Boots Between AT and Mountaineering

I'm wondering if there are boots made that I could use with Silvretta
404 bindings that are not as beefy as AT boots but ski better than
regualr mountaineering boots. I have a pair of waxless (Fisher
Outtabounds) skis mounted with Silvretta 404s that I use for
approaching ice climbs and casual touring. I also have a full blown
AT rig. I'd like to have the option of running the waxless skis with
some boots that don't require survival skiing mode on the downhills
even if they aren't suitable for anything extreme. I'm thinking of
trying to modify leather bc boots or lightweight plastic teleboots if
the toes don't work with the Silvrettas. I could also modify my old
Scarpa Invernos to ski better if that's possible. Has anyone out
there attempted such a feat?

Hi Chris,

There is a solution to your problem, an old fashioned one for sure,
but one that has worked extremely well for me. Back in the 60's the
"standard" leather mountaineering boot was the French made Galibier.
They also made a removable cuff that fitted onto their boot
immobilizing the ankle joint, thus transformed the climbing boot into
an AT boot.

Galibier no longer makes this stuff, although Koflach tried to copy
the idea, but as far as I am aware it was dropped. The good news is
that you can make your own cuff from an old DH ski boot and fit it to
most plastic climbing boots.

I did this for myself and is my rig of choice if I have to do much
climbing and or cramponing, something that I found very difficult to
do in dedicated AT boots. In practice such a cuff/boot combination
works as well as most soft AT boots (I cannot detect much difference
from my Dynafits) and is certainly good enough to do the most
demanding tours. Where they give away a little is when one has to bend
the knees and lean the shins forward as there is no support and the
thighs have to do the work, especially if carrying a heavy pack. The
way around this is to keep the skis as short as possible, around 180cm
since at this length one does not have to bend the knees to turn. The
benefit of the this system is that if one fits a thermoplastic inner,
the boots are incredibly light and even with cuff fitted they are
about the same as the lightest AT boots, and then one can walk and
climb without hindrance, as well as ski.

Other solutions include a long tape wrapped around the climbing boot's
ankle, a popular solution in pre WWII times, or the wearing of a
special lace up anklet that immobilizes the ankle joint and is worn
inside the boots. Their main problem is that they take a lot of time
and effort to put on/take off and are very inconvenient, especially in
bad weather.

If you like, I could send you a photo of the cuff - Just drop me a
line from the e-mail address that you have given here.

Cheers
Craig

(Chris Clarke) wrote in message . com...
I'm wondering if there are boots made that I could use with Silvretta
404 bindings that are not as beefy as AT boots but ski better than
regualr mountaineering boots. I have a pair of waxless (Fisher
Outtabounds) skis mounted with Silvretta 404s that I use for
approaching ice climbs and casual touring. I also have a full blown
AT rig. I'd like to have the option of running the waxless skis with
some boots that don't require survival skiing mode on the downhills
even if they aren't suitable for anything extreme. I'm thinking of
trying to modify leather bc boots or lightweight plastic teleboots if
the toes don't work with the Silvrettas. I could also modify my old
Scarpa Invernos to ski better if that's possible. Has anyone out
there attempted such a feat?

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

In article ,
Chris Clarke wrote:
I'm wondering if there are boots made that I could use with Silvretta
404 bindings that are not as beefy as AT boots but ski better than
regualr mountaineering boots. I have a pair of waxless (Fisher
Outtabounds) skis mounted with Silvretta 404s that I use for
approaching ice climbs and casual touring. I also have a full blown
AT rig. I'd like to have the option of running the waxless skis with
some boots that don't require survival skiing mode on the downhills
even if they aren't suitable for anything extreme. I'm thinking of
trying to modify leather bc boots or lightweight plastic teleboots if
the toes don't work with the Silvrettas. I could also modify my old
Scarpa Invernos to ski better if that's possible. Has anyone out
there attempted such a feat?

_ There's a few hundred ( thousand?? ) Rando Racers in Europe
trying to figure that dilemma out. I would just spring for
a pair of Dynafit TLT4's, they are as light any teleboot,
hike very well and are plenty stiff enough to transform your
setup from survival to fun. I've been using mine on a pair
of Alpina X-terrains and they are a blast. You might also
look for a pair of last year's Scarpa F1's.

