Ultimate alpine TOURING boot?

Idle musings during a day in town...

The sketch below shows some ideas for what could be the ultimate alpine TOURING boot.  I emphasize TOURING because the idea of this boot is to balance cross-country and downhill performance.  This is not a boot for if-you-fall-you-die skiing.  It's a simple "go anywhere, do almost anything" boot for ski mountaineering where you want to cover distance as well as make turns.  Perfect for, say, skiing the Ptarmigan Traverse.



Features:

1. Dynafit compatible
2. Flexible forefoot
3. Forefoot buckle
4. Quick-cinch upper lacing
5. No rear spoiler

In my experience, the biggest drawback to touring on gentle terrain with alpine touring boots is that you can't make a full stride.  By loosening the cuff, you can bend forward at the ankle, but you can't point your toe or extend your foot forward very much because of the rear spoiler.  I find this to be true even with the cuff unlocked.  The spoiler always gets in the way.  (Maybe you need to have toured in mountain boots a lot, like I have, to notice the difference.)

It's conceivable that you could design a really free-ranging cuff with a lock system, but I haven't seen one yet.  The Scarpa F1 is an interesting attempt, but the locking system is too bulky and weird for hiking and scrambling, in my opinion.  I'd rather have a traditional mountain boot cuff.

Dynafit compatibility is a no-brainer.  The flexible forefoot would improve the "step-off" part of each stride just as the low cuff would improve the "step-onto" part.  The forefoot buckle would provide quicker and more positive adjustment of the forefoot than a lace.  The quick-cinch upper lace on the cuff is something I've been experimenting with on my current mountain boots.  I use a lace from a pair of cross-country skating boots.  The lace is light, quick, simple, and very adjustable between touring and downhill modes. A buckle might work here, but in my experience, most buckles don't loosen enough and I end up unbuckling them entirely. I'd like to avoid that.

Based on past on-line discussions of skiing in mountain boots, I suspect that almost nobody would buy this boot.  Few people notice the shortcomings of today's alpine touring boots for touring and even fewer people are willing to give up some downhill performance and adapt their skiing to use a boot like this.  But it's nice to daydream.

Who will build this boot?  

Have you tried makeing any mods to a pair of plastc mtn boots to be Dynafit compadible. Seems like it wouldn't be to hard ounce you figured out where to drill the holes.

OldHouseMan,<br><br>Lou Dawson's site has a description of how to modify a boot to be Dynafit compatible:<br><br> Check it out. <br><br>Lowell,<br><br>We have a full machine shop here. Maybe someday we can get a couple of old pairs of leathers and plastics, some extra spare parts, and make a go of it. I'm somewhat interested, especially since I know where I could borrow a pair of ultralight skis with Dynafits.

Lowell, you might have to build them yourself.<br><br>After nearly a year of skiing on the F1's, I think you could do worse than start with that boot as a base. No one else has the combination of flexible bellows and Dynafit compatibility as yet. I agree that the all-in-one lever to lock the heel and close the top strap is a PITA (sometimes literally), it ends up being slower for me than a separate conventional buckle and walking hinge, usually because I can't get it to lock right away or because it's hard to unlock without jamming both thumbs into the release lever.<br><br>The flexible sole and the range of motion of the cuff, however, make for very comfortable touring on the flat or steep; the more or less regular height of the rear spoiler works well for recoveries while descending and doesn't impede kick and glide much at all compared with most AT boots.<br><br>If anyone has ideas for replacing the F1 locking lever with a smaller, simpler device and conventional buckle up top, I'd be all ears.

I like the idea of a light boot that allows a longer stride but I don't think I'm quite ready to give up the aft support of a spoiler. Call me wimpy but I definitely like to load up the tails with a stiff spoiler - especially when the snow gets weird (currently on 3 yr old AllTerrains). I appreciate the goal of a lighter more TOURING oriented boot designed for longer distances but even on lower angle tours snow conditions can and do get difficult and its nice to have a supportive boot especially descending with a heavier pack.<br><br>I haven't used the F1 but I would be more inclined to buy it if it had a more concentional upper strap. I like that it has a cuff that has a large range of motion for touring but is still supportive when in down hill mode.<br><br>

How about a boot with an F1-type lower and INTERCHANGEABLE cuffs?

