to GPO to Huascaran on the soft.

  11. #161
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    South Lake Tahoe
    Posts
    3,498
    I skied my 6ps yesterday with no tongue but with first gen pro tour with stiffer pro tour tongue. Skied well and felt like my 5p with tongue. Great to not have tongue while hiking and transitions are much faster. Had a little slop in my heels but I will try to fix that with some heel lifters.

  12. #162
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    56
    Perhaps I'm blind or just plain suck at internetting but I can't seem to find anyone comparing the fit of TLT6's and Mercury/Vulcans. From what I've gathered the 6 is not the same last, but is it similar? My Mercuries fits me perfectly without punches, but they are pretty beat up so I'm thinking of getting TLT6P's to complement them this winter and eventually replace the Mercs for an Alpine boot or some sort of hybrid-whatchamacallit. Do they come close to the Mercury in stiffness or are they slippers in comparison?

  13. #163
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Cascadia
    Posts
    525
    I've not had to punch either shell. I think of the Mercury/RS as general ski boots, the TLT6 as a touring boot I can lift ski in as well with no real down side. I also rotate the same custom inner boot through both the TLT6 and my Mercury in the same 28 shell size. Shells are different in size but close enough not to notice much for my feet. I've got to the point it is really the liner and insole that are really the majority of fit between the Mercury/6/RS/Spectre. Performance runs a small difference between them. Mercury likely on top of the heap. But I strip the 6 down, so it really isn't the best comparison.
    Last edited by Dane1; 08-21-2014 at 07:02 PM.

  14. #164
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Zurich, Switzerland
    Posts
    5,521
    TLT6 is about the same shape, but smaller last all around - just slightly. The difference in shell/plastic thickness allows for more fitting options though. TLT6 with tongue is close to stiffness, but the lighter weight and (what feels like) lower cuff makes it ski a little less secure. I haven't tried the TLT6 with the CR liner though - only the CL liner.

  15. #165
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Amherst, Mass.
    Posts
    4,176
    Quote Originally Posted by Lindahl View Post
    I haven't tried the TLT6 with the CR liner though - only the CL liner.
    Bought from Europe, or ...?
    For those stuck in the Northeast, check out the NE Rando Race Series and my avalanche course. (For other avalanche course providers anywhere, feel free to use any of my "homework" assignments for your own courses too.)

  16. #166
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Zurich, Switzerland
    Posts
    5,521

    Dyna TLT6

    TLT6 is about the same shape, but smaller last all around - just slightly. The difference in shell/plastic thickness allows for more fitting options though. TLT6 with tongue is close to stiffness, but the lighter weight and (what feels like) lower cuff makes it ski a little less secure - on top of the slightly softer flex. I'd agree with Dane - there is more of a compromise towards the touring side of things - the 6 does tour/hike/climb noticably better. Thats what makes it so great though. I haven't tried the TLT6 with the CR liner though - only the CL liner.

  17. #167
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    56
    Might just spring for a pair then. I skied my Mercuries a couple of days sans tongue last year just because it's a pain to fiddle in the tongues most of the time and they ski fine so long as there's powder. I tend to go touring most of the time unless it's a powder day these days so the 6's will probably be a good complement. Oh and they come in gold this year, will go perfectly with my pimp cup and necklace.

  18. #168
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    西 雅 圖
    Posts
    3,161
    In the same shell size (I've owned 27/27.5 in both boots) the Mercury and TLT6 are similar in fit from the instep back with overall volume of the TLT6 just slightly smaller. The TLT6 instep is actually slightly taller, while the Merc forefoot is a bit wider and much taller. The midfoot and met heads are easy to punch in both boots, but the instep is more of a problem, and some people find the disparity in height between midfoot and forefoot in the Mercury/Vulcan (or just the low instep) hard to adjust to. To me, the TLT6 is quite a bit less powerful, but it's better for most of the touring I do.

  19. #169
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Golden, BC
    Posts
    1,355
    Just got TLT6p, have had TLT5m's for 2 seasons now. It seemed like all the new (Atomic/ Solly) options were not very close to the TLT5 fit I loved so I went with these.

    The biggest question I have now, is about the fabric tongue. I found the TLT5m to be juuust stiff enough when I first got em, but now they are downright foldy. My best guess at why it's so advanced (past what I'd expect from wear) is the fabric tongue separating. See pic:

    I see the TLT6 has a very similar setup. Is it notably more durable than the TLT5 counterpart? If not, what should I be doing to not break the shit out of it?

  20. #170
    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    Location
    SLC
    Posts
    4,422
    Just got a pair of these to replace my old Garmont Mega Rides, which I loved... and damn, these are nice. The ROM in walk mode is incredible, they feel almost like some of my hiking boots. ~1.5lbs per boot lighter, obviously stiffer even just in the living room. I am stoked to do some mushy spring touring.

  21. #171
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    voting in seattle
    Posts
    4,049
    It amazes me that people think this boot is anything capable of driving bigger skis... It pretty much folds in half when you look at it.

  22. #172
    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    Location
    SLC
    Posts
    4,422
    Quote Originally Posted by XavierD View Post
    It amazes me that people think this boot is anything capable of driving bigger skis... It pretty much folds in half when you look at it.
    One mans trash it's a hell of a lot stiffer than my last boots. Also at 150lbs it doesn't need to be made of steel for it to be relatively stiff for me.

  23. #173
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    2,525
    I haven't skied the 6, but I skied the 5P a few times driving my wailer 112s. While I wouldn't want this as an inbounds boot, it is very compelling as a bc boot - especially if you are skiing soft snow or driving narrower skis.

    Strangely, I have read similar comments (as Xavier) from people who ski the Vulcan. Some (including me at 190#) feel that this is a great one boot quiver for inbounds (with tongue) and bc (without). Others want more for an inbounds boot. I believe it probably has a lot to do with individual technique and skiing style.

    To each his own.

    Seth

  24. #174
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    voting in seattle
    Posts
    4,049
    Don't get me wrong, I love the boot, and think it is great for what it is designed for. I wouldn't however want to try and ski anything much over 180cm or 100mm under foot with it. For that I would get the mercury. I'm 200lb btw.

  25. #175
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Eburg
    Posts
    12,899
    I ski TLT6M w/CL liner with skis ranging from 96mm (Vector) to 116mm (V8s). Black tongues for big skis, of course. Yellow tongues or no tongues for the Vectors.

    Different boots for different galoots.

Posting Permissions

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