Dynafit ONE and TLT6 comparison?

I do have some additional long term ski boot reviews in the pipeline but here is an interesting observation from this week that kinda surprised me.   Although I have both boots in the closet and have skied the ONE a bunch the thought never occurred to me to make a comparison.

The Dynafit TLT6 ski boot, shake and rebake!

 

Lets see if I can sort through some of the early Internet misinformation and misrepresentation on the TLT6.  Admittedly some of it clearly my fault here @  C-T no matter how unintentional.

First up lets talk shells and add some definitive comparison numbers to the older TLT5.

Zamberlan 4000 Eiger Ice boot...

 

A few years ago at Winter OR I stumbled across a boot company called Zamberlan.  Honestly I can't remember if I had heard of them prior.  May be in Europe some time but I simply don't remember now.  Friend Jonathon Miller and fellow guides at the show really liked their Zamberlan boots and tried in vain to get me hooked up with Zamberlan that winter,

 

Mammut Eiger Extreme Nordwand TL Boots

Mammut sez:

"Despite a complete range of technical features, this full-gaiter boot is the lightest in its category, making it a perfect fit for the Eiger Extreme range."

Weight is not the end all for even a weight weenie like me.  But since it is the very first comment of the online Mammut description I'll address that.

The C-T Dream Boot ? One of a few BTW.

 

 

 

In a recent  Dynafit TLT 6 boot conversation on the TGR tech forum (skiing specific)
http://www.tetongravity.com/forums/showthread.php/266818-Dyna-TLT6

 I was asked,  

 

"What would you have done (differently), aside from creating a One/Mercury/Vulcan? (honestly curious)"

 

My answer if you are interested is below.   Add a comment if this is a boot you would like to see built.  'Cuz it would be so easy to do!

 

 

"Gotta realise where I am coming from. It aint skiing.

More rando boot reviews worth a look...

If you ever wonder what I look at and pay attention to for reviews here are a couple that would have helped with my own decision making.

http://outerlocal.com/skiing/scarpa-alien-1-0-vsdynafit-dy-n-a-evo-review

http://outerlocal.com/skiing/scarpa-alien-review

http://tetonsandwasatch.com/2013/dynafit-dyna-pdg-boot-review/

http://tetonsandwasatch.com/2013/scarpa-alien-1-review/

http://l-caldwell.blogspot.com/2012/11/dynafit-dyna-pdg-boot-review.html

http://outerlocal.com/skiing/scarpa-alien-1-0-review2-review

Dynafit TLT6 for Fall of 2013

TLT6 with the unavailable currently CL liner

My TLT6 P came with the CR liners which I really like btw. 

Everyone is trying  to figure out the actual weight difference of the CL and CR liners.

 

Edit:

Turns out some of my comments here were based on a preproduction sample.

For the most part the info is accurate but  not always on the minute details.  An example is the One and TLT6 buckles are very similar but not exactly the same.  The last PF-X liner is close but not exactly the same as the production CR liner.  My impressions habven't changed o nthe TLT6 but I strive to be accurate in the deatils so you cna better make up you own mind what is important to you.

 

If you want more detail worth a look here as well on an additional review of a production sample :

http://coldthistle.blogspot.com/2013/09/the-dynafit-tlt6-ski-boot-shake-and.html

The original review below, written in June 2013 after a couple of weeks with the TLT6:

OK, I'll admit it, I am a little pissed.

In late winter and early Spring of 2011 Dynafit started delivering on something special few of us had seen before.    That was the TLT 5 ski mountaineering boot.

Finally a ski boot that would climb ice almost  as well as a decent ice climbing boot and in the right circumstances may be better than some.

 

 

 

So why am I pissed and pointing all this out?    Because as everyone knows or should know by now there are plenty of really good ski boots in the world.  And damn few, real ski mountaineering boots.   Light weight boots you can ski and climb in without your foot wear  ever coming to mind.  The emphasis is on the mountaineering not the skiing so much.  

