Member of the Month

theabortionator
April, 2025

Online

Welcome to the Newschoolers forums! You may read the forums as a guest, however you must be a registered member to post. Register to become a member today!

Phaenoms showing up.

profile picture
PartyBullshiit
Posts: 4713 - Karma: 20,093
looks like their new models are available here now


https://www.evo.com/shop/phaenom-footwear?utm_medium=email&utm_source=promo&utm_campaign=2024.07.29_snow_phaenom_ski_boot&obem=ny_McXC01fC9Gwwr5i0MDyCZpcnyRTAk6OvoKI4dtp8%3D&bc_lcid=t6618516204675072lw5553117178486784li0
10 months ago
6 5
profile picture
bennwithtwons
Posts: 1747 - Karma: 17,103
10 months ago
16 0
profile picture
muffMan.
Posts: 2893 - Karma: 27,618
What in the two buckle BS is this. Really doubt the 130 flex is comparable to any other brands 130. And 102 last is dumb for a “performance” boot.

dont know jack about these but initial thought is these ain’t it.
10 months ago
13 1
profile picture
PartyBullshiit
Posts: 4713 - Karma: 20,093
muffMan.What in the two buckle BS is this. Really doubt the 130 flex is comparable to any other brands 130. And 102 last is dumb for a “performance” boot.

dont know jack about these but initial thought is these ain’t it.


Well according to the review posted you’d be right. They’re stiffer than other 130’s. User came from a team reccon 140 and said these are on par or stiffer.
10 months ago
3 1
profile picture
PartyBullshiit
Posts: 4713 - Karma: 20,093
Here’s evos review.

https://www.evo.com/reviews/ski/phaenom-fr-01-130-boots?utm_medium=email&utm_source=promo&utm_campaign=2024.07.29_snow_phaenom_ski_boot&obem=ny_McXC01fC9Gwwr5i0MDyCZpcnyRTAk6OvoKI4dtp8%3D&bc_lcid=t6618516204675072lw4638323504177152li0
10 months ago
3 1
profile picture
muffMan.
Posts: 2893 - Karma: 27,618
PartyBullshiitHere’s evos review.

https://www.evo.com/reviews/ski/phaenom-fr-01-130-boots?utm_medium=email&utm_source=promo&utm_campaign=2024.07.29_snow_phaenom_ski_boot&obem=ny_McXC01fC9Gwwr5i0MDyCZpcnyRTAk6OvoKI4dtp8%3D&bc_lcid=t6618516204675072lw4638323504177152li0


Eh looks a little better but still personally would wait. Also, I’ve heard of recons not being that stiff, closer to 120s in other brands.

Also definitely a huge mistake making it 102 last, for a free ride boot it is a little wide. Touched on that in the review
10 months ago
3 9
profile picture
maaattt
Posts: 2757 - Karma: 33,589
muffMan.Also definitely a huge mistake making it 102 last, for a free ride boot it is a little wide. Touched on that in the review


Last isn't really an intended use/performance thing, it's a just a dimension.

102mm is still pretty wide tho, I'd expect a narrow last release to happen at sometime
10 months ago
4 2
profile picture
PartyBullshiit
Posts: 4713 - Karma: 20,093
muffMan.Eh looks a little better but still personally would wait. Also, I’ve heard of recons not being that stiff, closer to 120s in other brands.

Also definitely a huge mistake making it 102 last, for a free ride boot it is a little wide. Touched on that in the review


I think the 102 last with the initial boots is just so more people can have access to them. Not everyone has super narrow feet or super wide. 102 gives a wider group of people the option To try.
10 months ago
5 5
profile picture
tomPietrowski
Posts: 7291 - Karma: 18,703
The boots ski really pretty well i thought. I had the 120 and it skis flex wise like most consumer 120 boots. But their 26.5 is like most 27.5 so make sure you try them on for size. But I thought its a good boot which looks great and to be honest Im stoked to see new boots come to the market. Ski boots have have been pretty stale for a while.

**This post was edited on Jul 29th 2024 at 6:11:10pm
10 months ago
16 0
profile picture
PartyBullshiit
Posts: 4713 - Karma: 20,093
tomPietrowskiI think the biggest issue they will have is the length. The boots ski really pretty well. I had the 120 and it skis flex wise like most consumer 120 boots. But their 26.5 is like most 27.5 so make sure you try them on for size.


