Trend of lightweight resort boots is a good thing?

Durability

if you have the interest & time, these very deep dives on ski boots with @onenerdykid on the Blister podcast will answer a lot of questions you have on ski boots and some you didnt even know you had. https://blisterreview.com/tag/matt-manser

**This post was edited on Jun 23rd 2020 at 9:33:20am

Lighter products are more maneuverable, more agile, better for boot packing, energy saving, etc. just like you would find in other sports like biking, running, tennis, golf, etc. In every one of those other industries, the better products get lighter. But, I'll be first to tell you that dumping all of your R&D budget into solely making things light and ignoring other aspects is a HUGE mistake. Light only makes sense if you can check off the other important boxes of fit, comfort, performance, and durability. You never want to make an alpine boot light at the sacrifice of any of those other aspects. Touring boots can and do get way lighter (we've got a boot that weights 775g in 26.5) but there are known & expected compromises when doing that. That's not the case for alpine boots- everyone expects them to do the job they are intended to do, light or not.

When we were developing the Hawx Ultra and Hawx Prime, we knew that going crazy light would cause the fit, comfort, performance, and durability to suffer and we didn't want to do that. So, I think we are at the best "Goldilocks" point where we can make things light & agile without sacrificing fit, customization potential, comfort, performance, and durability.

We had to invent new ways of making ski boots in order to do this and there were some definite bumps along the way; there were A LOT of learnings we took away from the first year of trying to do it. But, we got the kinks ironed out and things are super dialed now.

FaunaSkisif you have the interest & time, these very deep dives on ski boots with @onenerdykid on the Blister podcast will answer a lot of questions you have on ski boots and some you didnt even know you had. https://blisterreview.com/tag/matt-manser

**This post was edited on Jun 23rd 2020 at 9:33:20am

Thanks, I've just started listening to this and it's fantastic!

onenerdykidLighter products are more maneuverable, more agile, better for boot packing, energy saving, etc. just like you would find in other sports like biking, running, tennis, golf, etc. In every one of those other industries, the better products get lighter. But, I'll be first to tell you that dumping all of your R&D budget into solely making things light and ignoring other aspects is a HUGE mistake. Light only makes sense if you can check off the other important boxes of fit, comfort, performance, and durability. You never want to make an alpine boot light at the sacrifice of any of those other aspects. Touring boots can and do get way lighter (we've got a boot that weights 775g in 26.5) but there are known & expected compromises when doing that. That's not the case for alpine boots- everyone expects them to do the job they are intended to do, light or not.

When we were developing the Hawx Ultra and Hawx Prime, we knew that going crazy light would cause the fit, comfort, performance, and durability to suffer and we didn't want to do that. So, I think we are at the best "Goldilocks" point where we can make things light & agile without sacrificing fit, customization potential, comfort, performance, and durability.

We had to invent new ways of making ski boots in order to do this and there were some definite bumps along the way; there were A LOT of learnings we took away from the first year of trying to do it. But, we got the kinks ironed out and things are super dialed now.

Thanks for your response! On the theme of "lighter products are more maneuverable, more agile, etc.", is it fair to say that lighter boots (e.g. Hawx Ultra/Prime) may not ski poor conditions/east coat crud and ice as well as a heavier, 2000+ gram/foot boot? Or is the weight difference between a Hawx and a heavier alpine boot not consequential?

While I ultimately chose another touring boot (Maestrale RS), I actually tried the Hawx Ultra XTD 130 for touring and was so, so close to pulling the trigger on the Hawx that I was motivated to investigate replacing my beginner boots (Salomon QST 100 TR) with the Hawx. It's down to Hawx vs X/Pro 120 (2019/2020), and I'm torn.

Thanks again!

I'm in a middle of a boot decision - Hawx Prime 120s vs Salomon X/Pro 120. Not a huge difference in weight - 250g, but the Hawx are light for sure. Similar comfort and both sized for performance fit, but the X/Pro is ever so slightly cushier. The "big" difference is weight.

Anyone can provide reference, opinions, or point me in a direction to answer these questions?



My advice would be try both on. The x pro has a slightly less accommodating instep than the hawx prime. That’s the biggest difference between the two imo. The plastic and liners on both are similar enough. Two really solid boots though

Im down to 1950gram boots, and wowie they feel nice, better than ever, I currently rock the 2020 cochise dyn 130, and atomic something something 130 2015 2,1-2.2KG, (tad heavier) vs my older technicas and misc at 2,2KG 2.5KG. I will give the older boots, like 110 flex technica that they are comfy, and I can flexxxx them, so good for park jibby stuff, but saving thoose say 500 grams in each foot.... yeah you feel it.


I've been riding park on the dyn 130s this season, while I do kinda feel bad, they held up fine. The shinbang is real though.



