A Snow and ski forum. SkiBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » SkiBanter forum » Skiing Newsgroups » Nordic Skiing
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Salomon 9 vs Carbon



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old December 30th 03, 07:13 PM
Griss
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Salomon 9 vs Carbon

OK, I'm in the market for new striding/classic boots. The boots I have were
top of the line about 10 years ago. I ski about 75 times per year, about
1/3 of that striding. I race only a few times per year and am middle of the
pack in the 50+ age category.

I understand and fully agree with the principle that fit is the most
important thing.

I currently am on the Salomon system so am looking at the 9 (yellow) and
carbon (grey). Other than $100, what is the difference? Obviously the
Carbon's are lighter, but how much? Are there any other characteristics
that are significant (e.g. ease of use, flex, overall support). As I said,
I do race a *little*, but mainly like a "performance" boot just because I
like the feel and function of good equipment. Since I ski a *lot* and
really only buy new equipment when I need it (every 10 years or so), I am
not adverse to spending the extra $100, but not if it is something that
really doesn't suit me. Comfort is important, for example, and it kind of
looks like the Carbon might be less comfortable and more difficult to use.

As a related question, I see that the current yellow and black 9's are
colored opposite to what they were before the carbon came out. (e.g.
whatever parts used to be yellow are now black and vice versa). Other than
that, I can't see any difference between the new 9s and the 9s of two years
ago - is there any difference other than switching the black and yellow in
the color?

Another boot that I've seen on the Salomon system is the Sportful. They look
like decent boots but are quite a bit cheaper. I can't do side by side
comparisons w/ Salomon, and can't find info on weights for any of these
boots. Any experience with these?

Finally, I might just take the plunge and switch systems. Are there any
relative advantages to the top of the line Alpina or Rossignol (the only
others available locally). Here, both of these boots are significantly
(~$50) cheaper than even the Salomon 9's - and of course closer to $150
cheaper than the Carbons. One observation I've made is that the Salomon
9's, while no longer the "top of the line" for Salomon - are still at the
quality and features level, or even above, of the "top of the line" in
Alpina and Rossy - is this true?

Thanks for your help.

Grizzy




Ads
  #2  
Old December 30th 03, 09:52 PM
Chris Cline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Salomon 9 vs Carbon

--0-1634447870-1072820565=:95490
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii

Hi Griss-
Simplest solution: try the boots on, and ideally, demo them on snow. There are weight and (maybe) some perfomance differences between the Sal. 9's and the carbons, but the biggest difference is FIT. I don't have intimate experience with the classic boots, but all I can say about the carbon skate boots is: "At last I have ski boots that fit my foot!" (after 5 years of padding and propping up my feet in the "Bumblebee" pilot boots) I may be making an assumption about the classic boots, but I think that there is a difference in the last between the Salomon 9 Classic and the Carbon Classics consistent with the difference in the skate boots.

As to whether to cast farther afield (e.g., Sportfuls, maybe ditching the whole SNS system and going to NNN, etc): try the boots on!! My possibly ill-formed impression is that the Salomon Carbons have a more similar fit to the Rossi boots, but there may still be differences.

Did I forget to urge you to try the boots on?
;- )
Chris Cline
SLC, UT

Griss wrote:
OK, I'm in the market for new striding/classic boots. The boots I have were
top of the line about 10 years ago. I ski about 75 times per year, about
1/3 of that striding. I race only a few times per year and am middle of the
pack in the 50+ age category.

I understand and fully agree with the principle that fit is the most
important thing.

I currently am on the Salomon system so am looking at the 9 (yellow) and
carbon (grey). Other than $100, what is the difference? Obviously the
Carbon's are lighter, but how much? Are there any other characteristics
that are significant (e.g. ease of use, flex, overall support). As I said,
I do race a *little*, but mainly like a "performance" boot just because I
like the feel and function of good equipment. Since I ski a *lot* and
really only buy new equipment when I need it (every 10 years or so), I am
not adverse to spending the extra $100, but not if it is something that
really doesn't suit me. Comfort is important, for example, and it kind of
looks like the Carbon might be less comfortable and more difficult to use.

As a related question, I see that the current yellow and black 9's are
colored opposite to what they were before the carbon came out. (e.g.
whatever parts used to be yellow are now black and vice versa). Other than
that, I can't see any difference between the new 9s and the 9s of two years
ago - is there any difference other than switching the black and yellow in
the color?

Another boot that I've seen on the Salomon system is the Sportful. They look
like decent boots but are quite a bit cheaper. I can't do side by side
comparisons w/ Salomon, and can't find info on weights for any of these
boots. Any experience with these?

Finally, I might just take the plunge and switch systems. Are there any
relative advantages to the top of the line Alpina or Rossignol (the only
others available locally). Here, both of these boots are significantly
(~$50) cheaper than even the Salomon 9's - and of course closer to $150
cheaper than the Carbons. One observation I've made is that the Salomon
9's, while no longer the "top of the line" for Salomon - are still at the
quality and features level, or even above, of the "top of the line" in
Alpina and Rossy - is this true?

Thanks for your help.

