Lange RX-130 vs. RS-130

RunSki

At the base lodge
Skier
Joined
Feb 21, 2016
Posts
5
Hi All-- I'm currently in the process of looking at new boots and am looking at the two Lange 130's. I previously skied 5 years on the non dual core version of the RX130 (green and black ones). I'm considering switching to the RS130 in the new version but wanted to get a little imput. I'm not a racer, but I do own some cheater SL skis and enjoy carving it up when the snow is firm. On the other hand, I live it Utah and do a good bit of powder and free skiing. I'm aware of most of the technical differences (such as the harder bootboard in the RS). A had a couple of specific questions. I know there are differences in liner, but I'll be bringing over a Zipfit.

How does the stiffness compare between the two? How about to the non-dual core versions? Sometimes I felt like the old RX's were a little soft, causing me to have to buckle them tightly to get the control I wanted (hence wanting to move to the RS), but I'm also not a big guy (only about 165 lbs), so I'm also a little worried about going too much farther in the other direction.

How does the RS version do in free skiing and powder? If you have them, have you been unhappy with their off-piste performance. With the new RX's, the bootboard is much softer than my old RX's so these differences may be enhanced.
 

jo3st3

Putting on skis
Skier
Joined
Jan 5, 2018
Posts
144
Location
CT
Not on expert on the RS, but I would say the RX is designed to be a little more happy feet oriented and versatile for resort skiing of groomed or ungroomed snow. RS is really best suited for on-piste skiing and will give max feedback and control and rebound, the type of characteristics you look for when racing. They are both great boots and there are no rules with what you can do with boots. I would recommend being realistic about where you spend most of your time skiing, and what you need from a boot performance wise.

I think the RX is a solid boot and in a 130 is a legit boot that I can't imagine anyone that races or otherwise wouldn't consider to be a worthy boot to use when not racing. Remember, it's a non alpine touring Lange 130, so they aren't messing around. At 165lbs, 130 is pretty darn stiff boot and perhaps not ideal if looking to use on powder days, but you would know your own needs better than anyone else in this regard. If you're skiing mostly groomed trails on-piste, than you can always go into higher flex ratings versus off-piste and powder. You might like the 120 and you shouldn't rule it out if you want to do more than just rip GS turns on-piste. Typically you're. getting the same quality of liner and performance from a 120 vs 130 boot, it's just a littler easier on the shins and allows you to flex into the boot when you don't have rock hard icecoast groomers under foot.

I'm not sure if the plastics changed too much over the years since your last boot, but it's not too interesting imo. The ability to inject two plastics just makes the boots easier to get in and out of on a cold day now. On a warm day, you might even pull the tongue straight through the instep it's so easy. But the boots are just as solid as they need to be where it matters.
 
Last edited:
Thread Starter
TS
R

RunSki

At the base lodge
Skier
Joined
Feb 21, 2016
Posts
5
Good points. There is a part of me that is tempted by the direct 1:1 responsiveness of the RS, but I also know there is a solid shot that I will hate it for powder and the like. I'm not intending to end up in a boot quiver, but if I hated it for powder, I could get an RX120, which would be the same mold and BSL. At that point, I could switch my Zips between the two shells, which is an intriguing option.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BMC

Ken_R

Living the Dream
Skier
Joined
Feb 10, 2016
Posts
4,276
Location
Denver, CO
The RX130 LV is very similar to the RS130. The RX130 non-LV is a bit higher volume. The RX has a different liner that is a bit more comfort oriented but still very high performance. Flex wise they are all very similar. The soles are also different.
 

oldschoolskier

Making fresh tracks
Skier
Joined
Dec 6, 2015
Posts
2,533
Location
Ontario Canada
I haven’t skied either boot but will comment on what do you want in a boot (fit a given). I like responsiveness and given my ability I prefer a race boot as I can tune back my force to match the conditions. (I’ve been is stiffer boots at a lot lighter wt).

So it depends on what you want or can do or prefer and pick accordingly.

This is not a definitive or directive answer but one on a Zen type.

Hopefully this helps.
 

ScottB

Out on the slopes
Skier
Joined
Oct 29, 2016
Posts
810
Location
Boston
I have skied a RS Lange for years. I am currently in the 140, but I find that a little stiff and had to get the forward lean just right since it doesn't flex as easily as I would like. I have only tried on an RX and have not skied one. Didn't feel as burly and rigid a shell as the RS. Anyway, I love the RS for any type of skiing, its very precise and gives me great control over my skis, which is what I want. About the only thing I can complain about is on corduroy, when hard snow, the vibration from cutting across the slope comes right through into my legs. Its very unpleasant. I would expect the rubber boot board of the RX to tone that down a little bit.

If you value precision and excellent control over your skis go RS, if you want more comfort and more cushioning, then RX. They are both excellent boots.

The other thing I think most skiers should consider is getting a much lighter boot. Something like the Atomic Hawks Ultra. That will be a very noticeable change due to weight and may really help your skiing and stamina.
 

markojp

mtn rep for the gear on my feet
Industry Insider
Instructor
Joined
Nov 12, 2015
Posts
4,320
Location
PNW aka SEA
Good points. There is a part of me that is tempted by the direct 1:1 responsiveness of the RS, but I also know there is a solid shot that I will hate it for powder and the like. I'm not intending to end up in a boot quiver, but if I hated it for powder, I could get an RX120, which would be the same mold and BSL. At that point, I could switch my Zips between the two shells, which is an intriguing option.
There's not a reason in the world an RS 130 won't ski powder just fine as long as it isn't too stiff for you. And if it's too stiff, the RX 130 will be too. and because of the solid block sole, it will have better lateral (more accurate) input to the ski for your SL skis on hardpack.
 

skifastflylow1

Booting up
Skier
Joined
Oct 20, 2017
Posts
23
I had a pair of RX and a pair of RS. I use Zips too. I gave my RX’s away since I only skied them a few times a year and noticed the decrease in performance and fit-too sloppy. The RS boot just fit my feet better and I always went back to them. I now have 2 pairs of RS- one for free skiing and one only for race nights.
 

pliny the elder

Industry Insider
Skier
Joined
May 28, 2019
Posts
84
Location
Somewhere good
Other than the liner, which is a little cushier in the RX, the primary difference is the RS is a solid soled boot.
This makes the clog quite a bit more rigid torsionally and laterally.
It is a noticeable difference if you ski with one on each foot, solid soled boots generate more power and rebound and feel more, well, solid.
It is also worth noting that the 100mm RX and RS Lange are quite a bit softer than the 97mm versions as the extra 3mm comes out of the wall thickness.

pliny the elder
 

jmeb

Stereotypical Front Range Weekend Warrior
Skier
Joined
Nov 13, 2015
Posts
3,516
Location
Colorado
It is also worth noting that the 100mm RX and RS Lange are quite a bit softer than the 97mm versions as the extra 3mm comes out of the wall thickness.
Wow--this is interesting. So the 97mm and 100mm last have the same exterior dimensions, but the 97 has ~1.5mm extra plastic on each side?
 

Marker

XLTL
Skier
Joined
Oct 16, 2017
Posts
1,022
Location
Kennett Square, PA & Killington, VT
Wow--this is interesting. So the 97mm and 100mm last have the same exterior dimensions, but the 97 has ~1.5mm extra plastic on each side?
Is this true? Wow, I didn't know that. I have skied a RX 100 mm and my current RS 130 in 97 mm, and greatly prefer the latter. The shop couldn't get the RX LV in 30.5, but could get the RS pre-dual core, so there you have it! So my comparison is a bit apples and oranges, but I will be leaning towards a new set of RS130 unless the shop puts a different boot on my feet that feels better.
 
Thread Starter
TS
R

RunSki

At the base lodge
Skier
Joined
Feb 21, 2016
Posts
5
That is surprising and good to know. I have a low instep and will be in the LV version, as in the previous.
 

Tony Storaro

Dreams are made of corduroy...
Skier
Joined
Mar 2, 2020
Posts
440
Location
Europe
Been skiing RS 130 for the last 3 seasons and absolutely love them. Lange 130 seems to be a "soft 130". I mean compared to Salomon SMax 130 for instance, Lange feel more flexible. Perhaps it is just the way they flex, dunno, but I find them much more forgiving than the Salomon.
Fantastic boots for sure, love them to bits, my only concern here is that at 165 lbs (74 kg) 130 may be a bit too much. In the skiing season I am pushing solid 200 and have no problems with the flex. Up to you to decide really.
 

jo3st3

Putting on skis
Skier
Joined
Jan 5, 2018
Posts
144
Location
CT
Lange has a progressive flex, so the deeper the bend the stiffer they get, which is much better and versatile imo. Also, it flexes fairly different at room temperature than in ski conditions, so don't let any boot fool you in the shop. There's a lot that goes into choosing the flex but bottomline, you'll know if it's too stiff or it's too soft when skiing with them.

Typically the faster you ski, the harder the surface, the less flexible your ankle, and the more you weigh, the stiffer the boot you want. And the opposite is true, the slower you ski, the softer the surface, the more flexible your ankle, and the less you weigh, the more flexible the boot you want.

If you classify yourself as an expert level skier that primarily skis on groomers, and you've had a 130 before, then get a 130. If you feel like you're in the backseat and your shins are taking a beating, or you're technique suffers on a powder day, it's too stiff and take a bolt out so it's more flexible. The way boots are made, it's fairly easy to reduce flex with a turn of a screw or two, and even cutting material away if it's really bad. Adding additional stiffness would require some workshop ingenuity that you probably wouldn't want to get into.

I can only speak about the RS Wide 130 from trying them on in a shop back to back with the RX 130 (both 100mm) last year, and I thought the RS felt a smidge stiffer than the RX but fairly comparable. And I had a Nordica SpeedMachine 130 and I think my current 2020 Lange RX 120 is actually stiffer. It really comes down to fit and feel and where you spend most of your time.

You can ski with any boot, but they put the boots in categories for a reason. The product teams that build and design the boots spend a lot of time focusing on building the best product for a targeted segment of users. They build race boots for people that go fast on groomers and race, and wider more friendly boots for resort skiers and powder days, and AT boots for people that hike for their runs. And the boots perform accordingly for those categories. Yes, you can ski with any boot and they will still get you to the bottom, but in general it's a good idea to use the boot that is designed to do what you do most of the time. And as always, always work with a good local bootfitter that can work with you.
 
Last edited:

Delicious

Glass Cranks
Skier
Joined
Feb 27, 2020
Posts
58
Location
WA
I would be curious as to how the geometry of the boot has changed since your version? Ramp/cuff angles? Have they changed? I would personally be more sensitive to the "posture" than the plastic with regard to soft/hard snow versatility.
 

Tim Hodgson

PSIA Level II Alpine
Instructor
Joined
Aug 20, 2016
Posts
443
Location
Kirkwood, California
Jo3st3, Runski, @Philpug, et al.: This has turned into a great thread! I've been in the Lange RS 130 97mm last for 2 years now coming from a new old stock Lange L10 Race 97mm last (before that a Lange L10 Race 97mm last which I wore out). All are 29.5 or US Mens size 11 (332mm Boot Sole Length). My shoe size is US Mens 12 or with the flattening of my arches with age, more recently 13.

The Lange L10 Race is a design from the era of "straight" skis.

While the Lange RS 130 is a design from the era of "parabolic" shaped skis.

Couple of differences I noticed immediately when I switched.

The Lange L10 Race had much more forward lean than the Lange RS 130 which is more upright. I immediately noticed that it was harder to drive the ski/scribe an arc in a short radius carved turn with the more upright stance. I really need to think about getting forward on the tip at the top of the turn with the new boot style.

The Lange L10 Race also had a very stiff and heavy plastic silver colored "spine" on back of the boot which the Lange RS 130 does not. The newer boot is thus lighter, but flexes backward more. Why is there a design difference?

The Lange L10 Race had a very narrow toe box, so much so that in the last 24 years my toes have permanently nested into each other to fit the shape of the Lange L10 Race 97mm last narrow toe box and with bunyons on the interior side of each "index finger" toe.

I like the Lange RS 130 97mm last allot. But I am also looking forward to getting back into my Lange L10 Race boots on carving skis.

But because of this thread I am now interested in buying the Lange RX 130 in the 97mm last for my DPS Alchemist Wailer 100RP and other off-piste and powder skis!

Because for the last 10 years I have been skiing primarily off-piste (since when my thereafter wife made me chase her through the trees when we first started dating).

Any comments or suggestions?

Hilarious! Yup, I have carried them up Lassen:

1606072951048.png


1606080605245.png


1606080522842.png

So, what is all this difference in boot design over the last 24 years about anyway?
 
Last edited:
Top