Forums Boots Dynafit TLT 5 Mountain, WOW!
Viewing 20 posts - 1 through 20 (of 302 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #574655
    barrows
    1490 Posts

    OK, so my original thread on this boot got lost with the SB.com server meltdown. Since then, I have made a couple of simple mods: I cut down the upper cuff on the medial side, just a little, about 3/16″ or so. Removed the power strap, as the upper buckle is high enough on the cuff to not need the extra support of the power strap. Elongated the hole in the forward lean bar, just a little, about 5 mm or so; this allows free forward flex of about ten degrees when in ski mode. I also did some bootfitting mods on the liner to accommodate some of my irregularities, and I made a custom (carbon birch ply) 4 mm heel lift for my rear binding.
    The boot is riding incredibly well, and, as expected touring fantastically as well. I think I will shim the rear of the liner just a little, to add a little more forward lean, and ultimately I’ll probably replace the stock liner with an Intuition “Freeride” tongue liner, as the Intuition’s are better then the stock liner.
    I would suggest that anyone looking for a super light hard boot, with great riding and touring performance, should check out this incredible boot.

    #638494
    russman
    689 Posts

    Photos or it didn’t happen sir

    #638495
    barrows
    1490 Posts

    Russ, what kind of photos???

    For the boot in action, see the Notchtop Spire Couloir trip report.

    For those who actually are interested in any more details about this boot, I am happy to help out.

    #638496
    jbaysurfer
    947 Posts

    I’d be interested in seeing photos of the mods TBH. I think the biggest inhibitor to me trying hardboots (again) is the idea of of taking some sort of cutting blade to a 600 boot. (though I confess I don’t know how much these cost).

    #638497
    barrows
    1490 Posts

    Mods on these were really simple. The inside (medial) cuff was cut down just a little, maybe just a quarter to three eighths of an inch, the power strap was removed, and the square hole in the forward lean bar was elongated upwards just a little, maybe an eighth of an inch or so to allow for a little free play in the forward flex. I also do not use the (optional) ski tongue.
    These are light and soft boots stock. My opinion is that every rider will do a little bit different mods to suit their individual preference.
    I used a dremel followed by sandpaper on the cuff, and a small square file on the lean bar.

    #638498
    jbaysurfer
    947 Posts

    @barrows wrote:

    Mods on these were really simple. The inside (medial) cuff was cut down just a little, maybe just a quarter to three eighths of an inch, the power strap was removed, and the square hole in the forward lean bar was elongated upwards just a little, maybe an eighth of an inch or so to allow for a little free play in the forward flex. I also do not use the (optional) ski tongue.
    These are light and soft boots stock. My opinion is that every rider will do a little bit different mods to suit their individual preference.
    I used a dremel followed by sandpaper on the cuff, and a small square file on the lean bar.

    what kind of attachment on the dremel? A cutting wheel or a sanding drum..or something else?

    #638499
    barrows
    1490 Posts

    I have used both the sanding drum and the cutting tool (not wheel) to trim plastic on boots. The sanding drum tends to work by melting the plastic rather than actually sanding. The cutting tool works best-this is the attachment which looks like a drill bit, but is actually for cutting.
    I like to stick a piece of tape on the boot shell to mark where to make the cut, then follow the tape line. I smooth out the cuts by hand sanding with 80, then 150 and finally 220 grit sandpapers, and polish with scotchbrite to remove sanding hairs.

    #638500
    96avs01
    874 Posts

    barrows – are you rockn the TF or the TF-X? curious as to what the difference is b/n the two models? from the website i don’t see a whole lot other than the weight, with the TF ~1/3lb lighter. assume you didn’t opt for the the performance model due to the added stiffness from the carbon fiber upper, but have you tried on all 3 models?

    this boot and your review of it have me incredibly intrigued. would really like to find someone that has ridden these and the garmont masterlite and lite rider. my suspicion is that these are superior, but would still like an apples-apples comparison.

    165 Venture Divide/Spark Frankenburners/La Sportiva Spantiks
    163W Jones Solution/Phantom Alphas/Dynafit TLT5s
    162 Furberg

    Chris

    #638501
    barrows
    1490 Posts

    Chris-the TLT-5 Mountain comes stock (in the US) with the heavier liner. This liner is made by Dynafit, and is more of a traditional AT liner: it has a rubberized hut sole, lace loops and is only partially thermoformable.
    The other liner (stock on the TLT-5 Performance, with the stiffer carbon fiber cuff) is made by Palau (France) is lighter, and is a fully thermoformable liner.
    Both liners are very thin, designed to work with the highly anatomical shaping of the shell for better skiing performance without thick (heavy) plastic.
    Unfortunately, I do not believe either of these liners is as good as an Intuition (I have a pair of Dynafit Zzero 3s with the Palau liners). For best fit, I suspect I will be replacing the stock liners with an Intuition Freeride liner (the Freeride is Intuitions softest flex tongue style liner). I have some unusual foot/ankle fit issues (related to previous injuries) and I am certain I could get a better fit working with an Intuition (better molding foam, thicker) liner. That said, I have been using the stock liner with good performance, but I want to replace it to achieve an even better fit.
    I did not try on the Garmonts (Masterlites), but the store where I tried the TLT-5s had the Masterlites, and I could not figure a way to mod the forward lean mech without replacing it entirely. The Masterlite also felt stiffer when just hand flexing them (vs the TLT-5). Once I tried on the TLT-5 I was sold pretty quickly-the outer dimensions of the boot were so compact feeling and light on the foot I was inspired to boulder around on the climbing wall used for testing rock shoes.
    Ultimately, boots are really personal, but I am really impressed with the TLT-5 Mountain.

