Page 2 of 11 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 ... LastLast
Results 26 to 50 of 270
  1. #26
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    西 雅 圖
    Posts
    2,528
    Quote Originally Posted by YoEddy View Post
    So good to hear this - thank you.

    Can you confirm if the cuff has canting adjustment or not? Photos are tough to tell but it looks identical to the RS boots.
    It has a cant adjustment on the lateral side only.

  2. #27
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Beer:30
    Posts
    5,128
    Can we please stop calling cuff alignment canting? Canting is shimming the entire boot or grinding the sole of the boot so that the entire boot is at an angle relative to the ski. Cuff alignment is changing the angle of the upper shell relative to the lower shell. The adjustment thingy at the cuff pivot of a boot is cuff alignment, not canting, no matter what words the manufacturer prints on the side of the boot. {/petpeeve]

  3. #28
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    CO/OR
    Posts
    5,320
    Quote Originally Posted by adrenalated View Post
    Can we please stop calling cuff alignment canting? Canting is shimming the entire boot or grinding the sole of the boot so that the entire boot is at an angle relative to the ski. Cuff alignment is changing the angle of the upper shell relative to the lower shell. The adjustment thingy at the cuff pivot of a boot is cuff alignment, not canting, no matter what words the manufacturer prints on the side of the boot. {/petpeeve]
    AND get off his damn lawn, kids!

    But he is right on this one
    Music: http://soundcloud.com/powtron

    "Four score and seven turns ago..."

  4. #29
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Beer:30
    Posts
    5,128

  5. #30
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Der Town
    Posts
    4,204
    Quote Originally Posted by adrenalated View Post
    Can we please stop calling cuff alignment canting? Canting is shimming the entire boot or grinding the sole of the boot so that the entire boot is at an angle relative to the ski. Cuff alignment is changing the angle of the upper shell relative to the lower shell. The adjustment thingy at the cuff pivot of a boot is cuff alignment, not canting, no matter what words the manufacturer prints on the side of the boot. {/petpeeve]
    I agree. This is TGR tech talk. We can do better than that.

    I'm glad XT will have cuff alignment because out of the box I find Lange boots too biased to the inside edge for my lower leg anatomy and ski style.

  6. #31
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    location location location
    Posts
    551
    Relax. I didn't mean to offend your anal sensibilities on canting versus cuff alignment terminology, but i figured the collective here knew exactly WTF I was referring to since just about EVERYONE other than anal boot fitters call cuff alignment 'cant adjustment' ... including LANGE, Fischer, Dalbello, and just about every other manufacturer out there (not just printed on the boot, but listed as a spec for all of them).

    That said, I'm so glad to hear the XT Freetour has the cuff alignment screw dealio that would allow me to angle the fucking cuff in the proper direction for my liking.
    Last edited by YoEddy; 02-12-2016 at 12:40 PM.
    Who cares how the crow flies

  7. #32
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    西 雅 圖
    Posts
    2,528
    Did a full day of lift-served skiing today on the XT 130 Freetour. Conditions were 5-12" of dense fresh over partially to completely frozen mush (rained heavily the day before) with some crust and occasional frozen chicken heads/bowling balls underneath.

    My initial impression is overwhelmingly positive from a skiing perspective. Forward flex isn't as stiff as my "reference" 130 boots (Lange RS 130 and Tecnica Mach 1 LV 130), but it flexes much like a current RX 120 (black one with yellow buckles). In terms of "feel" and "progressiveness" it is just like a good polyether Lange, just lighter. The fit is more relaxed than a normal 100mm Lange RX, but much of this is due to the liner (thinner and lighter). I was able to get this boot to fit with 15 minutes of punches to the first and fifth met heads, and simply heating the left navicular area with my foot in the boot. The Grilamid lower shell is a pleasure to work on, requiring minimal heat, and this is probably the easiest personal bootfit I've ever done (plus the boots were pretty much perfect from the first run). For the record, my foot is 103-104mm wide (not counting bunions) with a taller than average instep and wide medial midfoot. I measure 27.6 on the Brannock and wouldn't go any longer or wider.

    Ran the 26.5 mondo 2017 XT 130 Freetour with my regular "forgiving" setup, 185 Blizzard Gunsmokes with STH2 16's, the toes easily accommodate the extra height of the WTR soles with about 2mm to spare. The thicker WTR front sole block gives me a flatter ramp than I'm used to, still trying to figure out if this bothers me or not (I skied fine, it just felt a bit different). I'll try this boot with some more demanding skis (185 Bodacious and 185 Cochise) when I get a chance.

    Did not touch the cuff alignment.

