Page 16 of 17 FirstFirst ... 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 LastLast
Results 376 to 400 of 411
  1. #376
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Posts
    1,863
    Picked up a pair of 2018/19 XT Free Pros, they definitely feel better then the XT Freetour 130. The flex ramps up differently, it’s less of a wall, more of a get progressively stiffer as you flex the boot more. I’m still not a fan of the reward flex. If you get in the back seat, neither boot helps you out, as the RS130/140 does. Guess I should just not ever get back on them.


    Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

  2. #377
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    5,308
    Quote Originally Posted by Andyski View Post
    Moar Freetour 130 data points.

    Stoked on them so far.
    Glad you're enjoying them.
    Quote Originally Posted by XXX-er View Post
    the situation strikes me as WAY too much drama at this point

  3. #378
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    panhandle locdog
    Posts
    6,523
    If someone wants a pair of the XT FREE 130 - https://www.tetongravity.com/forums/...0-Free-LV-26-5

    I bought a pair and am returning. If a mag wants them, please send me a PM.

  4. #379
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Bethel, Maine
    Posts
    630
    A post-mortem review of the 2016-2017 XT130s, and initial thoughts on the XT140 Pro follow.

    tl;dr:
    1. The XT130 skis better than any other AT boot I've tried and are adequate to drive a race ski; the 140s are another step forward in this regard.
    2. Touring ROM was plenty for me.
    3. The wider last is really nice for long days on the hill, but even the LV version seems more roomy than a real race boot
    4. With about 330 days on my 130s, I more or less thrashed through my second set of sole blocks, had managed to snap the lace-up attachment points off one of the liners, and had zip ties on both walk-mode switches because the fabric pulls had failed a while ago.
    5. This may be psychosomatic, but the DIN sole on the 140 seems to provide much better power transfer and a much-improved skiing experience on hard snow.

    Pics of the 130s after about 330 days of use, a fair number of which were bootpacking around rocky places in Montana and a bunch of the rest being coaching (so also a lot of time in the boots and not necessarily in skis):

















    As noted above, the soles were the #1 wear point. I went through two sets of sole blocks (the set installed is the second set) and probably should have installed a third at the beginning of this season, but I knew I was planning to switch to the 140 Pro. If you're going to be bootpacking around in the Rockies, I'd expect similar wear (the rate of wear did seem to accelerate quite a bit during the late May through July window, when a much greater percentage of my skiing involved bootpacking). I'm also a weekend ski coach, so there's a fair bit of usage out of skis in that regard, but most of it is on snow and shouldn't be causing significant wear to the boots.
    ...con't...

  5. #380
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Bethel, Maine
    Posts
    630
    The other wear points that was really, really annoying was the pull tabs on the ski/walk switches. Particularly given that I struggle to get in and out of the boots without switching to walk mode first, not being able to switch to walk mode is...problematic. It shouldn't be too challenging to get the mode switch back to ski mode if the pull tab failed in the field, but getting it back into walk mode will require some sort of tool to slip between the switch and the chassis to flip it up (I used the corner of a metal scraper).

    The liner lace-attachment failure was similarly annoying; I don't think I was being particularly hard on them, but during the past year, I managed to break the top lace loops on one liner. I didn't notice a significant difference in how they felt without those attachment points, but I did continue to lace them up and use a "put on the liner, then stick my foot and liner into the boot" process for booting up. The heel wear on the liner is probably a side effect of the frequent removal and insertion into the boot, but I'd argue that the liner design should have better accounted for that use case (they are lace-up liners) and included a bit of more wear-resistant material in place to mitigate that.

    The ski/walk mode switches definitely loosened up over time. As you can see in one of the photos, they started popping further out while in walk mode, as well; I've had a coupe of occasions where the main portion of the switch (not just the pull tab) managed to work itself even further from the shell and I needed to work it back into place with my hand to get back into ski mode. It's entirely possible that I caught it on my ski pants or something to get it to pop that far out of position, but I did find it concerning. The flip side is that they did become much easier to get into walk mode as the mechanisms loosened up; when I initially got them, there were a few times I ended up rebuckling the top buckle so I could rock fore and after to get the mechanism to release (after pulling up the tab), but over time it became much easier to make that happen just by pushing on the cuff with my hand.