I am however also very stoked on the new 2021 atomics, I'm fairly big at 215-220lbs(used to be more) so not sure how they will hold up, Guessing someone in this thread will know. I'm on a 98?99) last cochise, but older atomics are 100



Also stoked on new il moro 2021, some rumours of august delivery :o



To sum up, if we are all talking 2020-2021 stuff

Heavier boot, more power, better flex pattern, more comfort, better liners, easier to mold shells. a 2KG boot theese days will have amazing power transfer, for that mach1 stuff or stuff you know you shouldnt do, yeah this.



Lighter boot, still decent power, way way better for touring, you feel a 1600 vs 2000 gram boot, or even 2400gram!. Often harder to get the shells customized right, lighter liners and less comfort, lighter boots, skis and misc can save the day, even in the resort, your swinging all this weight around all the time.

**This post was edited on Jun 23rd 2020 at 10:43:33am

get full tilts

I went from a heavy and stiff af K2 Spyne 130 to a Hawx Ultra 130. I immediately felt a difference in agility/quickness and really liked it. The only weird thing that I think is caused by the lightweight construction is that sometimes the boot will actually buckle from forward pressure at weird times. Its a disconcerting feeling and hurts a little in a really weird way when it happens. Not sure what to think of it. I'm 215# and ski aggressive. But other than that I only consider the lighter weight an improvement.

MikeLofgrenThanks for your response! On the theme of "lighter products are more maneuverable, more agile, etc.", is it fair to say that lighter boots (e.g. Hawx Ultra/Prime) may not ski poor conditions/east coat crud and ice as well as a heavier, 2000+ gram/foot boot? Or is the weight difference between a Hawx and a heavier alpine boot not consequential?

While I ultimately chose another touring boot (Maestrale RS), I actually tried the Hawx Ultra XTD 130 for touring and was so, so close to pulling the trigger on the Hawx that I was motivated to investigate replacing my beginner boots (Salomon QST 100 TR) with the Hawx. It's down to Hawx vs X/Pro 120 (2019/2020), and I'm torn.

Thanks again!

At some point, yes - a heavier boot will ski choppy/bad conditions better but again I think we found a great balance point that still allows for adequate damping, progressive flex, and suppleness that other lightweight boots miss or straight up don't have. Our Redster line of boots are all over 2200g / 26.5 and I think race boots will always be this way. Mainly for stability, but also because the other parts of the equation are heavy as shit too. Race skis and race bindings are incredibly heavy, so pairing a lightweight boot there causes a legit imbalance when skiing. Your gear should be nicely balanced, and that applies to touring to alpine to racing.

One of the things I always pushed for with our boots was to have the highest degree of customization potential possible. The Hawx Prime (and Ultra) series of boots have heat moldable shells & cuffs, new MIMIC liner technology (definitely read up on this), cuff alignment, forward lean adjustments, and the ability to be sole canted. There isn't a boot on the market that offers all of those in one boot. So if you ever wanted to fully dial in everything about your boot, the Hawx can do it but the Salomon can't.

Fair points. Given that my other sports (running, rock/ice climbing) are always made more enjoyable by lightweight gear, and that most of my skiing is done in trees, where ant added agility afforded by a lightweight, responsive boot is helpful for someone as untalented at skiing as I am, I have made my decision:

I’ll follow up here with how they perform in my setup (Volkl M5 Mantra 177).

thanks all for your input. Super psyched to try the hawx out (prime 120s)

**This post was edited on Jun 24th 2020 at 8:41:53pm

m5 mantra wouldnt be my first choice as a tight woods ski ;) (its a good ski though)

anders_am5 mantra wouldnt be my first choice as a tight woods ski ;) (its a good ski though)

Fair point! I also have the Salomon QST and that’s a very solid woods ski, but IMO carves quite poorly and chatters terribly at speed. I may have swung a little too far over toward the opposite end of spectrum w/Mantra but we’ll see.

I was dumb enough to hit a line that took me to supertight trees, in interesting terrain with 2.5kg boots and mantra 102, 191cm... in WET heavy "powder" Was not enjoyable, even broke a pole why trying a super horrible backup manouver. I've skied a lot of mantras before, the new ones are pretty sweet for power/speed stuff, but now even worse for trees ;)

MikeLofgrenFair points. Given that my other sports (running, rock/ice climbing) are always made more enjoyable by lightweight gear, and that most of my skiing is done in trees, where ant added agility afforded by a lightweight, responsive boot is helpful for someone as untalented at skiing as I am, I have made my decision:

I’ll follow up here with how they perform in my setup (Volkl M5 Mantra 177).

thanks all for your input. Super psyched to try the hawx out (prime 120s)

**This post was edited on Jun 24th 2020 at 8:41:53pm

And?

