Jump to content
Note to New Members ×

UPZ RC10 vs Deeluxe Track 700


Jack M

Recommended Posts

I switched from Track 700s to the RC10 at the beginning of the 2016/17 season.  Out of the box, the RC10 is significantly softer in every way.  If your foot is not a perfect fit for your shell size, the stock liner will "squirm" inside the shell.  This has been reported by several users.  My foot measures 28.4cm, I'm in a 28 boot, and I got the squirm.  UPZ boots come with a spring system, Track 700s do not*.  The stock rigid forward lean adjuster on the T700 doesn't make sense to me.  It prevents the ankle hinge from hinging at all, so any flex comes from you deforming the boot.  The Track 700 comes with a good moldable liner much like an Intuition Power Wrap. The UPZ liner is moldable, but I wasn't inspired to try that.  I switched to Power Wraps which made a big difference.  Much better fit and performance.  In addition to fitting better, they also stiffen the boot, which is welcome.  After that I still needed more so I went to the stiffer gray tongue.  This was a big improvement too.  The standard black is simply too soft for me.  Felt like riding in walk mode.  This year I'm on the stiffest dark gray tongues and I'm loving them for hard carving.  For all-mountain riding they're almost too stiff.  I got the stiffer RCR cuffs, but I haven't tried them yet.

The fit of the UPZ is better for me, I get zero heel lift.  I would get heel lift in the T700s even with molded liners, and I would have to add those stick-on X-pads on the back of the liners.  They helped, but didn't completely solve the issue.  T700 heel lift seems to be a common thing.  I also broke a number of T700 ankle hinge bolts.  I would replace them but then the plastic of the boot itself around the hinge began failing.  I'm 5'11" 190.  If you're lighter you might not have that issue.  Other than all that, the T700s ride well and I enjoyed them for years.  With BTS red (stiff) springs installed I never felt a need for the race tongues.  I'm liking my UPZs better though.  The heel hold down is a significant improvement.  The overall fit is more racy, which is more performant, but I have to unbuckle them at the bottom of every run.  It's worth it though.  I've had them punched out for more width at a shop.

The UPZ heel is more forward under your heel than Deeluxe.  This reduces boot length slightly, but it also means that you have to offset your binding toe/heel positions to center the boot on the binding.  This also makes the UPZ heel higher.  I had to change from a 3 degree cant/lift disc under my front foot to a 6 degree disc to avoid front leg burnout.

So I guess if you want a boot that you can just take out of the box, mold the liners and start riding, the T700 is probably closer to being that, but you'll still have to replace the forward lean selector.  If you're willing to spend more for aftermarket liners and possibly stiffer tongues/cuffs, I think the UPZ has greater potential. I can see why more racers ride UPZ than Deeluxe.  I'd love to try the .951 but I just got the UPZs last year, and I like step-ins.

*Until Bomber BTS kits are available again, there is a Deeluxe version available at YYZCanuck:

http://www.yyzcanuck.com/shop/parts/deeluxe-lean-mechanism-spring/

  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

To be frank, the RAB didn't do much for me. At about 140 lb. or slightly above, it felt like the boot was a one-piece design, even with the softer springs. There is another spring system for Deeluxe available from a guy on the Swoard forum, though.

I also found the stock UPZ tongues (the black ones) rather too stiff, so I got the red ones instead.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

I'm very happy with my UPZs. I haven't had some of the experiences mentioned in Jack Michaud's review.

No liner squirm here. I'm also in mondo 28 UPZ (8.5/9/9.5 shell) with stock Flo liners (9.5). They felt slightly stiffer than the Deeluxe Indys (also Mondo 28) I had been using (blue BTS).

I used the Indys with Power Wrap liners. They were not particularly comfortable, due to my wide forefoot and the room sucked up in the toe box by the foam liners. And I had serious heel slop, so performance was definitely sub par. The UPZs w/Flos reduced both problems. I still get a little heel lift, but nothing major. Basically I don't think about my boots any more when I'm riding. No need to unbuckle, ever. But it sometimes takes a few tries to get the tongue in the right position. What works best for me is to leave the boots unbuckled as I walk through the lot. That lets things settle in. Then buckle up just before clipping in and it's good for the day.