  8. #33
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Posts
    864

    2016 Lange XT Freetour

    Quote Originally Posted by gregL View Post
    Did a full day of lift-served skiing today on the XT 130 Freetour. Conditions were 5-12" of dense fresh over partially to completely frozen mush (rained heavily the day before) with some crust and occasional frozen chicken heads/bowling balls underneath.

    My initial impression is overwhelmingly positive from a skiing perspective. Forward flex isn't as stiff as my "reference" 130 boots (Lange RS 130 and Tecnica Mach 1 LV 130), but it flexes much like a current RX 120 (black one with yellow buckles). In terms of "feel" and "progressiveness" it is just like a good polyether Lange, just lighter. The fit is more relaxed than a normal 100mm Lange RX, but much of this is due to the liner (thinner and lighter). I was able to get this boot to fit with 15 minutes of punches to the first and fifth met heads, and simply heating the left navicular area with my foot in the boot. The Grilamid lower shell is a pleasure to work on, requiring minimal heat, and this is probably the easiest personal bootfit I've ever done (plus the boots were pretty much perfect from the first run). For the record, my foot is 103-104mm wide (not counting bunions) with a taller than average instep and wide medial midfoot. I measure 27.6 on the Brannock and wouldn't go any longer or wider.

    Ran the 26.5 mondo 2017 XT 130 Freetour with my regular "forgiving" setup, 185 Blizzard Gunsmokes with STH2 16's, the toes easily accommodate the extra height of the WTR soles with about 2mm to spare. The thicker WTR front sole block gives me a flatter ramp than I'm used to, still trying to figure out if this bothers me or not (I skied fine, it just felt a bit different). I'll try this boot with some more demanding skis (185 Bodacious and 185 Cochise) when I get a chance.

    Did not touch the cuff alignment.
    Three questions:

    Did you use your own liner, and if you did which liner did you use, to get the more relaxed 100mm last feel, or is this another touring boat of a boot that the skinny feet crowd, which I'm a member of, won't be able to ski?

    Do you need WTR bindings for the boots, in order to not do any grinding to the sole? Will people who want to use this boot every day, be required/need WTR compatible bindings?

    Does the boot have a different ramp angle/forward lean/foot leg angle (not sure this is the right term if anyone wants to correct me here) then the RS130 shell?

    Thanks for the review!

  9. #34
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    西 雅 圖
    Posts
    2,528
    Quote Originally Posted by skibrd View Post
    Did you use your own liner, and if you did which liner did you use, to get the more relaxed 100mm last feel, or is this another touring boat of a boot that the skinny feet crowd, which I'm a member of, won't be able to ski?

    Do you need WTR bindings for the boots, in order to not do any grinding to the sole? Will people who want to use this boot every day, be required/need WTR compatible bindings?

    Does the boot have a different ramp angle/forward lean/foot leg angle (not sure this is the right term if anyone wants to correct me here) then the RS130 shell?
    I used the stock liner today, I am pretty sure it's thinner than the RX or RS liners. I'm just speculating that the liner's the reason the boot seems to be higher volume than an RX 130 100mm boot. Keep in mind that Lange will also offer a 97mm version. Officially, you need to use WTR bindings with this sole; the STH2 16 is WTR compatible. I set this boot up like my RS 130 (cuff wedges in and pushed down, which means about 14 degrees in the RS) and it felt good. I didn't measure the interior ramp at the bootboard, but it felt slightly flatter than my RS 130 - I am guessing the thicker WTR sole blocks are the reason. I'm not super sensitive to ramp anyway, as I regularly switch between alpine setups and un-shimmed Dynafit Speed Radical setups, so I'm not sure if it's going to be a problem or not. Other people are way more sensitive to changes in ramp angle.

  10. #35
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    西 雅 圖
    Posts
    2,528
    Used the XT 130 Free Tour on the lifts with my "charger" ski today (2015 Blizzard Bodacious 186) - the boot had plenty of power to drive the Titanal-infused 32m sidecut ski and I never felt "underbooted." I also did a quick lap skinning with my Dynafit Denali setup, and while I did notice the extra weight of the whole package, the walk mode was smooth and efficient (you need to remember to unfasten the top two buckles to get the full forward range of motion). Heel hold while skinning was exemplary - Lange didn't hold back on foam around the achilles area like many manufacturers do to save weight on their touring models. Is the XT FT enough boot to be my "daily driver" at the ski area and still tour "some?" The answer is probably yes.

  11. #36
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    Taos Ski Valley or my truck
    Posts
    409
    Wrapping my head around boots for next year...

    Greg, thoughts on the ski/walk locking mechanism? Pretty bomber? Feel like it will last a while?

  12. #37
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    西 雅 圖
    Posts
    2,528
    Quote Originally Posted by the_flying_v View Post
    Greg, thoughts on the ski/walk locking mechanism? Pretty bomber? Feel like it will last a while?
    I don't think the walk mechanism is any different than the regular XT - it should have good longevity. Range of motion is limited compared to other boots in this category, though.