Lowell, you might have to build them yourself.

<br><br>Yeah, this is mostly daydreaming.  Actually, I modified the Dynafit Mountain Lites I bought last fall to get part of the way there. I chopped off the spoiler, shortened the laces, and put the quick-cinch lace on the cuff. If I could scrounge up some buckles to replace the lower lace, I'd be quite satisfied. (The lower shell is so stiff that it's hard to tighten the forefoot using the lace.) The flexible bellows would be nice, but I can live without that. I'm pretty happy with my Mountain Lites at this point, but I can imagine better (hence this post).<br><br>I certainly understand what Jan is saying about being reluctant to forgo the spoiler. Like I said, the idea of this boot is to more evenly balance between touring and downhill performance. Most of the time, most alpine tourers today aren't looking for that. We want better downhill than touring performance and are willing to live with the results. But sometimes I get real pleasure out of slipping into a pair of mountain boots for a tour. It's like "Aaah, I can move in these..." The trick is that I have to descend slower and with less abandon.<br><br>With our modern, more shaped skis, using the spoiler is even less necessary than it was in the past. When you're on your feet on modern skis, there's no need to pressure the tail of the ski at any point in the turn. You really want to pressure the tip slightly. So the spoiler becomes a tool for recovering from mistakes--a very handy tool, I agree. But I think you can achieve the same level of control by just slowing down a bit.<br><br>Oh well--this is all just rag chewing on a rainy day when my son is home from school.  

Lowell, you can easily get buckles from Black Diamond. I imagine they'd be quite easy to install. <br><br>As for the F1 cuff lock mechanism, it can't be THAT hard to remove the aluminum lever and install a smaller lock system. Maybe just a plastic lever that prevents rearward movement, like on Scarpa's T3? If you have the guts to start drilling holes in a pair of $500 boots, I'm sure one could come up with something interesting.

Lowell,<br><br>Dave Page in Freemont put a pair of buckles on my Asolo leather telemark boots. I am sure he could put them on yours or give you the advice on how to do it yourself. He has made many such modifications.<br><br>Now that I have taken the plunge and bought Garmont AT boots this year, I read your post with great interest, because tourability and hike-ability in the current AT and plastic tele boots is one reason that I have stayed away from the plastic boots. I do have Scarpa plastic mountaineering boots and knowing how they walk, I could tell when trying to fit the ski boots years back that they would take a very distant second place. Also, seeing so many pictures from postings and descriptions of skiers carrying their ski boots has been very disheartening. <br><br>I fear walking the five miles to Ruth or the Rainbow in these boots, but time will tell whether or not I reserve these trips for my leather gear. I try to travel as light as possible yet maintain self sufficiency for a night or two stay out, if needed or planned. It bugs me that I might have to get a larger pack or carry a larger load just because I might have to carry an extra pair of footware.<br><br>I think that your idea is a great one, it just takes the vision of someone with the need and desire to do it. I truly believe that the boot market is primarily driven by the masses of those who will mostly use the gear at lift service sites (Shockingly this is most evident by the current telemark gear. Gosh the thought of people having to carry their tele boots on their back during the hike bugs the heck out of me!) On the other hand I do believe that a tourable/walkable boot is acievable that can ski well. If you get the formula right and pass it along to enough people who modify the boots to reach that goal, my guess is a boot maker might take notice. It seems to me that more flexibility in the typical hinge (including a liner that is not too stiff to interfere with the hinge) and a removable cuff/liner that integrated properly could do the job. I can imagine a cuff that telescopes up an inch or two in the downhill mode and then can be dropped back down in walking mode.<br><br>Alan

I try to travel as light as possible yet maintain self sufficiency for a night or two stay out, if needed or planned.  It bugs me that I might have to get a larger pack or carry a larger load just because I might have to carry an extra pair of footware.<br><br>...<br><br>On the other hand I do believe that a tourable/walkable boot is acievable that can ski well.  If you get the formula right and pass it along to enough people who modify the boots to reach that goal, my guess is a boot maker might take notice.

