Results 1 to 25 of 49
Thread: Light boots VS Fat Skis
-
07-07-2020, 08:47 AM #1
Light boots VS Fat Skis
I am wondering what the fattest ski you could drive with a lighter weight touring boot (F1, TLT, Alien RS, F1 LT [I know these arent out yet] etc)
My ideal set up is something like the F1 (or F1 LT) with the Volie Hyper V8 (about 114mm under foot).
Does anyone have experience with a setup like this? Did it work? or not so much.
Any input is appreciated
CheersLast edited by Larix; 07-07-2020 at 09:12 AM.
-
07-07-2020, 09:07 AM #2Registered User
- Join Date
- Mar 2008
- Location
- northern BC
- Posts
- 31,040
I've run floppy teleboots with wide skis and it depends on how nice the snow is, they will be fine as long as you are skiing wonderful pow when it gets icy & shitty not so much
Lee Lau - xxx-er is the laziest Asian canuck I know
-
07-07-2020, 09:11 AM #3
I like the idea of "light boots, light bindings, and whatever skis you want." My main touring setup is La Sportiva Spectres (which are apparently softer than the F1s according to that comparative flex thread) on ON3P Steeple 116s. I think you end up skiing more centered and drive less, but it's been working great for me. I also think that if you're mainly touring on soft snow, you can get away with a softer boot in a bigger ski. Not sure if there's science to that.
All that said, I am down to 3 buckles between the two boots, so I guess there's a chance big skis will shred your boots faster than little skis.
-
07-07-2020, 09:44 AM #4
-
07-07-2020, 10:07 AM #5
-
07-07-2020, 10:14 AM #6
Width is fine. Width makes shitty snow easier. I've got around 100 days skiing 182 UL Praxis GPO's with F1's.
But length is different. I didn't like 185 Zero G 108's with my F1's. They ski much longer than the GPO's. Too much ski for the boot. The 178 Zero G 108's are a great match, however. I also ski some 188 Rustler 11's with Atomic Hawx Ultra XTD's. The F1's would not be enough for those either. But I bet they could handle 180's.
-
07-07-2020, 12:32 PM #7Registered User
- Join Date
- Feb 2012
- Posts
- 609
I got a lot of COVID closure touring days on my Atomic BC 120 184s paired with my Fischer Travers CS this spring. Mostly in good snow but some days of skiing refrozen crap too.
As long as you are able to ski from a centered stance comfortably, then pairing the 1kg boot and the 120mm ski works great. If you press your shins hard into the front of this class of boot, they sometimes just fold on you.
Overall, I’m pretty sold on the above setup when touring for pow.
-
07-07-2020, 12:37 PM #8
Do you still like your Fischer Travers? They had a recall on the carbon cuffs as I recall, so wondering how yours have held up.
Well maybe I'm the faggot America
I'm not a part of a redneck agenda
-
07-07-2020, 12:45 PM #9
Light boots VS Fat Skis
I felt my Carbon Travers (OG model) were enough for my 179 Wootests in good snow, the setup was not so fun in bad snow. Maybe partly the skis, idk. I also didn’t like them in bad snow with my ZGTPs so maybe it’s more the ski.
Anyway, you’ll find your limit charging bad snow in your light boots quicker (a little to a lot quicker) with a big ski IME, whether that bigness is primarily width or length or weight or some combination thereof. Those boots all flex about 100 though, which 10 years ago would’ve been an insanely burly AT boot right. It’s not like it suddenly became impossible to ski hard in a boot like that. It’s just much more fun/easy to ski hard in a beefier boot.
-
07-07-2020, 01:34 PM #10Registered User
- Join Date
- Feb 2012
- Posts
- 609
Like Mall Walker, I have the OG Fischer Travers Carbon (Carbon infused clog but no carbon in the cuff). It is the same boot as last years Fischer Travers CS, but not the same as the Fischer Travers CC (Carbon cuff).
I like the boot a lot! I swapped the stock liner for a 27 Tour Wrap (in a 27.5 Travers). Resistance through the touring ROM is a bit worse, but the heel hold and forward flex is much improved for my skinny heel/ankle/shin.
-
07-07-2020, 01:37 PM #11
Thanks guys. I have gotten many days on sub optimal snow on my F1s skiing (on a skinner ski) in the PNW. I am living in the Tetons now and want a fatter ski for the winters and bigger pow days in The Park.
I have some Atomic Hawk 130 XDTs that I am thinking of ditching any moving back to the Scarpas, which I found way more comfortable on the uphill and didnt notice all that much of a difference on the downhill.
Seems a lighter fat pow ski should work with the setup I am trying to put together
-
07-07-2020, 02:17 PM #12
Good reminder on the tour wrap liners. I did that in my old Dynafit Zzeroes and you get a lot more forward stiffness, for not a lot of penalty.