    #638502
    96avs01
    874 Posts

    ^^^Many Thanks!

    165 Venture Divide/Spark Frankenburners/La Sportiva Spantiks
    163W Jones Solution/Phantom Alphas/Dynafit TLT5s
    162 Furberg

    Chris

    #638503
    russman
    689 Posts

    Closeup photos of your boots you kook!

    #638504
    Taylor
    786 Posts

    I am flirting with the idea of getting a hard boot set up for my split board. I rode (riveted, zero-flex) hard boots elusively for many years when I was racing, but have always felt hard boots of any sort to be far too restrictive for free-riding.

    Assuming I can find a boot with enough flex, the two factors that could push me over the edge would be weight savings and uptrack efficiency. Given Barrow’s review, this boot, the TL5 Performance (a partly-carbon version of the TL5 Mountain), which weighs an astounding 2 lb 5 oz per pair, has me seriously considering such a set-up.

    http://www.backcountry.com/dynafit-tlt-5-performance-tf-alpine-touring-boot

    So what I’m wondering is whether its carbon fiber cuff precludes or makes far more risky mods discussed here, or if mods needed to facilitate snowboarding-friendly flex could avoid the cuff.

    I’ve modified plenty of plastic boots over the years, but has anybody ever cut into carbon fiber?

    @sun_rocket

    #638505
    barrows
    1490 Posts

    Taylor:

    Stiffness of a modded AT boot, and a snowboard racing boot are not at all comparable. My TLT5s are very close in flex to my Driver Xs-and I could make them softer if I wanted to.

    RE: TLT5 Mountain (pebax cuff) vs. TLT5 Performance (carbon cuff). I would not consider the Performance version, the carbon cuff does not save any weight (the weight difference is actually the difference in the liners-see above posts re the liners). The carbon cuff version is much stiffer both for forward, medial, and lateral flex. For more details on these boots there is a long thread at TGR-suffice to say, skiers prefer the Performance because of its additional stiffness, us splitters are going to prefer the softer flexing (and more affordable) Mountain version.

    #638506
    Taylor
    786 Posts

    Barrows, do you know whether the performance liner be purchased separately from the performance shell? Or do you know if there are comparably light-weight liners out there (the ones you mention above?) that with which one would realize similar weight savings?

    Seems like I need to research or locate a break down of liners. If in this case weight savings are realized primarily in liners, I would need to find one that is relatively flexible and comparably lightweight to the Performance liner.

    @sun_rocket

    #638507
    barrows
    1490 Posts

    Taylor: you would need to send Dynafit USA a message about ordering liners separately. The TLT5 shell is highly shaped, and the stock liners are thinner than most aftermarket liners. The Mountain liner is heavier because it has a rubber sole, lace loops, and a cloth outer face. Personally, I prefer Intuition liners to all others, as they mold better, and hold their form better. I am planning on switching out my liner for an Intuition “Freeride” model-this is their softest flexing tongue style liner. This liner will probably be between the weight of the two OE Dynafit choices.
    The Dynafit liners have a “flex window” built into the back of the liner (achilles area) which allows more freedom in rearward flex for enhanced touring-I find this feature irritates my skin around the achilles, so I want a liner in there without this feature, I also feel I can get a better fit with the slightly thicker Intuition liner, as it will mold better. I would recommend choosing liners for fit and performance before weight-that said, the Intuitions are pretty light.

    #638508
    Taylor
    786 Posts

    This is helpful. Thanks, Barrows.

    @sun_rocket

    #638509
    trimbax
    3 Posts

    Hi Barrows: I am wondering to buy these boots but I am a bit scared about dimension of the boots over the board!!! I should buy the size 30 and I also have the Venture Storm 168 splitboard…I hope the boots are not too long…
    I see you have the same board…but which is you boots size?

    Thanks.

    #638510
    barrows
    1490 Posts

    The TLT5s are shorter and more compact than most AT boots. My size 28 TLT5s are actually shorter in sole length than my size 10 Driver Xs, so unless you are using a super compact soft boot with integrated liner (like Salomon X Series) the TLT5 should be shorter than your soft boots. I ride a 26 waist Venture. If you really need a 30 mondo boot, you probably should be on the 27 waist Ventures.
    I have a riding partner who wears a 30, and he uses a 27 waist Storm to good effect.
    BTW, the sole length of AT boots is published in the specs, and molded into the shell as well. My 28s are 307 mm long. I am sure you can find the sole length of the size 30 in the specs for these boots, check Dynafit’s site.

    #638511
    trimbax
    3 Posts

    Really thanks for the answer. Sure I should have bought a 27 cm waist Venture but the Storm 27 is at least 171 cm and may be too long for steep coloir and European snow condition. I have prefered the 26 cm x 166 cm and with Spark Blaze and Northwave size 30 cm is ok (forefoot +15, rearfoot -3).
    But I think with AT boot fixed on the Voile metal slider that are higher than Blaze bilding I should have no problem.

    Another question: how about jumps with AT boots. Some guys said you can’t do jumps with same pleasure with AT boots compared to soft ones.

    Thanks

    #638512
    barrows
    1490 Posts

    “Another question: how about jumps with AT boots. Some guys said you can’t do jumps with same pleasure with AT boots compared to soft ones.”

    Ask Damien Sanders!

    Clearly this is nonsense. AT boots will need some mods to get them to flex the same as soft boots, but they can be modded to flex any way that you would like with a little ingenuity and craftiness.
    That said, if my concern was riding pipe or park, I would choose soft boots-but I do not find any pipes or parks out in the backcountry.

Viewing 20 posts - 1 through 20 (of 302 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.