AT ski boots for plates?

[pokkis]

Heel of Backland is more narrow than regular HB's so fit is not perfect for carving without modification.

[philw]

On 1/7/2019 at 12:19 AM, lonbordin said:

There is to be room in F2 bails and that's why those in the thread are looking at other bindings.  You might look at other bindings as well as there's a lot of weight to be saved from F2s for the soft stuff you look to ride.

....

@DRUPI apparently makes a system for the boot.  The attachment is as simple as two hex screws.

Thanks... I've contacted Drupi (@Randy: he is prototyping this 3rd spring system at the moment).

If I'm going to need to buy new bindings to work with the Backlands (because they're clearly not Intec compatible), then does anyone know precisely which bindings will work well with these heels? The EC thread referenced here talks about "Redlines" - are those bindings?
---
My F2 Intec Titanium bindings are about a Kilo a leg. My HSP boots with standard liners etc are 3Kgs a leg. So that's 8Kgs all up. The Backlands are about 1.2Kgs a leg... DRUPI's mod is about 250g (per foot or for the pair?). Worst case that's about... 1.5Kgsx2 or half the weight of the HSPs.

Edited January 9, 2019 by philw
Add weight of HSPs

[pokkis]

None of std bails work perfectly with them. My friend bent his bails more narrow to get better fit. I ride with std ones due i use them only in pow.

[Lurch]

@philw not sure if +30 deg is enough for you, but but these would certainly fit Backlands:  http://www.phantomsnow.com/system/bindings/ 

I could not see an off-the-shelf cant system for them.

[pokkis]

Then it means that they dont work with regular hardboots, hmmmm.

[philw]

4 hours ago, Lurch said:

@philw not sure if +30 deg is enough for you, but but these would certainly fit Backlands:  http://www.phantomsnow.com/system/bindings/ 

I could not see an off-the-shelf cant system for them.

30 isn't enough, but their "Alpha" bindings look like they'd be ok with a suitable plate. Shame they don't use the "tech" toe, perhaps. Those bindings have some built-in cant.

[philw]

And another option looks like the Atomic Hawx Ultra XTD. 400g more per foot, but more ski boot like. Hmm.

[pokkis]

That is total different ball game, try to run with those and you realize how much tougher it is to hike up or traverse.
Weight sounds like more than 50% more than Backlands.
But if you just go downwards then not big issue.

Bails, Backlands have 10mm more narrow boot heel width than regular HB's, due that bails are quite sloppy without modification.
As said, not big issue on pow, but if you plan carve hard on slope, then it might be issue.

[pokkis]

Here version i did for my wife, seem to be very happy after todays pow session, result: It works

Edited January 16, 2019 by pokkis

[philw]

On 1/9/2019 at 10:42 AM, Lurch said:

@philw not sure if +30 deg is enough for you, but but these would certainly fit Backlands:  http://www.phantomsnow.com/system/bindings/ 

I could not see an off-the-shelf cant system for them.

450g a foot, and that's with all the split gubbins I guess. Anyone rode those on a 4x4 or Burton track? They have 3.5 degree canting. Doesn't say what or where - both feet, inwards, I suppose.  They don't seem to sell a plate for them. Presumably if you have a standard board with a plate you can spin them to any angle you like. Hmm.

[Dan]

Lots of good info here! I have been screwing around with easy backcountry stuff and for the time being, have settled on my Deeluxe hardboots, approach skis+skins, and a solid board. It's heavy, but I'm just doing little baby excursions on shallow (not steep enough to slide) pitches, and it's all conditioning, right? I do have a splitboard, but I wasn't very happy with its downhill performance. Similarly, I have some old Scarpas, but they sucked for downhill because of no forward flex.

Having said that, my wife cleans my clock going uphill, and maybe a lighter setup would be more fun for touring, so I'm interested in the Backlands. I guess no one is selling a replacement bail to fit a Backland, is that right? I'm not against DIYing it, but it's a pretty mission critical part, and I would hate to screw it up. Anyway, I'm following the conversation with interest, thanks for the info on the Backland and the upcoming spring system

Edited January 31, 2019 by Dan

[philw]

I think there are, in summary, two issues with the Backland Carbon which I'm trying to solve, or determine can be solved:

1. The bail height of the heel
2. The spring mechanism

Heel Bail Height... the solution someone suggested here was to use the toe piece from an Intec F2 Race binding as the heel piece for the Backlands. That I can fix, then, although I'd have to buy a traditional F2 Race binding and chuck the heel pieces. The Phamtom bindings look reasonable, but don't have centre disks. Their cleat system has, as stated, fixed angles with a maximum of 30 degrees. I could probably make a disk for them.

Spring Systems...  I'm hoping someone here or in the EC forum will sell a spring mechanism, or maybe someone will post instructions on how to build one. I suppose I could build one from scratch, but I don't live near snow so I don't really have the opportunity to prototype designs; it'd be better to buy an off-the-shelf solution. Phantom's solution looks good, but doesn't exist yet. I've not yet found anyone (Phantom or forum people) who will sell a spring system today.

[pokkis]

Height is less problem than width. 

[philw]

32 minutes ago, pokkis said:

Height is less problem than width. 

I see here that there are apparently two different F2 heel bail lengths - do you know which you're using for this? 

 

I hear you on width, they waggle about, presumably, which is how ski boots used to feel in most bindings I ever used.

[pokkis]

No clue, i use now old plastic base Proflex ones.