Grizzy









---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Find out what made the Top Yahoo! Searches of 2003
--0-1634447870-1072820565=:95490
Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii

DIVHi Griss-/DIV
DIVSimplest solution:  try the boots on, and ideally, demo them on snow.  There are weight and (maybe) some perfomance differences between the Sal. 9's and the carbons, but the biggest difference is FIT.  I don't have intimate experience with the classic boots, but all I can say about the carbon skate boots is: "At last I have ski boots that fit my foot!" (after 5 years of padding and propping up my feet in the "Bumblebee" pilot boots)  I may be making an assumption about the classic boots, but I think that there is a difference in the last between the Salomon 9 Classic and the Carbon Classics consistent with the difference in the skate boots./DIV
DIV /DIV
DIVAs to whether to cast farther afield (e.g., Sportfuls, maybe ditching the whole SNS system and going to NNN, etc):  try the boots on!!  My possibly ill-formed impression is that the Salomon Carbons have a more similar fit to the Rossi boots, but there may still be differences./DIV
DIV /DIV
DIVDid I forget to urge you to try the boots on? /DIV
DIV;- )/DIV
DIVChris Cline/DIV
DIVSLC, UTBRBRBIGriss >/I/B wrote:/DIV
BLOCKQUOTE class=replbq style="PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #1010ff 2px solid"OK, I'm in the market for new striding/classic boots. The boots I have wereBRtop of the line about 10 years ago. I ski about 75 times per year, aboutBR1/3 of that striding. I race only a few times per year and am middle of theBRpack in the 50+ age category.BRBRI understand and fully agree with the principle that fit is the mostBRimportant thing.BRBRI currently am on the Salomon system so am looking at the 9 (yellow) andBRcarbon (grey). Other than $100, what is the difference? Obviously theBRCarbon's are lighter, but how much? Are there any other characteristicsBRthat are significant (e.g. ease of use, flex, overall support). As I said,BRI do race a *little*, but mainly like a "performance" boot just because IBRlike the feel and function of good equipment. Since I ski a *lot* andBRreally only buy new equipment when I need it (every 10 years or so), I
amBRnot adverse to spending the extra $100, but not if it is something thatBRreally doesn't suit me. Comfort is important, for example, and it kind ofBRlooks like the Carbon might be less comfortable and more difficult to use.BRBRAs a related question, I see that the current yellow and black 9's areBRcolored opposite to what they were before the carbon came out. (e.g.BRwhatever parts used to be yellow are now black and vice versa). Other thanBRthat, I can't see any difference between the new 9s and the 9s of two yearsBRago - is there any difference other than switching the black and yellow inBRthe color?BRBRAnother boot that I've seen on the Salomon system is the Sportful. They lookBRlike decent boots but are quite a bit cheaper. I can't do side by sideBRcomparisons w/ Salomon, and can't find info on weights for any of theseBRboots. Any experience with these?BRBRFinally, I might just take the plunge and switch systems. Are there anyBRrela!
tive
advantages to the top of the line Alpina or Rossignol (the onlyBRothers available locally). Here, both of these boots are significantlyBR(~$50) cheaper than even the Salomon 9's - and of course closer to $150BRcheaper than the Carbons. One observation I've made is that the SalomonBR9's, while no longer the "top of the line" for Salomon - are still at theBRquality and features level, or even above, of the "top of the line" inBRAlpina and Rossy - is this true?BRBRThanks for your help.BRBRGrizzyBRBRBRBRBRBRBRBR /BLOCKQUOTEphr SIZE=1
Do you Yahoo!?br
a href="http://search.yahoo.com/top2003"Find out what made the Top Yahoo! Searches of 2003
/a
--0-1634447870-1072820565=:95490--




  #3  
Old December 30th 03, 11:08 PM
Gary Jacobson
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Salomon 9 vs Carbon

As a related question, I see that the current yellow and black 9's are
colored opposite to what they were before the carbon came out. (e.g.
whatever parts used to be yellow are now black and vice versa). Other than
that, I can't see any difference between the new 9s and the 9s of two

years
ago - is there any difference other than switching the black and yellow in
the color?



I just did a careful side by side comparison of my old yellow and the newest
blak ones. No discernable difference.

Another boot that I've seen on the Salomon system is the Sportful. They

look
like decent boots but are quite a bit cheaper. I can't do side by side
comparisons w/ Salomon, and can't find info on weights for any of these
boots. Any experience with these?


I have owned Artex, which are proto Sportful, and NNN. Excellent quality.
Would Sportful go back to NNN after switching to Solomon? I hope so.
Be careful that the sole of the Sportful is a true racing sole. They have
some versions with nice uppers but heavy rubberlike soles.


Finally, I might just take the plunge and switch systems. Are there any
relative advantages to the top of the line Alpina or Rossignol (the only
others available locally).


I really object to the complex and costly Pilot system, and am happy with
thr NNN and Rossi skate set up. Rossi is more a minimal boot than the
Alpina. I believe that most skate boots are way overbuilt. I think that
classic boots may be underbuilt. Also, I want to comment that maybe the more
flexible carbon sole of the Solomon high end classic boot is not best for
some people. I benefit from a stiffer sole, and am forever searching for a
classic or minimal combi boot with a stiff sole. Anyone with arthritic toes,
or maybe anyone who skis a lot, would benefit from stiffness in the sole as
it take the load off the toe joints. I can understand for racing that a
flexible sole in the toe area that is torsionally stiff is ideal.

Gary Jacobson
Rosendale, NY

Thanks for your help.

Grizzy






  #4  
Old December 31st 03, 06:19 PM
Griss
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Salomon 9 vs Carbon

Thanks for your help.

chanting mantra ... fit, fit, fit.... comfort, comfort, comfort, off to
try on a couple more boots.