There are three liners for this UPZ shell: 8.5, 9 and 9.5. Jack, which one did you use? Maybe you needed a thicker one?

As for heel height, I actually measured my UPZs and Indys and found that the UPZs had a higher toe as well as a higher heel. The actual ramp is a little less in the UPZs at this size (9 degrees for UPZ, 9.5 for Deeluxe). Maybe Track 700s have a different ramp from Indys?

For this year you can get "race heels" for UPZ which are lower (to match the Northwave boots).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm into my second season on the RC10s (MP 27) and am also very happy with them.  I switched from Deeluxe Suzukas for what seems to be a prevailing reason: moderate heel lift in the Suzukas no matter what I did, and pretty much zero heel lift in the RC10s. 

I was OK with the stock Flo liners.  They weren't super comfy, but I didn't have the squirminess or other issues others have complained about.  I did heat mold them a bit with a hair dryer, which helped with a couple of minor hot spots initially.  The toe area fit was great from the beginning, which was not the case with my old Deeluxe (Intuition?) liners: with those when molding I had to use a toe cap + rubber wedges between the toes, and usually more than once to get it so my toes weren't super cramped.  

However, this season for the RC10s I went with Intuition Pro Wraps, for reasons most people have made the switch: claims of snugger fit, stiffer, better overall performance.  Initially I was tempted to go with the tried-and-true Power Wraps, but was concerned about crowding in the toe area.  Again, the stock Flo liner/RC10 combo was a perfect fit for me in the toe area, and I didn't want to lose that.  The Pro Wraps as described on their website fit my needs exactly:  "PRO WRAP liners are new to the Power Wrap Series, and are an excellent option if you require the medium body thickness of the original Power Wrap, but are looking for more room in the foot and toe box area."  The neoprene toe section of the Pro Wraps is very similar to the Flo liner. 

So for anyone thinking of Power Wraps or similar in RC10s but are concerned about crowding in the toe area, the Pro Wraps could be a great option (the Pro Tongues have a similar toe construction, just in a tongue version).  And yes, compared to the Flo liners, the Pro Wraps are noticeably more comfortable and snugger,  and perhaps a tad stiffer. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I made the switch from Track 700s this season to RC 10s with the black tongue and intuition power wraps.  I have mixed feelings on them but mostly positive.

The good: Heel lift is completely nonexistent compared to the deeluxes.   My feet feel completely locked in and comfortable which is probably the most important thing I need in a boot. My heel never fit right in the 700s and contour of the UPZs are much closer to my narrow heel and very wide forefoot.  I still want to get the forefoot punched a bit.

The bad:  I think the recessed heel is ridiculous.  It makes them difficult to center in bindings properly and frankly kinda dangerous to walk around in.  I feel like a pretty ballerina walking around on my tippy toes.   The internal ramp is excessive so I had to add some toe lift to my front and take some heel lift off the back to balance.  I dont like the flex pattern fore/aft or laterally as much as the deeluxes.  I don't care for the hard toe pads. The hard pads are slippery and don't flex as much in the binding (which I guess some people might like). I think the quality is about the same as deeluxe.

So as much as I don't like about the UPZs, the seated and secured heel trumps all the negatives.  If the internal structure of the 700s were closer to my foot, I would hands down still ride those.

Edited by Carvin' Marvin
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

UPZ RC10 ramp angle - 2016 model, pivoting/gullwing tongue. 303-324mm 10/10.5/11 shell.

Measured the difference in sole thickness between heel and toe while checking Intec cable integrity and that all the sole screws were corrosion free and tight. With F2 Intec heel in place 52mm / 22mm, i.e. 3cm.

The heel units the boots came with are 3mm thinner than the Intec heels.