Dynafit buckled (forgive the pun) under the pressure to build another ski boot and as a result, for the most part folded up the TLT5 and put it away.

My suggestion if you want to climb technical ground in your ski boots?  Hunt the TLT5s down now and buy a pair while you still can.   Either model 5, it doesn't matter.

No question the the newest TLT 6 version is a better ski boot than the original TLT5.    But sweet Mary!!!....I wish Dynafit had gone in the opposite direction and built a better technical ski mountaineering boot instead of a a "better" ski boot.  The public's voice was clear.  There are a lot more skiers than ski mountaineers.   Even if they aren't reading about it here on Cold Thistle most asked, "Build us a better ski boot!"  And Dynafit did just that. 

Now, would someone build us a better climbing boot that skis well?

Overall boot weight is claimed the same on a 27.5 TLT even with the heavier warmer/better fitting  TLT 6 inner boot.

Dynafit's published info fro a 27.5:
1050g  tlt 5 P
1050g  tlt 6 P

"Chris said...

Just received my TLT6Ps with the new CR liner and can compare them to my old TLT5Ps. In a 29.0, the TLT6 shell weighs about an ounce more than the 5. The TLT6 CR liner weighs 2.5 ounces more than the flimsy TLT5 P-TF liner. Total weight difference is 3.5 oz (100g)  per boot."  TLT5 P being  lighter. "

Sorry, I don't have comparable sizes yet to weigh.  There are subtle changes in the boots but the weigh stayed the same mostly by dropping the LTW  inner boot of the TLT 5.

For most of us skiing is the priority on a $1000 retail boot.  Which with the carbon Performance version skiing is clearly the priority.  $750 for the Mountain version.  If the previous boots are any example both ski much better than any light weigh boot has a right to.  They simply ski very well.  I found a preference in the TLT5 for no tongue or power strap on the carbon Performance and use the tongue and power strap on the Mountain version unless I am in really light weight skis.  I also found I liked the Mountain version just a tiny bit better for booting and climbing because it is just a tiny bit softer and a more progressive flex when skiing when all buckled up and strapped in.  Both are very good boots.

I found  the TLT6 version every bit the ski boot and then some of the TLT5.

Eliminating the forward foot flex makes the TLT6 a better ski boot no doubt.  But any hiking or climbing in mixed terrain makes me miss that feature immediately.  I suspect having a size 29 shell and jamming my foot into it makes that flex something I notice and like.  Others simply riveted the TLT 5 toe solid their first season if not week.   Those that did will really like the TLT6.  Smaller toe profile on the TLT6 a result of loosing the hinge.

Buckles have changed some but not always as one might assume.   Certainly not lower profile in every case.  Hopefully they will stay buckled now on breakable crust of the nasty boot packs or even moderate skin tracks.  The fist generation TLT5 hasn't.  One of the TLT5's few faults imo.  Teh nect generation  forward buckle with a "stud" did better.   The new buckles are a different profile and shape which should solve the problem.  The spring snow conditions I skied the TLT6 in didn't allow me to test my theory on a "better buckle system" for staying shut.   I suspect Dynafit did.  I did however use pretty much the same two buckles on my Dynafit Ones all of last season and was pleased with them.  Although the One's instep buckle is higher up on the foot and better placed to lock in the heel in I think.  If the performance on the One is any example it is a better buckle system on the TLT6 by comparison to the TLT5.

If you are looking for a "better AT ski boot" with an emphasis on skiing, the Dynafit One is a pretty good answer btw.  I've been very pleased with the One PX TF when used on my 190cm and longer, 100mm+  skis.  No lack of power in reasonable conditions and very comfortable.   I have a comparison I have been working on since mid summer between the Dynafit One and the Scarpa Maestrale RS.  Short version spoiler?  "Both are very good ski boots!" :)

The real find here IMO is the boot Dynafit has yet to build.  A stripped TLT6 with a fiberglass cuff, the One's upper two buckle sytem and a Pebax lower.  I want that boot!