Do you know if they made any updates from the ones you tested to the ones being brought in now to the states?
10 months ago
1 1
profile picture
tomPietrowski
Posts: 7291 - Karma: 18,703
PartyBullshiitDo you know if they made any updates from the ones you tested to the ones being brought in now to the states?


No i don't believe so. Mine were just part of their early intro. Certainly shells wont have updated, liners may have possibly.
10 months ago
0 0
profile picture
muffMan.
Posts: 2893 - Karma: 27,618
Sound like a hater, if these would fit me I might try them out. But current boots are 100 last and with a liner packed out feels like a bucket. If they drop another one under 100 I’d be game.

im still skeptical but have read other good reviews.
10 months ago
1 0
profile picture
nCrow
Posts: 1319 - Karma: 9,228
bennwithtwons


These look so much better
10 months ago
3 1
profile picture
Non_State_Actor
Posts: 5093 - Karma: 18,644
PartyBullshiitI think the 102 last with the initial boots is just so more people can have access to them. Not everyone has super narrow feet or super wide. 102 gives a wider group of people the option To try.


102 isn't middle of the road though, it's bucket territory. You can always make a boot wider but not much you can do to make a wide boot narrower aside from packing them full of foam which is shit.
10 months ago
9 0
profile picture
PartyBullshiit
Posts: 4713 - Karma: 20,093
Non_State_Actor102 isn't middle of the road though, it's bucket territory. You can always make a boot wider but not much you can do to make a wide boot narrower aside from packing them full of foam which is shit.

I am not a boot fitter so I can’t say for certain but I feel like majority of the population population especially in the United States have a foot that is closer to 102 in the 98 range which would be more narrow
10 months ago
5 8
profile picture
Non_State_Actor
Posts: 5093 - Karma: 18,644
PartyBullshiitI am not a boot fitter so I can’t say for certain but I feel like majority of the population population especially in the United States have a foot that is closer to 102 in the 98 range which would be more narrow


I'm just bitter because all the new boots are buckets and my foot is extremely skinny. Low volume doesn't sell because average consumers want comfort straight out of the box.
10 months ago
14 0
profile picture
PartyBullshiit
Posts: 4713 - Karma: 20,093
Non_State_ActorI'm just bitter because all the new boots are buckets and my foot is extremely skinny. Low volume doesn't sell because average consumers want comfort straight out of the box.

If they’re successful im sure a LV version will follow.
10 months ago
5 2
profile picture
partyandBS
Posts: 5844 - Karma: 91,198
tomPietrowskiSki boots have have been pretty stale for a while.


homie is gonna shit a brick when he finds out they started putting boas on ski boots
10 months ago
23 0
profile picture
tomPietrowski
Posts: 7291 - Karma: 18,703
PartyBullshiitI am not a boot fitter so I can’t say for certain but I feel like majority of the population population especially in the United States have a foot that is closer to 102 in the 98 range which would be more narrow


This is absolutely correct. Of every ten boots sold 5 are wide, 4 are mid volume and only one is low volume. People really overestimate how many people actually need a low volume boot.
10 months ago
13 2
profile picture
Twig
Posts: 6469 - Karma: 62,085
partyandBShomie is gonna shit a brick when he finds out they started putting boas on ski boots

10/10 comment.

Also, I will eventually drop a review on these, I've been skiing them a bunch lately. I do actually NEED a low-volume boot, I have super skinny feet. For reference, I normally ride an OG shell Full Tilt mostly sized down a size (when I'm not testing) and even then I have to replace the liners pretty regularly when they get a bit packed.

In the Phaenoms I had to use foam to take up volume above my forefoot but the heel hold is really really good as stock so I don't think you'd need wide or high-volume feet to enjoy them. Obviously, they aren't going to fit someone with super skinny feet but as Tom said, that isn't a majority. They are definitely solid boots, the flex is pretty 'true' and they ski very well... light years better than the SPK and similar. I think you're going to see a lot of park/freeride skiers end up in these.
10 months ago
11 0
profile picture
PartyBullshiit
Posts: 4713 - Karma: 20,093
Twig10/10 comment.

Also, I will eventually drop a review on these, I've been skiing them a bunch lately. I do actually NEED a low-volume boot, I have super skinny feet. For reference, I normally ride an OG shell Full Tilt mostly sized down a size (when I'm not testing) and even then I have to replace the liners pretty regularly when they get a bit packed.