To put that in context, I have some home made lift wedges in my F2 Intec bindings producing approx. 6 degrees slope. The higher side height of the taller wedge is 2.7 cm. The thin end of the thinner wedge is effectively 0 cm.

So 6 degrees of toe lift under my front boot gives me a close to flat ramp angle 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 months later...

Update on my immediately previous post.
Found this xray image of a foot in a UPZ RC boot on the kimcarving blog site.

A little work in Powerpoint shows an effective ramp/zeppa angle of 11 degrees. Looking at the xray that's the slope between the heel and the ball of the foot. Forward of the ball the boot sole flattens out.

rVl1pxU.jpg

 

Thanks @daveo , followed up your hint below.

 

Edited by SunSurfer
directly link image
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, SunSurfer said:

Update on my immediately previous post.
Found this xray image of a foot in a UPZ RC boot on the kimcarving blog site.

A little work in Powerpoint shows an effective ramp/zeppa angle of 11 degrees. Looking at the xray that's the slope between the heel and the ball of the foot. Forward of the ball the boot sole flattens out.

https://imgur.com/a/aaOE8ga

 

Not sure if you're after this, but the image automatically embeds if you paste the actual .jpg url into the reply box 🙂

So if you paste in https://i.imgur.com/rVl1pxU_d.jpg?maxwidth=1920&shape=thumb&fidelity=high it'll look like this:

 

rVl1pxU_d.jpg?maxwidth=1920&shape=thumb&

Edited by daveo
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...
52 minutes ago, arneburner said:

I always wondered why people use heel lift on the back foot when you already have 11 degrees built in. 

Cause it feels right and resolves other issues?  😉 

Taken to an extreme: Why do you use 11-degrees?  Wouldn't it be better to run flat by using an 11-degree toe lift?  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Comfort, and allowing the widest possible range of effective body movement are reasonable goals for any binding setup. What constitutes "effective" will depend on your riding style, leg/foot geometry and range of movement, and ability to carve and otherwise control a snowboard. There are many different factors involved, all inter-related. If you have a theory/model of how the binding/boot/stance distance and physique are inter-related it will help you make changes that are less random and more likely to help you achieve the result you want.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

Yes, but clearly the boot geometry is a major factor. I found that out the hard way when changing boots years ago - some boots are good for me flat (Rachlies from what I remember), but others (Suzukas and Head) need a bit of toe and heel lift. Kind of obvious once you know they have different geometries, but they don't tell you that in the brochures.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 6 months later...

I went from Raichel 324s to UPZ RTRs MP28 several years ago. My age is probably showing with those boots. I agree with most of the what been said already and would add that after a lot of time with a heat gun managed to get UPzs (better plastic) to fit better than the Raichels. They always performed a little better because of the forward flex w/springs.  

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 10 months later...
9 hours ago, nick8228 said:

How do you guys prefer to have your springs set on UPZ RC's?

I never touch  the spring adjustment, as your only option is tightening and this effectively reduces the range over which the cuff can move which will lead to distorting the shell when you want to press beyond that limit. I use the different stiffness tongues to adjust boot stiffness, and liner options of course. I ride with the soft red tongues when I am on my off-piste board, and the stiff grey tongues when carving.

Regarding lift: I run nearly flat on both feet with the UPZ. Just a teensy amount of toe lift on the front foot but flat otherwise. I used to run a big gas-pedal setup but in retrospect, running flat or close to it seems to work much better for me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I use RCR Box springs. Works great:
- You do not have to lock/unlock (walk mode) springs.
- RCR Box contains 3 springs of different stiffness, so you can adjust stiffness without limiting max travel.
- Max travel a bit bigger.

Spring vs Tongue. Tongue has more of static stiffness, Spring is progressive. 
 

When I use orange spring with dark grey tongues, it is quite hard on shin of the back leg, but makes toe side turns more powerful. Black spring relives quite a bit of pressure off shin (even with dark grey tongue), but you loose a little bit in control.