 

 

 

 

 

Instep buckle is larger and has been reversed, then doubled for more adjustment on the TLT6.

 

 

New cuff buckle on the TLT6 (lower picture) does wrap around better (one extra hinge point) and offer a lower profile on the boot.

 

The TLT6 now has a easily adjustable forward lean adjustment in the cuff.  Thankfully this is a part you can buy and upgrade your own boots with.  Lots of toys to play with on this boot.

 

TLT5 mid sole or lack of

 

TLT6 insulated full length insole

 

I also failed to mention the TLT6 now comes with a soft and a hard tongue at no extra charge.  Yellow and green. Easy to tell apart.   In my first reviews of the TLT5 Mountain and Performance several years ago that option seemed like a no brainier for Dynafit.

 

So if you are listening :)  How about a Pebax lower and fiber glass cuff  TLT6 with a the two upper buckles of a ONE and no extra nonsense.  A metal on metal cuff rivet while you are there as well.  No tongues, no power strap and a lwt Palau foam liner?  Please?   

The TLT6 has been widened in the forefoot to enhance the fit for the general public.  2mm on the instep side, and 1mm added to the outside of the boot.  I dare anyone to do a blind test and tell me the TLT6 is a wider boot over the TLT5.   Helping address one of the most easily identified complaints from those using the TLT5 lift skiing...boot warmth,  is a warmer, full length insole has been added.  It is  easy enough to see.

 

Inner boot?  Late last season I bought a pair of TLT Mountains that have virtually the same inner boot that the TLT6 has now.  Gone at least in the US is the excellent (IMO) Palau heat moldable and exceptionally light foam liner except for the race PDG version and the DyNA here in  North America.  Rumors are the RL liner will eventually be avialable.  My guess is Dynafit is simply punishing the American's (rightfully so IMO) for complaining too much and then adding Intuitions.  (Dynafit comment below sums it up "best for this market")    Replacing the liner in the TLTP 6 is a slightly heavier (I am saying  100g +/- max)  and better fitting (for my feet)  heat moldable liner this season in both versions of the TLT6.  Although Dynafit claims you don't even need heat to mold them.  "Just wear them skiing."  I am always leery of that as an option.  But that seems to actually be the truth from the early reviews I trust.   For a $950+ retail boot you would think they could do much, much better.  But may be I just don't really understand the technology here.  Seriously.  It is possible and I could be wrong.  because I really like the CR liner.  But I also heat molded them.

 

Did he say?

"more down hill orienteed"

 

I've used the original Mountain's liner, the original Performance liner, a Intuition Pro Tour liner and now seemingly the newest version ( or at least a very close copy) that comes in the TLT6P.  The new liner is heavier by a few grams but is also better in every way but weight for my feet.  Likely most feet.

 

This from Dynafit on 9/16 :

- The TLT6s are available in North America with only the CR liner. They are the best for this market, warmer, more downhill oriented, adeguately thermo customizable (in the mean time it's not compulsory to thermo form them, - The fit of the liners is now done without footbed. In this way the skier can adapt the personal anatomy on the soft bottom layer of the liner. This layer changes thickness between the full and half size

 

 

Bottom line?  TLT6 is an awesome back country AT ski boot.  Better by a fair bit in several ways that the TLT5.  Including the new inner boot I think.  Smaller over all outer volume.  Same weight, wider fit, warmer boot, better buckles.  No metatarsal joint to flex on the boot.  Loosing the sole flex alone makes it a better ski boot.  It is worth repeating again.."better ski boot".

 

If you really want a climbing boot to ski in buy the TLT5 if you can still find them on discount.

But you aren't loosing much there either with the newest TLT6.  I may not like the trend to a better ski boot over "a better climbing boot" but the TLT6  is without question an exceptional boot and clearly an improved TLT5.

