Forums Boots Atomic backlands… Thoughts on mods
Viewing 20 posts - 21 through 40 (of 91 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #788873
    daway
    23 Posts

    Gotcha, thanks for the info!

    I tried the Atomic Backland Carbon in size 27/27.5 and it just felt too cramped, not worth punching out that much. The 28.5 fit just fine. Never tried a Dynafit One or BD Prime in 28.5, but I was pretty much bursting out of the 28.5 TLT and didn’t want to size up.

    Think the Backland Carbon would solve your heelside issue? Though the ones I tried weren’t my size, they seemed way too stiff medially so you’d probably be giving a lot up in general carve-ability (and I’m not sure about mod-ability of a carbon cuff).

    I finally tracked down a size 28.5 Backland (man…getting hard to find) for under $500 so I think I’m going to pull the trigger. I weigh 200 lbs, so the flex felt absolutely awesome and I couldn’t believe how good the walk mode was. Hopefully I don’t run into the same “heel side” issue as you. Never had problem with my Driver X/Cartel setup (which have relatively soft highbacks). I also never really run very much forward lean.

    Stoked as this is my first hardboot setup, pairing the boots with Phantom bindings.

    #788875
    Jason4
    442 Posts

    I’m also ~200lbs and have been riding DriverX/Malavitas mostly on my solid board. The difference is that I run 27* on my front foot and always rotate my highback to match the angle. I’m used to having more support on the outside of my calf than what I have with the Backlands. I’ve thought about trying to track down just one carbon cuff for my left boot. I avoided the carbon version intentionally since all the marketing material I saw said the foot of the carbon version was also reinforced with carbon and I wanted the softest plastic I could get all the way around. Like I said, it’s only really noticeable on traverses and doesn’t seem to have a performance impact on my riding.

    #788876
    daway
    23 Posts

    Nice, good to know.

    I usually run 18 – 21 degrees on the front and -5ish in the back, so maybe I won’t notice it as much. We’ll see.

    #790109
    daway
    23 Posts

    Just tried these out for the first time last night at Snoqualmie Pass to get them dialed in. First time riding in hardboots. Set up is size 28/28.5 backlands, medium Phantoms (bails set large, but bolts set in closer on both sides), ’16 Rossi Xavier XV 167cm.

    Boots set up in more aggressive forward lean setting, not running extra plastic tongues but do have eliminator tongue to take up more volume around my ankle to run a loose ankle strap. Had a few issues with the ankle strap coming undone so I’ll have to play around with strap configuration, perhaps remove the elliminator tongue? Might try the less aggressive forward lean option next time to see how I like that.

    All I can say is WOW. Riding was absolutely fantastic, the stiff set up handled the crappy, consolidated wet chunky/coppy snow really well. Boots not take much to get used to – they feel very similar front to back flex-wise compared to my Driver X’s. I do want a bit more medial flex, so after I ride a bit more I may evaluate some options there (or play around with the cant in my Phantoms).

    #791523
    hamp_e
    3 Posts

    Do you think the non carbon version of the Backland could be a good option for splitboarding as well?
    https://shop.epictv.com/en/touring-boots/atomic/backland-2016?sku=ATO16BAC24.5

    Besides the weight, is there any other major difference between the two versions?

    Thanks!

    #791532
    HansGLudwig
    601 Posts

    Plastic version will cost less, have more flex, and be easier to mod @hamp_e

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

    #795570
    neni
    43 Posts

    I avoided the carbon version intentionally since all the marketing material I saw said the foot of the carbon version was also reinforced with carbon and I wanted the softest plastic I could get all the way around.

    Could you elaborate on this? (Why did you want soft plastic?). I’m new to AT boots and don’t understand yet what and why certain traits of a boot are a pro or a cons…

    I ask since when trying boots, hubby had the same experience as you, he could size down quite a bit from a TLT6 to the Atomic. The TLT6 seems not to fit his wide feet, but on carpet in the shop he felt very happy with the fit of the Aromic. However, the Carbon version was the only version available to try. Is there anything which would advice against this Carbon version? It’s a lot of coins for that boot, the shop ppl are no help to gauge if the boot would work well for splitboarding, so… are they?

