The Never-Ending Atomic Ski Boot Discussion

[chris_the_wrench]

@onenerdykid
I picked up a set of Hawx XTD 130 98mm off the inter webs a few weeks back. Ive never bought boots online, but I was pretty darn confident in the size and the price was very good. Fit feels kinda crazy comfortable, abit scary comfortable. I need to put some J bars in. These are going to be my backcountry boots for self propelled uphill and I'll probably use these when riding my buddies snow machine, not planing to ski the lifts with these.

Im not expecting Redster stiffness, but is there any trick to add abit of stiffness to them? I know walk boots are totally different than alpine. yada yada. But if I could get'ed abit stiffer Id be happy...The liner seems real nice, so Id prefer not to toss it aside for a intuition wrap liner just yet.

And another props for the blister podcast, I always enjoy them. Blister is pretty much the only podcast I always listen to.

Also I got to add, I've owned alot of boots. Most functioned fine but looked, blah. I really like the look and details of this boot. The buckles, the walk mode lever, it all looks and feels good.

-Chris

 

[Vinnie]

Here is an early living room review of 19/20 Redster CS 110 (Low Cuff) and 20/21 Hawx Ultra 120S @ 24.5

Per Boot Weight Comparison (not including stock footbed)

	Year	Shell (g)	Liner (g)	Boot Board (g)	Total (g)
Redster CS 110	19/20	1474	466	58	1998
Hawx Ultra 120	20/21	1124	376	44	1544
Difference		350	90	14	454

No surprise that the Redster CS comes in about a pound heavier than the Hawx Ultra. But at 1998g at 24.5 mondo it is not ridiculously heavy. The 20/21 and later Redster CS at 24.5 now has a regular height cuff so I am sure that adds some weight.

Fit:
For reference here is a scan of my feet

At 24.5 mondo the Hawx Ultra states a 94mm last. I am guessing that the Redster CS has a 92 mm last at 24.5. My foot width indicates a medium volume boot but I have really skinny ankles/heels and find medium volume boots don’t have the heel retention I want.

As far as fit out of box, the Hawx Ultra is ok. I feel that I’ll definitely need boot work done to expand the forefoot and increase the instep. The heel hold is snug. I feel confident that I can get it to work for me.

Now for the Redster CS. I wasn’t sure I would be even be able to get into the boot but I can slip into it without any problems. The heel and ankle fit really snug and locked in. I attribute this more to the shell than to the liner, which is more contoured than the Hawx Ultra. I have a bit of a hot spot on the sixth toe area but the real surprise that for my feet at least it seems to have a bit more instep room than the Hawx Ultra. It will definitely need boot work but I have been wearing them in the house for up to an hour with what I would consider the normal discomfort of a ski boot.

I think if you can fit into a Hawx Ultra you will be able to fit into a Redster CS.

Flex:
My sense of the flex at room temperature is that the Hawx Ultra 120 is softer than the Redster CS 110. I experience this as a longer travel before reaching the bottom of the compression. The Hawx also has a quicker rebound. The Redster CS compression and rebound feels more balanced and smooth. What I am hoping for with the Redster CS on the snow is compression similar to the Hawx but with damper rebound.

 

[Halfskip]

Both the STI 110 and CS 110 use the same injection material. The flexes will be similar but slightly different due to the boots being differently shaped. You will notice a different feel to the flex pattern/characteristics, but not a wildly different stiffness.

Liner wise, the STI uses our (non-Mimic) World Cup liner which is thinner, softer liner (due to it being a much lower volume boot) with a removeable tongue. The CS 110 will use a Mimic Gold liner with a fixed tongue. The STI boot will feel a little more race-y and the CS boot will feel a little more comfortable.

Would this would be consistent with the 130 flex, CS vs STI? I am currently in a 2017ish Hawx Ultra 120s and am looking for a tighter fit and stiffer flex. I have the Hawx Ultra set at 17 Degrees forward flex, but it seems that this is near the end of the flex range of this boot (hope i am making sense). This leads me to really want to try on the CS 130, which I haven't been able to locate. But one shop did have a STI 130 in my size so I thought what the hell and was surprised I could fit into that narrow of a boot. Yes it would definitely need work, but it is totally doable. The STI 130 was never on my radar but after trying it on I am now interested. I don't race, but really want a "snug" fit and I am anxious to compare the 2 side by side if I can get the chance.

 

[onenerdykid]

@onenerdykid
I picked up a set of Hawx XTD 130 98mm off the inter webs a few weeks back. Ive never bought boots online, but I was pretty darn confident in the size and the price was very good. Fit feels kinda crazy comfortable, abit scary comfortable. I need to put some J bars in. These are going to be my backcountry boots for self propelled uphill and I'll probably use these when riding my buddies snow machine, not planing to ski the lifts with these.

Im not expecting Redster stiffness, but is there any trick to add abit of stiffness to them? I know walk boots are totally different than alpine. yada yada. But if I could get'ed abit stiffer Id be happy...The liner seems real nice, so Id prefer not to toss it aside for a intuition wrap liner just yet.