 

The liner options? Guess they didn't just drop a PDG or the old P liner in the new TLT6 as the CL liner.  Turns out the CL is very similar but slightly different, with laces now, more reinforcement for durability and a bigger flex cuff in the boot shaft. Thickness of the foam is different (1mm maybe 2mm, I am still checking) as well between TLT and EVO. PDG and Evo liners are thinner and offer an even easier ankle flex for a longer stride. But the thin PDG/EVO liner might be an option if you need more room in your TLT?!  Go down a shell sixe on the tLT6 and use the EVO liner?  Might be worth a try.

 

TLT6 liners?  CL liner on the left.  CR liner on the right.

Photo courtesy of www.mountainski.eu

 

 

Great early TLT6 review here as well:

 

http://www.mountainski.eu/177/several-days-long-testing-of-prototype-of-new-ski-touring-boots-dynafit-tlt6

 

 

   Interested to see what the foam liner will actually show, if it is ever available in the US...and what else is available in Europe.  

 

 

 

 

 

Now, how about a real, "mountaineering/ski" boot?

Anyone going to step up and dominate that market share?

 

 

Late '70s Scott ski boot.  With a Vibram sole glued on they were a useful LWT mountaineering double boot that you could actually ski in. 

The "new" alpine ice boots?

These are all new to me and the blog anyway.   After all the blog is suppose to about alpine ice and winter climbing.  Not the foo-foo world of skiing :)  Some really good boots available these days for cold weather climbing.  The key is finding the one pair that fits YOU the best!  Hopefully I'll be able to shed some light on that part of the process with the up coming reviews, weights and comparisons.

A few of the boots here now or coming shortly for reviews.  I can do better than the stock pictures I pulled off the net this morning :)

Zamberlan
3000 PAINE PLUS GTX RR

4000 EIGER RR

6000 DENALI RR

Asolo

 EIGER

 

 

 

 

 

La Sportiva Nepal Cube

 

 

 

 

 

 

Mammut Nordwand TL

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Lowa 6000

 

 

and the newest Lowa 6000 below

 

 

Lowa Katok XT

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Salewa Pro Guide

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Scarpa Rebel Pro

 

 

 

Why a double boot?

With reviews of the most popular double boots on the blog and more coming of similar models I think the use of double boots might need some explanation again.

The majority of my alpine climbing has been done in the Canadian Rockies in winter or in the Alaska Range in spring.

In both places a good single boot and decent gaiter will get you by, generally, in perfect conditions. The problems arise not in the perfect conditions but in the exceptions both in the weather conditions and temperatures. As important or maybe more import is the physical condition of the climber.

Open bivy high on the North side of Deborah May '76


Frostbite is not generally a cold issue believe it or not but simply a physical exhaustion and dehydration issue of climbers strung out in difficult conditions. Double boots are a reasonable insurance policy to avoid a cold injury when you are dehydrated and exhausted and still having to keep moving. Sounds pretty much like any worthwhile alpine climb doesn't it?

While expensive, quality double boots are nothing compared to the price of what even a short stint in the hospital from frostbite and the resulting down time will cost you long term. Not to mention the resulting cold sensitivity that will follow you well into the future. The result of a serious case of frostbite is you'll either stop climbing in cold weather or you'll buy double boots after the first incident. My suggestion is buy the double boots up-front and save yourself the worry and pain.

With all the new climbers able to get out and crag climb long before they jump on difficult alpine climbs single boots are the norm. The single boots generally climb better and are cheaper. The same single boots are generally over kill for most things, including Rainier in summer. So, of course we all want to use those same single boots...that aren't cheap either....all winter and on every climb.

A good percentage of the time you'll get away with it. In Canada these days most climbers won't go out if the temps drop below -15C. That is up from the old norm of -30C as the temps we generally called it off. One of the reasons is most boots are not comfortable climbing below -15C unless they are double boots.


Galiber Makalu dbl boots, late '70s.





