@friedmst wrote:

I still wanna know if anyone has done much cramponing in fitwells. How do they climb compared to mountaineering boots? Would you use them as your only climbing boot? For long hikes, I’ll probably use approach shoes anyway.

I’ve done extensive high angle ice climbing and glacier slogging in the Fitwells. Last summer, I climbed the DC route on Rainier in them, while I left my spiltboard at Camp Muir (I was tagging along with my Climbing Ranger buddies, and they aren’t aloud to ski / board above 10K while on the clock). Walking in them on the glacier was just fabulous. There’s actually more ankle support than a normal mountaineering boot, and I found my lower legs didn’t get as beat up in them as I do in my traditional mountaineering boots.

After that trip, I did a climb and snowboard of the Edmonds Headwall on the North side of Rainier. Once on the route itself, its a sustained 3,000 feet of 45-55 degree snow / ice. Climbing it was just fantastically fun! In those boots you can still use french technique, but the ankle support allows you to avoid ankle fatigue, and when you’re doing thousands of feet of hybrid French / German technique (front pointing) these boots also allow you to avoid calf burn. As I said, climbing the route was amazing…. Snowboarding back down? Well, the boots were fine, but the route itself was terrifying, as it has a near infinite degree of exposure and objective hazard.

Two weeks after that Edmonds HW climb / ride, BGnight and I with 2 buddies climbed the North Face of the NW Ridge on Mt. Adams in the Fitwells. That route is also a sustained 3-4K vertical foot line that cruxes at 55 degrees, and when we were there it was NOT in snowboard shape, rather, it was a full on ice climb. We did the route in simul-solo style, and in any other boot, there’s no way in hell I would have felt comfortable. Its truly an amazing sensation being thousands of feet in the air, on a 55 degree firm snow face, UN-ROPED. There just isn’t any room to make an error, and having full confidence in your crampons and tools is critical. Anyway, BG and I decided not to snowboard back down because the route was in such shit shape, but our skier buddies did scrape their way down (fucking idiots! LoooL).

Overall, my experience is that the Fitwells are an amazing general mountaineering tool. As for snowboarding, they ride “very” well. Other boots I have ride “exceptionally” well, but for the overall package, these boots are incredible.

They are a bit heavier than running one of the lightweight AT boots, but not too bad.

For more Fitwell knowledge, ask my buddy Zach Clanton (Zclanton on here). He’s been living in Alaska for the past two years doing expedition after expedition, and he swears by them at this point.

@russman wrote:

For more Fitwell knowledge, ask my buddy Zach Clanton (Zclanton on here). He’s been living in Alaska for the past two years doing expedition after expedition, and he swears by them at this point.

well russman,

i was on the glacier with zach this may and did some shredding with him. -edited- it was clear to all who cared that the tlt’s climbed better than fitwells.

there is no comparison to the climbing capabilities of fitwells to tlts. the dynafits win hands down. anyone who tells you otherwise is just plain misinformed.

oh, and if you think rearward flex is a sham you’re a kook too.

Hello,
The Fitwell Backcountry snowboard boot is available in the US at http://fitwellboots.com
You can also order from the entire Fitwell product line with some amazing alpine, big wall and canyoneering boots and as well as approach shoes.

Here is the current Fitwell product catalog:
http://www.fitwellsrl.it/commons/include/php/resourceFilePublic.php?id=15935

Stay tuned for some US magazine reviews!

Todd Anders Johnson
US Sales and Marketing|Fitwell Boots and Shoes
PO Box 3068|Breckenridge, CO 80424
todd@fitwellboots.com|http://www.fitwellboots.com

You need to pair any AT boot with a Dynafit style toe piece to take full advantage of the touring abilities of an AT boot. I used the voile plates to tour on before I got my toe pieces and they pretty much suck.

Sorry russman,

Not trying to personally attack anyone. This is after all a website about splitboarding, in the end it’s all fun.

Ill smoke it wit ya bro.

Hello to all from Greece,
I wanted to ask a question on the fitwell backcountry boots,
are they like the most common snowboard boots of the market that riders tend to buy smaller size numbers because the boots are getting “bigger” and “roomier” by the use …. ?

