Nordica Unlimited boots

[turnfarmer]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8vur2HqvjiE

Anyone have a foot in these yet?
99mm last could be anything from a comfy narrow to a boat.

[Lord Thomas]

Yeah, I wanna know bout these too. The one guy I've talked to who skied them was "very impressed"

[turnfarmer]

Bumpage. Anyone?

[GoldenBC]

roomy ankle. reminded me of a cochise fit but maybe even roomier. Seems like it could be a good boot if they just made the ankle tighter. Such a shame.

[GravityDT]

Anyone have a chance to try these on yet? Curious about the LT 130s specifically

[Pegleg]

I just bought a pair of the Unlimited 130s (not the LT version). Larry's Bootfitting in Boulder isn't selling the LT version; they said they think there are better boots if you want a light touring boot, but that the regular version seems like a solid entry into the 50/50 category.

I'm 6'0" 210 lbs with a moderately narrow foot. Fit was amazing, best fitting boot out of the box that I've ever tried. Felt like a firm grip all over my foot, no hot spots, ankle is locked. We'll see how they pack out, but I'm starting from probably the best fit I've ever had. Also tried the Speedmachine 130 (similar fit but the Unlimited was modestly better for me), Cochise 130 (didn't quite hug my whole foot the same, had a hot spot on the instep), Mach 1 130 (similar to Cochise but maybe a bit better) and the Lange Shadow 130 (not as solid a fit, ankle wasn't locked and it felt like it was going to need work in a few places).

Wire system for the front two buckles is IMHO a perfect compromise between BOA and regular buckles; it's got the wire to distribute the pressure evenly (adjustable at each of the buckle points) but no giant BOA knob to get damaged.

The other thing I noticed was that the walk mode has a huuuuge range of motion. I'm coming from Lange XT130s that barely had any difference between walk and ski mode; these feel like you can legitimately walk normally in them. In ski mode they felt somewhat soft (relative to the other 130s) in the shop, but I'm not giving that too much weight since we all know that temperature is a big factor in stiffness and it was like 70 degrees.

And much less important obviously, but my subjective view is that the colors/appearance of the 130 are some of the best looking that I've seen. Can't figure out why Technica thinks that screaming orange all over is what anyone wants.

Haven't gotten them on snow yet. I'm nervous about buying such an expensive boot without any reviews or experience in them, but the fit was so much better than anything else that it seemed worthwhile. I'll report back when I have some days on them.

Update: Just did my first day on them. So far so good. Super comfortable, still seemed a bit softer than a 130 but didn't seem to hold me back. No problems on the WROD.

[bwcurran]

I've skied both extensively and landed on the LT for myself. The fit is much closer to the 98mm promachine in the LT version. The heavier version is roomier, I typically ski a 27.5 (foot measures to around 29 but have small ankles/ instep) and had to go all the way down to a 26.5 with a lot of toe stretching. I am very happy in my normal 27.5 shell in the LT version with no extra work. They both ski great and are supple compared to most touring boots with the unique plastic choices in the cuff, the walk mode is solid, the buckle design on the toes is clever and is super quick while providing some of the boa style wrapping, and the fully replaceable soles have been really nice as I typically wear soles quickly with rock scrambles and sledding.

The heavier version will have a more durable clog and sole, and the fit is more generous... both ski great.

[CaliBrit]

Seems like the LT to regular difference is PA vs PU clog and lighter liner in the LT. Anything else?

Edit: Michelin sole on the LT whatever the F that adds.

[CaliBrit]

I've skied both extensively and landed on the LT for myself. The fit is much closer to the 98mm promachine in the LT version. The heavier version is roomier, I typically ski a 27.5 (foot measures to around 29 but have small ankles/ instep) and had to go all the way down to a 26.5 with a lot of toe stretching. I am very happy in my normal 27.5 shell in the LT version with no extra work. They both ski great and are supple compared to most touring boots with the unique plastic choices in the cuff, the walk mode is solid, the buckle design on the toes is clever and is super quick while providing some of the boa style wrapping, and the fully replaceable soles have been really nice as I typically wear soles quickly with rock scrambles and sledding.

The heavier version will have a more durable clog and sole, and the fit is more generous... both ski great.

Looks like the same last so I’m guessing the difference you feel is a real liner vs a flimsy one.