And another props for the blister podcast, I always enjoy them. Blister is pretty much the only podcast I always listen to.

Also I got to add, I've owned alot of boots. Most functioned fine but looked, blah. I really like the look and details of this boot. The buckles, the walk mode lever, it all looks and feels good.

-Chris

Thanks, Chris - glad you are liking our rants and the boots. With our walk-mode boots, there isn't really a way to stiffen the boots up. They just aren't built like a traditional alpine boot- the plastic is simply thinner. There are some products you can buy aftermarket from Pulse where you basically add a stiffening tongue to the shell, but this greatly reduces forward mobility while touring. So, you will get a bit of a stiffer boot but less of a touring boot. It's all going to be a compromise, just depends where you want the compromise to be. But, as these are just going to be your BC boots, you might hold off on doing anything to them just yet. They might be totally adequate as a soft-snow-oriented boot.

 

[onenerdykid]

Would this would be consistent with the 130 flex, CS vs STI? I am currently in a 2017ish Hawx Ultra 120s and am looking for a tighter fit and stiffer flex. I have the Hawx Ultra set at 17 Degrees forward flex, but it seems that this is near the end of the flex range of this boot (hope i am making sense). This leads me to really want to try on the CS 130, which I haven't been able to locate. But one shop did have a STI 130 in my size so I thought what the hell and was surprised I could fit into that narrow of a boot. Yes it would definitely need work, but it is totally doable. The STI 130 was never on my radar but after trying it on I am now interested. I don't race, but really want a "snug" fit and I am anxious to compare the 2 side by side if I can get the chance.

The boots use the same injection material, but an STI 130 is going to be marginally stiffer than a CS 130, mostly because the boot is lower volume- a smaller tube is simply harder to bend/deform than a larger tube. Moreover, your foot will fill up an STI more so than a CS, and this adds even more stability to the shell. The boots have relatively the same wall thickness (STI is thicker in some spots, CS is thicker in some spots, but overall quite similar).

If you had an STI on your foot and you think you can make it work with a little love from your boot-fitter, it will make for a great all around boot for you. The CS boot will just have a bit more anatomical shaping already done for you. Both boots are powerhouses and will allow you to charge through choppy snow with reckless abandon.

 

[Moose32]

Just purchased some sweet Atomic WC 170’s. Anyone know why they only installed one bolt in the back and left the other out? Anyone put in the other in by themselves? Any other insights on the hardware for these boots? I ski in the 170 from a few seasons back. Below are some pics. Thank you.

 

[maxwerks]

Sort of. Memory Fit will make the shell as wide as the foot/liner combo, but not everyone wants that kind of fit (that might be too wide for some people). This is because Memory Fit cannot take into consideration your tolerance for foot compression. For example, someone with a 100mm foot might be totally ok with a 98mm lasted boot with no work done to it and doing the Memory Fit process would potentially make the boot feel too wide for them. Finding the right fit really needs to take into consideration your personal preference for foot compression.

Thanks ONK, that's very insightful. Could mitigate this by memoryfitting the boot using the stock liner since my zipfit has a slightly higher volume or could add some extra cork filler

 

[Vinnie]

Just purchased some sweet Atomic WC 170’s. Anyone know why they only installed one bolt in the back and left the other out? Anyone put in the other in by themselves? Any other insights on the hardware for these boots? I ski in the 170 from a few seasons back. Below are some pics. Thank you.
View attachment 144772 View attachment 144773

same question for the Redster CS

 

[onenerdykid]

Just purchased some sweet Atomic WC 170’s. Anyone know why they only installed one bolt in the back and left the other out? Anyone put in the other in by themselves? Any other insights on the hardware for these boots? I ski in the 170 from a few seasons back. Below are some pics. Thank you.

same question for the Redster CS

Both boots have adjustable forward lean, which is achieved by swapping out the little black pieces that sit underneath the screw(s) on the back of the cuff. 3mm piece = 16°, 5mm piece = 18°.

The top screw fixes the forward lean in place. If you add the top screw with the 3mm piece in the cuff, you can't go try the 5mm piece afterward.

Play with the different forward lean settings and once you find the one that is right for you, then you add the second screw.

 

[Moose32]

Both boots have adjustable forward lean, which is achieved by swapping out the little black pieces that sit underneath the screw(s) on the back of the cuff. 3mm piece = 16°, 5mm piece = 18°.

The top screw fixes the forward lean in place. If you add the top screw with the 3mm piece in the cuff, you can't go try the 5mm piece afterward.

Play with the different forward lean settings and once you find the one that is right for you, then you add the second screw.

Thank you for the reply. Do you need to remove the bottom screw to test/swap the shim?
Haven't looked closely from the inside of the boot, but can this job be done with a simple hand drill and wrench that fits in the bolt? Any steps would be great.
Thanks again.