_ There was one recent attempt to blend mountaining and
skiing boots, the dynafit MLT4. Seems to have been a market
flop, but you can get them on sale here

http://www.life-link.com/specials.htm

_ I have no idea how well they work and frankly I think
without at least one real buckle, you're never going to
have much of a ski boot.

_ Booker C. Bense


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.2

iQCVAwUBQY/LS2TWTAjn5N/lAQHBwAQAn6gs3V3MRhazkb0PLgNqmr0cKuGziAYn
ld13ECSrna3p+grhQx/fRFqEZqCl48Ywr//A019yWp3Qm9M4Q11j7JqXgT1LFt9j
wz61Qu2sLu2vSThJUmHPv4uXSq+zdrVE1ZpqQFMic4Qikk5CNK AD6TiE3NdQUhvx
KxHcws0pby0=
=DpwJ
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Hi Booker,

I have a pair of MLT4 boots, they are very light and ski well enough,
but as far as walking beyond a couple miles or prolonged 10 point
cramponing, forget it; The cuffs bite into my calves something
shocking, especially if walking down hill - Also the rigid soles do
not help at all. I know that some people can get away with it, maybe
they have different leg lengths, but I can't.

Of these hybrid boots, perhaps the Scarpa F1 would be the best, given
that it has a slightly flexible sole, that replicates the old leather
ski mountaineering boots of the 50s and 60s, which also flexed a
little. Couple that to the Dynafit binding and it all should work out
well. However, the Dynafit binding, in my experience is unsatisfactory
in ondulating country. See the other post that addresses this issue.

Cheers
Craig


Booker C. Bense bbense+rec.skiing.backcountry.Nov.08.04@telemark. slac.stanford.edu wrote in message ...
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

In article ,
Chris Clarke wrote:
I'm wondering if there are boots made that I could use with Silvretta
404 bindings that are not as beefy as AT boots but ski better than
regualr mountaineering boots. I have a pair of waxless (Fisher
Outtabounds) skis mounted with Silvretta 404s that I use for
approaching ice climbs and casual touring. I also have a full blown
AT rig. I'd like to have the option of running the waxless skis with
some boots that don't require survival skiing mode on the downhills
even if they aren't suitable for anything extreme. I'm thinking of
trying to modify leather bc boots or lightweight plastic teleboots if
the toes don't work with the Silvrettas. I could also modify my old
Scarpa Invernos to ski better if that's possible. Has anyone out
there attempted such a feat?

_ There's a few hundred ( thousand?? ) Rando Racers in Europe
trying to figure that dilemma out. I would just spring for
a pair of Dynafit TLT4's, they are as light any teleboot,
hike very well and are plenty stiff enough to transform your
setup from survival to fun. I've been using mine on a pair
of Alpina X-terrains and they are a blast. You might also
look for a pair of last year's Scarpa F1's.

_ There was one recent attempt to blend mountaining and
skiing boots, the dynafit MLT4. Seems to have been a market
flop, but you can get them on sale here

http://www.life-link.com/specials.htm

_ I have no idea how well they work and frankly I think
without at least one real buckle, you're never going to
have much of a ski boot.

_ Booker C. Bense


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.2

iQCVAwUBQY/LS2TWTAjn5N/lAQHBwAQAn6gs3V3MRhazkb0PLgNqmr0cKuGziAYn
ld13ECSrna3p+grhQx/fRFqEZqCl48Ywr//A019yWp3Qm9M4Q11j7JqXgT1LFt9j
wz61Qu2sLu2vSThJUmHPv4uXSq+zdrVE1ZpqQFMic4Qikk5CNK AD6TiE3NdQUhvx
KxHcws0pby0=
=DpwJ
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Craig and Booker-

Do the Dynafit boots work with Silvretta bindings? It's important for
me to keep the bindings as the most important use for the skis is
approaching ice climbs which I like to do in very lightweight leather
boots. I would mostly use the more ski oriented boots when doing
touring/yo-yo'ing tree runs like you'd find in New England,
Adirondacks or West Virginia. The Dynafits look like they have a very
skimpy toe welt but maybe it's enough to hold in the 404s wire bail.

Anyone have positive experience with the Karhu Sirius?

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

In article ,
Chris Clarke wrote:
Craig and Booker-

Do the Dynafit boots work with Silvretta bindings?

_ Yes. My older tlt4's work just fine with a Silveretta 505
binding. If an ice climbing boot will work then just about
anything with a decent welt should work.