    As you may note in the photos, I had Beast horseshoes on 'em, so no concerns about top-of-heel wear.

    I used the 130s with Atomic 10-18s, Atomic X14s, Fischer (Tyrolia) Freeflex, and STH14 alpine bindings, as well as Dynafit Radical ST2, Fritschi Tectron, and Atomic Shift touring bindings. In all cases, I was able to get the boots into the bindings well enough; I didn't encounter any issues with release/retention, although I'm sure I was out of spec in the race bindings. I did find the Fischers and the Atomic X14s to be particularly sensitive to snow build-up on the boots, presumably because they were already too tall per the appropriate ISO spec.

    The soles do not allow for bootskiing except with significant pitch and just the right surface conditions, and even it's sketchy as f***. As a race coach, this is a bit annoying.

    XT140 Pro comparison / contrast
    By comparison, the DIN soles on the 140s allow for bootskiing; they have more drag than a pair of race boots (especially with risers), and walking/bootpacking requires a bit more attention versus the 2016-17 WTR soles. The boots seem to be more precise in edging movements and provide better power transfer when getting to the front of the ski; while the different plastic characteristics account for some of this, I strongly expect the DIN sole accounts for most of it.

    At this point, I'm happy to take the tradeoff. Were I still in Montana, I might switch back and forth to the non-DIN soles for sled-accessed and bootpack-intensive missions (especially ones that would beat up the soles scrambling over sharp rock), but I don't see much reason to do that here in the northeast. It's worth noting that stepping into my Dynafits with the DIN sole requires a different angle of attack (gotta go in with the sole nearly vertical, rather than stepping straight down), presumably because the DIN soles don't have the insets for the pins. I'm guessing that the same with the DIN soles on the 2017-18 Freetours and all varieties of 18-19 Freetours, but I haven't looked at a pair to verify. I did feel like a bit of an idiot spending upwards of five minutes trying to click in to my Dynafits while my leashed dog ran circles around me.

    I'm not sure if the taller spoiler attached to the shell in the 140 has much of an impact; I haven't noticed it specifically, but the overall power transmission is definitely better.

    The liners have more black and less grey, and they seem a little more streamlined (no premarked cut point for heated insole wires, fewer bulky seams on the upper). I'm not sure if that will reduce wear and tear having them in and out on every usage, but I'll find out.

    Upper buckle catches have gone from black to blue; lower buckle catches have gone from green to blue. Upper catches can still be moved in and out on predrilled points to allow for a tighter cuff.

    While the fabric pulls on the ski/walk switches are a different color, I can't tell if they're any more sturdy (in part because I no longer have the originals for comparison).

    On cold days, my toes do miss the extra width from the non-LV last, but overall I can't say it's a particularly obvious difference. It wasn't enough to get me back into liner socks.

  6. #381
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    315
    apologies if this has been covered in this thread already. didn't have time to read it through completely. my wtr soles are worn out and need replacement. does anybody know if the gripwalk soles have the same screw pattern and i could use those as replacements instead on 17/18 xt 130s.

  7. #382
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    5,308
    Quote Originally Posted by anotherVTskibum View Post
    A post-mortem review of the 2016-2017 XT130s, and initial thoughts on the XT140 Pro follow.
    Good work.

    Great fucking review.
    Quote Originally Posted by XXX-er View Post
    the situation strikes me as WAY too much drama at this point

  8. #383
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Squaw valley
    Posts
    2,620
    Quote Originally Posted by anotherVTskibum View Post
    The other wear points that was really, really annoying was the pull tabs on the ski/walk switches. Particularly given that I struggle to get in and out of the boots without switching to walk mode first, not being able to switch to walk mode is...problematic. It shouldn't be too challenging to get the mode switch back to ski mode if the pull tab failed in the field, but getting it back into walk mode will require some sort of tool to slip between the switch and the chassis to flip it up (I used the corner of a metal scraper).

    The liner lace-attachment failure was similarly annoying; I don't think I was being particularly hard on them, but during the past year, I managed to break the top lace loops on one liner. I didn't notice a significant difference in how they felt without those attachment points, but I did continue to lace them up and use a "put on the liner, then stick my foot and liner into the boot" process for booting up. The heel wear on the liner is probably a side effect of the frequent removal and insertion into the boot, but I'd argue that the liner design should have better accounted for that use case (they are lace-up liners) and included a bit of more wear-resistant material in place to mitigate that.