 

[onenerdykid]

Thank you for the reply. Do you need to remove the bottom screw to test/swap the shim?
Haven't looked closely from the inside of the boot, but can this job be done with a simple hand drill and wrench that fits in the bolt? Any steps would be great.
Thanks again.

You'll need to dismount the cuff from the shell. On softer versions, you can sometimes take one side of the cuff alignment off and peel the cuff back, but on a 170 you'll be taking the whole cuff off to do it.

Use the top hole as your guide and drill a hole through. You might have some difficulty pressing the claw nut into the shell (again 170) but get it started and you can usually pull it into the shell by tightening the screw.

 

[Moose32]

You'll need to dismount the cuff from the shell. On softer versions, you can sometimes take one side of the cuff alignment off and peel the cuff back, but on a 170 you'll be taking the whole cuff off to do it.

Use the top hole as your guide and drill a hole through. You might have some difficulty pressing the claw nut into the shell (again 170) but get it started and you can usually pull it into the shell by tightening the screw.

Thanks. If I like the current 3mm, I just drill and tap it in from the inside?

 

[Hootbmx]

Is the WC 170 a true 170 flex? Curious how it compares to my Head Raptor 140 RS? I found some WC 170s at an awesome price but the 170 seems excessive for other than strictly racing. Although perhaps not because I have no problem flexing my Raptors and love them in all conditions. I probably would have bought WC 170s based off the positive feedback I have heard with the WC line but it was a 26.5 and I usually try to fit in a 25.5 on most of my boots.

 

[ScottB]

I tried on the WC 130 flex boot and it was too stiff for me (6'4", 240lbs), I can't imagine how stiff a 170 would be. I bought the Club Sport 130 and softened it a bit. I like a 130 flex boot, the Hawx Ultra XTD 130 is about the perfect stiffness for my tastes. If you like a really stiff boot, I would say the WC 170 is it.

 

[onenerdykid]

Thanks. If I like the current 3mm, I just drill and tap it in from the inside?

Yes

 

[onenerdykid]

Is the WC 170 a true 170 flex? Curious how it compares to my Head Raptor 140 RS? I found some WC 170s at an awesome price but the 170 seems excessive for other than strictly racing. Although perhaps not because I have no problem flexing my Raptors and love them in all conditions. I probably would have bought WC 170s based off the positive feedback I have heard with the WC line but it was a 26.5 and I usually try to fit in a 25.5 on most of my boots.

As "true" as it gets. A Redster CS 130 is arguably stiffer than your Raptor 140 RS (which is delivered as a 130, not 140), a World Cup 130 is stiffer than a CS 130, and there is a World Cup 150 (stiffer shell, stiffer cuff) and the 170 has a stiffer shell and stiffer cuff than a 150. Both 150 and 170 are 1:1 same spec as the boots built for the World Cup athletes. Very serious boots.

 

[ScottB]

This should help. The bottom screw goes through the slot in the black piece above. Atomic gives you another black piece in the box with the bottom curved part thicker to increase forward lean.

 

[ScotsSkier]

As "true" as it gets. A Redster CS 130 is arguably stiffer than your Raptor 140 RS (which is delivered as a 130, not 140), a World Cup 130 is stiffer than a CS 130, and there is a World Cup 150 (stiffer shell, stiffer cuff) and the 170 has a stiffer shell and stiffer cuff than a 150. Both 150 and 170 are 1:1 same spec as the boots built for the World Cup athletes. Very serious boots.

ONK, are the WC 150 and the TI 150 (lifted) basically the same boot? I have a 150 TI and just acquired a virtually unused WC boot which has a 140 clog and 170 cuff (claimed to have been built by some guy called Leon Hirscher ) for basically the price of the liner. i dont see any noticeable differences in shape/build between the 2 shells.

Thanks!

 

[onenerdykid]

ONK, are the WC 150 and the TI 150 (lifted) basically the same boot? I have a 150 TI and just acquired a virtually unused WC boot which has a 140 clog and 170 cuff (claimed to have been built by some guy called Leon Hirscher ) for basically the price of the liner. i dont see any noticeable differences in shape/build between the 2 shells.

Thanks!

Same plastic material, that's about it. Completely different shell mold, different shell last, different cuff mold, different cuff last. WC is matte finish, TI is glossy and both have very different industrial design language (especially around the cuff pivot area)... To be honest, other than being red, they don't really look anything alike...

Post pictures to confirm you are comparing a TI to a WC?

 

[ScotsSkier]

Same plastic material, that's about it. Completely different shell mold, different shell last, different cuff mold, different cuff last. WC is matte finish, TI is glossy and both have very different industrial design language (especially around the cuff pivot area)... To be honest, other than being red, they don't really look anything alike...

Post pictures to confirm you are comparing a TI to a WC?

OOPS! Guess i should have looked a bit closer.... .....I only tried on the WC and fit didn't feel a lot different than the TI I used last year. Will be interesting to compare them on snow..