Flyin Hawaiian Posted February 25, 2010 Report Share Posted February 25, 2010 Alpine Tournig, correct? Anyone have a good explanation on their purpose? It's a ski boot and fit into ski bindings? Seems like they would work well with All Mtn alpine boards and Freeride boards with plate bindings. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scrapster Posted February 25, 2010 Report Share Posted February 25, 2010 They are a specific type of ski boot intended for a specific type of ski binding. They work somewhat like a telemark setup, with the advantage of being able to lock your heel down for downhill sections. Otherwise, you can freeheel flats or up hills. I don't know enough to compare the flex profiles versus snowboard HB's, though they do tend to have more forward flex than many traditional ski HB's. I guess the lateral flex would be the question. I have a pair that seem to work fine on wider boards (as you suggested)--they do have longer soles than snowboard HB's, so that can limit you. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scrapster Posted February 25, 2010 Report Share Posted February 25, 2010 PS- They also tend to be much lighter than snowboard HB's, and have handy lug soles. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobdea Posted February 25, 2010 Report Share Posted February 25, 2010 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ski_boot#Randon.C3.A9e_.28Alpine_Touring.29 they tend to be pretty long. the nordica SBH (their snowboard specific hard boot) was not too far from a AT boot just heavier Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
astrokel Posted February 25, 2010 Report Share Posted February 25, 2010 Any ideas if step in heels could be added to AT boots? Probably not right? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buell Posted February 25, 2010 Report Share Posted February 25, 2010 No, step in heels are not going on an AT boot. Standard bindings work just fine though. I use them for splitboarding in a modified F2 binding. They work really well, especially for ascending and walking on approaches. I will consider testing a pair for carving at some point. There are lots of different options. Rebecca just got a pair of Dynafit Zzero4s for splitboarding and is testing them for carving. She has not been back in her Track 225s since she got them. Super lightweight, good lateral flex and forward flex. They are a less beefy AT boot, but are a little stiffer than the 225s with blue BTS. They are much better designed than alpine hardboots. I know of a couple of Tahoe riders who are happy in Garmont Megarides for carving. I am pretty sure BOL member John Dahl uses Dynafit TLT 4s (discontinued) for splitting and carving. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
docrob Posted February 25, 2010 Report Share Posted February 25, 2010 This seems like a good place to ask about the relative merits of the current Deeluxe, Head and UPZ offerings. The less they feel like a block of concrete the better ! I don't have a chance to go look / try where I am. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jon Dahl Posted February 25, 2010 Report Share Posted February 25, 2010 are used for all the above listed reasons. If I never had to hike at all, I'd probably still use my modded SB series boots. They were just at 5lbs per foot. My Dynafit boots are 2lbs 14oz per foot. Crampons fit better, they hike much better, and don't wear me out as the heavier boots did. Mostly they are used for mountaineering purposes. Lateral flex can be similar to SB series boots, forward flex is a tad bit stiffer. They carve just fine, and work for me on all me freeride decks. There are a few guys riding carve decks with 'em, too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boarderboy Posted February 26, 2010 Report Share Posted February 26, 2010 I'm a mondo 30.5 or so. Thus, my Scarpa Lasers require that I ride nothing narrower than 21.5 waist width. At this late point in my boarding career, it's all about total comfort, including walking/hiking on and off piste. My Lasers are 3 buckle - hence very convenient, and I've found an oddball Burton step-in plate (not the "bear traps") that I think will work with them with very slight heel trimming. I do need a really good set of moldable liners for em, though. There are several 19 cm waist boards that I'd like to try, so I may experiment with one more pair of snowboard specific hardboots. Otherwise, a good pair of AT's could well be the last pair of boots I'll ever need. (HOWEVER, I'll admit the $1300 carbon hybrid hard/soft ski boot looks really intriguing. Money aside, I could easily be enticed into trying that boot.) cheers