Forums Boots The first Hardboot designed for snowboard mountaineering Viewing 9 posts - 21 through 29 (of 29 total) ← 1 2 Author Posts November 17, 2016 at 8:18 pm #796335 shad 8 Posts This is much appreciated! November 19, 2016 at 2:53 am #796362 Kahti Ryan 48 Posts Wow really cool! I would agree with previous posts that this is too expensive and not durable enough for the kind of winter activities I want a boot to stand up to, but the statement of finally designing a hardboot specifically for splitting is massive! Let’s hope this inspires some of the big companies at last. @buell I was thinking about the adaptation of phantoms for weltless boots last night. How about a low profile rathchet capstrap instead of the front bail? Would need to be stronger and firmer than a typical softboot strap, but could work? November 19, 2016 at 7:58 am #796366 buell 534 Posts Kahti Ryan wrote: Wow really cool! I would agree with previous posts that this is too expensive and not durable enough for the kind of winter activities I want a boot to stand up to, but the statement of finally designing a hardboot specifically for splitting is massive! Let’s hope this inspires some of the big companies at last. @buell I was thinking about the adaptation of phantoms for weltless boots last night. How about a low profile rathchet capstrap instead of the front bail? Would need to be stronger and firmer than a typical softboot strap, but could work? They are expensive, but we don’t know about their durability. They may be completely fine. It will be interesting to put the Gignoux boots to the test. My TLTs are really scuffed up after 2 seasons and both those seasons were on the short side. I expect a binding design for ledgeless boots would be a modified version of tech bindings. For the toe, the open/lock mechanism would need to be on the side to avoid dragging in the snow. The tech heel piece would need to be shorter so they do not stick out either. The current bail binding design has been around for quite a while so there would probably be a learning curve with a brand new design. Hopefully hardshell splitters will have their own boot design options going forward and it won’t be an issue. All the same, perhaps there is a splitboard tech fitting binding design someone (John?) will create that actually works better than our current bail bindings and splitters won’t need the ledges after all. November 19, 2016 at 1:03 pm #796372 Kahti Ryan 48 Posts True we don’t know about the durability, but carbon fibre, whilst known for its stiffness and strength/weight ratio tends not to hold up well to impacts and is bad at dampening vibration. Hence why it is only used as a midsole on climbing boots. I would really like one pair of boots that I could use for winter climbing and splitting. So either high durability or ease of repair and shock absorbance are big factors for me. Unfortunately there’s no way a boot like that is going to weigh less than 1kg but I’ve accepted that. If the boot was being used only for skinning and riding on good snow the gignoux seems pretty ideal! (with a gaiter at least) I was thinking about tech toes for ride mode but that would be a very complicated system to get the release anywhere sensible it seems. Then again I’m not an aerospace engineer! Tbh though I don’t see any reason to get rid of the toe welt. Its useful for crampon options, saves reinventing the wheel and hardly adds to BSL on well thought out designs. Looking at the pic on the procline thread it seems the fit could be made better with just a slightly different “clip” on the front bail. Still, such exciting times! I wonder which big company will be the first to bring out a split hardboot? My experience of Italy so far is that the snowboarding scene in general is much smaller than elsewhere compared with skiing so I reckon it might not be one of the Italian companies you would expect… November 19, 2016 at 7:10 pm #796383 buell 534 Posts Agreed on the carbon characteristics. When I look at the beat up lower shells on my TLT5s and TLT6s, I do have to wonder how the carbon will hold up to accidentally kicking a rocks while booting or just generally getting scraped while rock hopping. I had similar concerns about the carbon Amplid Milligram last season. How would it ride, would it be chattery, would it hold up overall, would it be too stiff, would it handle hitting rocks? After 30 tours, the board, particularly the carbon top sheet, looks better than any other split I have had at that point. It has hit a number of rocks, one of them hard and there is no damage that is out of line with any other split I have owned. To top it off, performance wise, It is the best all around split I have ridden. I am hoping for the same out of these boots. Between the Milligram and the boots, that would mean dropping roughly 2 pounds per foot on the way up and roughly 4 pounds when riding down. November 20, 2016 at 12:45 am #796386 Kahti Ryan 48 Posts While I’ve never owned TLT’s (their narrow fit and lack of alternatives in the UK until recently is the main reason I’m still on a soft setup) their durability always seems to get brought up. I don’t know enough about plastics really but wondering if there is a big difference in durability between pebax and grilamid. The old Scarpa Omega climbing boots where grilamid and absolutely bomber, although the shells were still very thin. (And a pair of those with an AT cuff would be a damn good starting point for a split boot, I’ve always thought!) I wonder if a carbon layup could have its impact strength increased with the addition of a layer(s) of aramid/kevlar? In my geeky attempts at trying to understand composites I read that is what the military use for laptop cases etc. I guess not often done in ski boots for cost and difficulty working with aramid? I’d really like to see a full rand on a boot. Yes it would add all of 75g or so but there’s a reason every mountaineering boot has one! Perhaps something to consider adding yourself if the Gignoux feels a bit fragile. Look forward to hearing of your experience with it! November 20, 2016 at 6:52 am #796394 buell 534 Posts Gignoux had a rand on a previous ski boot model a few years ago, the XP Mountain. He might have decided it wasn’t needed. The La Sportiva Stratos and Scarpa Alien 3 are also full carbon lowers. In the comments on this post on Wildsnow, there is some back and forth about carbon’s durability / repairability. https://www.wildsnow.com/12108/alien-2-0-scarpa-carbon-ski-boot-review/ November 20, 2016 at 7:51 pm #796429 Scooby2 620 Posts There are two different issues you have here with composite boots. Impact resistance and abrasion resistance. Impact resistance can easily be solved by adding polypropylene fibers like innegra or aramid fibers like Kevlar. Abrasion is harder to solve. These fibers have good abrasion resistance but bc they are in hardened epoxy, the epoxy wears away before long and the innegra or Kevlar becomes a furry mess on the outside. It’s hard to sand and make pretty again. Carbon fiber gets ground up easier but it is also easy to sand it and add patches and make it fairly pretty again. I think the best approach for these boots for durability would be to have Gignoux glue on rubber rands like he had in previous models. Any climbing shoe repair place could repair them in the future. The weak link is probably from grinding the toe ledge away around the tech fittings, if you climb sharp rock, not from the shells January 17, 2017 at 11:03 am #798590 Mr_Orange 76 Posts I don’t think i can ride my La Sportiva Siderals at all before getting the forefoot shell width and the big toe area heat stretched out. I can probably go for even more stretching. My feet are unusually wide up front with very narrow heels. To me, one of the biggest perks of plastic boots is you can really dial in the shape even beyond molding the liner. How do these carbon boots account for this? Viewing 9 posts - 21 through 29 (of 29 total) ← 1 2 You must be logged in to reply to this topic.