Powder dingo approved plastic origami power.
One year later: mods and thoughts on the La Sportiva Solar
How much boot do you need, really? The La Sportiva Solar (and its carbon cousin the Skorpius) present a strong argument that the average ski tourer could be well served with more of less. While not quite full on ski-mo weight weenie light, the impressive lack of heft to these boots combined with the range of motion, speed of transitions, and decent downhill performance nails La Sportiva’s stated goal of a “lightweight touring boot for general backcountry skiing.”
I started skiing the Solar midway through last season (read the initial WildSnow review), and they have been my go-to boot for this season of local tours, resort laps, and a recent hut trip. The massive articulation (68 degrees) has been a revelation in uphilling comfort and performance for me; almost eliminating my use of risers, and makes every other boot I’ve had on my feet feel clunky by comparison. The Swing Lock deploys rapidly, and even with the upper cuffs buckled, and heels locked in, the range of motion on flat exits almost rivals that of my tele setup.
The two buckle closure system makes for rapid transitions; particularly since the upper buckle / velcro strap arrangement is low-profile enough to open and close under ski pants. The lower spider buckle arrangement has proven to be susceptible to ham-fisted operation. It broke at the upper guide, then around the plastic rivet. Both instances occurred when I tried to swing the instep buckle from completely open to fully closed in one motion, instead of closing each stage of the buckle separately, which insures that the cable is properly set in the guide before the final pressure is applied.
When I first started skiing the boot, the tight fit over the instep was the primary discomfort I noted, stating “ I probably wouldn’t go on a long hut trip with them.” Breaking the upper guide forced me to run the cable in the lower/tighter position which exacerbated this issue. Snapping the guide around the plastic rivet inspired a safety wire fix that allowed for a bit more room in the cable closure, and mitigated the issue of the tight instep. Just this weekend, I took them on a trip to the Harry Gates Hut, a route remarkable for not necessarily for its length (a little under 7 miles), as its flatness. With the safety wire mod, I never noticed any issue with instep pressure, and the quick access to range of motion came in very handy on the very flat exit, which required several miles of double poling / faux skate skiing.
The Solar has more exposed hardware on the rear of the boot than the Skorpius. My 3mm hex key fit in a few of them, but the others did not fit any other metric hex keys in that range. These boots have an earlier version of the Swing Lock, lacking the pronounced thumb detent of the Skorpius.
After the cable guide broke off, I was able to use the lower plastic rivet as a cable guide, but it made the tight instep even tighter.
Perhaps the reasons hex keys don’t fit is because the “bolt heads” viewed from the outside are actually rivets on the inside?
Engineers of both the professional and armchair variety will probably spew coffee all over their desks in horror at my “safety wire” mod, but it has held up for several backyard tours, and hut trip.
I just got around to fiddling with the lean spacer block, which can be positioned below the cuff for maximum forward lean, just above for more moderate lean, or completely removed. Hopefully the forward lean position helps take up some room for my skinny calves. Will update once I’ve skied them in this position.
Omar Jones speculates that the “Trophy Truck” travel limiting strap on the rear cuff may be one of the reasons the Solar skis so well for a two buckle boot with a very moderate flex rating. The strap has a certain amount of elasticity which could account for how predictable the boot feels; i.e. it doesn’t have the distinct “bottoming out” / “folding over” feel that my TLT 6’s exhibited off larger drops, or more abrupt grade transitions.
Though the flex is only rated as 90, it skis admirably well for a two buckle boot driving my 120mm waist Line Magnum Opus skis. In my preferred environment of low-angle pow jibbing, tree runs, and exploratory bushwhacking, I never find myself wishing for more boot. Only on in-bounds days of navigating chopped up snow piles have I found myself bumping up against the performance limits of the boot.
If the Solar were a mountain bike, it would be in the category of 4-5” travel trail bikes such as the Ibis Ripley. Neither the Solar or the Ripley are likely to be your first choice for spinning laps on the chairlift, but for the very broad “average” ability skier/rider out to earn their turns on backyard adventures, it hits a sweet spot between enjoyable uphill efficiency, and sporting descending capability.
16 comments
So how’s it compare to the F1?