BB Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave* Posted February 26, 2010 Report Share Posted February 26, 2010 AT boots work very well for snowboarding with one caveat. That caveat : not the greatest for aggressive carving* IMO and that is due to flex . * with some mods this could be fixed, if anyone knows how to rig a BTS to the backside of a set of Nordica TR 10-12 series AT boots let me know. I have found that the walk mode is too soft in most cases and the Ski mode is to stiff for my tastes ( especially in the Scarpa denali ), for a chunky sized guy I like a medium flex boot. All other riding scenarios they will work pretty good and in some cases better than your Deeluxe/UPZ etc HBs. AT boots I have owned/ridden in 1) Scarpa Titan, a soft flex , 3 buckle denali ankle pivot rivets failed after about 60-80 days riding time, warranteed so upgraded to the Scarp Denali 2) Scarpa Denali ( the red shell version) a stiffer flex 4 buckle, tough as nails, way to stiff for my tastes when in ski mode ( for boarding), 3) Nordica TR 10 and 12 , still own a few sets. 4) Raichle 121 ( technically a "SB" boot,the bevelled heel/toe version of the Raichle Concordia ) these were my starter HBs. I rode em till they died, shell way outlasted the liners, I honestly think I would not be happy in them now, but at the time for the skill level I had they were perfect Of those boots my favorite has been the Nordica, my 27.5 shell is close to the binding length of a Deeluxe Suzuka shell in 28 mondo that both boots can be used without monkeying with binding length. The thing I like about the Nordica is the walk/ski switch doesnt stiffen the cuff, it only stops the back rotation of the cuff, If a BTS could be rigged to these boots I would be in heaven. The Nordicas after a touch of shell work fit me like a glove in a small (for me) shell size and are very comfortable, walking= traction out the yinyang and the vibram sole seems to last forever. The only reason my AT boots were collecting dust the past few seasons is that I got a taste of the BTS ride and dont want to give that up so its been all Raichle/Deeluxe SB/AF series HBs for me the past few years. .........Almost forgot to mention that depending on boot size etc the wider toebox may not work on TD1/TD2 with out some mods either to the boot or the binders. Never a problem on the Burton Raceplates/Trident Rattraps etc Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlueB Posted February 26, 2010 Report Share Posted February 26, 2010 Those AT vibram soled boots might work better then Raichles when you walk down the archery field ;) Good to see you posting again. Are you in for some spring riding with the Boyz? I had good time at Hemlock today... Back to AT boots. I had a pair of Lowa Structuras - only carpet carved them - too narrow for my funny feet. They definitelly looked better engineered then typical Raichle/Deelux. I agree on flex, a bit soft in walk mode (probably perfect for freeride, though). Relativelly stiff in ski mode, on par with my Dalbellos with mokied-in BTS. What I didn't like is that flex came from deforming the shell, when in ski mode. I couldn't judge the lateral flex. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
b0ardski Posted February 26, 2010 Report Share Posted February 26, 2010 My Lasers are 3 buckle - hence very convenient, and I've found an oddball Burton step-in plate (not the "bear traps") that I think will work with them with very slight heel trimming. I do need a really good set of moldable liners for em, though. cheers BB I use old Nordica SBH with burton "rattrap" stepin race for spring hiking. The SBH is basically a TR9 ski touring boot with a shorter tongue & a lateral flex mode, I did have to carve out a notch in the side of the heel for the burton to work smoothly. I have used my124 raichles with crampons as well but the extra weight, cut back toe/heel suck for hiking in the snow. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
astrokel Posted February 26, 2010 Report Share Posted February 26, 2010 Maybe a dumb question but... Why are AT boots so much lighter than SB HB's? I'm not talking about performance reasons but construction reasons. If they can make AT boots so light why not SB HB's? Is it just that nobody cares?:( Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
