new scarpa boot guess

[bauerb]

hmmm. I have an old pair of TX Comps NTN, and an old pair of Crispi 4 buckle 75mm...I have a Dremel. maybe at some point these boots end up on my workbench for some surgery...

[tele.skier]

My point about matching the cuff stiffness with the stiffness of the scaffo has to do with getting the whole boot to have a single, matching flex characteristic between it's 2 parts. Having consistent flex qualities gives the boot better sensitivity and more predictable feedback. The prophet was a good example of an out of balance boot. I tried to like it but it had a stiff cuff and a very soft bellows. It felt like an alpine boot that someone cut the toe off and reattached with a hinge. It was just harder to use the boot's resistance to flexing to stay well balanced because the soft bellows allowed the boot to hinge so readily in rough terrain.

I've also felt the exactly opposite mismatched flex characteristics, where a low boot cuff that didn't have a long lever length was combined with a very stiff lower scaffo. The lower stiffness didn't translate into a boot with greater leverage because the smaller cuff didn't have enough lever length to collapse the bellows easily, without loading up a large amount of pressure on a short amount of cuff (and the skier's shin) The boot felt like a high top sneaker in a block of cement. (That boot was the crispi shiver/rando)

To Chez's point, I know the original premise of NTN was that the binding activity level would combine with the boot bellows stiffness to give an adjustable feel to the system. The Prophet was certainly the boot to either prove or disprove that "theory". After the prophet hit the market and people bought them, ebay was flooded with them as everyone who paid retail for them tried to sell them to recoup some of their money. I bought my used Prophets from a member here, then I sold them to another member here for cheap, and he later told me that he hated them and sold them to someone else... My conclusion is that the NTN premise of the binding's spring tension compensating for the softness of the lower scaffo is just that, it really doesn't work all that well to rely on the binding to stiffen the boot. It's better to get the lower boot stiffness in a usable range of resistance, rather than make it soft and hope the binding tension compensates for that softness. If you have all the leverage/stiffness qualities of your boot along with the tension of the binding in the same range of resistance, it enhances the sensitivity of the system in that range. If components are mismatched, the system loses sensitivity.

If you wanted to clean your ears with a Q-tip, you wouldn't grip the Q-tip with the arm of a backhoe for many reasons, but primarily the backhoe has so much leverage that it couldn't have the sensitivity in the range necessary to work gently where it wouldn't easily drive the Q-tip into your brain. I know that's not a great analogy, but I'm trying to make my point clear about why having everything in the same range of leverage enhances the sensitivity of the levered object which makes it work better because it's sensitivity is tuned to the best working range.

My hope for the new touring boot is that Scarpa won't try to make it too stiff to please resort skiers, nor too soft of a bellows like the prophet. I always thought the Tx was just about perfect in terms of flex. It was a little bit soft where you could feel the whole boot shape distort if you drove it powerfully, so it was not a boot that would last many seasons if it was used to ride the lifts regularly. As a touring boot, it was just about the right stiffness to ski backcountry snow without being "weak".

Then Scarpa needs to make it lighter with some ground breaking cuff articulation in walk mode! Yeah, I'm dreaming....

[jeff_er_why]

I like the new tele alpine norm (NTAN) proposed by bobby, all that would need is a colab between Scarpa and Pierre @ Meidjo. It would be great to convert my current Meidjo Alpine heel but I doubt it would be that easy and I understand (as a mountain biker) that new standards drive up sales, increase innovation and open the floodgates to tinkerer frustration and internet rants.

I like the idea of a non-tech heel and I've even considered it with AT heels like the Marker Kingpin or Fritschi Tecton. The thing is it needs rollers for easy lateral release and springs for vertical plus a "walk/tele mode" that slides the heel forward and back, not the toe like with the Shift. The 2 pin system makes this lighter and simpler so I imagine that's the way to go.

I'd want a Fritschi Xenics heel with no lateral springs and a shift plate to slide it forward and back. The fore and aft fex helps with preventing prerelease (into tele mode) when the ski flexes.

As for my guess/wish on the Scarpa boot, I see them going the Maestrale w/ no Alpine heel route and hoping for something w/ adjustable flex or that is stiffer.

[xmatt]

I was hoping for less than 1500g but I really like the thought of adjustable bellows stiffness, the more I think about it. Imagine going with really soft bellows on a rolling approach, and then swapping in stiffer bellows before a technical descent. Or at least just swapping bellow stiffness when going from sidecountry skiing to touring. Plus, while I have some opinions about what I like in bellows stiffness (I think I generally like soft bellows), it would be great to do a direct comparison and really see what works best.