It's important for
me to keep the bindings as the most important use for the skis is
approaching ice climbs which I like to do in very lightweight leather
boots. I would mostly use the more ski oriented boots when doing
touring/yo-yo'ing tree runs like you'd find in New England,
Adirondacks or West Virginia. The Dynafits look like they have a very
skimpy toe welt but maybe it's enough to hold in the 404s wire bail.


_ It should work just fine. I really like the Dynafit boot
for such terrain. It is a HUGE improvement compared to leather
climbing boots.

_ Booker C. Bense


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.2

iQCVAwUBQZEDuWTWTAjn5N/lAQFM4QQAl74uZrkXR9BGxbWD3KpqNH90Q93kGsbo
LLQJGGupkyEloO/nwmn0zbhWvnAmfXaPpaNWmexdrr80ETUIKdyBkQm2ws25aDnf
8QH44eGHJNB0bthGlsyPXw5H/O12rH3ngMpgwfTl9+PMXvi1vxqw2sTwISS8nA3B
1QW8syOp5rs=
=eiFM
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

In article ,
Craig R.Grattan wrote:
Hi Booker,

I have a pair of MLT4 boots, they are very light and ski well enough,
but as far as walking beyond a couple miles or prolonged 10 point
cramponing, forget it; The cuffs bite into my calves something
shocking, especially if walking down hill - Also the rigid soles do
not help at all. I know that some people can get away with it, maybe
they have different leg lengths, but I can't.


_ I find that pretty interesting as I find the TLT4's to be nearly
as comfortable walking/cramponing as a plastic ice boot. Of course,
your french technique is limited, but otherwise they are very
comfortable. I notice that the MLT actually has a higher cuff
and no cuff lock[1]. Perhaps to improve the skiablity, they
have actually made a less walkable boot. Buckles vs laces also
improve your ablity to make the boot change modes as you change
modes. You can never get laces tight enough and it's a pain
to be constantly loosening them.

_ Booker C. Bense












[1]- I know this is not the right term, but the correct one
escapes me at the moment. I mean the bit that locks the
backward/forward lean in place.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.2

iQCVAwUBQZEGh2TWTAjn5N/lAQEjwQP8DsXArE9IiQV9Zz5JmRmF4BdcI6CIZ978
SHPtRfK3YFcg6skgJntI8FLEBcInKr8o/LWuFbysc/PjOvVEpdIKTFRmQg4B72Bv
MXkGh8TdVc5ayFUSVC+aRCNmyYiy0NTwokpxhzCX6R8UpXIAkR 0bL5TyiibzGebF
8fDwZFSeKi4=
=Ygyv
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Hi Chris,

Do the Dynafit boots work with Silvretta bindings?

I regularly use them with my Ramer bindings, which have a similar
front toe bail
and rear ltach to the Silvretta. But do try it out first as there is
very little margin.

Cheers
Craig

Hi Booker,

When it comes to walking, the big problem with AT boots is that they
have very little by way of a rocker, something that is far more
pronounced in climbing boots, though both types share the same rigid
sole. Also the higher cuffs can make progress extremely uncomfortable
at time, requiring a very peculiar gait.

As for cramponing, AT boots are extremely good at front pointing but
much less so on more moderate terrain such as encountered on ice
fields and the lower reaches of the great glaciers. An additional
problem, peculiar to Dynafit compatible boots is that if having to
traverse long sections of glacier rubble, the binding inserts get
damaged; In addition the soles of the Dynafit boots, after the TLT3
series, do not stand up to walking on rubble
In this part of the world very long walks and glacier rubble bashing
are on par for the course. Also cramponing on the lower reaches of
glaciers can go on for hours.

I also have a pair of TLT4s, a fairly heavy boot and far from the
fetherweigh claimed in the advertising. For their weight they do not
ski all that well, and for me at least they are still limited as to
how far I can walk with them.

The MLT4 shares with the TLT4 the same lower shell, differing only in
the cuff. The lace loosening and tightening is a pain as you say, but
can be alleviated by a nylon "power strap" with velcro that tightens
the cuffs when required; I suspect that their latest AT racing boot is
just as light and more convenient to use, but am not sure about
walking in them.

Unfortunately, I am not familiar with US conditions, but around here
very long approach walks are the norm and some of the tours require a
fair bit of cramponing; I for one prefer to do it in a climbing boot.