    (His soft set-up is Driver X/Diode and Deeluxe XV/Afterburner; +/+ angles of 27/15, 190lbs; main reason to swap to AT is the hope for easier uphill traversing on hardpack)

    Jones Solution 152 / Phantom Alpha / Dynafit TLT6 Mountain CL
    (Spark Afterburner / Deeluxe XV)

    #795611
    moridinbg
    149 Posts

    Carbon hardboots are super stiff. Carbon is not very flexible.
    In general you want a flexible ski touring boot for splitboarding, because even the softest (here we are talking about proper ski boot. I can imagine that there are ski running boots as flexible as a pair of sneakers out there) boots are very stiff compared to pretty much all softboots. That’s why some people are cutting away from the boot cuff – to give more flex for splitboarding.

    The TLT5 and 6 are very soft from skiers point of view – the TLT5 is something like 90 on the very arbitrary skiers scale where 80 is super soft, 110-120 is what most people prefer to ride in the backcountry and 130-140 is for racing/piste laps.
    That’s why they have an extra pair of tongues for descent (with ski) and that’s why they are a good fit for splitboarding. I imagine the same holds true for the Backlands.

    They made the carbon versions of the boots so that people looking for a lightweight boot with similar profile have the option to ride something stiffer. I don’t quiet remember, but I thing the carbon TLT5 was ~105 on that scale (vs 90 for the regular)

    If you put one foot into a plastic, the other in a carbon version of the same boot, you will notice how super stiff the carbon is. It would be very uncomfortable for riding, will force you in a robot stance and take away all your steez!

    #795615
    neni
    43 Posts

    The TLT5 and 6 are very soft from skiers point of view – …
    That’s why they have an extra pair of tongues for descent (with ski) and that’s why they are a good fit for splitboarding. I imagine the same holds true for the Backlands.

    They made the carbon versions of the boots so that people looking for a lightweight boot with similar profile have the option to ride something stiffer. I don’t quiet remember, but I thing the carbon TLT5 was ~105 on that scale (vs 90 for the regular)

    If you put one foot into a plastic, the other in a carbon version of the same boot, you will notice how super stiff the carbon is. It would be very uncomfortable for riding, will force you in a robot stance and take away all your steez!

    Thanks.
    Do I understand it correctly that its mainly soft fwd flex is what we seek? (To be able to ride low in ones knees like one’s used to with soft boots). That backward stiffness is good as it compensates for the highback? Not sure what to think of lateral stiffness…

    When the stiff tongue is removed, the TLT6 I bought for me actually feel very similar on carpet like my Deeluxe XV terms of fwd lean flex. I’m used to a stiff softboot and liked the stiff fwd lean flex of my Deeluxe, so I was positively surprised how well I felt with the TLT6 and sort of hope that I’ll can ride it without any complicated mods 🙂 (the thought of having to DIY mod a brand new expensive boot with my clumsy hands made me nervous and reluctant to even try AT).

    Considering the Atomic Backland Carbon for the husband; I also had tried that boot with removed tongue in the shop and to me, it seemed to have an equally soft fwd lean like the TLT6. I had the impression that the carbon is only in the hind upper boot leg part; that the fwd flex is not hampered. However, unfortunately there is no non carbon version available to compare it to.

    Would the non carbon Atomic have an even more soft fwd flex? Or is it true that only the backward flex is stiffer?

    I ask since the Carbon version is available in a local shop, but a non carbon we would have seek to order online which makes bootfitting and returning more complicated. If stiffer backward flex is the only “downside” of the Atomic Carbon, I’d assume that he could buy it anyway cos hubby is used to a stiff highback with his Diodes, and as such may like the backward flex stiffness the Atomic Carbon provides.

    Jones Solution 152 / Phantom Alpha / Dynafit TLT6 Mountain CL
    (Spark Afterburner / Deeluxe XV)

    #795622
    moridinbg
    149 Posts

    You also need some lateral flex. Ski boots are usually designed with minimum lateral flex. Actually, that’s what most mods are for.
    I have been perfectly happy with my unmoded TLT5s for the past 4 years, so this is not something that you absolutely have to do.

    I have only briefly seen the Atomics in a shop, but judging by this picture – https://www.wildsnow.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/01/IMG_4380-copy.jpg You will have flex issues in all directions. I would not recommend.
    If you already have your board and bindings you could go to the shop and do some carpet testing strapped in to the board and get an idea how it feels, but my opinion is to avoid carbon boots.

    #795624
    daway
    23 Posts

    Agreed. I tried on the Backland Carbons to get a feel for sizing, then ordered the regular ones online. The Carbons would be WAY too stiff for riding, and I weigh 215lbs. They seemed to be significantly stiffer in terms of medial flex.

    For the regular backlands, I still haven’t had to mod them yet besides a set of eliminator tongues.

