Page 3 of 28 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 ... LastLast
Results 51 to 75 of 686
  1. #51
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    89
    Quote Originally Posted by njfreeskier View Post

    The walk mode doesn't look great, but whatever.
    can you compare it with scarpa freedom SL?

  2. #52
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Posts
    23
    So will the lupine t.i work in alpine bindings officially or is it a pure tech binding boot

  3. #53
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Dolomites
    Posts
    114
    Quote Originally Posted by linkan110 View Post
    what you`r base that on, on the ones I have you can`t switch any soles and what I know of lupo you can`t either but that I`m not 100% on tho...or are you talking about that you can change the rubber ? aka not to DIN-soles ala cochise ? in that case i didn`t say anything
    I base that on what a guy that works for dalbello sad on an italian forum, also as i sad, just look at those screws in the pics at top page....get it?
    From the word of the same guy walk mode should be slightly improved

  4. #54
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Trondheim
    Posts
    29
    more rumours on sole part

    aparantly the lupo soles would infringe on a patent k2 has from pinnacle, but you should be able to change to those, or some friends of mine has tryied. But now since v÷lkl bought dalbello there could come something in the future, the onces i bought i didn┤t get any or couldn┤t buy any soles.

    but there could be the possiblity in the future with this new info

    and yes, skied them once in a p18 but you have to force them down, aka not acurate DIN-value. So you can ski them in a sth16 but still think they wouldn┤t be DIN-certified but Touring-certified, belive there is some differnence ?

  5. #55
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Dolomites
    Posts
    114
    Linkann, I don't know who told you those thing but just by looking at the dalbello catalogue from 13/14 you can see that the s.p. ones are interchangeable, as sad before you'll be able to screws those one on a lupo t.i., and as for the pinnacle they will not be din certified but just for a little quibble.

  6. #56
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    400
    Quote Originally Posted by thehaze View Post
    From the word of the same guy walk mode should be slightly improved
    fwiw

    What I heard was that the construction is unchanged but that the new liner with flex-zones makes the walk-mode slightly better/smoother/larger.
    Same source said alpine-soles definitely on the way.

    Me, Ive started putting money aside for a new pair of boots and some beast bindings.
    Maybe the trekkers will finally be retired.
    LOL

  7. #57
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Dolomites
    Posts
    114
    I'm super ashamed to correct what I've said, the guy from dalbello was reporting about a pre production one and at last they decided to change it, so no more din sole.
    Fuck that i was dreaming of my stiff cabrio desing with dyna and din boot and I don't know where to look now!!

  8. #58
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    WA
    Posts
    2,503
    Quote Originally Posted by thehaze View Post
    I'm super ashamed to correct what I've said, the guy from dalbello was reporting about a pre production one and at last they decided to change it, so no more din sole.
    BOOOOO!

    They already make the Sherpa/Virus for ski mountaineers who need vibram sole. This choice is a mistake.

  9. #59
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    livin the dream
    Posts
    3,556
    https://instagram.com/p/wb0wEEtKKW/

    Sam smoothies frankenboot. Krypton lower lupo upper. Not sure what the purpose is... Kypton lean with lupo walk?
    Best Skier on the Mountain
    Self-Certified
    1992 - 2012
    Squaw Valley, USA

  10. #60
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Dolomites
    Posts
    114
    Looking at that pic I was thinking that it shouldn't be to hard to do a diy walk mode on a cabrio desing boot, or am I just a dreamer?

  11. #61
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    WA
    Posts
    2,503
    Quote Originally Posted by nickwm21 View Post
    https://instagram.com/p/wb0wEEtKKW/
    Sam smoothies frankenboot. Krypton lower lupo upper. Not sure what the purpose is... Kypton lean with lupo walk?
    That's awesome, but who has two pairs of shiny brand new high-end boots laying around?

  12. #62
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    The Chicken Coop, Seattle
    Posts
    2,576
    Quote Originally Posted by thehaze View Post
    Looking at that pic I was thinking that it shouldn't be to hard to do a diy walk mode on a cabrio desing boot, or am I just a dreamer?
    Well, you're not the only one. I want a boot to rule them all (and by that I mean to fit in all the bindings I like) that isn't as colossally shitty and morbidly obese as the pinnacle. My frankensole mod on the cochise (I shaved the tech sole down to din height) is close and I like the performance of that boot. But I like my ligaments more and they will probably not survive a twisting fall. Even in a reliable clamp like an STH or p18. Although both marshal and lindahl have had good experiences with that...

    Come on, though. Someone other than k2, take a crack at what I need.
    wait!!!! waitwaitwaitwaitwaitwaitwaitwait...Wait!
    Zoolander wasn't a documentary?