Grissy


  #5  
Old January 2nd 04, 09:30 AM
Ira Edwards
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Salomon 9 vs Carbon

Also remember that the Rossignol boots are lighter than the Carbon boots,
cost over $100 less and have thermo Adjustable fit. this allows them to
break in to the shape of your foot (have a shop tech mold them for you, they
can be remolded if you choose not to buy them...) and gives you great warmth
through bertter circulation. due to the molding, they fit a fairly broad
rang of feet, but fit is key and definitely go withthe boots that fit YOUR
feet, not what the masses say are the best boot...

-Ira
Anchorage, AK


"Griss" wrote in message
...
Thanks for your help.

chanting mantra ... fit, fit, fit.... comfort, comfort, comfort, off to
try on a couple more boots.

Grissy




  #6  
Old January 5th 04, 07:34 PM
Griss
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Salomon 9 vs Carbon (vs Alpina vs Sportful)

"Ira Edwards" wrote in message
...
Also remember that the Rossignol boots are lighter than the Carbon boots,
cost over $100 less and have thermo Adjustable fit. this allows them to
break in to the shape of your foot (have a shop tech mold them for you,

they
can be remolded if you choose not to buy them...) and gives you great

warmth
through bertter circulation. due to the molding, they fit a fairly broad
rang of feet, but fit is key and definitely go withthe boots that fit YOUR
feet, not what the masses say are the best boot...


Thanks Ira. You're right on. I looked at the Rossys that a friend has,
talked to him about them, and was very interested. But there's none
available locally right now. I was actually quite interested, but not
interested enough to go the mail order route.

Warning: Long analysis and personal experience follows, for those that are
interested. I'd also like to know if anyone else is this OBSESSIVE about
fitting boots. I always go through this and really can't help myself.

I'm currently in the Salomon system in my striding gear, but was willing to
change to NNN if necessary for best fit. My main goal is to improve the
overall stability and support, and especially downhill control. I'm
replacing what was more or less, near-top of the line, IIRC, 10+ years ago
when they were just a low cut boot - no ankle collar, relatively flexible
sole. I want a "more or less" top of the line boot and can afford it. I
decided that, while cost is important, fit is more important and if it cost
me an extra $100 to get that, so be it. I ski several times a week for 5
months a year so it's easy to spend the extra money. I'm just a guy who
skis a lot, has pretty good classical technique, races enough (mid pack at
best) to motivate me, and really enjoys high performance gear. Gear lasts
me forever. My current boots are still in excellent shape and have been used
a lot. All of the following is based on actually bringing a pair of each
boot home and wearing them for a couple of hours a couple of times (morning
and evening). I was able to do this because I paid for them up front with
the understanding I could do this inside the house.

It boiled down to four boots / three brands available locally (in top end
striding boots): Solomon (both Racing 9 and Carbon), Alpina CL (NNN), and
Sportful (Model ?? - top of the line competition model - SNS profil sole).

Local retail costs we

Alpina and Sportful ~$180
Salomon 9 ~$230
Salomon Carbon ~$330.

Sportful: I looked at the top of the line racing model. It looked like an
excellent quality boot with excellent features. Has an adjustable heel
snugger. Has a fairly stiff sole, but I thought not as stiff as the
Yellow/Black Salomons, but stiffer than the Alpinas (they were in different
stores, so I'm not real sure about that). Has a substantial velcro ankle
cuff. I looked real hard at it and tried on the available pair that was
close to my size. Unfortunately, the 43 was a little too big/sloppy and
there was not a 42 available to try. I suspect it would have been too
small. I probably could have made the 43 work with different insoles,
really snugging down the heel, etc. but didn't have to. I do strongly
recommend looking at this boot if anyone is in the market for a SNS boot. I
really think it's a "sleeper".

Solomon: The yellow/black (Racing 9) and the grey (Carbon) are definitely
built on different lasts and have different characteristics. Both are
excellent boots with excellent features. Both have adjustable heel snugger.
The 9 has a fairly substantial velcro ankle wrap. The Carbon has a slip-in
lycra-looking ankle cuff. The Carbon seems to be narrower in a given size.
The 9's fit me in a 42 2/3, but felt a little sloppy in the next size up, 43
1/3 (even using heel strap). The Carbons were too small in the 42 2/3, but
felt good in the 43 1/3. The 9's that fit best gave me an uncomfortable
spot on the bottom of the ball of my left (larger) foot when flexing. The
Carbons that fit best felt much more comfortable in that area. The arch and
heel on both felt fine. The Carbon has a much more flexible sole. The 9
has the stiffest sole of any that I tried. I thought that the 9 felt like
it had the best ankle support of any I tried, but that could be an illusion
because of the way the ankle cuff is built. Of course, the Carbon is
"lighter" and costs $100 more.

In fact, I purposefully AVOIDED trying the Carbon at first because I'm not a
dedicated racer and didn't want to spend the extra $100. To be honest,
another reason I avoided the Carbon is that, although I ski a lot and am a
pretty good with my classical technique, I'm not a super strong skier and
really would feel sheepish about traipsing around on leading edge boots, and
being passed by many, many people on less expensive and much older gear.

