Splitboard.com Forums

The World's first exclusive splitboard discussion forums






It is currently Fri Aug 22, 2014 12:59 am

All times are UTC - 8 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 191 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 ... 15  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: Fitwell Backcountry
PostPosted: Sat Jul 14, 2012 11:51 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri May 13, 2005 8:05 am
Posts: 1498
Location: 395
I can't wait til they start hardbooting big wave surfing and wakeboarding too! :lol: (lol sorry Barrows I had to :D )

You're in a soft boot thread so we're allowed to tease you fruitbooters. I know your cult has recently brainwashed a friend of mine into the dark side (b.s). I'm hoping these boots will exorcise the demons he's been possessed by! Starkey, come back to the light!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Fitwell Backcountry
PostPosted: Sat Jul 14, 2012 12:18 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Apr 20, 2011 6:15 pm
Posts: 673
Location: mountains of portland, oregon
i have been riding hardboots all spring and i am now unconvinced they are the way to go. they make me a worse snowboarder. no doubt about it.

i have been dreaming about highbacks now for days. like bcrider once said "i want my boot to move seperatly from my highback." that is the difference right there.

sorry barrows i tried to hardboot and they climb, walk and skin great- but they are not as good for going down. they work, but they are not the same.

these fitwells seem to be going in the right direction. still want a fully auto crampon capability though for real tough climbing.

_________________
https://nextadventure.net/community/blogs/chris


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Fitwell Backcountry
PostPosted: Sat Jul 14, 2012 3:11 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Oct 23, 2011 9:27 am
Posts: 65
Location: Bham
Quote:
still want a fully auto crampon capability though for real tough climbing.


This


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Fitwell Backcountry
PostPosted: Sat Jul 14, 2012 4:22 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Mar 23, 2005 10:05 am
Posts: 1503
Location: Colorado
christoph benells wrote:
i have been riding hardboots all spring and i am now unconvinced they are the way to go. they make me a worse snowboarder. no doubt about it.

i have been dreaming about highbacks now for days. like bcrider once said "i want my boot to move seperatly from my highback." that is the difference right there.

sorry barrows i tried to hardboot and they climb, walk and skin great- but they are not as good for going down. they work, but they are not the same.

these fitwells seem to be going in the right direction. still want a fully auto crampon capability though for real tough climbing.


Hey do not apologize to me :wink: Without information on what boot, and bindings you used, and what mods you made to them, you are not sharing much information. The differences between various hard boots are night and day. Unfortunately, some people just try any old boot, with any old binding, and do not take the necessary time to dial in the system, and make the dritical mods, to make the system work well. The right boot, the right mods, and the right binding set up is critical to get the best riding performance. This is just the truth of dealing with boots which were not designed to snowboard, and I understand that some people may not be willing to take the time and do the work involved in dialing in a hard boot set up to get perfect riding performance.

_________________
Never Summer Prospector 167X, furberg 173 DIY, Dynafit TLT5/6 Mountain , Phantom Bindings, BD Glidelite Skins
Quiver Killer inserts

http://protectourwinters.org/
http://14ersnowboardproject.homestead.com/


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Fitwell Backcountry
PostPosted: Sat Jul 14, 2012 5:28 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Apr 20, 2011 6:15 pm
Posts: 673
Location: mountains of portland, oregon
ive been riding bd primes with a cut down cuff on both sides, and with the "triax frame" removed and replaced with accessory cord. I ride them in walk mode with the top buckle flipped open. they are soft enough, and flex like soft boots toe edge to heel.

Image

riding that on a venture with voile plates and burton race binders. no cants. thats the one mod im missing. good response with those bindings.

Image

_________________
https://nextadventure.net/community/blogs/chris


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Fitwell Backcountry
PostPosted: Sat Jul 14, 2012 5:29 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Apr 20, 2011 6:15 pm
Posts: 673
Location: mountains of portland, oregon
still i want to go back to soft boots.

_________________
https://nextadventure.net/community/blogs/chris


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Fitwell Backcountry
PostPosted: Sat Jul 14, 2012 6:00 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed May 27, 2009 11:01 pm
Posts: 120
Location: June lk, CA
If those Fitwells came in some hot 80s neon they would have a sick Vision Gator vibe.

Glad to see another option. Too bad the liner isn't so great(?).

_________________
Blaug


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Fitwell Backcountry
PostPosted: Sat Jul 14, 2012 6:11 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Mar 23, 2005 10:05 am
Posts: 1503
Location: Colorado
Christoph: I know some folks do ride with the BD boots, but I cannot imagine how. Looking at them I just cannot see a good way to get a supportive ride combined with a snowboarding friendly flex.
I never use boots in "walk" mode, as this gives no highback support. My goal for my boots is for them to flex similarly to my Driver Xs in my Burton C-14 bindings with Team Skybacks. I mod the boots until the flex is the same, (actually better in some ways, no creasing and a more progressive flex rather than a fold and then stop flex common in soft boots). I ride with forward lean for solid heelside support, but mod the lean adjuster to allow for nice, deep forward flex with progressive resistance. Riding in "walk" mode is like riding with no highback in soft bindings (fine I guess, for those who prefer that), and riding with the top buckle really loose or undone, results in a totally sloppy feel. If one has to leave the top buckle undone, the boot itself is too stiff. Best to use a boot with a soft enough cuff to close the top buckle (just snugged up, not cranked down for me) so the ankle has some support, other wise the ankle just flops around in the shell until it hits the edge of the shell, and then encounters a sudden stiff barrier to movement.
I am not surprised this set up did not please you, I would have hated it...