<br><br>A few years ago, two friends and I extended the Ptarmigan Traverse on skis from Dome Peak to Holden. Two of us used mountain boots and hiked down the Railroad Creek trail in them. The third skied in Dynafit TLTs and carried tennis shoes for five days just to avoid hiking out in his boots. If I had used regular AT boots I probably would have done the same. I hate hiking in them.<br><br>To be honest, I doubt that manufacturers will go out of their way to provide a really walkable alpine touring boot. There's negligible demand for them. I once thought that randonnee racing might lead that way, but I no longer think so. Rando racing is pretty much straight up and straight down. The racers don't spend enough time on low angle terrain to give an advantage to a really walkable boot.<br><br>This discussion has inspired me to tinker with my boots more. I called up Life-Link and ordered a pair of TLT instep buckles, which should fit my Mountain Lites, since the lower shell is the same. I'm sure I can find somebody to install them. I'll let you know how they work.

A walkable touring boot might well exist already. Have you considered something like this?<br><br> <br><br>Russel Rainey says they tour like a pair of Asolo Extremes (leather). <br><br>

<br><br>To be honest, I doubt that manufacturers will go out of their way to provide a really walkable alpine touring boot. There's negligible demand for them.

<br><br>I tend to agree. Most of the excitement in AT gear seems to be aimed at stiffer, higher, more descent-oriented footwear (ie Adrenalin) as most of the fresh market seems to be people looking to sacrifice little or no downhill performance with their touring gear. I hear of people all the time who are looking to "improve" the performance of MegaRides/G-Rides and Denalis/Matrices by adding stiffer tongues or riveting on extra plastic panels and who are amazed that I'm skiing mid-fat skis with F1's.<br><br>Edited to add: I had Jet Stix.<br><br>Edited again to add: Actually a removeable spoiler is not a bad idea.<br><br>

Greg, if I remember correctly, you're skiing Teledaddies AT, right? Are you using your F1s on those? <br><br>I suspect that those who rip on light boots rip because of their skill. Over Christmas break I saw a guy on F1s and TM:11s on Tumalo. And in the tracked out slightly chunky snow he was just flailing. I'm sure I would do the same. Then again, maybe someone should videotape me trying to ski in my mountain boots...I'm sure it would be very entertaining.

I suspect that those who rip on light boots rip because of their skill.

<br><br>For sure a guy like Lowell has the advantage here; he's been ripping in variable snow conditions since childhood and could probably figure out how to ski most anything in tennis shoes if need be. On the other hand, no one's figured out how to comfortably do a 10 mile hike in ski boots yet.<br><br>Edited to add: I put Freerides on the Teledaddies. Still waiting for the powder this year to use them . . .

Edited to add: I had Jet Stix.

<br><br>I still have a pair.  <br><br>For some reason, I never bothered trying them on my Scarpa Invernos or any of my other mountain boots. But I just tried them on my Mountain Lites and they fit really well. Hmm... Irresistibly retro.<br><br>During my historical reading, I found ads for Jet Stix and similar gadgets in old Northwest Skier magazines. Here are some memories for you old-timers:<br><br>www.alpenglow.org/ski-history/notes/peri...kier-1970-oct-16-p11

<br>Northwest Skier<br><br>Oct 16, 1970, p. 11: "New Lange boot accessory"<br>The Spoiler, made of flexible epoxy and cushioned with foam, can be attached to the rear of the Lange competition model, extending the height of the boot by about one-third. "Mastery of the modern 'sit back' technique is made easier by the Spoiler while fatigue is reduced and control increased." A drawing of the Spoiler is included.<br><br>The 11-27-70 issue (p.11) reports on the popularity of Jet Stix, introduced by former U.S. Olympian Jack Nagel. "Jet Stix are simple to use--they fit around the boot top and require no modification of the boot. They're held in place by a single strap and fastened by a boot-type buckle. With Jet Stix, ski boots become like the new high-backed models."<br><br>The 10-22-71 issue (p.14) has the first display ad I noticed for a factory-produced high-back boot, the Dolomite Super-Comp. The 11-5-71 issue (p.3) has a display ad for Cheetah sticks.