  13. #38
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    2
    I have been skiing quite a bit in the 97mm XT Freetour this spring. Fit and stance are on par with other current Langes, this is a good thing. I molded the Ultrlom liner although not much changed. The Grilamid clog is easy to work.

    The cuff alignment is the same bit as the other Lange/Rossi models with a good range that can easily be modified to extract a little more movement if needed.
    I have not tried canting the sole yet, as I am concerned about creating compatibility issues with tech bindings. The Cantology shims for Lange/Rossi
    WTR are not a match but could be with some modification. Not so sure about cutting the toe lug. I intend to experiment a bit, particularly as it will likely impact the angle when fitting into the toe pegs of a tech binding.

    The 130 designation is a bit optimistic, but the boot is stiff enough, and more importantly it flexes like a ski boot. Forward flex is progressive without the hard stop found in most boots with a walk mode. Rearward stiffness, another typical shortcoming of side country boots, is also quite good.

    I have been using them in both WTR and tech bindings and am happy to report the boots will drive a Rossi E100HD with no problem. Not so sure they would be a good match for a race ski. The boots hike Highland Bowl almost as well as the Salomon Mtn. Lab (the other AT boot in my quiver) and ski down a bit better.
    Obviously, the Mtn. Lab is more of an AT boot and would be a better choice for extended or more technical tours, the Freetour skis very well and tours adequately.

    While I have not spent anytime skiing in them, the new Cochise is also a significant step forward from brand T.

    Personally, I am not sure that the one boot quiver is the optimal way to go, a dedicated alpine setup skis better and a pure AT kit tours much better, but skis much worse. The manufacturers continue to spend a lot developing and promoting side country and next years product shows they are getting closer to the one boot for many uses.

    Overall, the 2016-17 Lange Freetour, is an excellent boot, with two lasts it will fit a lot of feet and can be stretched and punched satisfactorily . It will do very well in the marketplace in my opinion.

    jummo

  14. #39
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    location location location
    Posts
    551
    Hey a question for one of you guys lucky enough to already be in the boot - what's the BSL for the size you have?

    If I recall the BSL for an RS/RX is 27.5=316, 28.5=326, 29.5=336mm. How does the XT Freetour compare?
    Who cares how the crow flies

  15. #40
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    西 雅 圖
    Posts
    2,528
    Quote Originally Posted by YoEddy View Post
    Hey a question for one of you guys lucky enough to already be in the boot - what's the BSL for the size you have?

    If I recall the BSL for an RS/RX is 27.5=316, 28.5=326, 29.5=336mm. How does the XT Freetour compare?
    They are the same - my 26.5 is 306mm.

  16. #41
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Den/Baltimore
    Posts
    3,935
    I've been really stoked to buy these for jesski next season, but I just read that the smallest size in ALL versions (including the women's) is 24.5. What?? I mean, why even make a women's version if it's not going to come in small sizes???

    I thought Lange was better than this.
    "Alpine rock and steep, deep powder are what I seek, and I will always find solace there." - Bean Bowers

    meager stoke

  17. #42
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    西 雅 圖
    Posts
    2,528
    Quote Originally Posted by auvgeek View Post
    I've been really stoked to buy these for jesski next season, but I just read that the smallest size in ALL versions (including the women's) is 24.5. What?? I mean, why even make a women's version if it's not going to come in small sizes???
    My guess is they needed an entirely new last to make the thinner Grilamid shell fit more or less like the RX/XT, and started with the men's sample size (26.5) and worked their way toward bigger and smaller (they don't offer anything bigger than 29.5 for men, either, for 2017). Chances are more sizes will be available by SIA time (December this year).

  18. #43
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Den/Baltimore
    Posts
    3,935
    Quote Originally Posted by gregL View Post
    My guess is they needed an entirely new last to make the thinner Grilamid shell fit more or less like the RX/XT, and started with the men's sample size (26.5) and worked their way toward bigger and smaller (they don't offer anything bigger than 29.5 for men, either, for 2017).
    I hear you, but I'd put money on there being FAR more women who should be in a 22.5-23.5 than men should be in 30.5-31.5.