May I expand upon your remark, Aaron, about heel risers? With modern touring boots and their generous range of ankle flex, heel risers are obsolete. They make sense when boot cuffs hardly hinge or are rigid.
Consider hiking up a steep trail. Does anyone put on high heels for uphill? They do not, and you do not either, because your trail shoes or boots permit your ankles to bend and your feet to accommodate themselves to the trail. So it is with modern touring boots. Using heel risers is now just a bad habit. They add weight and are more things to fiddle with. I’ve been skiing the past two seasons using bindings without risers. I don’t miss ’em.
Hey Jim, I’m sorry but I believe your analogy is a little flawed. You don’t hike uphill in heels because you put you weight on the balls of your feet with your heel off the ground. Doing this on a skintrack steep enough to need risers will case a quick reversal of direction. The key to keeping purchase while skinning up steeps is heel pressure.Tough to do without risers.
Au contraire, Brad. I generally do not hike uphill on the balls of my feet with my heels off the ground. I expect you don’t either. Skiing without risers I have no less traction than companions using risers.
Even with lots of articulation, I still prefer heel risers. I have bindings with and without and its much more comfortable with and the more the better IMO. Guess just another bad habit I have…
Jim’s generally correct on this one. I would only add – there are people who need risers, some even need risers for their risers, and they mostly seem to live in the Wasatch. I have a quasi feeling of respect for those guys, who go straight up the fall line, no matter how steep – but if I’m being honest, the practice is very inefficient and I won’t be copying.
In short – IMO, if you need your risers, your skin-track is steeper than my personal ideal. Even if you are young and strong, you can and will go father of you drop it back a notch.
Ben, I haven’t skied the F1, so I can’t make a direct comparison, other than general observations. The Spiderwire arch system is a bit lower profile than the Boa knob of the F1, but also more suspect to user error. The lean lock on the LaSportiva swings to the side of the boot, rather than inline with the boot at on the F1, which means the LaSportiva require less pant cuff fiddling than the F1. I mentioned it in the review, but the ability to rapidly transition from uphill to downhill mode with minimal fuss is one of my favorite aspects of this boot.
Jim, I’ve spent much of my last two seasons in a quest to minimize use of heel risers through careful skin track route finding, and enjoying the generous range of motion of this boot. Even with a substantial motivation to simplify my ski touring process, I have to disagree with your pronouncement that heel risers are obsolete. As a matter of fact, I often put on high heels for hiking rugged terrain, as do many wildland firefighters, trail builders, timber cruisers, loggers, and others who make their living scrambling around off-piste. The White Smokejumper boot (and related patterns / brands of boots used in these occupations) have a very significant amount of heel rise, more for arch support than uphilling advantage.
I find the extended range of motion in modern ski-mo inspired boots is most appreciated on the flatter sections of skin track; the steeper the pitch becomes, the advantage of r.o.m. becomes less apparent. Heel risers on steep skin tracks aren’t so much about making up for range of motion, as keeping your body more perpendicular to the slope, driving the fibers of the climbing skin more directly into the snow. I made several attempts in these boots at ascending as steep of an angle as possible without heel risers, but inevitably there comes a point when there is not enough flex in my calf / Achilles to accommodate keeping my body vertical, and I start to get the “tipping over backwards” sensation. Were I hiking the same angle sans snow, this would be the point where I would shift my hiking strategy from orienting my feet parallel to the fall line to putting them sideways across the slope to take advantage of the longer effective edge on the side of my boot.
Thanks for the write up. I have heard great things about the Skorpius. With new boots coming out every year I appreciate able to keep up on everything thanks for the detailed write up!
I’ve been really interested in personal preference and how the whole experienced ski touring community has slowly drifted away from high risers in the last decade.
Seems with the modern boots with exceedingly greater range of motion we all have adapted, to need high risers less and less. I’ve learned to enjoy skiing without any more than a fixed race binding heal with up to an F1. Maybe it’s been 6-7 years without any additional riser option? (Except when I’m skiing my Maestrale) Gore Range, Elk, Tetons and Cham I just don’t need them or even have them. Usually in an Alien RS. It happened over some time but is definitely more efficient for me to not have to ever mess with a riser and to have more range of motion with out it. I find more natural longer strides uphill and at very steep and tricky kick turns, the basic single riser pays off. It’s been cool to watch the ski touring equipment and athletes change and improve the freedom and stride out there over the years!