    #799035
    matty_mcd
    34 Posts

    Excellent discussion and intel, thank you to all for posting!! After having a pair of TLT5 carbons punched out twice by highly qualified boot fitters and being upsold on custom food beds, I’m finally throwing in the towel on the TLTs. My foot is simply too wide.

    I tried the Backlands on in store this weekend and they felt way better out of the box. I can only imagine how much better they’ll get after molding both the shell and the liner. Given the available expansion of up to 6mm, the boot fitter was confident we could get them fitting my wide feet. Being a techy guy who gets caught up in “top model” marketing, I was heading for the carbon versions. But you guys bring up good points with regards to flex (90 vs 110). I don’t think the weight reduction is worth the flex tradeoff so I’m looking for the plastic versions. I’ll keep you posted,

    #799675
    daway
    23 Posts

    Quick update about 1 year into use of my boots! I now use these at all times…on the splitty and on the solid.

    I’ve cut down the upper orange cuff about 4 mm all the way around. I still run the elliminator tongue – they fit great with the stock liner underneath the liner laces (which help hold them in place perfectly. I also now run the more aggressive forward lean angle, and I’d recommend EVERYONE start from this position as I wish I had to begin with.

    I may mess around with cutting down the cuffs a bit more for additional lateral flex, but I’m pretty happy with them for now. They have definitely broken in a bit since I first got them, and offer a great feeling forward flex.

    I run the ankle strap VERY loose, so the one pain point is they sometimes pop open. On resort days, I just run an extra voile strap around my ankle so the strap doesn’t come undone. Annoying, as if these had dynafit style straps (that lock in place), I wouldn’t have to take this extra step. Minor pain point though that takes an extra 2 minutes when I put my boots on.

    Still…absolutely love these boots and prefer them over any soft boot set up!

    #800625
    whistlermaverick
    312 Posts

    Shave another half pound off the boot for next year, make em pretty damn tempting
    https://www.wildsnow.com/21401/atomic-hawx-frreeride-touring-gear-new/

    @j.memay

    #800682
    KGN
    215 Posts

    Yeah those atomics look good. They claim they wont be as expensive as other touring boots, but well see. My TLT6 are working awesome, but they are a touch big, which is why I am holding off on fully modding them. Doesnt seem to be causing much issue, but I am nervous when my liners pack out more they will be a touch sloppy, especially for resort riding. The atomics will be on my radar next season.

    #802456
    Jimy
    64 Posts

    Interesting thread I found over on the bomber forums:

    http://forums.bomberonline.com/index.php?%2Ftopic%2F39762-dynafit-tlt5-for-carving-and-powder%2F

    Started with a TLT5 discussion, but someone modified Atomic backlands using a hardboot snowboard spring.

    knuckle dragger

    #811517
    whistlermaverick
    312 Posts

    Hey Backland owners, show me your mods!

    Anyone have their hands on a pair of Backland Ultimates yet?

    Share the beta.

    @j.memay

    #813226
    mgco3
    50 Posts

    Hey Backland owners, show me your mods!

    Anyone have their hands on a pair of Backland Ultimates yet?

    Share the beta.

    I bought a pair of Backlands end of the past season and had four days on them so far. On the first day without mods, I realized I had to change something. I modded them in a similar way like my Scott Orbits. Now I am pretty happy riding with them so far:

    Amplid Milligram 163, Tour Operator 159 & LabCarbon 162, Phantom Alphas 14/15, Atomic Backland w/ Phantom LinkLevers
    https://mgco3.wordpress.com, https://www.instagram.com/conathanjumpman/

    #813338
    caveman
    9 Posts

    Do you have more details about the modifications

    Thanks allot

    #813356
    mgco3
    50 Posts

    Do you have more details about the modifications

    Thanks allot

    All the information is basically displayed in the two pictures: no additional tongue, I removed the upper buckle and placed the velco above the ankle. It can be fixed by replacing the upper screw of the walk/ride mechanism by a longer screw. Additionally, I have cut away about 1 cm of the cuff at the heelside because it caused some pressure pain at my calves. That’s it so far, but it rides a bit different compared to my Scott Orbit so I have to learn once again how to ride a AT boot, at least in some points.

    Any further questions?

    Amplid Milligram 163, Tour Operator 159 & LabCarbon 162, Phantom Alphas 14/15, Atomic Backland w/ Phantom LinkLevers
    https://mgco3.wordpress.com, https://www.instagram.com/conathanjumpman/

Viewing 20 posts - 21 through 40 (of 91 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.