[pow4ever]

I am looking for that 1 pair boots to rule them all.
Carving -- #1 95%+ use case.  Lighter weight is good.
I want to learn how to ski -- #2 4% use case
AT/split boarding -- very far in the future 1%

Does AT boots make sense for my use case?
Is it just the same type of boot liner for AT boots?

Related:

 

[BlueB]

3 hours ago, pow4ever said:

I am looking for that 1 pair boots to rule them all.
Carving -- #1 95%+ use case.  Lighter weight is good.
I want to learn how to ski -- #2 4% use case
AT/split boarding -- very far in the future 1%

Does AT boots make sense for my use case?
Is it just the same type of boot liner for AT boots?

Related:

 

Yes, just look for stiffer ones. 

On 2/1/2019 at 1:44 AM, pokkis said:

No clue, i use now old plastic base Proflex ones.

Yes, I also had an impression that the Proflex has lower rear bail than Carve RS. But I gave the RS to my Niece, so I can't compare right now. 

[Beckmann AG]

13 hours ago, pow4ever said:

Does AT boots make sense for my use case?

Not really.

The boot flex sort of has to match the board flex. If you go to an AT boot for lift served, you'll probably not want to ride most of the boards you already own on packed snow.

AT boots require specific types of ski bindings for proper release, which means you can't just buy boots and rent skis.

That said, learning to ski in AT boots will most likely be easier than using conventional ski boots, and re-learning to snowboard in AT boots might be very informative,  answering some of the questions you're asking regarding technique, etc.

 

Edited February 3, 2019 by Beckmann AG

[JRAZZ]

I have to admit that lightweight AT boots are really sexy at the moment.

But in reality, I've finally dialed in my Track 700s/BTS/Binding combo. I can't really find a good reason to spend more money on an inferior (from a carving/convenience/setpin standpoint) setup.

I've already been to ski boot land. Not going back.  

[pow4ever]

21 hours ago, Beckmann AG said:

 

The boot flex sort of has to match the board flex. If you go to an AT boot for lift served, you'll probably not want to ride most of the boards you already own on packed snow.

AT boots require specific types of ski bindings for proper release, which means you can't just buy boots and rent skis.

That said, learning to ski in AT boots will most likely be easier than using conventional ski boots, and re-learning to snowboard in AT boots might be very informative,  answering some of the questions you're asking regarding technique, etc.

 

Great points!  on rental/learning ski with it.  I was thinking pick up a setup cheap during off season/craigslist/forum.
I have seem the AT boot binding at work just yesterday.  It does have many more moving parts.

So If I am to understand correctly:  AT boots is not going to be the best choice for resort alpine snowboard carving/hardpack?
I understand there will be compromise when a piece of gear is to ask to perform in multiple function.  Is it good enough?

How much of an efforts in re-learning snowboard in AT boots?  Mostly depends on individual; is it like going from a real stiff hard boot to softer or vice versa?  I would think/hope most of the technique translate?

I am not handy so "stock gear/pre modified" are preferred.

[pokkis]

They can be best if one is light weighted, and user needs/prefers eurocarve style flexible boots. Seen that.

[LambertoMI]

I use many AT boots and have for years.  Love the reduced weight and comfort.  They work with all bindings except step ins.  I suggest you try it.  

Let me know if you want more details on what works well

Lamberto

[Beckmann AG]

14 hours ago, pow4ever said:

How much of an efforts in re-learning snowboard in AT boots?  Mostly depends on individual; is it like going from a real stiff hard boot to softer or vice versa?  I would think/hope most of the technique translate?

Sort of depends on what you ask of your boots at present.

If you're accustomed to leaning on the plastic to make your board turn, then you'll feel rather awkward in the lighter shells. On the other hand, if you tend to focus on directing inputs through the soles of your feet, and you match the lighter boots to a lighter/softer board, then the transition should be less abrupt.

When I began boring holes in my ski boots a few years ago, I found I couldn't get my skis to perform in certain circumstances, or at least not in the way to which I was accustomed. Now, however, I can get more performance out of them, across the snow condition spectrum. Just took some time to figure out where all of the 'new' controls were hidden.

[philw]

4 hours ago, Beckmann AG said:

Sort of depends on what you ask of your boots at present.

If you're accustomed to leaning on the plastic to make your board turn, then you'll feel rather awkward in the lighter shells. On the other hand...

If you're moving from stiff boots to less stiff boots, that makes sense. I made exactly that move when I switched from very stiff ski race boots to rather more flexible hard snowboard boots. Some adjustment was required.

I'm thinking that the stiffness of (say) Atomic Backlands isn't available (?). There are plenty of Atomix Hawx boots with that same walk/ lean lever which have a stiffness comparable to modern piste boots. I guess I could probably "stiffen up" my ride once more if I switched to those, and still lose weight as I'd gain 40 years of ski boot design. Better, I'd get a modern "walk/ride" system I could plug replace to deliver any fore-aft stiffness I wanted. Or did I miss something there?

But we're talking here about AT boots, which are going to be softer... I just don't know how soft. People say that using them "out of the box" with the rigid "ride" lever makes them too stiff, but too stiff for whom? For soft boot riders, maybe... but that stiffness will be less than the ski race boots I started out on, irrespective. And the lateral stiffness may be better too.

Ah well, there's one way to find out, I'd best buy some (and some old fashioned bindings to go with them) and we shall see.

 

[pow4ever]

Thank you all for being the pioneer/explorer. 

I will gladly be that 2nd mice   just because I have no idea what I am doing.