The other important reason to invest in double boots is the amount of time you can comfortably spend out in a cold, harsh environment. No they aren't fun to walk in or climb difficult mixed terrain in. But both can be done adroitly with a little practice. You might find they climb ice better than your single boots in fact. On moderate, long, ice routes, most will appreciate the added support and calf relief of a good double boot. The most important reason to look at a double boot is the ability to keep the liners unthawed and warm over night and if required dry the inner out in your sleeping bag. If things really go to shit and you have an open bivy the fastest way to thrash your feet is to be laced into a tight pair of single boots. Better yet on a open bivy you can loosen a dbl boot a bit, gain some warmth usually by doing so, and still keep your 'pons bolted on the boot and not worry about loosing gear. It is a big advantage if actually required.  Getting your steel crampons off your boots or better yet your boots off your feet is alwasy a better and warmer over all option.

The advantages of a double boot are significant to keeping your toes and feet in good health. The down side is first the expense, and then the ability to climb difficult ground in them. That can be over come with time, by climbing more in your dbl boots. Lastly the bulk and weight. The newest boots are getting better.  The Scarpa 6000 and La Sportiva Spantik are both warm, light and climb well.  Worth the added effort to climb in doubles unless you feel like the risk of damaged feet is lower than I do.


On frozen feet after an open bivy at 13,800 in Nov.

Some will wonder about the Batura and Phantom Guide style of boots (single boots with attached "supergators") as a less expensive (if  $500+ is less expensive) option to a true double boot. This style of boot has two design features that limit their use in similar conditions. They are both very difficult to dry out and keep unthawed on over night or longer trips. And the ankles are generally a lot softer and more flexible than a true double boot. So you lose the extra ankle and calf support as well. My take having used a Batura for a few years is they are good one day boots on cold days but I would never take them out over night intentionally. Each style of boot has a place. Just don't trust the advertising to help you decide when and what is right for you.

Times haven't changed much. Good (read winter technical boot) double boots would/do cost a lot more than a good (read winter technical boot) pair of single boots. That changed for 20 plus years as plastic double boots dominated the market place. No matter your skill or experience level plastic double boots were common on almost every mountaineer's feet. And for good reason..they would keep your feet warm and dry in just about any condition...some times too warm. For years you could easily assume that anyone who did technical ice climbing or went out in winter would own a pair of plastic double boots.

Not so today. And because of it I am seeing and hearing of frost bite injuries again outside of the greater ranges....which had been, until just very recently, a thing of the past.
One of my litmus tests for winter climbing partners, 30 years ago and again now is, "do they own double boots?" It doesn't mean that you use double boots on every winter climb.
But if they do, I can generally count on the fact they take their own survival and climbing seriously. That is usually because of hard won experience in really cold weather conditions. So I can worry less about them getting a cold injury and both of us staying healthy on our adventures. And just as often the owner of a pair of double boots is likely to value his partner more than some one with less experience would. Surprised? You shouldn't be. It is all in the details.

If you plan to go BIG and go LIGHT....the place not to short yourself on gear is your boots...go BIG there first!

More on the end result of "minor" frostbite.

http://www.summitpost.org/frostbite/856321







A pair of Herman Buhl's cold weather boots.

By comparison a light weight double boot for their time.  Something the first Kolflachs were.  And the recent TLT5 hinted at  prior to the full blown ski boot with the introduction of  TLT6.

The climbing world still waits for the super light technical double boot to catch up with the modern technology available.


Hermann Buhl (September 21, 1924 – June 27, 1957) is considered one of the best post-World War II Austrian climbers and one of the best climbers of all time. He was particularly innovative in applying alpine style to Himalayan climbing. His accomplishments include:

1953 First ascent of Nanga Parbat, 8,126 metres (26,660 ft) (solo and without bottled oxygen).
1957 First ascent of Broad Peak, 8,051 metres (26,414 ft).
Before his successful Nanga Parbat expedition, 31 people had died trying to make the first ascent.