Alpina: This is also an excellent boot. The sole is very flexible. The
arch seemed a little higher. The toe area of the boot seems a bit more
roomy and the arch seemed a little higher than the Salomon. I have a fairly
flat foot, so this isn't necessarily good. This boot, in walking around in
it, seemed lighter and more "slipper-like" than the Sportful and Salomon 9.
The quality is top notch, although I didn't like the ankle cuff design as
well as the Salomon and Sportful (Alpina: zipper - something to fail
eventually; others: velcro - which won't fail and would be easy to replace
if it did). It also didn't have an adjustable heel snugger, but that didn't
seem to be a problem. The 43 fit me well, the 42 was too small.

At this point, I hadn't tried the Carbon on and it came down to the Salomon
9 and the Alpina. Both fit OK, but the Alpina seemed more comfortable over
all, after obsessing over it for a few days. The Alpina's arch was a little
high, but the Salomon felt uncomfortable on the ball of the left foot when
flexing. Probably both problems weren't insurmountable, but the ball of the
foot thing bugged me much more and had the potential of actually hurting. I
came THIS CLOSE to buying the Alpina and changing my two pair of striding
skis over to NNN.

Then two things happened.

1. I went out for a long ski on my old gear with a good friend, and far
better skier. He reminded me that for the amount I ski, I was foolish to
avoid trying the Carbon simply because it costs more. He agreed that the
weight and other possible performance features were probably nothing to pay
for (for me), since all options would be a satisfactory improvement. But,
he (and others on this newsgroup) reminded me that the Carbon did in fact
have significant structural differences than the 9 - mostly in the last and
the sole flex, and therefore it is not simply a racier version of the 9. He
also reminded me of many FAR less important things I've spent $100+ on.
And, AS WE ALL KNOW (but need to continually remind ourselves), the BOOT IS
THE MOST IMPORTANT THING, BY FAR.

2. Although the lower cost of the Alpina was NOT an important
consideration, I also realized (DUH!) that the $150 I'd "save" by going with
the Alpina over the Carbon, would be eaten up by replacing two pair of SNS
bindings with two pair of NNN, local prices. It would actually cost me $20+
more to go with the cheaper boot. I repeat, the cost was not the factor in
the Alpina, it was the most comfortable to that point. But remember, cost
WAS a factor in avoiding the Carbon to that point.

So I tried on the Carbon, as above, and felt it gave me a little better fit
than the Alpina. The arch felt a little better. The sole felt much more
flexible than the Salomon 9 (more like the Alpina) and didn't give me the
uncomfortable spot. It seems pretty obvious to me that the Alpina would be
warmer, but that's not a consideration to me, even though I live in a very
cold climate. I bought them, and saved some money to boot in a round about
way!

I know I'll be a little sheepish about skiing around on these "leading edge
racing boots". Believe me, I'm REALLY NOT thinking I'm buying free speed. B
ut they are very comfortable and I know without a doubt I'll get my use and
enjoyment out of them once I get over this "stigma". I won't look
ridiculous on these things, technique-wise, just an old slow guy.

I skied an easy 15 km tour on the new boots the other day and they passed
the test. I would say they are much better in all respects over my old "low
cuts", but are HUGELY (!!!) better in down hill control when cornering.
Like I said, I'm not a really strong skier, but am relatively good at
downhill, and love going fast and in control down hill and around corners.
I don't know if it's the better ankle support (after all, it's not a whole
lot of support given by a lycra cuff), or better torsional rigidity of the
sole - I suspect that's mostly it. I also suspect I'd have found the same
thing with any of the other options I looked at.

As for warmth, yes, they definitely LOOK like they won't be as warm as the
others I tried on. However, my old boots are VERY minimal and I truly think
these new ones will be as warm. From the ankle cuff alone, they will
probably be in fact warmer. And I always have the overboots.

Anyway, there ya go.

Did I ask, is anyone as obsessive about boot fit as I am??

Grissy


  #7  
Old January 5th 04, 08:56 PM
Chris Cline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Salomon 9 vs Carbon (vs Alpina vs Sportful)

--0-951611698-1073335988=:29754
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii

Thanks for the review on the boots, Griss. Good, firsthand comparative information is something that not all of us can afford to get, so it's helpful to get it from someone who has the ability and is willing to take the time to write it down.

Just in case you're still feeling insecure about skiing on equipment that's "too good for you", here are two other things to add to your rationalization mill: 1) If you're only buying boots every 10 years, think about the cost on an annualized basis. Also, 2) realize that you will only be skiing around on "leading edge" equipment for maybe 10 or 20 percent of the time that you will be skiing on the boots.

Besides, if people are so concerned with whether or not someone has "the cred" to ski on particular equipment, they need to spend time thinking about more important things!

Get what fits, what's comfortable, and what makes you happy!

Chris C.
SLC, UT

Griss wrote:
"Ira Edwards" wrote in message
...
Also remember that the Rossignol boots are lighter than the Carbon boots,
cost over $100 less and have thermo Adjustable fit. this allows them to
break in to the shape of your foot (have a shop tech mold them for you,

they
can be remolded if you choose not to buy them...) and gives you great

warmth
through bertter circulation. due to the molding, they fit a fairly broad
rang of feet, but fit is key and definitely go withthe boots that fit YOUR
feet, not what the masses say are the best boot...


Thanks Ira. You're right on. I looked at the Rossys that a friend has,
talked to him about them, and was very interested. But there's none
available locally right now. I was actually quite interested, but not
interested enough to go the mail order route.

Warning: Long analysis and personal experience follows, for those that are
interested. I'd also like to know if anyone else is this OBSESSIVE about
fitting boots. I always go through this and really can't help myself.