In the Phaenoms I had to use foam to take up volume above my forefoot but the heel hold is really really good as stock so I don't think you'd need wide or high-volume feet to enjoy them. Obviously, they aren't going to fit someone with super skinny feet but as Tom said, that isn't a majority. They are definitely solid boots, the flex is pretty 'true' and they ski very well... light years better than the SPK and similar. I think you're going to see a lot of park/freeride skiers end up in these.


I know it’s not it’s not a touring boot but how does the walk mech work for general range of motion?
10 months ago
0 0
profile picture
partyandBS
Posts: 5844 - Karma: 91,198
pretty limited sizes. no 30.5. maybe next year lol
10 months ago
0 1
profile picture
tesla.coupe
Posts: 16 - Karma: 593
rode the fs 120 from feb to april, coming from a 4 buckle lange sx 120 the flex is very comparable between the two. This boot is a "102" last i would say its closer to 100 the boot is a high volume shell with a high volume liner allowing for lots of adjustments by a boot fitter to be made. if you have large ankles/high instep/high arches or a medium wide foot this boot will feel tight but with proper fitting very comfortable. the instep adjustment on the liner is interesting but the tounge can come detached if you pull to hard getting them on .The liner also has a thick rubber shoe like sole on the bottom great for impact reduction on hard days. the power strap is wicked. feels like it rebounds when you load the front of the boots to pop and i no longer get a bad pinch point at the top of my boot with a somewhat less ridged strap that still holds solid.
10 months ago
1 0
profile picture
Brule.
Posts: 3988 - Karma: 6,701
We personally haven’t brought them into the shop I work at bc it’s way too new and we are still unsure of what void this boot fills in terms of fit, as well as whether or not they can handle 200 days of skiing like every other boot is supposed to be. I just remember passing on trying the boots bc I was so pissed about the Faction rep having me try shorter skis at an industry demo even though I’m a taller and heavier-set person.

And I know this is slightly off topic but not gonna lie, more and more brands jumping into the boot game is getting pretty overwhelming in the past 5-10 years. I was given a set of Kastle K110P’s to try out, but I still find myself scratching my head about how they determine the volume compared to the width of the forefoot. Also despite having the shell feel like a race boot, a 110 flex was just way too soft for me bc I found myself crunching and bellowing the shell whenever I flexed the boot.
10 months ago
0 0
profile picture
Twig
Posts: 6469 - Karma: 62,085
PartyBullshiitI know it’s not it’s not a touring boot but how does the walk mech work for general range of motion?


The walk mech seems a pretty standard one tbh. It does fine for some light touring but it's not a touring boot for long days. Off the top of my head/with no numbers on the actual range, I would say it feels pretty comparable to the Full Tilt/K2 Flex one.
10 months ago
4 0
profile picture
.Roockley.
Posts: 3872 - Karma: 4,146
Twig10/10 comment.

Also, I will eventually drop a review on these, I've been skiing them a bunch lately. I do actually NEED a low-volume boot, I have super skinny feet. For reference, I normally ride an OG shell Full Tilt mostly sized down a size (when I'm not testing) and even then I have to replace the liners pretty regularly when they get a bit packed.

In the Phaenoms I had to use foam to take up volume above my forefoot but the heel hold is really really good as stock so I don't think you'd need wide or high-volume feet to enjoy them. Obviously, they aren't going to fit someone with super skinny feet but as Tom said, that isn't a majority. They are definitely solid boots, the flex is pretty 'true' and they ski very well... light years better than the SPK and similar. I think you're going to see a lot of park/freeride skiers end up in these.

Skinny feet suck, I've been through so many liners in my full tilts haha
10 months ago
0 0
profile picture
nhs
Posts: 24 - Karma: 204
ROM for FR 01 is 58 degrees (reported on Evo) and K2 Diverge SC I believe is 60 with tongue out and 40ish leaving tongue on. Interested to see how the FR 01 compares to the K2 Diverge SC in terms of overall fit and on snow performance. Just excited to see new offerings in the ski boot market
10 months ago
3 0
profile picture
IcantSki42069
Posts: 36 - Karma: 195
tomPietrowskiThis is absolutely correct. Of every ten boots sold 5 are wide, 4 are mid volume and only one is low volume. People really overestimate how many people actually need a low volume boot.