[jtb]

I hope those of us who already have the current Meidjo heel can swap heel inserts. I like the idea of adjustable bellows stiffness. As cesare pointed out above, TTS would benefit from a stiffer bellows than NTN bindings that support the ball of the boot even after lifting it off of the ski.

[iBjorn]

To sum up rumors, details from interviews with Scarpa representatives and filed patents - the Scarpa boot will be:
-A Maestrele class boot at approx 1500g
-It will have non-standard tech heel inserts for a new version of the Meidjo AT heel
-It will have adjustable flex at the toe bellow through insert plates

[cesare]

Doesn't @tele.skier's point about the soft forefoot flex of the Scott's and the Scarpas bring us back around to the original vision behind the NTN standard? Specifically, I seem to recall statements coming out from Rotte and Scarpa that the original TX--which many skiers felt was too soft--was soft because the binding was supposed to provide the resistance to flexing the boot. I definitely feel like that is still what's in play when I ski my TXs in v2 Lynx. There may not be that much difference in the boot flex between the TX and the Pro but that element feels pretty much the same to me in the stiffer Lynx and is very different from the way the same TX Pros felt in my TTS bindings, all of which used the long, soft Voile spring cartridges.

I think NTN's original vision kind of got lost because the market demanded stiffer boots. Crispi, and to a lesser extent, Scarpa did oblige with the CX-Rs and the TX Comps respectively. I only skied the Rotte NTN bindings with soft springs in TX Pros so I never got a taste of what stiffer springs would have done but I thought both the Freeride and the Freedom were pretty damn soft. It was on me to flex the boots, which was fine because that was how I tended to ski 75 mm gear with Switchbacks.

I guess I am a convert to "active" bindings since I got the Lynx v2. After one or two days on them, I thought they were going to be too stiff for me, but by the third day, in combination with making adjustments to my frankenboots, they disappeared and I have been happy ever since. Soft boots, stiff binding works for me.

[paul]

Most people don't notice it too much until after they ski their boots for a season or two and then they feel that the lower have fatigued a bit and softened even more than from when the boots were new. If that same person had tried the Txcomps, in a side by side test when they first got their Txpros they would have quickly realized that the Txpro's bellows flex was just a little bit soft.

Very true. After 2 seasons I gave my TxPro to a friend. They were fine for most backcountry and mellow area skiing. But more aggressive skiing the bellows basically collapse part way through the turn. Bought the TxComp and it is really not a stiff boot after you ski it a few days. Especially with the Intuition Power Wrap liner which adds a bit of stiffness to cuff compared to stock liner. Balance in stiffness between cuff and bellows seems like a key factor in tele boot design.

[tele.skier]

Certainly lower boot flex has to be a combination of how flexible the boot's sole is AND how stiff/soft the bellows are. That flex characteristic needs to be well matched to the cuff stiffness, so the boot gives a feeling of predictable flex to the skier. Without that quality the boot lacks the proper sensitivity.

IE: The Crispi shiver has a very stiff lower scaffo and bellows. It also has a low cuff which doesn't have the lever length to easily bend the lower boot. It has a weird feel to it.

The Crispi Orange Evo (boots of death) have a very stiff scaffo and bellows. It has a tall stiff cuff which has the lever length to bend the lower boot so that boot works with a stiff scaffo because the cuff has the leverage to bend the lower boot. (but it really favors large powerful skiers because overall a very stiff boot requires more input to work well, whether through lever length, greater skier's mass, or just a very dynamic technique)

The Garmont/Scott Prophet has that "coffee filter" extremely soft bellows. It has a stiff grilamid tongue design that connects the cuff to the lower boot making a very stiff cuff with powerful leverage. Unfortunately, all that cuff stiffness does not turn into boot leverage because the bellows is so soft, the boot just hinges at the bellows with very little force, so all that leverage power is conducted through a flexible point which isn't even close to the same stiffness as the cuff. (It's like tieing a tugboat's rope to the dock with a rubber band. Of course the rope can handle the force of the boat floating away from the dock, but the rubber band breaks instantly...)

The Scarpa txpro's has a similar problem as the Prophet, but to a much lower extent. The lower scaffo is a bit softer than the cuff. Most people don't notice it too much until after they ski their boots for a season or two and then they feel that the lower have fatigued a bit and softened even more than from when the boots were new. If that same person had tried the Txcomps, in a side by side test when they first got their Txpros they would have quickly realized that the Txpro's bellows flex was just a little bit soft. (but not horribly soft)

The proper flex all comes down to having a well matched flex between the scaffo and the cuff, whether the boot is stiff or soft. The Scarpa Tx has a soft bellows and has a soft cuff. When you reach the boot's leverage limit by driving it too hard, you can feel the whole boot shape distorting. Other than that, it has great sensitivity before a skier overpowers the boot completely. The Crispi evo has that same matched quality between it's cuff and scaffo. It's a hugely powerful boot in comparison to most other boots, but it still has sensitivity in a much higher range of force.