<br>

I guess part of the challenge put forward in this thread is what an individual wants or needs in a particular descent on skis. It certainly is a very personal thing. If the descent is the only interesting part of the trip then I guess a total control type boot will be put up with on the hike in, either on foot or on one's back. I still think that the industry hasn't provided much of a choice in this matter, though I did see a lace-up (dynafit?) last year that wasn't around this year when I bought.<br><br>I am really not down on this segment of the industry, however. I am actually amazed that with the relatively small market in these boots, compared to the downhill market, that these specialty boots are as numerous as they are. Also, being specialty as they are, I was shocked at how reasonable they are priced compared to new downhill gear, having bought my son (eight years old) a pair of downhill boots this year. With the variability in the plastics used to inject the mold and the extra features required, such as vibram soles, rocker soles and cushioning etc., these companies could easily have justified charging a lot more.<br><br>For me, I am now entering a grey area. My ski trips on leather had been more centered on being in the mountains and yes the descents were lots of fun, albeit somewhat limited and less elegant than might have been. I think I will continue to do these trips. But darn it I really like the way my new plastic stuff skis! I guess the positive is that I will gain in the amount of skiable terrain I will now access. But I have not really demanded much from the ski descent at this point in my career and if there was such a boot as Lowell suggested, I think I would have bought it and still been extremely satisfied with the increase in downhill performance. I don't see it as a problem or personal weakness to reduce speed by some degree to gain control. The challenge in skiing new terrain and push the ability of the gear can be as satisfying as speed, especially when one has the positive distractions of dropping down a line in a remote area of the Cascades that make you feel as if you were the first one to ever lay tracks there.<br><br>Regarding the plastic tele boots. I probably will go plastic. In fact I got my wife a pair of the lighter Scarpas (I think the T2 or 3) and she really likes them. She seems to be a little walk impaired, but since I weigh about twice as much as her, I suspect that I will have them broken in real quick. The modified Asolos are on their third resole and I think they might be saved for my museum some day.<br><br>Alan

I had used the Dynafits (the old green, blue, yellow, orange, pink ones) for many years and was comfortable with long approaches in them (Olympus, Ruth, the Ptarmagin, not to mention all of the timber roads we northwesterners travel to get to the snow) and was happy on steeps and firm - ice was a little tricky, but passable. I think a good part of it was the rocker and certainly the light weight.<br><br>Recently I "upgraded" to Garmont G-lites - searching for that magical combination of light weight and skiability. They are definitely a stronger ski boot and the weight is great, however, I can't say I'm overjoyed with how they walk. When scrambling across rock or walking for miles, these boots destroy my feet. I am always amazed by the boot reviews when they talk about how comfortable some of these boots are to walk in. These guys must be kicking vertical steps up snow slopes. <br><br>I think part of it is the liner. Old liners (both plastic climbing boots and ski boots) used to have laces which almost allowed the liner to act separately from the boot. Now the trend seems to be towards the thermofit liners with no laces - which then relies on the outer boot to hold the foot in place. It doesn't seem to work.<br><br>I think the Dynafits may represent the best attempt at a boot that can travel and ski. Maybe part of the key is a removable spoiler, but they seem to always get lost somewhere. I think you need something back there - I remember those first days of backcountry skiing in climbing boot - not pretty.<br><br>I think the AT boot world is still searching for the holy grail. They've got the weight down and power up - now to make them walk well. We need Ramer!<br><br>Has anyone tried to put a lacing system on their inner boot - like a thermofit?<br><br>

I think lacing on inner boots is overrated. My stock Denali liners had laces, but after a while I pulled them out and it made no difference whatsoever in either how they hiked or how they skied. If the laces make a difference, then the boot isn't holding your foot well in the first place. <br><br>I can't imagine a ski boot I'd like to walk in. Even my rigid mountain boots are uncomfortable compared to tennis shoes.