    The ski/walk mode switches definitely loosened up over time. As you can see in one of the photos, they started popping further out while in walk mode, as well; I've had a coupe of occasions where the main portion of the switch (not just the pull tab) managed to work itself even further from the shell and I needed to work it back into place with my hand to get back into ski mode. It's entirely possible that I caught it on my ski pants or something to get it to pop that far out of position, but I did find it concerning. The flip side is that they did become much easier to get into walk mode as the mechanisms loosened up; when I initially got them, there were a few times I ended up rebuckling the top buckle so I could rock fore and after to get the mechanism to release (after pulling up the tab), but over time it became much easier to make that happen just by pushing on the cuff with my hand.

    As you may note in the photos, I had Beast horseshoes on 'em, so no concerns about top-of-heel wear.

    I used the 130s with Atomic 10-18s, Atomic X14s, Fischer (Tyrolia) Freeflex, and STH14 alpine bindings, as well as Dynafit Radical ST2, Fritschi Tectron, and Atomic Shift touring bindings. In all cases, I was able to get the boots into the bindings well enough; I didn't encounter any issues with release/retention, although I'm sure I was out of spec in the race bindings. I did find the Fischers and the Atomic X14s to be particularly sensitive to snow build-up on the boots, presumably because they were already too tall per the appropriate ISO spec.

    The soles do not allow for bootskiing except with significant pitch and just the right surface conditions, and even it's sketchy as f***. As a race coach, this is a bit annoying.

    XT140 Pro comparison / contrast
    By comparison, the DIN soles on the 140s allow for bootskiing; they have more drag than a pair of race boots (especially with risers), and walking/bootpacking requires a bit more attention versus the 2016-17 WTR soles. The boots seem to be more precise in edging movements and provide better power transfer when getting to the front of the ski; while the different plastic characteristics account for some of this, I strongly expect the DIN sole accounts for most of it.

    At this point, I'm happy to take the tradeoff. Were I still in Montana, I might switch back and forth to the non-DIN soles for sled-accessed and bootpack-intensive missions (especially ones that would beat up the soles scrambling over sharp rock), but I don't see much reason to do that here in the northeast. It's worth noting that stepping into my Dynafits with the DIN sole requires a different angle of attack (gotta go in with the sole nearly vertical, rather than stepping straight down), presumably because the DIN soles don't have the insets for the pins. I'm guessing that the same with the DIN soles on the 2017-18 Freetours and all varieties of 18-19 Freetours, but I haven't looked at a pair to verify. I did feel like a bit of an idiot spending upwards of five minutes trying to click in to my Dynafits while my leashed dog ran circles around me.

    I'm not sure if the taller spoiler attached to the shell in the 140 has much of an impact; I haven't noticed it specifically, but the overall power transmission is definitely better.

    The liners have more black and less grey, and they seem a little more streamlined (no premarked cut point for heated insole wires, fewer bulky seams on the upper). I'm not sure if that will reduce wear and tear having them in and out on every usage, but I'll find out.

    Upper buckle catches have gone from black to blue; lower buckle catches have gone from green to blue. Upper catches can still be moved in and out on predrilled points to allow for a tighter cuff.

    While the fabric pulls on the ski/walk switches are a different color, I can't tell if they're any more sturdy (in part because I no longer have the originals for comparison).

    On cold days, my toes do miss the extra width from the non-LV last, but overall I can't say it's a particularly obvious difference. It wasn't enough to get me back into liner socks.
    Thanks for the review.

    I have the freetour 130 and I'm considering the 140.
    I had to widen the 130 around the widest part of my foot.

    Is the 140 a lot narrower?

    Also, how is the walk uphill with the we 140? With mine, there's not a lot of flex forward when hiking. Doable, but sometimes i have to walk on my toes.

    With just the at soles, is the boot still a lot stiffer?



    Sent from my moto g(6) using Tapatalk

  9. #384
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Den/Baltimore
    Posts
    5,126
    Quote Originally Posted by anotherVTskibum View Post
    The boots seem to be more precise in edging movements and provide better power transfer when getting to the front of the ski; while the different plastic characteristics account for some of this, I strongly expect the DIN sole accounts for most of it.