Consistency in a boot's flex qualities between the cuff and the lower boot enhance that boot's sensitivity, but the character of the flex also dictates the range where that sensitivity works well, by being either "both cuff and scaffo stiff" or "both cuff and scaffo soft"...

[jnicol]

Speaking of Scarpa and new boots... I might be putting the cart ahead of the horse here but I have to give them a thumbs up, and perhaps even more so, Telemark Pyrenees who were the intermediary and have been extremely helpful.

Got my son some TXPros last season from TP. One had a weird flex. We both skied it and agreed. At the end of the season I sent one shell back to TP on warranty. It never arrived although tracking said it was delivered. I was able to show proof of shipping and delivery and so TP went to Scarpa. Didn't take long to hear back and they will be sending us a new pair of shells. In a way, that's what you'd expect but it's always good to see a company standing behind their product but also giving the customer the benefit of the doubt when things cannot be proven.

[bobbytooslow]

That's not the lesson I drew from, for example, the person who cut a notch out of a pair of old Garmont AT boots and used them as tele boots. I drew the lesson that if you cut out a notch, the sole will flex whether or not it was designed to, and the bellows can help add some resistance to flex and also help stiffen the boot in torsion while still allowing it to bend. But I may be off-base here.

I'm sure that boot *hinged* -- and, after not long, broke -- where the "bellows" were cut. But I doubt it felt good to ski. As jasonq said above, the sweet sweet tele flex that we all love comes from flexion occuring in front of and behind the bellows as well.

Good point about the bellows helping with torsion, they most certainly do that too.

[jasonq]

WRT to sole flex, i think it plays a very important role, but my opinion on it is that it is the area forward and rear of the bellows that is most involved in that magic feel. I think a dual injection could be done, as long as the seam between them was far enough back. certainly farther back than the M2 boots. Might even feel better if that allowed a softer Pebax in the front of the boot????

on a related tangent, i never really understood how much angle flex was involved in the feel of the turn. That is until i broke my ankle and tore ligaments, and the result was reduced range of motion in my ankle. Before my first day back on tele after that injury, i was worried about my knee, which i mess up in the same crash, and didn't give my ankle thought. Well, it took like 3 turns to realize that reduce flexibility was what was holding me back from making fluid turns. my knee didn't feel great, but it was my ankle that made my turns feel all wrong. I expect a boot with a super rigid sole, and a bellows like a hinge would feel the same way. crappy. like a garmont prophet (never skied one, but they have a certain reputation)

[jasonq]

c'mon man, someone must have a 3D printer and can start making what we all want...just bring your own liners and buckles...

https://www.3printr.com/easystand-first-3d-printed-ski-boot-5527493/

i guess is this has not caught on due to being both too expensive and too brittle in cold weather. Or too heavy if not brittle. or the boots just suck, who knows.

for telemark, printing a bellows that is the right durometer and doesn't crack would be rough, and expensive. But probably possible? you can buy Pebax filament for 3d printers. But it is WAYYYY too soft for ski boots. i know, i have some. Maybe it could be formulated for FDM printers at more appropriate durometers, but i am not chemical engineer. I can't see how one could make powdered Pebax to use in SLS or MJF, but maybe???

I can see 3d printing cuffs for telemark. maybe tongues, maybe. but not scaffos. at least any time soon.

[xmatt]

It goes back to something discussed in previous threads: Adding bellows does not make a boot flex. Engineering the sole to flex makes a boot flex, and the bellows are there mainly to permit the rest of the scafo to change shape without getting all distorted and wrinkly. Yeah the bellows' durometer/thickness/stiffness can be tuned to resist/dampen/smooth out the flexion that the sole permits, but it all really starts with the sole. Who knows, maybe Scarpa has some magic geometry/molding tricks up their sleeve.

That's not the lesson I drew from, for example, the person who cut a notch out of a pair of old Garmont AT boots and used them as tele boots. I drew the lesson that if you cut out a notch, the sole will flex whether or not it was designed to, and the bellows can help add some resistance to flex and also help stiffen the boot in torsion while still allowing it to bend. But I may be off-base here.

[bauerb]

c'mon man, someone must have a 3D printer and can start making what we all want...just bring your own liners and buckles...