I think I understand what Bill G was getting at. If the inner boot is snug to the foot and ankle (and with the outer loosened alot), it can "float" a bit within the outer boot, somewhat negating the apparent stiffness of the outer boot.<br><br>I prefer sneakers walking too, but even on relatively short hikes on rough terrain, my feet ache too much in sneakers. With added weight on the back I just can't use light shoes or light hikers.<br><br>Alan

I think lacing on inner boots is overrated. My stock Denali liners had laces, but after a while I pulled them out and it made no difference whatsoever in either how they hiked or how they skied. If the laces make a difference, then the boot isn't holding your foot well in the first place.  

<br><br>I was told once that the laces in the liners of that category of boot are *only* there so they can better be used as camp booties . . .<br><br><br>Edit to add:<br>Hmm, on second thought: the notion that the laces in liners hold you feet in the liner better while skinning and all buckles are loose, doesn't sound unreasonable. But it'll not make a significant performance difference when the boot is buckled for the descent.<br>

If you didn't want the flexible bellows there is the Dynafit TLT 4 Races which no one has and no one knows much about.<br> . <br><br>Of course these don't have flexible bellows. I always thought bellows where a great idea until I read Lou Dawson's F1 review , "In a word it adds comfort, though how much energy it saves over a stiff soled rando boot is open to debate -- and I'm pretty certain it is minimal or even zilch. Why? Because even if the more natural stride saves a smidgen of energy, when you engage the Dynafit binding heel lift, the F1 sags at the ball of the foot every time you start a stride (as telemark boots do when using a climbing lift), thus using up a small amount of umpf."<br><br>Do bellows really not improve skinning economy?<br>

The bellows sure would improve walking and scrambling economy. Some ski tours (especially around here, and especially in low snow years) involve a lot of walking. If I remember correctly, Lou only tested the F1s at a groomed ski area where he didn't do anything except skin up and ski down. His opinion might have changed a bit if he had walked a few miles each way to the snow?<br><br>I'm shopping for a pair of Dynafit compatible boots for a light-weight touring setup. What would you folks recommend? F1's? MLT4's? something larger? What do you ski on?

Also, considering the bellows on shorter trips: what about efficiency of kicking steps into hard snow and holding a grip upon climbing? And what about compatibility with crampons?

Also, considering the bellows on shorter trips:  what about efficiency of kicking steps into hard snow and holding a grip upon climbing?  And what about compatibility with crampons?

<br><br>I'm pretty sure that the boot review in either this fall's Couloir or Backcountry review (can't review which) remarked upon a noticeable inefficiency when kicking steps into hard snow with the F1. (But it didn't say anything about crampon compatibility problems, nor would I expect that, since the problem with tele boot crampon compatability is the duck toe, not the bellows.)<br>

I was one of the people on the Couloir thread who noticed a definite lack of security booting up steeps in the F1 due to the bellows flex (had just booted up the Slot w/o crampons on rain crust) but they fit step-in crampons fine and feel quite secure when the crampon is fitted properly (Grivel G10L). As far as hiking . . . they are easier to hike in than my G-Rides, but are by no means fun to walk in; I still take trail runners if there is much dirt to deal with (more than a couple of miles).

I'm not so sure the bellows are really worth it. No doubt they will be of benefit for walking and scrambling while the boot is not in the ski. So if this aspect is very important than they may be worth it.<br><br>However they probably don't contribute much if any benefit for touring. They present some small problems of sagging while descending (fixed with a retrofit shim). Also from my experience with tele boots will eventually wear through from ski edges and produce a troublesome leak.