If you depend on your boots/skis/bindings being ultra light in order to be able to spin on rails/jumps, then you shouldnt be in the terrain park.

i would rather have a 4 kg boot that had a 98% performance level than a 2 kg boot that had a 95% performance level.

you gotta get comfy with the weights attached to your legs. Skiing on inferior equipment just so its easier to huck yourself is possibly the worst tradeoff you could ever making if having fun on your skis is your top priority.

if things can be made light that is great but like one nerdy kid says, substituting anything dynamically important to save weight is stupid.

A lighter boot (Hawx Prime 130) was a very solid combo with my M5 Mantra ski. The Mantra’s were significantly heavier, stiffer, and more powerful than what I skied on last year. The Hawx was stiff enough and sensitive enough to ski the Mantra’s really well, without me noticing a significant weight difference between my old setup - heavier boots and lighter skis. For me, I’m not someone who does or would train for ski season, as it conflicts with other higher priority sport specific training. With that said, this set wasn’t too fatiguing but have be the performance improvements I was seeking.

I may demo and lighter more agile ski than the Mantra next year to see what that gets me.

Lastly, 100% never entering a terrain park. Zero interest. Thanks again all for your input

I’ll throw my opinion in here since everyone seems to be in support of lighter boots, I’ll throw an opposing opinion in.

For the past few years I have skied in the nordica promachine which is decently light, and this year I skied the atomic hawx s 130 which is very light. As well as the head raptor 140 rs which is quite heavy.

I like the way the promachines ski and fit a lot, but found performance to degrade pretty quickly after two seasons in them, even after putting a new set of liners in and also trying a zipfit. They also don’t provide as damp a ride in choppy snow as I’d like. Overall I liked this boot but definitely found there were some downside to how light it is.

then I got the hawx ultra 130. I really liked how moldable this boot was, one shell cook and I was on my way with no pressure points and super stoked on the fit. After skiing them a few days I became less and less impressed, they were very soft rearward which I haven’t felt since skiing the salomon mtn lab touring boot. They also weren’t damp at all, every ounce of energy I put into them rebounded back out at me, think a full suspension mountain bike with the rebound set all the way fast, super sweet for popping off things, less sweet for skiing variable snow. Lastly they totally collapsed on me every time I landed any larger sized air, and I am not a big person. I weigh maybe 135 pounds and the 130 flex on these felt significantly softer than my 130 promachines or even some 130 touring boots. I ended up aggravating a heel spur from flex through them so often, so I moved on.

Head raptor RS 140: extremely heavy, had to do way more boot work to get the pressure points right. Added a zipfit liner for a better fit. This thing is plenty stiff, even though the stock configuration is also a “130” flex it is way stiffer than the hawx and also stiffer than my beat promachines. Skis variable snow very well, provides a damp smooth ride. This would not be my choice for frequent boot packs, although at jackson I still boot pretty frequently.

so theres one vote for heavier boots, but really its just a vote for boots that fit you the best. Id much rather have a light boot that fits perfectly than a heavy boot that fits poorly.

I’m sure onenerdykid will have something to say about me talking trash on his brainchild boot, but they didn’t work for me, I know a lot of people they do work for though, so if the hawx fits your foot shape well then by all means go for them.

TheWeazso theres one vote for heavier boots, but really its just a vote for boots that fit you the best. Id much rather have a light boot that fits perfectly than a heavy boot that fits poorly.

I’m sure onenerdykid will have something to say about me talking trash on his brainchild boot, but they didn’t work for me, I know a lot of people they do work for though, so if the hawx fits your foot shape well then by all means go for them.

Honestly, I think we're generally going to agree here. These are always the three main aspects to look for in a ski boot: fit, comfort, and performance. You need to check/prioritize the boxes in the ways that apply to you and your skiing.

For 21/22, we have a brand new Hawx Ultra coming that is way more stable and durable than the first generation. Hopefully we'll see some thoughts from Blister since they have a pair, along with the new Mimic Professional liner and Professional Dual Strap. It really does solve the performance and longevity issues that some people had with the first generation, without turning the boot into a heavy race boot.

But even then, some people will just prefer the way a commercial race boot skis, which is totally fine and why we always kept the Redster CS 130 in our range (our analog to the Raptor you talked about). If someone wants the dampest, smoothest, freight train-esque ride possible then this is it. The polyurethane-ether material used in that boot combined with its thickness just delivers a ride quality that is unmatched in my opinion. But, a hefty weight necessarily comes with that ride quality.

I think moving forward people will be super stoked on the improvements we made to the new Hawx Ultra, and there's also a very similarly fitting Redster CS range sitting next to it for those who want the ultimate plow machine.