It seems to me this is the market manufacturers need to focus on: 1000-1400 boots for normal touring.
Using some tech and concepts from rando racing boots, but making them warmer and more durable, with some more adjustability in tightening, and with taller cuffs and a little bit stiffer/better flexing.
While we have boots like the Zero G Pro Tour that walk and ski well at 1400g, the models like this Solar probably ski well enough for most people, and being able to transition easier, and with even better walking performance seems the sweet spot of the bell curve.
Problem is, I haven’t read a single review of these types of boots that doesn’t have some significant issues, usually with durability.
I wouldn’t mind if they were another 100g heavier, as long as they still walked great, if that meant they would be bombproof reliable out in the mountains.
Slim, you pretty much nailed my wish list for ways to improve the Solar; particularly the taller cuff / stiffer flex. I’ve been wondering if it putting in a stiffer liner might be a good way to amp up the performance, and if there might be way to add some reinforcement to the tongue of the boot.
Slim’s comment on durability is also important. In a season of moderate skiing I broke most of the buckles on my Sportiva boots (my field fix was also some bailing wire to replace the little rivets!), as well as cracked tongues and torn liners. I really don’t want to think of an $800 boot as a 1-2 year gear investment. It seems folks are getting more longevity out of other brands? I really enjoy the ability to get a longer-term review like this: thanks for the great work.
Also I should say Sportiva was good about replacing buckles and sounds like they’re updating the synchro/spectre line.
I just received the set of Skorpius CR boots that La Sportiva sent as a replacement for the issues I was having with the Solar. Several changes to design details point towards a more durable boot: The tongue has a slightly different profile, with reinforcement ribs at the narrowest part where mine tore, and the rivets have a more pronounced countersink cavity, which should make for less hang-ups. (On my boot, a protruding rivet was snagging on the tongue, which flexed the tongue awkwardly enough in walk mode, especially when snow would pack up in front of the risers, creating an exaggerated angle on flat skin track). The toe has more options for positioning the end of the Spider Lock cable, which should provide more options for dialing in arch fit. The liner appears to be thicker on the Skorpius, and the SwingLock hook has been moved up by 12 mm. The pivot bolt of the SwingLock as been upgraded from a 3mm hex to Torx 25 fitting, and has more secure feel. Hopefully all these details point to a stronger skiing, more durable boot.
Even though touring boots are softer than normal alpine boots and thus not as stable for high-speed piste skiing, I still feel they are way more comfortable to wear a whole day. I would say a touring type of boot in the region of 1000-1400 gr/boot, would be the ideal for most normal skiers. With walking mode, stiff enough as long as you do not plan to rip those competition pistes in high speed (those one watered etc prepared for world cups etc) and still soft enough for walking around with
Just bought a pair of Solars for general use as I got them very cheap. After a few years I know whether I went too light or not …
Jim, agreed. As a backcountry skier adapts and fitness and technique improves we don’t need high risers as often. Although with bigger higher descent performance oriented boots in deep snow, they still are helpful to keep the other joints balanced. It really comes down to if the boot and skier has enough ankle ROM and if they have adapted over time to the conditioning and technique needed to cover full ski tours with out high risers. High risers, biomechanically make for shorter steps and limits range of motion. Fitness and range of motion in the ankle overcomes the need for assistance of an elevated heel on and off snow. That’s why they are far better descending and agility in rugged terrain. You do not see the best and strongest mountain runners, rock climbers in high heels. They choose a flatter shoe the more rugged the terrain. Again less is more in the mountains if we let them shape us. I haven’t used a high riser in Alien RS, F1, and rarely even with my Maestrale except for steeper deep trail braking. Even without the high riser I stand on the basic race binding riser with my heel and have better skin track purchase without a high riser or as I have more ability to move my ankle and make it stick. 12 to 30hr days 10k -28k efforts. No risers, no problem and better off! It does take time and stoke to adapt though.
Teague,
unequivocally agree with both you and Jim !
Comments are closed.