Cheers
Craig
Booker C. Bense bbense+rec.skiing.backcountry.Nov.09.04@telemark. slac.stanford.edu wrote in message ...
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

In article ,
Craig R.Grattan wrote:
Hi Booker,

I have a pair of MLT4 boots, they are very light and ski well enough,
but as far as walking beyond a couple miles or prolonged 10 point
cramponing, forget it; The cuffs bite into my calves something
shocking, especially if walking down hill - Also the rigid soles do
not help at all. I know that some people can get away with it, maybe
they have different leg lengths, but I can't.


_ I find that pretty interesting as I find the TLT4's to be nearly
as comfortable walking/cramponing as a plastic ice boot. Of course,
your french technique is limited, but otherwise they are very
comfortable. I notice that the MLT actually has a higher cuff
and no cuff lock[1]. Perhaps to improve the skiablity, they
have actually made a less walkable boot. Buckles vs laces also
improve your ablity to make the boot change modes as you change
modes. You can never get laces tight enough and it's a pain
to be constantly loosening them.

_ Booker C. Bense












[1]- I know this is not the right term, but the correct one
escapes me at the moment. I mean the bit that locks the
backward/forward lean in place.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.2

iQCVAwUBQZEGh2TWTAjn5N/lAQEjwQP8DsXArE9IiQV9Zz5JmRmF4BdcI6CIZ978
SHPtRfK3YFcg6skgJntI8FLEBcInKr8o/LWuFbysc/PjOvVEpdIKTFRmQg4B72Bv
MXkGh8TdVc5ayFUSVC+aRCNmyYiy0NTwokpxhzCX6R8UpXIAkR 0bL5TyiibzGebF
8fDwZFSeKi4=
=Ygyv
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

In article ,
Craig R.Grattan wrote:
Hi Booker,

When it comes to walking, the big problem with AT boots is that they
have very little by way of a rocker, something that is far more
pronounced in climbing boots, though both types share the same rigid
sole. Also the higher cuffs can make progress extremely uncomfortable
at time, requiring a very peculiar gait.

In this part of the world very long walks and glacier rubble bashing
are on par for the course. Also cramponing on the lower reaches of
glaciers can go on for hours.

I also have a pair of TLT4s, a fairly heavy boot and far from the
fetherweigh claimed in the advertising. For their weight they do not
ski all that well, and for me at least they are still limited as to
how far I can walk with them.

_ You're right, they aren't "light", just lighter than everything
else available. Short of NNN/BC boots they are the lightest
telemark or AT boots I own. I use the Loden liners in mine,
because I think they ski better than thermoflex ones. Thermoflex
liners are great for getting lighter boots, but I do think they
give up some support compared to more traditional liners. Maybe I
just don't expect much of mine, but I'm always pretty impressed
with how well they ski.


The MLT4 shares with the TLT4 the same lower shell, differing only in
the cuff. The lace loosening and tightening is a pain as you say, but
can be alleviated by a nylon "power strap" with velcro that tightens
the cuffs when required;

_ Power straps suck, Buckles rule...


I suspect that their latest AT racing boot is
just as light and more convenient to use, but am not sure about
walking in them.

_ From what I can see I think they compromise the skiing side
too much for my taste. No cuff lock and a velcro strap.


Unfortunately, I am not familiar with US conditions, but around here
very long approach walks are the norm and some of the tours require a
fair bit of cramponing; I for one prefer to do it in a climbing boot.


_ My primary use of these boots is for peak bagging in the spring
which generally involves climbing lot's of relatively low angle
hard snow with crampons before the sun rises, waiting on top for
the snow to soften and skiing back down. It's not glacier ice,
but it is a lot of walking with crampons. It's generally easier
than glacier climbing since even hard corn snow gives a bit
compared to glacier ice. I've never tried much dirt/rocks walking
with them, but even plastic ice climbing boots aren't much fun
for that. In general I think that if the conditions will let
you get away with it[1], you're better of carrying your boots
than walking in them.

_ Booker C. Bense



[1] you can wear sneakers or "approach shoes".

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.2

iQCVAwUBQZO6G2TWTAjn5N/lAQG2dwQAl2NrCZarUJtWk/sidF79t9ngK3wDnai5
jXnUw6iJImiU+enpiRxDFqo8Qz4h2PbHl297I58ig06EQHA7dm KtNqYNp79AQmw7
89fX9ym75xRBeAzjSnG7iIecLKhV6NkpabfJNNxuPN5l3MWiU/WlsjUVWj+y8H49
yo85ENmqEDg=
=M5d6
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----