Buhl is the only mountaineer to have made the first ascent of an eight-thousander solo. Just a few weeks after the successful first ascent of Broad Peak (with Fritz Wintersteller and Marcus Schmuck), Buhl and Kurt Diemberger made an attempt on nearby, unclimbed Chogolisa peak (7654 m) in alpine style. Buhl died when he fell through a cornice on the southeast ridge near the summit of Chogolisa. His body was never found.

"Buhl was very lucky on Nanga Parbat, escaping with just a few frostbitten toes. This story reflects Buhl's style of climbing; totally focused and by taking enormous risks he often succeeded where others failed."

Buhl on Nanga Parbat 1953




http://www.summitpost.org/article/173032/Hermann-Buhl-1924-1957-.html

La Sportiva Nepal Cube?

Nepal is one of the very best all around boots from La Spotiva.  And it just keeps getting better.

This is a quick look the newest CUBE version.  Carbon honey comb mid sole like the Batura 2.0 and a new toe cap as well.  The Batura 2.0 was a total revamp of the Batura.  I'd expect the same make over with the Nepal.  More than first meets the eye generally from La Sportiva.   Available  Fall of 2013.

 

More here: http://coldthistle.blogspot.com/2013/06/la-sportiva-back-at-ya.html

 

Heads up!? Rebel Ultras are now shipping in North America.

Few pieces of gear I would ever bother to make this kind of announcement on.  Any particular piece of gear I think is *that*  good I will typically want a spare of.  The Ultra is, imo,  *THAT* good.  Only time and other users can verify that fact.  I heard today that the Ultra has arrived in numbers at warehouse in Colorado for North America deliveries.

I'll have more to say about this boot once I get out of my ski boots and get time in them again.  Till then my earlier review is below.  If you are interested in a LWT boot and why you should be, check out the second link that Eric wrote.  My guess is the first shipment of the Ultra will sell out quickly and we'll be screwed here in NA waiting for the 2nd shipment to come in late Fall.  Can't say you weren't warned.  Or I could be totally full of shite.  We'll have to wait and see if my prediction is true or not.  I'm not taking a chance.  Even if that means owning two pair.

Funny, I noted in recent photos of Ueli Steck's gear room half a dozen pairs of the new Ultras.  Now that is a pretty pathetic gear geek to be looking at photos of some guys gear room, right?  Also noted I haven't seen Steck in any other boot but the newest Ultra since they made production and well prior to production as well,  back to Steck and Carolyn George's ascent of the Dru Couloir, 10/2010.  Take that for what it is worth.

http://intothemountains.com/2010/10/16/drus-north-couloir/

Boot links below:

http://coldthistle.blogspot.com/2013/02/the-scarpa-rebels-part-one-ultra.html

http://coldthistle.blogspot.com/2010/05/why-weight-of-your-footwear-is.html

Everyone draws a line some where....

If you haven' read this and the research behind it you should.

http://coldthistle.blogspot.com/2010/05/why-weight-of-your-footwear-is.html

I draw a line at cold feet and heavy boots.  Admittedly that is going to be a balancing act generally.  

While I was in the Alps a friend who was on the way to Chamonix asked me, "should we bring doubles?"

At that point in my own trip I had been handed my ass time wise and by the cold on two separate climbs that by guide book and my "sitting at my desk standards" should have been easy...to the point of casual.  They weren't and I was cold.  Luckily for me I never had cold feet.  But then I didn't have to spend the night out either as clearly I would have if  I had been required to do so.  One climb was in dbl boots, Spantiks in fact.  The other was in Scarpa Ultras.

So of course I suggested they bring dbl. boots.  And of course they didn't.  It worked out fine as the weather warmed up in the couple of weeks it took for them to show up in the valley and get on something big.
When they did climb, they climbed fast which helps :)

Snell's had several dozen pairs of the Scarpa Guide in stock but only 3 pair of the Ultras available.  No Ultras in my size or I would have bought a second pair as they aren't available in NA and easily replaced.

