Forums Boots Are soft boots as effective as hb going up the slope?
Viewing 12 posts - 41 through 52 (of 52 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #676431
    802smuggler
    369 Posts

    [vimeo:16daas7f]http://www.vimeo.com/91885957[/vimeo:16daas7f]

    Effectiveness can be debated, sure. Possibilities however are not limited.

    Hard tail 26ers’ can be a tiresome bitch on the way up, but they sure are fun as shit on the way down.

    #676432
    WhitePine
    503 Posts

    I’m not sure how they differ on the feel up but I should be able to opine in the coming months. I just got a hold of a Dynafit ski setup (blasphemy – I know) and if it works out well, I’m going to try for a hardboot split setup. But for reference, here are the relative weights of my setups (actual measured weights without skins):

    Voile V-tail, Spark Burner LT, Salomon Malamutes – 17.87 lbs
    Dynafit C-Two ski, Speed Radical bindings, Dynafit TLT6 C-One boot – 12.12 lbs

    That’s 5.75 lbs!! of difference. Almost 3 lbs less per foot with every step I take.
    As far as I can tell there isn’t a soft boot setup that can even touch that. So I’m going to experiment with a hardboot splitty setup if this ski setup works out well for me. Otherwise I’m afraid this light ski setup is going to kill off my splitboarding permanently. I hope it doesn’t cause skiing isn’t anywhere near as fun in powder. I’m really excited about more lateral stiffness on traverses and more ankle articulation.

    The only setup I have estimated can reach the weights I’m achieving on skis is the following (Estimated weights only):

    Jones Ultracraft 5.5 lbs, TLT6 C-One boots 4.94 lbs, Phantom Bindings (tour mode only) = 11.97 lbs
    Tour mode only because the bindings are in your pack on the way up.

    Granted you are dropping a hella-ton of greenbacks to achieve a splitty setup like that.

    #676433
    barrows
    1490 Posts

    @whitepine wrote:

    I’m not sure how they differ on the feel up but I should be able to opine in the coming months. I just got a hold of a Dynafit ski setup (blasphemy – I know) and if it works out well, I’m going to try for a hardboot split setup. But for reference, here are the relative weights of my setups (actual measured weights without skins):

    Voile V-tail, Spark Burner LT, Salomon Malamutes – 17.87 lbs
    Dynafit C-Two ski, Speed Radical bindings, Dynafit TLT6 C-One boot – 12.12 lbs

    That’s 5.75 lbs!! of difference. Almost 3 lbs less per foot with every step I take.
    As far as I can tell there isn’t a soft boot setup that can even touch that. So I’m going to experiment with a hardboot splitty setup if this ski setup works out well for me. Otherwise I’m afraid this light ski setup is going to kill off my splitboarding permanently. I hope it doesn’t cause skiing isn’t anywhere near as fun in powder. I’m really excited about more lateral stiffness on traverses and more ankle articulation.

    The only setup I have estimated can reach the weights I’m achieving on skis is the following (Estimated weights only):

    Jones Ultracraft 5.5 lbs, TLT6 C-One boots 4.94 lbs, Phantom Bindings (tour mode only) = 11.97 lbs
    Tour mode only because the bindings are in your pack on the way up.

    Granted you are dropping a hella-ton of greenbacks to achieve a splitty setup like that.

    WP: Consider, a splitboard offers soft snow performance on par with a ski set up featuring skis with >120 mm waists, therefore, it is not fair to compare weights to much smaller skis. When one compares weights of a light, backcountry free ride ski setup (say DPS Lotus 120s, Dynafit Beast Bindings, and one of the burlier 4 buckle backcountry free ride boots) you will find comparable weights to lightweight split set ups (especially those with Phantom Bindings and TLT6s). it is wrong to compare a split set up to a really lightweight “touring” ski set up which is not nearly as capable of charging in soft and variable conditions as the split is.

    #676434
    WhitePine
    503 Posts

    Very valid point, I’ll concede. Let’s try another scenario. Keep the same board (Vtail) and just swap for the boots and bindings. That still nearly a 2.5 lbs drop.

    That has to be noticeable on the skin track right? Less fatiguing?

    #676435
    barrows
    1490 Posts

    @whitepine wrote:

    Very valid point, I’ll concede. Let’s try another scenario. Keep the same board (Vtail) and just swap for the boots and bindings. That still nearly a 2.5 lbs drop.

    That has to be noticeable on the skin track right? Less fatiguing?

    There is no question that lighter weight on the feet is less fatiguing on the skin track. This is one reason why I love my setup so much. But I would never choose this set up if it did not also provide the absolute best riding performance on the way down. Phantom bindings interface the two board halves better than anything else out there, and the precision control and lack of over ally slop cannot be beat.

    #676436
    christoph benells
    717 Posts

    I am suprised no one has talked about the advantages if hb’s while pooping in the backcountry.

    For example the range of motion in the cuff allows for one to take up poses like the “thinking man” and “track start” much easier. And the rearward flex makes resting your back against a tree much easier.

    Pair that with the low profile and stiff sole of the tlt6 and you have one of the easiest pairs of boots to poop in.

    #676437
    acopafeel
    134 Posts

    adding on to Christoph’s fantastic point… if you do happen to misfire and poop a bit on your boot – don’t worry, as it will just bounce right off that hard shiny plastic :thumbsup:

    #676438
    HansGLudwig
    601 Posts

    Is this thread really even a question? …smells more like a troll bait to me.

    Be sure to bookmark Splitboard.com's Recent Activity page...
    http://splitboard.com/activity-2/

    #676439
    nickstayner
    700 Posts

    @acopafeel wrote:

    adding on to Christoph’s fantastic point… if you do happen to misfire and poop a bit on your boot – don’t worry, as it will just bounce right off that hard shiny plastic :thumbsup:

    Plus, plastic surfaces are more easily disinfected! You’d be a real shitheel at that point. (can’t believe this thread was revived!)

    #676440
    WhitePine
    503 Posts

    @nickstayner wrote:

    @acopafeel wrote:

    adding on to Christoph’s fantastic point… if you do happen to misfire and poop a bit on your boot – don’t worry, as it will just bounce right off that hard shiny plastic :thumbsup:

    Plus, plastic surfaces are more easily disinfected! You’d be a real shitheel at that point. (can’t believe this thread was revived!)

    My bad. :thumbsdown:

    #676441
    christoph benells
    717 Posts

    @802smuggler wrote:

    [vimeo:12czi865]http://www.vimeo.com/91885957[/vimeo:12czi865]

    Haha that MCALPINE character is an alaskan legend! spent some time with him at KIA. Watch out or you get “mcalpined”.

    #776494
    SPLITRIPPIN
    709 Posts

    Everything is effective …. It depends on how you use it.

    I give 2 shits what you’re rocking. Open your eyes …. enjoy the beauty and majesty around you. Don’t be in a hurry …. take it all in.

    I respect Barrows, and HFT’s very educated and precise opinion … They’re good friends and great touring partners. I may be slower on the up.(HFT pretends to be patient) I’m not there for being up the mountain the fastest. I’m there because I appreciate a good day in the mountains, and good friends.

    I’ll most likely always ride soft boots because I like the companies I support(Rome Folsoms, and Spark R&D), and like to boost a proper booter from time to time. Simple as that.

    Figure out what works best for yourself, and how you like to ride ….. give info to those that ask, but spare me and others the bullshit and self righteousness about what platform is better. Is the mountain more beautiful to the fastest person up it? Neither platform will benefit the experience of being in the moment, and throwing a rooster.

Viewing 12 posts - 41 through 52 (of 52 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.