Not trying to throw shade, For sure respect all of your experience. As well as knowing that this sales idea reigns true.

But to play devils advocate. I think that newer Bootfitters across NAM lack the technical training that the generation before them did. I think a large percentage of bootfitters these days bump unknowing people into the next volume up to expedite them to the cash register.

In reality the numbers should be closer to of 10, 3 should be 102+, 6 should be 100mm, and 1 should be sub 98mm.

North Americans traditionally have a wide forefoot but there are a lot of people out there who still should be in a mid volume heel pocket, and circling back to my point above. If more boot fitters had more technical experience they would be able to manipulate a 100mm shell to accommodate a 101-103mm forefoot with a mid-low volume HIP,Ankle,Calf.

Like I said not disagreeing with you but I think that coming to market with a 102 boat playing into the trend that sales folks are more inclined to throw people into something that is immediately comfortable out of the box (read Large) just perpetuates this issue.
10 months ago
3 0
profile picture
tomPietrowski
Posts: 7291 - Karma: 18,703
IcantSki42069Not trying to throw shade, For sure respect all of your experience. As well as knowing that this sales idea reigns true.

But to play devils advocate. I think that newer Bootfitters across NAM lack the technical training that the generation before them did. I think a large percentage of bootfitters these days bump unknowing people into the next volume up to expedite them to the cash register.

In reality the numbers should be closer to of 10, 3 should be 102+, 6 should be 100mm, and 1 should be sub 98mm.

North Americans traditionally have a wide forefoot but there are a lot of people out there who still should be in a mid volume heel pocket, and circling back to my point above. If more boot fitters had more technical experience they would be able to manipulate a 100mm shell to accommodate a 101-103mm forefoot with a mid-low volume HIP,Ankle,Calf.

Like I said not disagreeing with you but I think that coming to market with a 102 boat playing into the trend that sales folks are more inclined to throw people into something that is immediately comfortable out of the box (read Large) just perpetuates this issue.

I would generally agree with you and almost through in something similar to this in my original point.
One point to consider with these boots though is that even though they are 102mm in the forefoot they are by no means a high volume boot. They are a pretty weird mid volume fit. Far too many people confuse forefoot width or last and volume when they really are not connected. The heel is certainly mv in the pheanom and the instep is super low so I would not call these high volume at all.
10 months ago
3 0
profile picture
jakeordie
Posts: 665 - Karma: 3,281
tomPietrowskieven though they are 102mm in the forefoot they are by no means a high volume boot. They are a pretty weird mid volume fit. Far too many people confuse forefoot width or last and volume when they really are not connected. The heel is certainly mv in the pheanom and the instep is super low so I would not call these high volume at all.

Yeah, looking at mine next to SPKs the toes look wider while the heels & cuffs look way narrower
10 months ago
4 0
profile picture
fokobi
Posts: 1 - Karma: 18
honestly, I didn’t think Full Stack would manage to get these boots out, given their recent track record. I figured the whole project had been cancelled. After their launch in Europe last season, I expected to hear a lot more about them, but they’ve kept things pretty quiet.

Nice to see I was wrong—curious on how these perform
10 months ago
5 0
profile picture
hi_vis360
Posts: 5317 - Karma: 55,080
muffMan.What in the two buckle BS is this. Really doubt the 130 flex is comparable to any other brands 130. And 102 last is dumb for a “performance” boot.

dont know jack about these but initial thought is these ain’t it.


Am I supposed to feel embarrassed for having a wide foot with a high instep?? I need the bucket. And yes it’s a performance fit. I spent 3 hours at the bootfitter, why would I want to spend more time than that trying to cram my foot into a boot that is too narrow
9 months ago
4 0
profile picture
goatmaster
Posts: 374 - Karma: 2,433
Ive been riding the fs 120 the whole past season and love them. Ive been on the 27.5s and coming from full tilts they fit great, tho a bit wider than boots Ive had before. If you have any questions send me a pm!
9 months ago
3 0
profile picture
FruitBootPro
Posts: 3176 - Karma: 14,528
bennwithtwons


we used to be a real sport.
9 months ago
4 0
profile picture
J_Mendez2001
Posts: 91 - Karma: 565
tomPietrowskiI would generally agree with you and almost through in something similar to this in my original point.
One point to consider with these boots though is that even though they are 102mm in the forefoot they are by no means a high volume boot. They are a pretty weird mid volume fit. Far too many people confuse forefoot width or last and volume when they really are not connected. The heel is certainly mv in the pheanom and the instep is super low so I would not call these high volume at all.