    Chances are more sizes will be available by SIA time (December this year).
    That'd be great, but I'll remain skeptical.
    Last edited by auvgeek; 05-25-2016 at 12:27 PM.
    "Alpine rock and steep, deep powder are what I seek, and I will always find solace there." - Bean Bowers

    meager stoke

  19. #44
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Bozeman, MT
    Posts
    239
    Quote Originally Posted by gregL View Post
    My guess is they needed an entirely new last to make the thinner Grilamid shell fit more or less like the RX/XT, and started with the men's sample size (26.5) and worked their way toward bigger and smaller (they don't offer anything bigger than 29.5 for men, either, for 2017). Chances are more sizes will be available by SIA time (December this year).
    Sidenote here but was of interest to me as I continue to look for a low volume touring boot... Talked to a Dalbello guy when trying on the Lupo carbon (and expressing dismay at the fit). He basically said grilamid will shrink by almost a full size in length coming out of the mold, unlike PU. I got the sense they (Dalbello) weren't totally psyched on the fit of the carbons either but it's A) expensive to do molds as has been said and B) I'm sure they are trying to get a light option to market fast. I imagine it is a pretty big pain in the ass to figure out exactly how everything is going to shrink to dial in the fit. It also may get trickier with the smallest and largest sizes as the relative shrinkage of length to width and height may change, although that's just speculation on my part.

    It explains why even though the MTN Lab is based on the X-max last the fit is different for sure (and I think not as dialed as the X-max which is one of the best selling low volume lasts on the market), and why it's not quite as easy as simply porting over a known winner from an alpine (PU) shell into a lighter boot. I only tried the Freetour on briefly but my impression was that it wasn't quite as dialed in as an RX, although that was a pretty quick assessment and didn't have boots on back to back to compare.

  20. #45
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Schruns
    Posts
    527
    Quote Originally Posted by deft_funk View Post
    Sidenote here but was of interest to me as I continue to look for a low volume touring boot... Talked to a Dalbello guy when trying on the Lupo carbon (and expressing dismay at the fit). He basically said grilamid will shrink by almost a full size in length coming out of the mold, unlike PU. I got the sense they (Dalbello) weren't totally psyched on the fit of the carbons either but it's A) expensive to do molds as has been said and B) I'm sure they are trying to get a light option to market fast. I imagine it is a pretty big pain in the ass to figure out exactly how everything is going to shrink to dial in the fit. It also may get trickier with the smallest and largest sizes as the relative shrinkage of length to width and height may change, although that's just speculation on my part.

    It explains why even though the MTN Lab is based on the X-max last the fit is different for sure (and I think not as dialed as the X-max which is one of the best selling low volume lasts on the market), and why it's not quite as easy as simply porting over a known winner from an alpine (PU) shell into a lighter boot. I only tried the Freetour on briefly but my impression was that it wasn't quite as dialed in as an RX, although that was a pretty quick assessment and didn't have boots on back to back to compare.
    The fit of the Carbons is wider/taller because, due to the shrinkage, the longer boots are getting the shorter size sticker?

    Like the 26.5 is marked 25.5, but has the volume of the 26.5 mold?

  21. #46
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Bozeman, MT
    Posts
    239
    That's the gist of what the guy told me. I'm sure they've done a bunch of stuff to try to compensate and get it closer to the fit they're looking for - it's not simple the bsl of a smaller boot with the volume of a bigger one - but that's it's an engineering problem that contributes to funky-fitting grilamid boots compared to their alpine counterparts.

  22. #47
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Schruns
    Posts
    527
    Interesting.

    I'm still gonna try them out, but I was thinking even before you said that of getting the 24.5 for my normal mondo of 25.5, then punching the toe.

    Seems like they might be accounting for that because saw a comment on their twitter saying the bsl for 26.5 was 314mm.

    Not sure how that aligns with the PU Lupo/krypton, but seems like a size off.

    I just want that sweet krypton flex back in my life.

    Thanks for the info

  23. #48
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    NorCal
    Posts
    357
    Can anyone on an XT 130 LV give a seat of pants somewhat educated semi knowledgeable yet experienced estimate on true flex? I've read all over the map guesses....from 100 to 130. Just looking for resort wear, going downhill 10-25 degree weather. TIA

  24. #49
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    西 雅 圖
    Posts
    2,528
    Quote Originally Posted by YoEddy View Post
    Can you confirm if the cuff has canting adjustment or not?
    It has cuff adjustment on the lateral side only.

  25. #50
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    西 雅 圖
    Posts
    2,528
    Quote Originally Posted by esseff View Post
    Can anyone on an XT 130 LV give a seat of pants somewhat educated semi knowledgeable yet experienced estimate on true flex? I've read all over the map guesses....from 100 to 130. Just looking for resort wear, going downhill 10-25 degree weather. TIA
    There is no industry standard for "true" flex. Manufacturers pick a number to represent what they think is appropriate for a given level of skier, with 130 typically being the stiffest men's recreational flex, but "130" flexes are all over the map. It's not even consistent even within a brand - the Lange RS 130, RX 130, XT 130 and XT 130 Free Tour all flex differently. On my foot (one on each foot), the XT 130 Free Tour feels about like the RX 120, not especially stiff but it skis great.

Posting Permissions

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