I've already reviewed the Ultra.  This is a revisit to that topic.

http://coldthistle.blogspot.com/2010/09/scarpa-phantom-ultra.html

http://coldthistle.blogspot.com/2010/12/phantom-ultra-vs-trango-extreme-gtx.html   

http://coldthistle.blogspot.com/2010/11/scarpa-phantom-ultra-and-scarpa-phantom.html

Weights are of a one boot in a size 45.


La Sportiva Spantik 3#.05oz / 48.05oz/ 1362g
La Sportiva Baruntse 3#2.5oz / 1503g
La Sportiva Batura 1st gen. 2#7oz / 1106g
La Sportiva Batura 2nd gen 2#11/ 43oz/ 1219gm
La Sportiva Nepal Evo 2#10.5oz / 1205g
La Sportiva Trango Evo Extreme GTX 2#3oz (35oz) / 992g
Scarpa Phantom Ultra new 2010 model 2#3.5oz (35.5oz) / 1006g
Scarpa Phantom Guide new 2010 model 2#7.5oz / 1120g
Scarpa Phantom 6000 new 2010 model 2#10oz/1190g

I've been trying to high light the gear I used and really liked in Chamonix this winter on the blog and will continue to do so as time allows.  I took 3 pairs of "big boots" on this trip.  The Ultra the lightest of the three.  It fits my feet very well and most importantly it dries easily.  They dry faster than either my new Baturas or my Scarpa Guides. Part of that is the insulation and inner boot body and part of it is the OurDry liner I suspect.  Now both the Guide and the Ultra are using OutDry.  My early Guides are Goretex.  Not sure what is in the Batura. But the Batura is warmer than either Scarpa single boot.

I had intended to climb in only the BD Sabertooth crampons with these boots as they offer the best fit with the addition of Petzl bales.  But it bacame obvious pretty quickly that I had chosen the wrong crampon for the hard ice conditions we experienced early on.  (more on that choice of horizontal or vertical front points in a later blog)  Not a big deal normally but the Ultra (and its stable mate the 6000) are not the easiest boot to  fit a crampon to.  Here is why.  The sole profile on the toe of the Ultra boot.  By far the most narrow toes on a technical boot from  the Industry to date.

Ultra and a new Batura side by side here.

I find the Petzl crampons or at least crampons with Petzl front bails seen to fit the Ultra the best.  So I started using a pair of Dartwins in the rock hard ice gullies.  The fit isn't perfect but it works well enough and you aren't likely to loose a crampon as a buddy of mine did in Spantiks and Sabertooth crampons in the middle of a a tight mixed chimney.  Annoying that, at best.

 

No real point to this blog other than to say how much I like and used the Ultra this winter.   November through April it has been my go to boot.  It fits me well and climbs good enough.  Not the support of a Nepal Evo or Spantik but they are lighter than either by a fair bit and warm enough.  More support and warmer than the Trango Extreme.  And I consider all of the boots mentioned some  of the very best available for alpine ice climbing.

All the boots I mentioned are obviously excellent boots.  No surprise of  the boots I climb in and have pictured above that I would like one pair better than the rest.  They all climb well so it eventually comes down to fit.  The Ultras fit me the best..even better by a fair margin than the Scarpa Guides.

Down side of the Scarpas?  They aren't very durable to date.  Which is why I would have bought a second pair in Chamonix.    I like them enough and know they aren't going to last long.  The inners are coming apart on both pair of my boots, new Guides and Ultras.   And I have had friends collapse the toe box on the new Phantom Guides.  Scarpa NA wanted nothing to do with the obvious warranty issue.  Thankfully the UK importer took care of the problem with a complete refund.

Nov.

                                                                        

                                                                            Dec.

For Jan. it was Spantiks in Canada and during Feb in Chamonix as well.  March was a toss up between singles and dbls.

If nothing else writing a bog post like this reminds me I have gotten some good climbing in this winter season. Nothing spetacular by any count but it was fun ;-)