b0ardski Posted February 26, 2010 Report Share Posted February 26, 2010 For lift served riding weight is not so much of an issue. For backcountry hiking & mountaineering some people spend $100s to save ounces on boots, bindings, crampons & other climbing gear. AT boots are aimed at the uphill traveler. I save almost a pound per step with ATs compared with normal ski or board boots. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scrapster Posted February 26, 2010 Report Share Posted February 26, 2010 It takes innovation to save weight. There's not much innovation going on in SB hard boots these days. Its hard to believe there's more demand for AT equipment to drive those changes, but I guess there's enough... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
astrokel Posted February 26, 2010 Report Share Posted February 26, 2010 but AT boots and SB HB boots are about the same cost. So cost isn't an issue or? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
b0ardski Posted February 26, 2010 Report Share Posted February 26, 2010 competitive pricing for ATs there's a lot more backcountry skiers than there are sb hardbooters and twice as many AT manufacturers and models as SB hardboots. Also way more innovation and R&D in Apline Touring, i.e. HB=older tech Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Pukas Posted February 26, 2010 Report Share Posted February 26, 2010 ditto on the above three threads. Our industry is so small, there's not enough $$ for a company to devote the resources for R&D. The AT/backcountry industry is actually quite big. Huge even. AT is much bigger in Yurp that the US of A. They're fanatical about saving weight, and performance, especially the racers. The AF boot was a big deal 11 years ago. The biggest thing in boot design in the last 10 years has been Fin's BTS... Pisses me off that Deeluxe, et al, brags about new design cahnges in their boots - like real buckles. Whoa!!! Real buckles??? what's wrong with them zipper strips??? Those worked 50 years ago, why change them now??? well, son, we've got to stay ahead of the game, and future trends are showing the ski boots industry may actual use these nifty new things called "buckles" to keep those new fangled plastic-type boots closed. We'll show them they way.... whatever. Give us new, better fitting, better performing, lighter, just better, boots already, DAMN IT!!!! Maybe after the Olympics we'll have a surge in interest in carving, more people = more $$$, and maybe some improvements will come along from the trickle-down effect boot wise. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Pukas Posted February 26, 2010 Report Share Posted February 26, 2010 On a higher note, I've been wanting to try AT boots for riding pow for years, but haven't wanted to drop the coin for them. There are some really, really trick AT boots out there now. I bet the Garmont Radium would be pretty sweet! But it's only got one forward lean mode, which I think would be too steep. Put a walk-mode-able BTS on the back of that and then we'd have something!!! The sidewinders open up some options to use stiffer AT boots. Maybe? Maybe not... There are so many advantages to using AT boots for off-piste - primarily in the walking-hiking end. And if you're really serious about snowboard mountaineering, then crampons come into play. No one is going to use crampons on a T700 (at least I don't think so). It doesn't seem too difficult to me for a backcountry focused company like Scarpa, Garmont, BD to take one of their existing AT ski boots and make a couple mod's - shorter sole, adjust toe-heel block shape for bails, and add an adjustable ride-walk mechanism. With a spring for forward-rear flex control like on the UPZ RC-10's, or without like the standard Deeluxe/Raichle. They're boots already all have ski-walk mode, so how hard could be? Then again, how many people would buy them? I bet less than 1,000 world wide... Prolly a couple hundred if that? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2stroke Posted February 26, 2010 Report Share Posted February 26, 2010 The AT's look interesting, at least from the standpoint of buying used, there seems to be something available in AT's where SB-HB's are rare on the used market. Is the longer sole of the AT boots an issue? They are similar in length to a ski boot? Looking for cheaper alternatives to getting an alpine set up. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
b0ardski Posted February 26, 2010 Report Share Posted February 26, 2010 It doesn't seem too difficult to me for a backcountry focused company like Scarpa, Garmont, BD to take one of their existing AT ski boots and make a couple mod's - shorter sole, adjust toe-heel block shape for bails, and add an adjustable ride-walk mechanism. With a spring for forward-rear flex control like on the UPZ RC-10's, or without like the standard Deeluxe/Raichle. They're boots already all have ski-walk mode, so how hard could be? Then again, how many people would buy them? I bet less than 1,000 world wide... Prolly a couple hundred if that? I would cream my jeans over an intec heeled AT boot, but your right, the market is minuscule. I will purchase an NTN (stepin tele) boot eventually, probably Scarpa because they're Dynafit compatible. I'm even considering cutting the heel off to attach my Nitro heels. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