I'm currently in the Salomon system in my striding gear, but was willing to
change to NNN if necessary for best fit. My main goal is to improve the
overall stability and support, and especially downhill control. I'm
replacing what was more or less, near-top of the line, IIRC, 10+ years ago
when they were just a low cut boot - no ankle collar, relatively flexible
sole. I want a "more or less" top of the line boot and can afford it. I
decided that, while cost is important, fit is more important and if it cost
me an extra $100 to get that, so be it. I ski several times a week for 5
months a year so it's easy to spend the extra money. I'm just a guy who
skis a lot, has pretty good classical technique, races enough (mid pack at
best) to motivate me, and really enjoys high performance gear. Gear lasts
me forever. My current boots are still in excellent shape and have been used
a lot. All of the following is based on actually bringing a pair of each
boot home and wearing them for a couple of hours a couple of times (morning
and evening). I was able to do this because I paid for them up front with
the understanding I could do this inside the house.

It boiled down to four boots / three brands available locally (in top end
striding boots): Solomon (both Racing 9 and Carbon), Alpina CL (NNN), and
Sportful (Model ?? - top of the line competition model - SNS profil sole).

Local retail costs we

Alpina and Sportful ~$180
Salomon 9 ~$230
Salomon Carbon ~$330.

Sportful: I looked at the top of the line racing model. It looked like an
excellent quality boot with excellent features. Has an adjustable heel
snugger. Has a fairly stiff sole, but I thought not as stiff as the
Yellow/Black Salomons, but stiffer than the Alpinas (they were in different
stores, so I'm not real sure about that). Has a substantial velcro ankle
cuff. I looked real hard at it and tried on the available pair that was
close to my size. Unfortunately, the 43 was a little too big/sloppy and
there was not a 42 available to try. I suspect it would have been too
small. I probably could have made the 43 work with different insoles,
really snugging down the heel, etc. but didn't have to. I do strongly
recommend looking at this boot if anyone is in the market for a SNS boot. I
really think it's a "sleeper".

Solomon: The yellow/black (Racing 9) and the grey (Carbon) are definitely
built on different lasts and have different characteristics. Both are
excellent boots with excellent features. Both have adjustable heel snugger.
The 9 has a fairly substantial velcro ankle wrap. The Carbon has a slip-in
lycra-looking ankle cuff. The Carbon seems to be narrower in a given size.
The 9's fit me in a 42 2/3, but felt a little sloppy in the next size up, 43
1/3 (even using heel strap). The Carbons were too small in the 42 2/3, but
felt good in the 43 1/3. The 9's that fit best gave me an uncomfortable
spot on the bottom of the ball of my left (larger) foot when flexing. The
Carbons that fit best felt much more comfortable in that area. The arch and
heel on both felt fine. The Carbon has a much more flexible sole. The 9
has the stiffest sole of any that I tried. I thought that the 9 felt like
it had the best ankle support of any I tried, but that could be an illusion
because of the way the ankle cuff is built. Of course, the Carbon is
"lighter" and costs $100 more.

In fact, I purposefully AVOIDED trying the Carbon at first because I'm not a
dedicated racer and didn't want to spend the extra $100. To be honest,
another reason I avoided the Carbon is that, although I ski a lot and am a
pretty good with my classical technique, I'm not a super strong skier and
really would feel sheepish about traipsing around on leading edge boots, and
being passed by many, many people on less expensive and much older gear.

Alpina: This is also an excellent boot. The sole is very flexible. The
arch seemed a little higher. The toe area of the boot seems a bit more
roomy and the arch seemed a little higher than the Salomon. I have a fairly
flat foot, so this isn't necessarily good. This boot, in walking around in
it, seemed lighter and more "slipper-like" than the Sportful and Salomon 9.
The quality is top notch, although I didn't like the ankle cuff design as
well as the Salomon and Sportful (Alpina: zipper - something to fail
eventually; others: velcro - which won't fail and would be easy to replace
if it did). It also didn't have an adjustable heel snugger, but that didn't
seem to be a problem. The 43 fit me well, the 42 was too small.

At this point, I hadn't tried the Carbon on and it came down to the Salomon
9 and the Alpina. Both fit OK, but the Alpina seemed more comfortable over
all, after obsessing over it for a few days. The Alpina's arch was a little
high, but the Salomon felt uncomfortable on the ball of the left foot when
flexing. Probably both problems weren't insurmountable, but the ball of the
foot thing bugged me much more and had the potential of actually hurting. I
came THIS CLOSE to buying the Alpina and changing my two pair of striding
skis over to NNN.

Then two things happened.

1. I went out for a long ski on my old gear with a good friend, and far
better skier. He reminded me that for the amount I ski, I was foolish to
avoid trying the Carbon simply because it costs more. He agreed that the
weight and other possible performance features were probably nothing to pay
for (for me), since all options would be a satisfactory improvement. But,
he (and others on this newsgroup) reminded me that the Carbon did in fact
have significant structural differences than the 9 - mostly in the last and
the sole flex, and therefore it is not simply a racier version of the 9. He
also reminded me of many FAR less important things I've spent $100+ on.
And, AS WE ALL KNOW (but need to continually remind ourselves), the BOOT IS
THE MOST IMPORTANT THING, BY FAR.