We just got some pairs from Italy and we have a fitment questions on if we have choose right size or not ….

for example my big toe on my right foot is on the limit and i have some contact on walking, when i bent my knees its pretty good ….
so will they “open” a size or half ? or i will have problems hiking ?

thanks

@barrows wrote:

I would expect Fitwells to climb very well in most situations, after all, they are made by a climbing boot company! But they do have two drawbacks in terms of climbing performance: one is the weight, they are much heavier than a TLT5/6 (see boot weight thread), and extra weight on the foot takes a lot more energy over the course of a long day, or week, in the mountains. Second, the lack of rearward flex is a liability in some situations, anytime one is scrambling on flat or downhill ground, especially if it is uneven. For example, if scrambling a ridge traverse to a line over rock is involved, it is important to be able to articulate the foot, otherwise things get awkward fast. For those who prefer the extra weight and bulk of a soft boot set up, it is too bad that Fitwell has not (yet) incorporated reward flex.

As far as boots like the TLT5/6 go in terms of climbing performance, well, they are the standard for ski mountaineers all over the world and were developed with such use in mind. There are also alpine climbers who use the TLTs specifically for doing alpine climbs, because they climb very well, and allow one to ski efficiently on the approach to longer less accessible routes.
It is important to understand that the TLT5/6 is a much better climbing boot than most AT boots, as it has a much smaller footprint, fits closer to the foot, and is much more precise in climbing performance than any other AT boot I have ever had on my feet. It rock climbs really well for example.

Wow! Sign me up! There must not be any downsides to these magnificent SKI boots you are endorsing! Glad you set the person who last posted in this thread in JUNE straight. Boy, you really taught them a lesson.

Barrows, wouldn’t it be great if there was a few hardboot threads for you to post in?

@shredgnar wrote:

@barrows wrote:

I would expect Fitwells to climb very well in most situations, after all, they are made by a climbing boot company! But they do have two drawbacks in terms of climbing performance: one is the weight, they are much heavier than a TLT5/6 (see boot weight thread), and extra weight on the foot takes a lot more energy over the course of a long day, or week, in the mountains. Second, the lack of rearward flex is a liability in some situations, anytime one is scrambling on flat or downhill ground, especially if it is uneven. For example, if scrambling a ridge traverse to a line over rock is involved, it is important to be able to articulate the foot, otherwise things get awkward fast. For those who prefer the extra weight and bulk of a soft boot set up, it is too bad that Fitwell has not (yet) incorporated reward flex.

As far as boots like the TLT5/6 go in terms of climbing performance, well, they are the standard for ski mountaineers all over the world and were developed with such use in mind. There are also alpine climbers who use the TLTs specifically for doing alpine climbs, because they climb very well, and allow one to ski efficiently on the approach to longer less accessible routes.
It is important to understand that the TLT5/6 is a much better climbing boot than most AT boots, as it has a much smaller footprint, fits closer to the foot, and is much more precise in climbing performance than any other AT boot I have ever had on my feet. It rock climbs really well for example.

Wow! Sign me up! There must not be any downsides to these magnificent SKI boots you are endorsing! Glad you set the person who last posted in this thread in JUNE straight. Boy, you really taught them a lesson.

Barrows, wouldn’t it be great if there was a few hardboot threads for you to post in?

Not attempting to “teach them a lesson”, just giving my opinion that I would expect the Fitwells to generally climb very well. Guess I cannot please you, too bad. The downsides I pointed out are just facts, there is nothing subjective about them, and they are not opinions, weight is just a fact, and that the Fitwell does not allow for rearward flex is also just a fact. As I said before, I still think the Fitwell is the best choice for those who rather not switch to a hard boot system, and I am glad that splitboarders have this option. I hope that Fitwell addresses the rearward flex in a future boot revision.

@bcrider wrote:

Barrows,

I appreciate your contributions to this forum from the bottom of my splitter heart but you’re starting to remind me of the Mrs in this thread. She always has to get the last word too. 🙂

Let it go brother. It is what it is.

Amen

Barrows,
That is very interesting information. Perhaps you could start a thread about it where you could discuss it with other like minded individuals. Meanwhile, the rest of us will continue to snowboard in snowboard boots, not robot boots.
Sincerely,
Shredgnar