Well maybe I'm the faggot America
I'm not a part of a redneck agenda
-
07-07-2020, 03:10 PM #13
I have quite a few days on tlt6's paired with a variety of longer mid-teens under foot skis (189 Down CD114 and CD114L, 192 Bros, 196 Lhasa). They ski great in consistent pow if you aren't trying to go mach schnell. When things get variable or crusty you most likely will want a boot you can drive a little more.
Sorry timing and plans never worked out for turns last spring, maybe next winter.
-
07-07-2020, 04:06 PM #14Registered User
- Join Date
- Mar 2008
- Location
- northern BC
- Posts
- 31,040
Instead of buying a too soft boot which sucks so much and then adding all kinds of things so they don't suck so much why not just just get the next class of boot up from that ?
Lee Lau - xxx-er is the laziest Asian canuck I know
-
07-07-2020, 04:46 PM #15Registered User
- Join Date
- Feb 2012
- Posts
- 609
Different strokes for different folks, as always. I own the old Hawx XTD 130 in a 26.5 as well. I used it zero days after buying the Fischer Travers 27.5. Both with Tour Wraps and custom foot beds, more for heel hold than anything else.
Part of that was comfort: my Haglund’s deformity on each heel hurt a lot after each touring day in the XTDs. It was much less painful in the Travers.
The Travers tour uphill better, and the Hawx XTDs descend better. But you knew that already
I’m also a smaller guy (150lbs) and I ski softer, playful skis even in the resort with alpine boots, so I’m rarely driving the front of my skis very hard. In my mind, a smaller skier with a centered stance probably is less sensitive to the difference in downhill performance between these two classes of boots. YMMV of course.
-
07-07-2020, 05:38 PM #16
I have a pair of Cochise 130’s to go w/ my TLT 5s
Well maybe I'm the faggot America
I'm not a part of a redneck agenda
-
07-07-2020, 05:48 PM #17
These guys know, sometimes it’s a bit moar work but there’s miles of smiles to be have.
watch out for snakes
-
07-07-2020, 05:52 PM #18
^ haha, I’m 150lbs as well and toured over half a mil vertical, maybe closer to 750k, in my Travers. I toured in them 0 days after getting the ZGTP, because I felt the ZGTP skied 10x better and toured close enough (fully unbuckled) to the Travers. still liked the travers a lot, but man it’s fun skiing twice as fast... I’m sure my pendulum will swing back toward fast and light eventually though.
-
07-07-2020, 07:14 PM #19
Ah your dreams of the one boot quiver have been crushed! You did fine on your old f1s eh? Just get a pair of alpine boots to enjoy your fancy new season pass and pull out the f1s when you’re walking
-
07-07-2020, 07:37 PM #20Registered User
- Join Date
- Feb 2012
- Posts
- 609
-
07-07-2020, 07:43 PM #21
Weight savings goes bindings -> skis -> boots for me.
Most go from a heavier boot to a lighter boot, and it goes something like “hey these light boots are pretty good! Almost as good as my heavier boots!”
IME most don’t notice the yuuuuge difference unless going the other way - skiing the light boot for a bit then switching back to the heavier boot. A spring of skiing F1s then back to ZeroGs For a surprise pow day was night and day for me. Instant uptick in speed and fun factor when taking the 300g(?) penalty in boot weight.
OP to answer your original question I find that my Alien RS can drive a 188 QST 106 well enough in bad snow, but that’s the limit. I have a hard time choosing them over the ZeroG for any outing under 10mi.
-
07-08-2020, 07:02 PM #22Registered User
- Join Date
- Jan 2020
- Posts
- 158
Do you guys think it's realistic for a boot like the 2020 Hawk 130 XTD to drive K108s, WC116s without much if any sacrifice? I only weigh 150, 5'11.
I need to get some touring boots, but my current pair of alpines are too big (panterra 120) I really don't want to buy two pairs of boots.
-
07-08-2020, 07:05 PM #23
^^^ Save yourself the trouble and get two pairs of boots unless you're only skiing perfect snow
-
07-09-2020, 11:23 AM #24
Sacrifice? Everything is a compromise in alpine touring because it's essentially two different sports, it just depends on what you can live with and/or afford.
You won't sacrifice much in terms of skiing down - they are plenty stiff and while a heavier alpine boot will be damper, more progressive and more confident at the limit, it's heavier. You'll be carrying a few hundred more grams going up, and the walk mode is not as good as a dedicated light touring boot.
-
07-09-2020, 11:48 AM #25
Yup.
If you're really set on using one pair of shells, a second set of liners would help a bit, but these things always come with tradeoffs.
That said, if they fit your foot, the Hawx 130 XTDs are about as good a choice as anything for a true 50/50 boot. They're stiff, but like Greg said, they're just not nearly as well damped as a good alpine boot.
Bookmarks