Edited by dgCarve
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/15/2020 at 4:21 PM, queequeg said:

I never touch  the spring adjustment, as your only option is tightening and this effectively reduces the range over which the cuff can move which will lead to distorting the shell when you want to press beyond that limit. I use the different stiffness tongues to adjust boot stiffness, and liner options of course. I ride with the soft red tongues when I am on my off-piste board, and the stiff grey tongues when carving.

Regarding lift: I run nearly flat on both feet with the UPZ. Just a teensy amount of toe lift on the front foot but flat otherwise. I used to run a big gas-pedal setup but in retrospect, running flat or close to it seems to work much better for me.

So with that said basically you don't adjust the lift in the back by the spring? Just clarifying?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I adjusted my forward lean with the springs, but know it decreases the range of movement. 

I raised the bottom nut on the rear foot and lowered the front nut on the forward foot. 

Coarse adjustments can be made with the little lever and where the cuff is when you raise it. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, nick8228 said:

So with that said basically you don't adjust the lift in the back by the spring? Just clarifying?

correct. Also don’t neglect the adjustments you can make at the hinge — you can adjust lateral cuff angle  (asymmetrical adjustment) as well as overall height/angle (symmetrical adjustment). There is a bunch you can do there. I am somewhat bow legged and like high angles, adjusting these cuffs to better suit my anatomy really helped me to keep the board more neutral when I want to make more subtle edging adjustments when I am riding nearly base-flat etc ... the cuff hinge adjustments are super useful IMO.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/21/2019 at 12:17 PM, arneburner said:

I always wondered why people use heel lift on the back foot when you already have 11 degrees built in. Will continue to run flat on back foot and increase lift on front foot. Thanks for providing that information.

I missed this comment — I think adding heel lift in the rear foot allows you to move your rear knee further forward/down and effectively increases the extent that you can crouch down closer to your board.

When I compress my body down:

  • my front knee bends while my front ankle does not, causing my front femur to lower to a more paralell-to-the-ground orientation, and causing the “front” part of my hip to rotate reardward.
  • Meanwhile: my rear anke is flexing to bring my rear knee further forward and my rear femur more perpendicular to the ground.
  • The result is your whole body is lower to the board, and your hips are very squared off with your momentum.

Adding lift to the rear foot makes this rotated-compressed position easier to achieve (I think of it as the ice-coast crouch, because it is so helpful when riding on ice). It helps you get lower because it sets the initial position of your front knee lower/more-forward than it would be otherwise: allowing you to flex even further forward and down when you bend your ankle. Depending upon your physiology, riding style etc : adding heel lift can make getting into this crouched ice-coast position easier and more natural. It also moves weight forward.

I personally don’t use (any) heel lift on the rear foot but I can see why other people might.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

I understand heel lift in and of itself. arneburner's question was if people really need so much of it that they add external heel lift for a boot that has such a lot of it already built in. Personally I ride without heel lift, but I use toe lift on the front foot to negate some of the built-in heel lift.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 1/5/2021 at 8:05 AM, Aracan said:

I understand heel lift in and of itself. arneburner's question was if people really need so much of it that they add external heel lift for a boot that has such a lot of it already built in. Personally I ride without heel lift, but I use toe lift on the front foot to negate some of the built-in heel lift.

You are correct. Just wondered if you needed  17 degress of heel lift. ( 11 +6) It seems excessive to me.  0 rear and 6 front seems balanced to me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree that that would be more "balanced" but when I tried it it was horrible!

I find that running the front foot flat and the rear with 6° of heel lift is far more comfortable for me. I also add 3° of outward cant to the rear foot. As best as I can tell I'm naturally knock-kneed and this helps position me in a more athletic position. It took FOREVER to dial this in but it works for me and if I mess with any of these settings I feel as though I can't turn the board.

I also found that I am very front foot heavy and so the heel lift in the back acts like a rear facing "gas-pedal". As I lean back the board engages better. Again, this took forever to figure out and honestly would have been faster if I didn't try to achieve a "balanced" stance that works for others.

The TL;DR is that a true balanced setup is one the puts YOU in a balanced position not one that is mathematically symmetric. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.



  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...