[bwcurran]

IÂ’ve mostly skied them with the same liner, the fit difference is from the different plastics used for the clogs, the lighter one shrinks more which is typical. I actually find that the lighter one maintains its stiffness better as the temps get warm in the spring. In normal conditions I had a hard time telling the difference between the flex characteristics.

Michelin soles are quite a bit softer/ grippier rubber. It doesnÂ’t last as long but it is a treat to walk around with.

[CaliBrit]

IÂ’ve mostly skied them with the same liner, the fit difference is from the different plastics used for the clogs, the lighter one shrinks more which is typical. I actually find that the lighter one maintains its stiffness better as the temps get warm in the spring. In normal conditions I had a hard time telling the difference between the flex characteristics.

Michelin soles are quite a bit softer/ grippier rubber. It doesnÂ’t last as long but it is a treat to walk around with.

Do you feel any extra benefit to the ski feel of the PU clog? Or are they pretty damn similar?

[bwcurran]

Do you feel any extra benefit to the ski feel of the PU clog? Or are they pretty damn similar?

Maybe on very firm/ chattery in bounds, but It seems like most of the flex quality comes from the cuff. They’re both significantly more supple than a zero g that I’ve skied a bit in the past

[CaliBrit]

Maybe on very firm/ chattery in bounds, but It seems like most of the flex quality comes from the cuff. They’re both significantly more supple than a zero g that I’ve skied a bit in the past

Great info thanks.

[alive]

Just thought I'd bump this thread and see how people are making out long term with these boots. While trying out some of the usual options out there, I thought I would just try them on as my size was on the shelf, the 120 DYN. One of the most solid, secure fitting boots that I have tried. (carpet testing, mind you). They were never on the radar, but looked a bit more into them and realized the DYN versions have a cork liner, similar to Zipfits? Thats where the extra grams come from, but sure seems worth it compared to the lite version.
In the research also came across some shell breakage reports. Anyone been able to ski these successfully? Very tempted.

[Pegleg]

Just thought I'd bump this thread and see how people are making out long term with these boots. While trying out some of the usual options out there, I thought I would just try them on as my size was on the shelf, the 120 DYN. One of the most solid, secure fitting boots that I have tried. (carpet testing, mind you). They were never on the radar, but looked a bit more into them and realized the DYN versions have a cork liner, similar to Zipfits? Thats where the extra grams come from, but sure seems worth it compared to the lite version.
In the research also came across some shell breakage reports. Anyone been able to ski these successfully? Very tempted.

Still digging on mine after about 20 days in them. Super comfy, great fit, performing well for inbounds use (haven't taken them out touring yet), relatively light with a great walk mode for hikes and parking lots. I had the same experience, they weren't on my radar but my bootfitter (Larry's in Boulder) suggested them and they fit better than anything else.

[turnfarmer]

Just thought I'd bump this thread and see how people are making out long term with these boots. While trying out some of the usual options out there, I thought I would just try them on as my size was on the shelf, the 120 DYN. One of the most solid, secure fitting boots that I have tried. (carpet testing, mind you). They were never on the radar, but looked a bit more into them and realized the DYN versions have a cork liner, similar to Zipfits? Thats where the extra grams come from, but sure seems worth it compared to the lite version.
In the research also came across some shell breakage reports. Anyone been able to ski these successfully? Very tempted.

Very different cork, the zip fit cork can flow to automold. The Nordica cork is solid and can be heat molded and possibly ground.

[rockymtn]

I have the heavier unlimited 130. Nice boot and the liner is not bad.
Still working through some fitting and getting the height correct at the second wire buckle, as it is very low with not much spacer. Other than that they ski nicely. I do find the flex transfers quite low and the bottom of the boot bellows a bit, so far nothing bad as happened!

[LA-73]

Any one who knows the sole lenght/binding size on the 26.5MP for the LT? Asking since it can vary quite a bit on AT boots. Hoping for 305mm ...

[mntlion]

will be CLOSE to 305. 310-300 range

[EricB]

Any one who knows the sole lenght/binding size on the 26.5MP for the LT? Asking since it can vary quite a bit on AT boots. Hoping for 305mm ...

Evo website says 305mm

[kc_7777]

I have (two pairs) Nordica Strider 120 DYN’s with Workhorse Zipfits, that I really get along with. Before I got the ZF’s, I skied a few days in the Nordica cork liner. They’re not bad for stock liners.

Been looking at the Nordica Unlimited 130…


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums