The Never-Ending Atomic Ski Boot Discussion

[onenerdykid]

Is the BSL the same for comparable sizes of Redster Ti vs CS 130? What is the BSL for the 27.5?

Redster CS = 315mm in 27.5
Redster TI = 314mm in 27.5
The internal last length is the same for both boots, meaning TI does not fit 1mm shorter.

 

[onenerdykid]

This does not sound too good for my budget....
XTD have BSL 4 mm shorter than RS 130, but strangely I feel good in them.

A note on BSL: BSL is only a measurement of the outside of the boot- it does not tell you about the internal length. Hawx Ultra has a BSL of 300mm in 26.5 but it's internal last is longer than a 26.5 Hawx Magna at 309mm.

Thicker boots tend to have longer BSLs, thinner boots tend to have shorter BSLs. That's a general rule, not a universal rule.

 

[Tony Storaro]

A note on BSL: BSL is only a measurement of the outside of the boot- it does not tell you about the internal length. Hawx Ultra has a BSL of 300mm in 26.5 but it's internal last is longer than a 26.5 Hawx Magna at 309mm.

Thicker boots tend to have longer BSLs, thinner boots tend to have shorter BSLs. That's a general rule, not a universal rule.

Yeah, thanks I was thinking about that. But as the 27,5 fits me real "performance if not race" like I will make sure I at least try 28.5, just to see how it feels.

Bear in mind I have absolutely no experience with touring boots/skis and quite a few people say the touring boots should be at least half size bigger, so trial and error it is gonna be.

 

[Philpug]

general rule, not a universal rule.

Thre is an interesting thread title.

 

[migdriver]

Redster CS = 315mm in 27.5
Redster TI = 314mm in 27.5
The internal last length is the same for both boots, meaning TI does not fit 1mm shorter.

Thx.... I’m looking to run two different set ups nxt season and concerned re binding compatibility btwn different boots/ skis

 

[onenerdykid]

Bear in mind I have absolutely no experience with touring boots/skis and quite a few people say the touring boots should be at least half size bigger, so trial and error it is gonna be.

It's less about "going up a size" and more about making sure your shell fit in each is correct.

If the shell fit in your alpine boot is ~2cm, then you definitely don't want to go up a size for touring.

But, if the shell fit in your alpine boot is ~1cm, then you most likely want to go up a size for touring (or be prepared to punch the toe box a lot and probably need a different liner than stock).

 

[Bruno Schull]

My apine boot fit is such that my toes just barely touch the front of the shells when standing up straight, and then retract slightly to a perfect fit when I flex forward. I assumed incorrectly that the same fit would produce good results for my touring boots, however, when sized in this way, the touring boots are too small. Again, in a flexed forward position, they're fine, so if you're using them mostly on piste you should be OK. But if you want to tour, with a close shell fit of this kind, every time you slide one foot forward, your calf will likely hit the rear of the boot, forcing your foot forward, and compressing your toes against the front. So, as Matt said above, if you have a ~1cm shell fir in your alpine boots, you'll likely want to go up one side for your touring shells.

 

[Bruno Schull]

Here's the link to another thread where the issue of alpine vs touring boot fit was discussed:

https://www.skitalk.com/threads/are...ountry-boots-the-same-size.22955/#post-592414

 

[Bruno Schull]

The 21/22 version is 1:1 the same as 20/21 - no change. If you can find them on sale now, grab 'em!

Thanks! I'll do that. This will now my third pair of Hawx boots to get the fit right...I'll get there eventually!

 

[Tony Storaro]

It's less about "going up a size" and more about making sure your shell fit in each is correct.

If the shell fit in your alpine boot is ~2cm, then you definitely don't want to go up a size for touring.

But, if the shell fit in your alpine boot is ~1cm, then you most likely want to go up a size for touring (or be prepared to punch the toe box a lot and probably need a different liner than stock).

Thank you!

I'll double check these days but I believe it is less than 2 cm as 2 cm is sorta "comfort" fit and I do not like that I like it tighter.

 

[Noodler]

Yeah, thanks I was thinking about that. But as the 27,5 fits me real "performance if not race" like I will make sure I at least try 28.5, just to see how it feels.

Bear in mind I have absolutely no experience with touring boots/skis and quite a few people say the touring boots should be at least half size bigger, so trial and error it is gonna be.

Keep in mind the impact on sizing from the liner. I have the same shell size/BSL in my touring and regular boots, but they use different liners. The lighter touring liners tend to be thinner, thus providing more room in the same shell size.

 

[Tony Storaro]

Keep in mind the impact on sizing from the liner. I have the same shell size/BSL in my touring and regular boots, but they use different liners. The lighter touring liners tend to be thinner, thus providing more room in the same shell size.

You are not making it any easier man. What is light touring liner? I thought the Ultra XTD already comes with a touring liner.

P.S. Anyway, just to be on the safe side I just went ahead and ordered another pair of Ultra XTD 130 in 28.5 because they are terribly hard to find now and because I got a real YUGE discount.
Will see how they fit, think a couple of months and then decide which size should I put up for sale.

 

[Lauren]

Couple questions about the new Ultra and XTD models for 21/22...
1) What are the notable differences in the Ultra and Ultra XTD (materials, features and fit)?
2) Are you giving up anything by going to the XTD model (performance, liner thickness, flex, etc).

 

[ScottB]

This does not sound too good for my budget....
XTD have BSL 4 mm shorter than RS 130, but strangely I feel good in them.
Good for alpine boot that is. Tight.
Means probably that I should immediately buy a pair of them one size bigger...if I can find one....damn.

Tony, maybe you are clear on this already, but I would like to clarify what is being said. Your touring boots should fit tight. What is critical is to have some length in the toes. If you unbuckled the top two buckles, and stride in the Boot, do your toes touch the end of the Boot. You need more shell length, but still want them tight. Even too tight is fine as you can heat mold them to loosen them up. If your toes touch the end of the shell, that will be an issue. A larger size gets wider, which is not good if too wide.

My toes do not touch the ends of any of my boots. My CS 130 is a race fit in width and tightness, but comfort in length. I think that is ideal. If I crank my buckles on my CS I can cut off the circulation, but my toes never touch the end of the Boot. I would call that a modern race fit, I found the ideal width/length combo for comfort and performance.

 

[onenerdykid]

Couple questions about the new Ultra and XTD models for 21/22...
1) What are the notable differences in the Ultra and Ultra XTD (materials, features and fit)?
2) Are you giving up anything by going to the XTD model (performance, liner thickness, flex, etc).

1. Ultra is a true alpine boot, built for 100% resort usage, and always uses PU plastic. Ultra XTD is a hybrid boot that blends both regular Hawx Ultra features (alpine features) and Backland features (touring features) together. Depending on which model you are looking at, Hawx Ultra XTD uses PA plastic in certain flexes/price points, or PU for certain flexes/price points. The fit & geometry are 1:1 the same for both boots.

2. For 21/22, the new Hawx Ultra is going to ski better than the Hawx Ultra XTD. Going with the Ultra XTD, you will be giving up some downhill performance in order to gain touring capability. But this is the case for all walk-mode boots from all boot brands. There is no walk-mode ski boot that skis 100% as well as its fixed-cuff counterpart. There's also no true alpine boot that tours as well as a hybrid boot, so you have to pick which compromises are important to you.

 

[onenerdykid]

You are not making it any easier man. What is light touring liner? I thought the Ultra XTD already comes with a touring liner.

P.S. Anyway, just to be on the safe side I just went ahead and ordered another pair of Ultra XTD 130 in 28.5 because they are terribly hard to find now and because I got a real YUGE discount.
Will see how they fit, think a couple of months and then decide which size should I put up for sale.

Many brands make their walk-mode boots with thinner liners so they are lighter and walk more efficiently. We did this with the first iterations of Hawx Ultra XTD, but since the 20/21 season Hawx Ultra XTD comes with a liner that has the same fit, same thickness, construction as regular Hawx Ultra. The only difference between the liners is that Hawx XTD liners have a flex zone in the Achilles area. The sizing and fit between Hawx Ultra and Hawx Ultra XTD is not in any way different.

The only thing you need to figure out is if you want the same shell fit between Hawx Ultra and Hawx Ultra XTD.

 

[Lauren]

Depending on which model you are looking at, Hawx Ultra XTD uses PA plastic in certain flexes/price points, or PU for certain flexes/price points.

Thank you for the detailed explanation. I’d be looking at the 115 W version.

2. For 21/22, the new Hawx Ultra is going to ski better than the Hawx Ultra XTD. Going with the Ultra XTD, you will be giving up some downhill performance in order to gain touring capability. But this is the case for all walk-mode boots from all boot brands. There is no walk-mode ski boot that skis 100% as well as its fixed-cuff counterpart. There's also no true alpine boot that tours as well as a hybrid boot, so you have to pick which compromises are important to you.

Thanks again, this is what I figured…just trying to figure out how much I’d be losing. without being able to ski the boot, it’s a tough metric to gauge.

I’m currently in a Nordica ProMachine115 W (on its last leg) for my resort boot, and a Dalbello Lupo 110 W (great boot, just never has fit me great) for a touring boot. I don’t tour much, maybe 10% of my days are human powered. I’m considering replacing both with 1 boot next year, but really looking to err towards a heavier touring boot with plenty of downhill drivability. The Ultra Hawk W is a pretty amazing fit on my foot (at least previous models, and sound like they’re the same fit moving forward), so considering it for this purpose. But really hesitant on moving into a hybrid style boot with what I could be giving up for everyday resort skiing.

 

[onenerdykid]

Thank you for the detailed explanation. I’d be looking at the 115 W version.



Thanks again, this is what I figured…just trying to figure out how much I’d be losing. without being able to ski the boot, it’s a tough metric to gauge.

I’m currently in a Nordica ProMachine115 W (on its last leg) for my resort boot, and a Dalbello Lupo 110 W (great boot, just never has fit me great) for a touring boot. I don’t tour much, maybe 10% of my days are human powered. I’m considering replacing both with 1 boot next year, but really looking to err towards a heavier touring boot with plenty of downhill drivability. The Ultra Hawk W is a pretty amazing fit on my foot (at least previous models, and sound like they’re the same fit moving forward), so considering it for this purpose. But really hesitant on moving into a hybrid style boot with what I could be giving up for everyday resort skiing.

If you are skiing 90% in the resort and only doing 10% touring, going with a walk-mode boot 100% of the time will introduce noticeable compromises for 90% of your skiing.

Where a hybrid boot makes more sense is when you are spending 50% of your time in the resort and 50% of your time touring, or it's your dedicated touring boot.

The main reason why we made the Hawx Ultra XTD was so people could have a hybrid/touring boot that fit the same exact way as their resort boot (which is the main issue you have with your current two-boot set up). With that said, I totally understand why some people don't want to mess around with owning two boots. In my opinion, it's the better solution but if you can only have one boot you will be experiencing a lot of compromises, somewhere/somehow depending on which side you commit to.

 

[Lauren]

If you are skiing 90% in the resort and only doing 10% touring, going with a walk-mode boot 100% of the time will introduce noticeable compromises for 90% of your skiing.

Where a hybrid boot makes more sense is when you are spending 50% of your time in the resort and 50% of your time touring, or it's your dedicated touring boot.

The main reason why we made the Hawx Ultra XTD was so people could have a hybrid/touring boot that fit the same exact way as their resort boot (which is the main issue you have with your current two-boot set up). With that said, I totally understand why some people don't want to mess around with owning two boots. In my opinion, it's the better solution but if you can only have one boot you will be experiencing a lot of compromises, somewhere/somehow depending on which side you commit to.

Thanks for confirming what I already was thinking (but didn’t really want to believe). This is what I needed to hear, even if I didn’t want to

 

[anders_nor]

I know its a new liner and booster for 2022... but! to good deal to say no to and I ski summer/indoor, grabbed a shell size down for when I really wanna have fun / masters which a few buddies and me are signing up for, for 2022.

buddy also grabbed a pair (thats why we were at store) and another buddy grabbed a pair on monday... the 130CS redster is just good. its my new daily.