b0ardski Posted February 26, 2010 Report Share Posted February 26, 2010 If I had the extra $$ I'd get these to attempt a stepin heel mod $215 http://www.backcountryoutlet.com/outlet/SCR0052/Scarpa-Denali-TT-Alpine-Touring-Boot.html?RSC_ID=RI_SCR0052 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
docrob Posted February 27, 2010 Report Share Posted February 27, 2010 Boardski; Be sure to let us know how you go on with the NTN boots (Term pro/prophet). I also want to try NTN. If I could use the boots in my sidewinders for carving, and in the Fritschi Freeride and Marker Baron AT bindings, I'd be stoked ! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P06781 Posted February 27, 2010 Report Share Posted February 27, 2010 I'm a mondo 30.5 or so. Thus, my Scarpa Lasers require that I ride nothing narrower than 21.5 waist width.At this late point in my boarding career, it's all about total comfort, including walking/hiking on and off piste. My Lasers are 3 buckle - hence very convenient, and I've found an oddball Burton step-in plate (not the "bear traps") that I think will work with them with very slight heel trimming. I do need a really good set of moldable liners for em, though. There are several 19 cm waist boards that I'd like to try, so I may experiment with one more pair of snowboard specific hardboots. Otherwise, a good pair of AT's could well be the last pair of boots I'll ever need. (HOWEVER, I'll admit the $1300 carbon hybrid hard/soft ski boot looks really intriguing. Money aside, I could easily be enticed into trying that boot.) cheers BB I have lasers too and the work great! Also the SB series snowboard tongues work in them . I have a set of sb race ones which signifigantly stiffen them up although mainly use the soft scarpa ones for touring/splitting. Jim Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alaskan Rover Posted March 3, 2010 Report Share Posted March 3, 2010 As to bOardski's question of why AT/randonnee boots are so much lighter than snowboard hardboots. It's basically market-driven. For a ski mountaineering kit, net weight of your gear is of primary concern. Above 10,000 feet, every extra ounce starts to feel like an extra pound. After a long ascent, every bit of your energy is used to summit...and sometimes, to a climbers peril, there becomes an energy deficit...that's how people die up there...not just altitude sickness...they just plain run out of the energy to go on. What ever boots you wear (even if you're wearing bedroom slippers) begin toi feel concrete blocks. To combat net over-weight...the boot companies make certain and definite choices...phooeey...that's not the right word, but can't think of it right now (too much aggregate altitude sickness...LOL). Anyway...the climbing/randonnee boot makers strive for lightness over some features or additional strength...plus uphill flexibility for these boots is more important than downhill stability. If you can't get uphill...you don't go downhill. Snowboard hardboots, on the other hand, are predominately used in lift-accessible slopes...and thus uphill weight is not the dominate issue. Thus, they strive more for downhill stability...with thicker plastic than the randonnee and features more focused on the downhill aspect. With randonnee gear, you give up some (not very much, mind you) downhill stability for less weight and more uphill climbing flexibility. With all that said...if you had a limited budget and liked to do some remote alpine climbing AND hardbooting at ski areas...I would actually get a really decent pair of climbing/randonnee plastic shell boots...as they can be used for BOTH. I have a pair of Scarpa Denalis that I use with randonnee skis...I have yet to use them on a board...but am going to soon give it a try. Sure, Scarpa Denalis are damned expensive....but so are good conventional snowboarding hardboots. You cannot use the convential snowboard hardboots for climbing (if you value your life!), but the randonee/climbing boots ARE dual-purpose. Even if you don't climb...you may like the nice lug vibram soles and extra flexibility for getting around the ski lodge and parking lot...and if you DO want to get into backcountry randonnee...you ALREADY have one of the most important pieces of equipment...your boots. :) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.