For sure it is a "six of one" situation . . . as Jan says, the soft plastic of the bellows is a weak spot, and a pain for bootfitters if your bone spurs happen to be right on the border of the bellows and the harder plastic (need to shield the bellows with foil while heating the green part).<br><br>OTOH, probable energy loss or no, the flexibility makes it possible to use the middle heel level to tour in pretty much all the time and seems to offer a better "feel" when skinning grip is marginal. The range of motion with the F1 cuff is exceptional as well.

I'm shopping for a pair of Dynafit compatible boots for a light-weight touring setup.  What would you folks recommend?  F1's?  MLT4's? something larger?  What do you ski on?

<br><br>Matt, I have the Garmont MegaRides which are a 4 buckle Dynafit compatible boot. I like them a lot and I've probably ascended over 90,000vft feet with them on my feet (40k this season already). In my opinion, with the exception of the TLT4Race, unless you're counting every ounce and drilling holes in your toothbrush (something I may start doing soon), there's not really a huge weight difference between the light Dynafit compatible boots (Scarpa F1s, Dynafit TLT4Pros) and the heavier Dynafit compatible boots (Garmont MegaRides, Scarpa Matrixes). Although I've only tried the light boots on in shops, there does seem to be a substantial skiing performance difference between the light and heavier Dynafit boots. For me--for standard use--the performance difference outweighs the weight penalty.<br><br>F1s would only save me .9lb per pair over my MegaRides, this may be worth it in a very specific application (like a randonnée rally), but for general Fall, Winter, Spring and Summer use I want my MegaRides for the snow and my tennyrunners for the hikes.<br><br>Here's a table from one of my excel spreadsheets with weights of rando boots, all of these are dynafit compatible except for the last 3:<br>

<br>BOOT...........................WEIGHT........SOURCE...........CATEGORY <br>

 <br>Garmont MegaRides sz 26.5......6.856.........My scale.........Ski well <br>Scarpa Matrixs, sz 26..........6.625.........bdel.com.........Ski well <br>Dynafit Aeros, sz?.............6.393.........life-link.com....Ski well<br>Scarpa F1s, sz 26..............5.937.........bdel.com.........Light <br>Dynafit TLT4Pros, sz?..........6.000.........bdel.com.........Light <br>Dynafit TLT4 RACE sz?..........4.761.........life-link.com....ABSURDLY LIGHT <br>Garmont Adrenalins, sz 25......7.350.........My scale.........SKI VERY WELL<br>Scarpa Denali TT 05, sz 26.....7.500.........bdel.com.........Ask Paul <br>Scarpa T1s, sz 26..............8.562.........bdel.com.........So heavy it's laughable 

<br><br>Sorry for the thread drift, Lowell. And apologies if I'm one of the reasons your boot will never be made. Thanks for starting a neat topic, though I see no appeal in your boot unless they'd be absurdly light (under 3lbs/pair) and hike as well as my tennnyrunners. My tennyrunners hike great, my MegaRides skin and ski great and I don't mind the extra weight (maybe in 25 years I'll feel different).

The T1/Race weighs a POUND more than the Denali?? Wow, I thought they were comparable, weight-wise. <br><br>I really really really want a TT with Dynafit compatibility. Maybe I can do it a la Lou's page. Anyone got some trashed dynafit boots to donate to the cause?

The T1/Race weighs a POUND more than the Denali??

<br><br>Yeah, though that's if you believe bdel.com's weights. I've found a number of discrepancies between what the manufacture lists as the weight, what the vendor lists, what the actual weight is determine by my .1 of ounce precision scale and then what the magazines list. This is why I keep a scale with me at all times in the back of my car, as well as maintain my own spreadsheet with the data. I imagine some of the discrepancies are caused by weighing different boot sizes then they're listing--at least I hope that's the cause. In general though the #s are pretty close and I'm sure the T1/TRaces are heavier then the Denalis, &lt;insert your favorite randonnee is vastly superior to tele line here &gt;.