2. Although the lower cost of the Alpina was NOT an important
consideration, I also realized (DUH!) that the $150 I'd "save" by going with
the Alpina over the Carbon, would be eaten up by replacing two pair of SNS
bindings with two pair of NNN, local prices. It would actually cost me $20+
more to go with the cheaper boot. I repeat, the cost was not the factor in
the Alpina, it was the most comfortable to that point. But remember, cost
WAS a factor in avoiding the Carbon to that point.

So I tried on the Carbon, as above, and felt it gave me a little better fit
than the Alpina. The arch felt a little better. The sole felt much more
flexible than the Salomon 9 (more like the Alpina) and didn't give me the
uncomfortable spot. It seems pretty obvious to me that the Alpina would be
warmer, but that's not a consideration to me, even though I live in a very
cold climate. I bought them, and saved some money to boot in a round about
way!

I know I'll be a little sheepish about skiing around on these "leading edge
racing boots". Believe me, I'm REALLY NOT thinking I'm buying free speed. B
ut they are very comfortable and I know without a doubt I'll get my use and
enjoyment out of them once I get over this "stigma". I won't look
ridiculous on these things, technique-wise, just an old slow guy.

I skied an easy 15 km tour on the new boots the other day and they passed
the test. I would say they are much better in all respects over my old "low
cuts", but are HUGELY (!!!) better in down hill control when cornering.
Like I said, I'm not a really strong skier, but am relatively good at
downhill, and love going fast and in control down hill and around corners.
I don't know if it's the better ankle support (after all, it's not a whole
lot of support given by a lycra cuff), or better torsional rigidity of the
sole - I suspect that's mostly it. I also suspect I'd have found the same
thing with any of the other options I looked at.

As for warmth, yes, they definitely LOOK like they won't be as warm as the
others I tried on. However, my old boots are VERY minimal and I truly think
these new ones will be as warm. From the ankle cuff alone, they will
probably be in fact warmer. And I always have the overboots.

Anyway, there ya go.

Did I ask, is anyone as obsessive about boot fit as I am??

Grissy







---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Find out what made the Top Yahoo! Searches of 2003
--0-951611698-1073335988=:29754
Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii

DIVThanks for the review on the boots, Griss.  Good, firsthand comparative information is something that not all of us can afford to get, so it's helpful to get it from someone who has the ability and is willing to take the time to write it down./DIV
DIV /DIV
DIVJust in case you're stil feeling insecure about skiing on equipment that's "too good for you", here are two other things to add to your rationalization mill:  1) If you're only buying boots every 10 years, think about the cost on an annualized basis.  Also, 2) realize that you will only be skiing around on "leading edge" equipment for maybe 10 or 20 percent of the time that you will be skiing on the boots.  /DIV
DIV /DIV
DIVBesides, if people are so concerned with whether or not someone has "the cred" to ski on particular equipment, they need to spend time thinking about more important things!/DIV
DIV /DIV
DIVGet what fits, what's comfortable, and what makes you happy!/DIV
DIV /DIV
DIVChris C./DIV
DIVSLC, UTBRBRBIGriss >/I/B wrote:/DIV
BLOCKQUOTE class=replbq style="PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #1010ff 2px solid""Ira Edwards" wrote in . ..BR> Also remember that the Rossignol boots are lighter than the Carbon boots,BR> cost over $100 less and have thermo Adjustable fit. this allows them toBR> break in to the shape of your foot (have a shop tech mold them for you,BRtheyBR> can be remolded if you choose not to buy them...) and gives you greatBRwarmthBR> through bertter circulation. due to the molding, they fit a fairly broadBR> rang of feet, but fit is key and definitely go withthe boots that fit YOURBR> feet, not what the masses say are the best boot...BRBRThanks Ira. You're right on. I looked at the Rossys that a friend has,BRtalked to him about them, and was very interested. But there's noneBRavailable locally right now. I was actually quite interested, but notBRinter!
ested
enough to go the mail order route.BRBRWarning: Long analysis and personal experience follows, for those that areBRinterested. I'd also like to know if anyone else is this OBSESSIVE aboutBRfitting boots. I always go through this and really can't help myself.BRBRI'm currently in the Salomon system in my striding gear, but was willing toBRchange to NNN if necessary for best fit. My main goal is to improve theBRoverall stability and support, and especially downhill control. I'mBRreplacing what was more or less, near-top of the line, IIRC, 10+ years agoBRwhen they were just a low cut boot - no ankle collar, relatively flexibleBRsole. I want a "more or less" top of the line boot and can afford it. IBRdecided that, while cost is important, fit is more important and if it costBRme an extra $100 to get that, so be it. I ski several times a week for >5BRmonths a year so it's easy to spend the extra money. I'm just a guy whoBRskis a lot, has pretty good
classical technique, races enough (mid pack atBRbest) to motivate me, and really enjoys high performance gear. Gear lastsBRme forever. My current boots are still in excellent shape and have been usedBRa lot. All of the following is based on actually bringing a pair of eachBRboot home and wearing them for a couple of hours a couple of times (morningBRand evening). I was able to do this because I paid for them up front withBRthe understanding I could do this inside the house.BRBRIt boiled down to four boots / three brands available locally (in top endBRstriding boots): Solomon (both Racing 9 and Carbon), Alpina CL (NNN), andBRSportful (Model ?? - top of the line competition model - SNS profil sole).BRBRLocal retail costs weBRBRAlpina and Sportful ~$180BRSalomon 9 ~$230BRSalomon Carbon ~$330.BRBRSportful: I looked at the top of the line racing model. It looked like anBRexcellent quality boot with excellent features. Has an adjustable
heelBRsnugger. Has a fairly stiff sole, but I thought not as stiff as theBRYellow/Black Salomons, but stiffer than the Alpinas (they were in differentBRstores, so I'm not real sure about that). Has a substantial velcro ankleBRcuff. I looked real hard at it and tried on the available pair that wasBRclose to my size. Unfortunately, the 43 was a little too big/sloppy andBRthere was not a 42 available to try. I suspect it would have been tooBRsmall. I probably could have made the 43 work with different insoles,BRreally snugging down the heel, etc. but didn't have to. I do stronglyBRrecommend looking at this boot if anyone is in the market for a SNS boot. IBRreally think it's a "sleeper".BRBRSolomon: The yellow/black (Racing 9) and the grey (Carbon) are definitelyBRbuilt on different lasts and have different characteristics. Both areBRexcellent boots with excellent features. Both have adjustable heel snugger.BRThe 9 has a fairly substantial velcro a!
nkle
wrap. The Carbon has a slip-inBRlycra-looking ankle cuff. The Carbon seems to be narrower in a given size.BRThe 9's fit me in a 42 2/3, but felt a little sloppy in the next size up, 43BR1/3 (even using heel strap). The Carbons were too small in the 42 2/3, butBRfelt good in the 43 1/3. The 9's that fit best gave me an uncomfortableBRspot on the bottom of the ball of my left (larger) foot when flexing. TheBRCarbons that fit best felt much more comfortable in that area. The arch andBRheel on both felt fine. The Carbon has a much more flexible sole. The 9BRhas the stiffest sole of any that I tried. I thought that the 9 felt likeBRit had the best ankle support of any I tried, but that could be an illusionBRbecause of the way the ankle cuff is built. Of course, the Carbon isBR"lighter" and costs $100 more.BRBRIn fact, I purposefully AVOIDED trying the Carbon at first because I'm not aBRdedicated racer and didn't want to spend the extra $100. To be
honest,BRanother reason I avoided the Carbon is that, although I ski a lot and am aBRpretty good with my classical technique, I'm not a super strong skier andBRreally would feel sheepish about traipsing around on leading edge boots, andBRbeing passed by many, many people on less expensive and much older gear.BRBRAlpina: This is also an excellent boot. The sole is very flexible. TheBRarch seemed a little higher. The toe area of the boot seems a bit moreBRroomy and the arch seemed a little higher than the Salomon. I have a fairlyBRflat foot, so this isn't necessarily good. This boot, in walking around inBRit, seemed lighter and more "slipper-like" than the Sportful and Salomon 9.BRThe quality is top notch, although I didn't like the ankle cuff design asBRwell as the Salomon and Sportful (Alpina: zipper - something to failBReventually; others: velcro - which won't fail and would be easy to replaceBRif it did). It also didn't have an adjustable heel !
snugger,
but that didn'tBRseem to be a problem. The 43 fit me well, the 42 was too small.BRBRAt this point, I hadn't tried the Carbon on and it came down to the SalomonBR9 and the Alpina. Both fit OK, but the Alpina seemed more comfortable overBRall, after obsessing over it for a few days. The Alpina's arch was a littleBRhigh, but the Salomon felt uncomfortable on the ball of the left foot whenBRflexing. Probably both problems weren't insurmountable, but the ball of theBRfoot thing bugged me much more and had the potential of actually hurting. IBRcame THIS CLOSE to buying the Alpina and changing my two pair of stridingBRskis over to NNN.BRBRThen two things happened.BRBR1. I went out for a long ski on my old gear with a good friend, and farBRbetter skier. He reminded me that for the amount I ski, I was foolish toBRavoid trying the Carbon simply because it costs more. He agreed that theBRweight and other possible performance features were probably not!
hing to
payBRfor (for me), since all options would be a satisfactory improvement. But,BRhe (and others on this newsgroup) reminded me that the Carbon did in factBRhave significant structural differences than the 9 - mostly in the last andBRthe sole flex, and therefore it is not simply a racier version of the 9. HeBRalso reminded me of many FAR less important things I've spent $100+ on.BRAnd, AS WE ALL KNOW (but need to continually remind ourselves), the BOOT ISBRTHE MOST IMPORTANT THING, BY FAR.BRBR2. Although the lower cost of the Alpina was NOT an importantBRconsideration, I also realized (DUH!) that the $150 I'd "save" by going withBRthe Alpina over the Carbon, would be eaten up by replacing two pair of SNSBRbindings with two pair of NNN, local prices. It would actually cost me $20+BRmore to go with the cheaper boot. I repeat, the cost was not the factor inBRthe Alpina, it was the most comfortable to that point. But remember, costBRWAS a factor in a!
voiding
the Carbon to that point.BRBRSo I tried on the Carbon, as above, and felt it gave me a little better fitBRthan the Alpina. The arch felt a little better. The sole felt much moreBRflexible than the Salomon 9 (more like the Alpina) and didn't give me theBRuncomfortable spot. It seems pretty obvious to me that the Alpina would beBRwarmer, but that's not a consideration to me, even though I live in a veryBRcold climate. I bought them, and saved some money to boot in a round aboutBRway!BRBRI know I'll be a little sheepish about skiing around on these "leading edgeBRracing boots". Believe me, I'm REALLY NOT thinking I'm buying free speed. BBRut they are very comfortable and I know without a doubt I'll get my use andBRenjoyment out of them once I get over this "stigma". I won't lookBRridiculous on these things, technique-wise, just an old slow guy.BRBRI skied an easy 15 km tour on the new boots the other day and they passedBRthe test. I would say !
they are
much better in all respects over my old "lowBRcuts", but are HUGELY (!!!) better in down hill control when cornering.BRLike I said, I'm not a really strong skier, but am relatively good atBRdownhill, and love going fast and in control down hill and around corners.BRI don't know if it's the better ankle support (after all, it's not a wholeBRlot of support given by a lycra cuff), or better torsional rigidity of theBRsole - I suspect that's mostly it. I also suspect I'd have found the sameBRthing with any of the other options I looked at.BRBRAs for warmth, yes, they definitely LOOK like they won't be as warm as theBRothers I tried on. However, my old boots are VERY minimal and I truly thinkBRthese new ones will be as warm. From the ankle cuff alone, they willBRprobably be in fact warmer. And I always have the overboots.BRBRAnyway, there ya go.BRBRDid I ask, is anyone as obsessive about boot fit as I
am??BRBRGrissyBRBRBRBRBRBR/BLOCKQUOTEphr SIZE=1
Do you Yahoo!?br
a href="http://search.yahoo.com/top2003"Find out what made the Top Yahoo! Searches of 2003
/a
--0-951611698-1073335988=:29754--