_________________
Never Summer Prospector 167X, furberg 173 DIY, Dynafit TLT5/6 Mountain , Phantom Bindings, BD Glidelite Skins
Quiver Killer inserts

http://protectourwinters.org/
http://14ersnowboardproject.homestead.com/


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Fitwell Backcountry
PostPosted: Sat Jul 14, 2012 6:40 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Feb 17, 2006 10:10 am
Posts: 1174
Location: Denver
Barrows speaks the truth. After trying on the TLTs there is no comparison to a standard AT ski boot. I rode in Scarpa Denali TTs for several years, then switched back to Softies. Now im going to try the TLT5s/dynafit combo on one splitty, deelux spark and karakoram on the other.

As far as the fitwell, I wish I would have held off on the deeluxe and gotten them, but Im kinda stuck with them for now. I will say I am not a fan of traditional laces though, thats the major downside I see with these boots.

Keep us posted BG

_________________
Phantom Bindings
Furberg Split 167


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Fitwell Backcountry
PostPosted: Sat Jul 14, 2012 7:17 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Nov 03, 2011 10:07 pm
Posts: 350
Location: Green Mountains
BG, How does the lateral support look? I'm wondering if they are going to be more supportive skinning a traverse. Can't the fruiters let us bask in this for one minute before you poop on it! :shit: You'll never catch me in hard boots!!!!
Oh yea, let it snow already!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Fitwell Backcountry
PostPosted: Sat Jul 14, 2012 11:35 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri May 13, 2005 8:05 am
Posts: 1498
Location: 395
I did some more carpet testing today and found that even laced up tight there's adequate forward ankle flex. I thought they'd be stiffer in this regard but the tongue really seems to allow you to bend forward. I hate a stiff forward ankle flex breaking a boot in because when you jump to a toe side turn on steep terrain it feels like you're gonna go over the bars backwards due to not being able to bend forward. The first few days on my last two pairs of T1's were like this. Too damn stiff but once broken in ride like a dream. I'm guessing/hoping these will be pretty good out of the box in that regard and will break in nicely.
Smuggler, not sure about lateral support but I'm guessing it won't be significantly better...but probably somewhat better for sure. Never thought of it. I'll keep it in mind when I field test them. Just need to get my new M heelcups from the K bros.

jimw also got a pair of these but he's tripping on the toe/heel drag issues as he got the next size up from me. He hasn't tested them either but I'm sure he'll chime in with his opinions on them too. It pays to have smaller feet in this game! Luckily I'm right at the cutoff of too big.

The liner is adequate imo for those with no choice. It looks and weighs about the same as my malamute liners but it has way more eyelets so one could lace them in a manner that felt better to them. I just happen to have some newish Malamutes lying around I couldn't sell and I like their liners way better than the stock ones. I bet some new intuition liners would feel real nice in these. They feel super comfy laced up walking around. Just hoping I don't get blisters on the heel as other testers have gotten. I get blisters hiking Shasta in any soft boot though if it's a warm day and my feet sweat.

Ok back to fondling the shiny vibram lugs while imagining myself kicking steps up steep couloirs :doobie:


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Fitwell Backcountry
PostPosted: Sun Jul 15, 2012 11:21 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Apr 20, 2011 6:15 pm
Posts: 673
Location: mountains of portland, oregon
christoph benells wrote:
like bcrider once said "i want my boot to move seperatly from my highback." that is the difference right there.


oh snap im quoting myself quoting someone else!

i have no complaints with my hard boot ride except for this lack of movement. i'll have the fitwells and tlts also next year. a man of many boots.

_________________
https://nextadventure.net/community/blogs/chris


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Fitwell Backcountry
PostPosted: Sun Jul 15, 2012 12:57 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Oct 23, 2009 9:38 pm
Posts: 819
Location: The Belly of Ham baby!!
christoph benells wrote:
christoph benells wrote:
like bcrider once said "i want my boot to move seperatly from my highback." that is the difference right there.


oh snap im quoting myself quoting someone else!

i have no complaints with my hard boot ride except for this lack of movement. i'll have the fitwells and tlts also next year. a man of many boots.




That is such an important variable to bring up Christoph. I used to do biomechanics research on lower extremity power transfers in high velocity movements, as well as footwear contributions to ground reaction force distribution. In terms of actual snowboard performance, I believe that you and BCrider are right on. Getting ankle mobility that is independent of the highback is critical! Although we really can't argue that hard boots are way better for icy sidehilling, I can make a very strong argument that progressive [snowboarding] truly is a form of athletic performance. Slogging is a form of endurance athleticism, but we're talking high level shredding here...

If you want to define what the most important objective biomechanical component to human athleticism is, its the coordinated and precise transfer of power through triple extension of the hip, knee and ankle. Furthermore, dynamic snowboarding has another critical component: For-Aft movement. Even if a hard boot has been sliced and diced to flex like a gymnast, the fact that there isn't independent motion between the tibia and the highback is CLEARLY visible in the way a hardbooter rides. I have yet to see a hard boot shredder truly turn their snowboard like its a surfboard. For me, snowboard athleticism means finely controlled dynamic movement, and this transfers to all riding situations. Its not just pow turns either... On steep exposure in a mountaineering situation, I need my body to be able to move precisely. In hard boots, I just haven't been able to get the same level of control. Its a Ginger-Bread-Man turn.

Anyway, its not like we're debating our savior Jesus Christ.... This is WAY more important than that! LOOOOL

:rock: :rock: :rock:

_________________
PROFESSIONAL AMBASSADOR OF STOKE


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 191 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 ... 15  Next

All times are UTC - 8 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 11 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  





Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group