As a boot fitter, the one I rode felt and looked like a bucket. Very hv everywhere, except the instep. I do have a pretty narrow ankle/heel and high instep so I feel the sliding due to less heel lock more than most people would just because my instep is high. But everyone I work with and know that have seen them says they look like a bucket in the ankle/heel area too.
I did think the performance of the shock absorbing piece to be pretty good, it made even the faction skis feel somewhat damp in mixed conditions. But I’m not a huge fan of the soft at first then load into a stiffer flex progressive style so I really didn’t like that, but see how people that want that bounce would like it, I just prefer a little more stability even if it means I have to try a bit harder to engage the edges, but I’m always trying out new shells so I think for me it’s more of a consistency thing whereas if I got used to the bounce it would be more predictable for me.
9 months ago
2 0
profile picture
tomPietrowski
Posts: 7291 - Karma: 18,703
J_Mendez2001As a boot fitter, the one I rode felt and looked like a bucket. Very hv everywhere, except the instep. I do have a pretty narrow ankle/heel and high instep so I feel the sliding due to less heel lock more than most people would just because my instep is high. But everyone I work with and know that have seen them says they look like a bucket in the ankle/heel area too.
I did think the performance of the shock absorbing piece to be pretty good, it made even the faction skis feel somewhat damp in mixed conditions. But I’m not a huge fan of the soft at first then load into a stiffer flex progressive style so I really didn’t like that, but see how people that want that bounce would like it, I just prefer a little more stability even if it means I have to try a bit harder to engage the edges, but I’m always trying out new shells so I think for me it’s more of a consistency thing whereas if I got used to the bounce it would be more predictable for me.

Bucket always makes me laugh as a term. I hear it all the time and usually with mv boots. I think a lot of people really do think unless a boot is truly lv that it is somehow huge. We test a lot of different boots and I would put these in line with most mv boots really. Perhaps a little wider in the forefoot but that’s it. If you think these are a bucket I’m guessing you need a really lv boot but if that’s the case don’t get caught up thinking anything which is big on you is a “bucket” when for most people it will probably be a pretty good fit if not actually a little tight. Lv feet are the exception not the norm.
9 months ago
5 2
profile picture
nCrow
Posts: 1319 - Karma: 9,228
Damn the initial lineup of skiers they've got is pretty stacked
8 months ago
2 0
profile picture
BigPurpleSkiSuit
Posts: 9614 - Karma: 71,523
PartyBullshiitIf they’re successful im sure a LV version will follow.


98 last is great,the real problem for me is always that i have room on top of my foot, and I feel I am not alone based on how many people I saw buying a Salomon S/Max and cranking it down all the way like me
8 months ago
1 0
profile picture
J_Mendez2001
Posts: 91 - Karma: 565
BigPurpleSkiSuit98 last is great,the real problem for me is always that i have room on top of my foot, and I feel I am not alone based on how many people I saw buying a Salomon S/Max and cranking it down all the way like me

Do you use a custom footbed in your ski boot? not that you always have to have one, but a lot of the boots are really designed to have a footbed put into them, making them have more height inside the boot than what is needed without one. Also, certain liners you can get will have thicker soles that you can use to take up space in the boot in a similar way the footbed does, the phaenom liner is an example of this, as well as surefoot x98 liners, ascent liners, some intuition liners, and i'm sure there are more I don't fully know about.
6 months ago
0 0
profile picture
Brule.
Posts: 3988 - Karma: 6,701
BigPurpleSkiSuit98 last is great,the real problem for me is always that i have room on top of my foot, and I feel I am not alone based on how many people I saw buying a Salomon S/Max and cranking it down all the way like me


Seems like your foot would really like either the newer S-Pro Alpha, Shift Alpha BOA, or the S-Pro Race* shell that Salomon offers.

*Don't be discouraged by the name S-Pro Race, though. It's a 96mm race boot that has a fully heat moldable shell in comparison to other boots with the same last, which I refer to as "beer-league race boots".
6 months ago
0 0
All times are Eastern (-4); Currently it's 4:02AM