  #8  
Old January 5th 04, 09:45 PM
Griss
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Salomon 9 vs Carbon (vs Alpina vs Sportful)

"Chris Cline" wrote in message
o.com...
--0-951611698-1073335988=:29754
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii

Thanks for the review on the boots, Griss. Good, firsthand comparative

information is something that not all of us can afford to get, so it's
helpful to get it from someone who has the ability and is willing to take
the time to write it down.

Having read this board for a while, I kind of thought there would be a few
who would enjoy reading my saga.

Just in case you're still feeling insecure about skiing on equipment

that's "too good for you", here are two other things to add to your
rationalization mill: 1) If you're only buying boots every 10 years, think
about the cost on an annualized basis. Also, 2) realize that you will only
be skiing around on "leading edge" equipment for maybe 10 or 20 percent of
the time that you will be skiing on the boots.

The amortization thing I've got down cold, no worries.

I got some Salomon pilot skate boots, along with top of the line skate skis,
as a gift about 4-5 years ago. At the time, they were fairly new and
definitely "leading edge" (of course, that's debatable, but it was early in
the Pilot life cycle). Since they were a gift, I was happy to have them, of
course. I really was a poor skate skier, and was a little sheepish about
having such good gear. But it was immediately clear that they really did
work much better than my old generation skate boots. But it was the same
"not worthy" situation.... but it only bothered me for about 2 days 8-).
They worked better, felt better and helped me ski better - and inspired me
to ski about 10X more than previous and take some lessons - and I quickly
improved to nearly "worthy" by finishing a 50 k race (3:45) that year. I
also found, that there were many who were like me - older, decent skiers,
not elite racers, but ski a lot and enjoyed the top end equipment (whatever
brand of boot, not to mention skis and POLES). So I was no longer alone or
so conspicuous! But I do NOT wear lycra.

Besides, if people are so concerned with whether or not someone has "the

cred" to ski on particular equipment, they need to spend time thinking about
more important things!

And how.

Get what fits, what's comfortable, and what makes you happy!

Chris C.
SLC, UT


Thanks for the comments, Chris.

Grissy


  #9  
Old January 6th 04, 03:02 PM
Jon
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Salomon 9 vs Carbon (vs Alpina vs Sportful)

Thanks,

As someone who loves the carbon skate boots and am considering the
striding boots, this was extremely helpful.

As a point of reference, did you find the sizing to be the same
between the striding and skate models to be the same?
  #10  
Old January 6th 04, 05:25 PM
Griss
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Salomon 9 vs Carbon (vs Alpina vs Sportful)

"Jon" wrote in message
om...
Thanks,

As someone who loves the carbon skate boots and am considering the
striding boots, this was extremely helpful.

As a point of reference, did you find the sizing to be the same
between the striding and skate models to be the same?


I didn't try on the Carbon skate boots. The only point of reference I have
is between my new Carbon classics and my 4 year old yellow/black Pilot
skates which I believe are a little wider for a given size than the Carbons.
But I wouldn't make any assumptions comparing these Pilot skates and current
Carbon skates.

If you're buying locally, you'll find out soon enough when you try them on.
If you're buying mail order, I'll bet the true specialty shops will have
folks who can answer your question. I found this to be true during my
search - if I'd specifically ask for someone who was familiar with the boots
in question.

Grissy



 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Replacement laces for Salomon boots Dean Snowboarding 6 February 29th 04 06:19 AM
salomon bindings / burton boards Joe Snowboarding 6 December 18th 03 10:48 PM
BINDINGS: Salomon SPX carbon, Drake Podium, Burton C-16 dhl28 Snowboarding 24 November 21st 03 05:44 PM
Salomon Racing 9 Skate boot fit. jacob hartsoch Nordic Skiing 1 November 19th 03 06:29 PM
Salomon rollerskis? Gene Goldenfeld Nordic Skiing 1 August 24th 03 02:52 PM


All times are GMT. The time now is 09:03 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 SkiBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.