  13. #63
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    voting in seattle
    Posts
    4,152
    Quote Originally Posted by SupreChicken View Post
    Someone other than k2, take a crack at what I need.
    I doubt anyone else is jumping up and down in their seats to do what K2 did. It technically does not mean the ISO whatever number that we call din on here. The spec actually says that the sole will be smooth over the lug where the tech inserts are. Some binding companies might have pulled this card on certain shops, saying they should not have passed K2 boots to work with their bindings, and won't have their back in a law suit.

    Also with Salomon/Atomic and Look/Rossi moving to the new WTR standard for bindings, that option will start to appear more attractive for a third 'happy medium' standard. Also, give the Kingpin, Beast, and upcoming Amer options a couple of years and we may all be skiing tech bindings quite a bit of the time.

    Personally, I like have a rockered rubber sole on my touring/bc boots for the extra grip and 'walkability' for scrambles and bootpacks. If Salomon just came to their senses and put the guardian 16 spring in the Warden, I'd probably start replacing my beloved p18s with them.

  14. #64
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Banff
    Posts
    20,362
    I wonder, if independent testing (calibration machine) will have this boot test within range in reality. Or if you can adjust the DIN to have it release where you want it to?


  15. #65
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    The Chicken Coop, Seattle
    Posts
    2,576
    Bump. That boot is so good looking and intolerably frustrating that it's just a heavy tech boot with a shitty walk mode instead of a do it all boot that can click into anything with a safe release.
    wait!!!! waitwaitwaitwaitwaitwaitwaitwait...Wait!
    Zoolander wasn't a documentary?

  16. #66
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    The Chicken Coop, Seattle
    Posts
    2,576
    So the most practical/stiff alpine boot to send to CAST for the mod is...what? I'd want some sort of walk mode, and I can live without tech heels because 1) I have to - the pinnacle doesn't count as an "option" and 2) I have other boots with tech heels.

    Lange XT 130?
    Dalbello panterra?

    Are there others?
    wait!!!! waitwaitwaitwaitwaitwaitwaitwait...Wait!
    Zoolander wasn't a documentary?

  17. #67
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    西 雅 圖
    Posts
    3,254
    Quote Originally Posted by SupreChicken View Post
    Lange XT 130?
    Dalbello panterra?
    Neither will save you much, if any, weight over the Pinnacle . . .

  18. #68
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Oberstdorf
    Posts
    185
    No boot with pins will ever meet DIN ISO norm for alpine bindings. Regardless of the soles. Toe lug must be smooth all the way around. You could of course get the TI and put regular soles from the SP on them... Everything should work fine. It just doesn't comply. Just like the K2. Or any boot with tech toe mod. Perhaps the DIN standard will change or be amended at some point. Who the fuck knows. Why tour in alpine(ish) boots? Or buy expensive cast mod? Maybe that's what I don't get. (Other than the benefit of a p18 or sth)

  19. #69
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    400
    Quote Originally Posted by SkiersLeft View Post
    You could of course get the TI and put regular soles from the SP on them...
    Sadly enough Dalbello didnt design the lupo ti to be compatible with the soles from the sp.
    The screw pattern is the same but the fit against the shell isnt. :P
    Maybe they will make some "din-soles" as extras for the TI?

    The beast horseshoe fitted badly as well.
    Didnt line up with the top shelf of the regular heel = crap for regular binding compatibility.

  20. #70
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    The Chicken Coop, Seattle
    Posts
    2,576
    Sigh. Everything sucks. Pit of despair. Don't even think about trying to escape.
    wait!!!! waitwaitwaitwaitwaitwaitwaitwait...Wait!
    Zoolander wasn't a documentary?

  21. #71
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    voting in seattle
    Posts
    4,152
    People who want tech inserts with 5355 soles = 0.0001% of the market.

    One heavy ass boot is enough. Been jamming vibram soles into P18s for years.

  22. #72
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    The Chicken Coop, Seattle
    Posts
    2,576
    Quote Originally Posted by SkiersLeft View Post
    No boot with pins will ever meet DIN ISO norm for alpine bindings. Regardless of the soles. Toe lug must be smooth all the way around. You could of course get the TI and put regular soles from the SP on them... Everything should work fine. It just doesn't comply. Just like the K2. Or any boot with tech toe mod. Perhaps the DIN standard will change or be amended at some point. Who the fuck knows. Why tour in alpine(ish) boots? Or buy expensive cast mod? Maybe that's what I don't get. (Other than the benefit of a p18 or sth)
    Fair question, and you answered it. The benefit of p18/STH was the entire reason to get the cast system in the first place. I despise frame bindings and don't really like the inelastic feel of dynafits. Radicals have their place, and I love the weight savings for a UL setup. Beast 16 was a step up for sure, but the heel insert requirement is a bigger PITA than I realized. It's ok if you have a vulcan-esque boot that only ever tours, but that thing does not work well for my feet at all, and I also don't really like the all on/all off feel of it skiing. Maybe there's a place for the MTN Lab, Scarpa Maestrale, Khion, or hopefully a new technica offering of some kind. However, my cochise 130 with pro tours weigh in at 1800 grams. My vulcans were 1590 grams. For an extra 210 grams, I'll tour with the boot that fits, that I actually like skiing with. At least for now, until I'm convinced one of these boots will work way better for me than the Vulcan.