    I'm not sure if the taller spoiler attached to the shell in the 140 has much of an impact; I haven't noticed it specifically, but the overall power transmission is definitely better.
    I'm really curious why you think it's the DIN sole instead of the plastic.

    I guess now I'd love to read a comparison of a new pair of XT Free 130 and XT Free pro with the same sole. In the shop, the Pro seems a bit stiffer, but maybe that's just me.
    "Alpine rock and steep, deep powder are what I seek, and I will always find solace there." - Bean Bowers

    photos

  10. #385
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Squamish, BC
    Posts
    713
    I just got word that my new 140's arrived to replace my 130's.
    My old WTR soles work in STH16's. Will I be able to ski the new Gripwalk in those?

  11. #386
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    28
    So I got my busted 130s replaced. Lange were a bit slow to reply, so I started the warranty procedure with the shop I bought them from - Sport65 in Germany. Overall turnaround was 3 weeks. Hats off to the fine gentleman at Sport65 for taking care of me. I also upgraded to the 140 model.

    my 2c on 130 vs 140
    I spent some time on both the DIN and WTR soles on my 130s, currently on DIN soles on the 140s - better power transfer for sure. I dont think its because of the soles though. I kept the WTR soles, so might experiment at some point.
    Velcro strap feels more substantial on the 140s. I got myself a booster strap, but not feeling I need it yet. Would've replaced the straps on the 130s.
    The tongue of the liner on the 140s has an added plastic? plate that spreads the load when driving the boot hard.
    The end shiny hooky bit on the top two buckles on the 140s are a pain in the ass (never bothered me on the 130s), thinking of removing them.
    My 130s were 100mm last, the 140s 97mm feel snug(ger) and better for my feet.
    Still havent toured in the 140s.

    edit: this is based on 17/18 130s vs 18/19 140s
    Last edited by banzai; 02-01-2019 at 11:00 AM.

  12. #387
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    5,746
    Does the 140 (or 130 for that matter) have the leaking issues that historically (at least for me) have plagued Langes? I remember my old RX130s (the see-through green w/ a white cuff) leaked no matter what.

  13. #388
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Squaw valley
    Posts
    2,620
    Quote Originally Posted by nyskirat View Post
    Does the 140 (or 130 for that matter) have the leaking issues that historically (at least for me) have plagued Langes? I remember my old RX130s (the see-through green w/ a white cuff) leaked no matter what.
    On my 130 i put some silicon glue on the overlap and it seemed to fix the leaking issue

    Sent from my moto g(6) using Tapatalk

  14. #389
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Den/Baltimore
    Posts
    5,126
    Thanks to everyone who offered thoughts on the 130 compared to 140.

    Would still love a comparison between the 140 and 130 using the same liner and same soles. Do it for science!
    "Alpine rock and steep, deep powder are what I seek, and I will always find solace there." - Bean Bowers

    photos

  15. #390
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Kilpisjärvi, Finland
    Posts
    811
    About 40 days of touring. Easy stuff, nothing hardcore.

    Lähetetty minun FIG-LX1 laitteesta Tapatalkilla

  16. #391
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Posts
    1,863
    Quote Originally Posted by auvgeek View Post
    Thanks to everyone who offered thoughts on the 130 compared to 140.

    Would still love a comparison between the 140 and 130 using the same liner and same soles. Do it for science!
    The XT Free Pro/140 in spring skiing temps 30-50 degrees, got really really soft, even with the RS140 cork liner in it. In colder temps the XT Free Pro was slightly softer, but more then manageable, close to a soft 130 or what I think a stiff 120 would ski like, when it got warm, my TLT6 Preformances were stiffer and more supportive.


    Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

  17. #392
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Squamish, BC
    Posts
    713
    Quote Originally Posted by auvgeek View Post
    Thanks to everyone who offered thoughts on the 130 compared to 140.

    Would still love a comparison between the 140 and 130 using the same liner and same soles. Do it for science!
    what do you want to know?

    quick summary - 140 is better.

  18. #393
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    panhandle locdog
    Posts
    6,523
    Get 140s. Trust me


    Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

  19. #394
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Posts
    599
    Had a bootfitter tell me that the 130 doesn't ski like a 130 because the walk mode allows the cuff to separate from the rest of the boot and flex forward. I was pretty sold on buying a pair until I heard that. Thoughts?