**This post was edited on Apr 1st 2021 at 2:43:53am

Love my hawx ultra with an intuition race tongue liner. Quite light and has a legit flex regardless of temp.

onenerdykidHonestly, I think we're generally going to agree here. These are always the three main aspects to look for in a ski boot: fit, comfort, and performance. You need to check/prioritize the boxes in the ways that apply to you and your skiing.

For 21/22, we have a brand new Hawx Ultra coming that is way more stable and durable than the first generation. Hopefully we'll see some thoughts from Blister since they have a pair, along with the new Mimic Professional liner and Professional Dual Strap. It really does solve the performance and longevity issues that some people had with the first generation, without turning the boot into a heavy race boot.

But even then, some people will just prefer the way a commercial race boot skis, which is totally fine and why we always kept the Redster CS 130 in our range (our analog to the Raptor you talked about). If someone wants the dampest, smoothest, freight train-esque ride possible then this is it. The polyurethane-ether material used in that boot combined with its thickness just delivers a ride quality that is unmatched in my opinion. But, a hefty weight necessarily comes with that ride quality.

I think moving forward people will be super stoked on the improvements we made to the new Hawx Ultra, and there's also a very similarly fitting Redster CS range sitting next to it for those who want the ultimate plow machine.

**This post was edited on Apr 1st 2021 at 2:43:53am

I almost moved to the redster instead of the heads solely for how awesome to work with the memory fit plastic is, but I ended up finding the heads for a better price, the plastic is definitely harder to work with though.

the ultra professional with the new liner and dual strap seem like it will be an awesome addition to the line, I may end up putting the dual pro strap on all my boots once I get to handle them in person, it seems like a better version of a booster strap at least on paper.

TheWeazI’ll throw my opinion in here since everyone seems to be in support of lighter boots, I’ll throw an opposing opinion in.

For the past few years I have skied in the nordica promachine which is decently light, and this year I skied the atomic hawx s 130 which is very light. As well as the head raptor 140 rs which is quite heavy.

I like the way the promachines ski and fit a lot, but found performance to degrade pretty quickly after two seasons in them, even after putting a new set of liners in and also trying a zipfit. They also don’t provide as damp a ride in choppy snow as I’d like. Overall I liked this boot but definitely found there were some downside to how light it is.

then I got the hawx ultra 130. I really liked how moldable this boot was, one shell cook and I was on my way with no pressure points and super stoked on the fit. After skiing them a few days I became less and less impressed, they were very soft rearward which I haven’t felt since skiing the salomon mtn lab touring boot. They also weren’t damp at all, every ounce of energy I put into them rebounded back out at me, think a full suspension mountain bike with the rebound set all the way fast, super sweet for popping off things, less sweet for skiing variable snow. Lastly they totally collapsed on me every time I landed any larger sized air, and I am not a big person. I weigh maybe 135 pounds and the 130 flex on these felt significantly softer than my 130 promachines or even some 130 touring boots. I ended up aggravating a heel spur from flex through them so often, so I moved on.

Head raptor RS 140: extremely heavy, had to do way more boot work to get the pressure points right. Added a zipfit liner for a better fit. This thing is plenty stiff, even though the stock configuration is also a “130” flex it is way stiffer than the hawx and also stiffer than my beat promachines. Skis variable snow very well, provides a damp smooth ride. This would not be my choice for frequent boot packs, although at jackson I still boot pretty frequently.

so theres one vote for heavier boots, but really its just a vote for boots that fit you the best. Id much rather have a light boot that fits perfectly than a heavy boot that fits poorly.

I’m sure onenerdykid will have something to say about me talking trash on his brainchild boot, but they didn’t work for me, I know a lot of people they do work for though, so if the hawx fits your foot shape well then by all means go for them.

Yeah there’s some good points here for sure. As someone who owns 3 different pairs of boots and regularly skis all of them, here’s my take.

Full Tilt First Chair 10. Best fit for my foot, not super heavy or super light. Good mix of dampening in heavy, chopped up snow and not super heavy in the air.

Roxa R3 130. 1500g a boot, great on the uphill. Performs well in deep snow, and on groomers. Heavy, wet snow or post-pow days, it lacks the lateral stiffness for me.

Lange RX Ri (pretty much just an RX130 that’s bright pink). Pretty heavy, tight as fuck on my feet. Drives big, heavy skis super well. Power transmission is unbeatable. Heavy as shit compared to my other boots, don’t like it in the air. Eats chop for breakfast lunch and dinner.

All depends on personal preference. For most companies, they’re aiming at the average skier. The average skier is gonna want something light so that carrying their boots around, or walking to their car is as easy as possible. More performance-oriented resort boots (Nordica Dobermann, Lange RX, Atomic Hawx) don’t need to be as light because the assumption is that there is a larger number of skiers who would prefer a heavier, but more stable boot, than there is skiers who want a boot that’s lighter than average. That said, it boils down to what feels best to each skier, like everything else 🤷‍♂️