    Auvgeek is usually good for some used barely used boots in this department that he's willing to try before me.

    So my target scenario is a boot quiver of two -
    1) a boot to do most things -
    -in bounds
    -CAST
    -BEAST
    2) a longer tour oriented mountaineering boot exclusively for tech bindings, e.g. backland or tlt6.

    ideally the lupo TI is boot 1. It sound likes it releases reliably in STH thanks to surfnski (check the STH height thread). I could live with (gasp) unloading my p18s if this turns out to be true.

    If I have to sacrifice beast functionality, Panterra with CAST mod is also an option that would either facilitate owning 3 boots (Shite) or trying to find a single touring boot for both beast and radicals, which is a compromise. The Panterra would probably work well for inbounds and CAST missions. Worth noting that those boots (TI stock and Panterra with CAST mod) are roughly the same price. I love the fit and performance of my cochise 130, but even shaving some thickness off the tech soles does not produce reliable STH or P18 release. I have a sliding AFD mod (1000 oaks design) that I've done that might make this work, but I can only get it to work with STH 14s, not 16s. I feel better about a clamp with more metal in it, especially if it's CASTed and in the BC. Also, the last time I tried, my local shop only had 1 set of these AFDs, and they didn't get anymore in last season...

    Shoot. Cheapest option by far is to find enough sliding AFDs and just not ride 16 DIN clamps anymore.

    A bird's gotta hunt.

    So...there's that. Could always get by this year and warden everything next year once there are CAST plates for that binding.

    Not willing to go marker Lord.

    So...yeah. Hopefully not stuck. I don't care about the boots meeting the DIN ISO norm. I care about them passing a release test on the bench.
    wait!!!! waitwaitwaitwaitwaitwaitwaitwait...Wait!
    Zoolander wasn't a documentary?

  23. #73
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Oberstdorf
    Posts
    185
    Quote Originally Posted by rabbit View Post
    Sadly enough Dalbello didnt design the lupo ti to be compatible with the soles from the sp.
    The screw pattern is the same but the fit against the shell isnt. :P
    Maybe they will make some "din-soles" as extras for the TI?

    The beast horseshoe fitted badly as well.
    Didnt line up with the top shelf of the regular heel = crap for regular binding compatibility.
    Okay. First I've heard. The dalbello rep said it that was an option, but I haven't tried/or seen that myself. Maybe it's good that the beast fitting doesn't line up? Being offset might help compatibility?

  24. #74
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Den/Baltimore
    Posts
    5,126
    Quote Originally Posted by SupreChicken View Post
    Sigh. Everything sucks. Pit of despair. Don't even think about trying to escape.
    Dood. Get an alpine boot for 1) and a Backland for 2). Or keep the Cochise or Vulcans for a burly touring boot.

    Everything sucks at something, so I guess by definition, "everything sucks." But alpine boots rule in the resort and touring boots work well in the backcountry. Neither are good for sport climbing, either.
    Last edited by auvgeek; 10-20-2015 at 01:58 PM.
    "Alpine rock and steep, deep powder are what I seek, and I will always find solace there." - Bean Bowers

    photos

  25. #75
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Oberstdorf
    Posts
    185
    Quote Originally Posted by SupreChicken View Post
    So my target scenario is a boot quiver of two -
    1) a boot to do most things -
    -in bounds
    -CAST
    -BEAST
    2) a longer tour oriented mountaineering boot exclusively for tech bindings, e.g. backland
    1.) So you want an inbounds boot for both alpine bindings and beast?
    2.) A lightweight sub 1200g touring boot? (Beast compattable?)

    You have Cochise 130's? When I bench test those with tech soles (not ground) the release in sth bindings is consistent enough that I wouldn't worry. That's at a din low enough to be tested... The machine won't test past 10,5 or 11 I think if I remember, been a while. So if you're riding at 14 etc you know what you need from past experiences. Which begs the point? Why so worried about exact release values? Margin of error etc.

    Is it that big a pain just to take off your beast fitting? It sucks I know, wood screws bla bla bla.

    How about dedicated alpine and touring setups? Or beast your inbounds skis? Or have both and spend lots of money.

    Why not just use your Cochise for alpine/beast? And get a lightweight boot for long tours?

    Maybe I just don't get it.

Posting Permissions

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