  20. #395
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Squaw valley
    Posts
    2,620
    Quote Originally Posted by gnarbro365 View Post
    Had a bootfitter tell me that the 130 doesn't ski like a 130 because the walk mode allows the cuff to separate from the rest of the boot and flex forward. I was pretty sold on buying a pair until I heard that. Thoughts?
    Not true.

    But they don't ski like a true 130, probably because of the type of plastic used

    Sent from my Armor_3 using Tapatalk

  21. #396
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    西 雅 圖
    Posts
    3,256
    Quote Originally Posted by gnarbro365 View Post
    Had a bootfitter tell me that the 130 doesn't ski like a 130 because the walk mode allows the cuff to separate from the rest of the boot and flex forward. I was pretty sold on buying a pair until I heard that. Thoughts?
    Any cuff that's got a split up the middle to allow a walk mode won't be as solid as a continuous riveted cuff, but that doesn't mean it skis poorly. It skis about like an RX120 in my opinion, and that's fine with me. If you need stiffer get the "140" flex Pro Model.

    It is also a Grilamid boot and much lighter than an RS or RX, which are both PU-Ether boots, so it's hard to compare models directly. I have multiple pairs of Langes that all say "130" on the cuff and they all flex differently but still ski great.

  22. #397
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Posts
    1,863
    I switched from the Lange RS140 and Lange ZB to the Freetour Pro with out any really noticing much of a change. If I want a stiffer boot (say spending the day inbounds) I will toss the cork RS140 liner in the Freetour shell. If I’m touring or hiking a bunch I’ll grab my intuition liners or the stock liners.

    I did add the stiffest Booster Strap to my shells, and that helped a ton. If Im touring in them, I let the buckles hang/dangle, same with the booster strap, and I don’t have any range of motion issues.

    I do still have a pair of RS140 shells, and brand new RS130s in my closet, but they don’t really get used much. I grabbed the Freetour Pros most days last winter.


    Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

  23. #398
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Posts
    599
    Thanks for the responses. Guess I won't be buying boots there...

  24. #399
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Swiss alps
    Posts
    496
    Quote Originally Posted by gnarbro365 View Post
    Had a bootfitter tell me that the 130 doesn't ski like a 130 because the walk mode allows the cuff to separate from the rest of the boot and flex forward. I was pretty sold on buying a pair until I heard that. Thoughts?
    Any overlap boot with a walk mode will ski a bit different than a rigid spine boot. But to say therefore they arent 130 is false.
    Plenty of overlap boots ski super well and the difference with rigid spine boots is becoming smaller and smaller.

    That being said, everyone I know says the 130 flexes relatively soft, but that in itself has nothing to do with the walk mode.

  25. #400
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    5,308
    I have the RX 130 and the Freetour 130 (FT130)

    Had 120 flex Lange's in the past.

    The RX 130 is my baseline 130 flex. I measure the flex of other boots against that baseline.

    The FT130 flexes softer than the baseline 130.

    Ft130 also flexes a bit softer than the 120 flex Lange's I had before. But more importantly the FT130 flex differently than the 120s and 130s. The flex pattern is different. FT130s have the nicest flex pattern of the many combo boots I've tried-on and skied. They ramp up almost like the RX130 or 120. But it does feel differently to those baselines.

    Many of the other combo boots I've tried-on and skied ramp up much too quickly, or they hit a wall, and it feels like your shin is going to snap. The FTs reach this point after a much longer and deeper ramp up period, to the point that I can feel myself hit the front wall of the Lange's for resort skiing, but don't really feel it in back country conditions.

    Additionally, many boots hit that wall, and then if you really go beyond that, the cuff collapses the clog of the boot, and it can suddenly feel like you're going over the bars with no support from the boot. Again, the Lange FTs arrive at this point much later than other combo boots I've skied, and they don't collapse nearly as much as other boots I've skied.

    The FTs do not have the rebound of the RX.

    An Intuition Pro Tour and a locking power strap help make the stock FT130 boot even more like the RX130. With those installed, the FT130 is within, say, a 5 or 7 degree Celsius temperature difference of the RX130.
    Last edited by reckless toboggan; 11-10-2019 at 04:47 PM.
    Quote Originally Posted by XXX-er View Post
    the situation strikes me as WAY too much drama at this point

Posting Permissions

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