With a few mods, the La Sportiva Skorpius CR is a strong contender for the elusive quiver of one boot for a lighter guy like myself.
Not-too-light is right for versatility
Two seasons ago I went to a two touring boot approach — the Scarpa Alien RS for fast days with faster friends on light skis, and the Hoji Pro Tour for normal strong pacing and pushing a bigger ski. This approach worked well and opened up the quiver a bit, but, as picky as I am with boots, it was a ton of effort. It also required adjusting my style depending on the boot of the day. I decided to replace the two-boot system with a long term test of the new La Sportiva Skorpius CR this season, hoping to go back to a single boot for all but resort and resort accessed backcountry. The Scarpa F1 has been the best single touring boot quiver for me in the past. Could the Skorpius be the next one?
Doug danced around in the Skorpius CR before there was any snow on the ground and gave us his initial impressions. Aaron Mattix has also covered the less stiff La Sportiva Solar extensively now. Here’s my take, including some modding and plenty of on-snow performance.
Design
The Skorpius CR sits at the high end of its weight class, and for good reasons — skiing performance and durability. The boot closure is entirely plastic (carbon reinforced grilamid), not the cloth gaiter that wraps across the shin of others. These designs ski brilliantly considering there is nothing in front of your lower shin, but they put the nail in the coffin for any hopes of a progressive feeling flex. Designers often use BOAs and/or cord systems in this class. I have found this sacrifices tightening leverage and gives you more small things to break. Buckles and thick cables, albeit heavier, simply work better with the amount of forces we are putting into ski boots.
La Sportiva has done a great job making a fully shelled and buckled boot as light as possible without worrying about advertising it as “sub-kilo”. The Spider Buckle Evo is a cool two-stage buckle system first seen on the Sytron. The cable crosses the top of the foot twice at four different anchor points, one of which is the buckle located directly above the upper-mid foot. The first short buckle lever is a walk position offering a slight clamping, then a longer buckle uses a multi point mechanical advantage to cinch the foot down for skiing.
Plastic and metal here, no cute cloth or gram-saving strings and ratchets.
The cuff is closed by a single buckle velcro strap that offers a giant range from preferred ski tightness to unrestricted walking. Being velcro, the strap is infinitely adjustable and offers measurements to help positioning. On the medial side of the boot, opposite the buckle, the strap connects to a small hook built in to the shell plastic via a 2mm steel wire loop. The wire loop has a plastic bit that clips to the shell preventing the strap from coming free while in walk mode. Doug mentioned that he had seen issues with this in previous renditions, but so far so good for me. Top the closures off with a simple velcro power strap — I’m always a fan of a power strap despite transition issues. In total, the shell and buckles without the liner weigh 970g in my 27, about the weight of the entire Alien RS.
The Swing Lock walk/ski lever is phenomenal. The industry standard lever that flips vertically works fine, but presents issues with pants sometimes, even more so the old, and now revisited Dynafit ultra-lock system. The Swing Lock is never more than a centimeter out from the boot and can be flipped underneath pants, along with the cuff buckle. An additional bonus: the Swing Lock can be locked in to ski position without interfering with a rear crampon lever, helpful for giving the calves a break on steep and long booters. This is not the case for many boot/crampon match ups. Speaking of crampon fit, La Sportiva’s very rockered soles have caused issues in the past. There is a very slight gap, less than 1mm, between the sole and toe plate of my CAMP XLC Nanotech automatics. I didn’t have any problems on my only day with them so far — breakable crust, firm crust and a bit of rock scrambling in crampons withstood. Perhaps some JB Weld and a super thin sheet of aluminum would fill the space?
La Sportiva’s in-house Grip-Guard soles getting the job done on this scramble. Color coordination an added bonus. The sun made for a crampon free ascent on this one.
The liner is basic and comfortable. At 212 grams without a footbed, the liner falls in line with the design theory of light but not overdone. Fine by me, as I find that more and more liners these days turn to mush a few weeks after seducing you with their low weight. The cuff and tongue have a nice dual density design with a very firm exterior foam. A softer foam with mesh-like face fabric inside make up the remainder. It is thin and therefore moves well at the ankle. I am starting to feel the pack out begin, particularly in the rear of the heel.
Fit
The Skorpius fit me comfortably right out of the box, in a size 27. I measure 27 mondo, yet have always sized down to 26/26.5 when shell sizes break traditionally as in the Skorpius. Sportiva’s Skorpius (and Dynafit’s new TLT 8) appear to have done the downsizing for us this season. The 102mm last is about right for a touring boot on my 101mm wide forefoot. The shell has a nice toe box and taper from the metatarsals back to the heel. That said, comfortable out of the box isn’t exactly my cup of tea for a ski boot, it should be borderline. Putting the boot on in the morning, I want to wonder if it’s too tight, and then after a day of skiing know it’s just right.
After a quick eight-minute heat mold with thin toe caps, I padded the inner and outer ankle with dense 4mm adhesive foam, using shapes from prior liner’s pads as a guide. Once padded I felt good about a test run. I adjusted the forward lean to it’s most forward 16 degree position and hit the snow.
Current level of padding? Heavy. Medial and lateral ankle, calf, lower shin. Read more below about the spoiler addition.
On snow
Not to my surprise, the Skorpius walks extremely well. I never reach the limits of the claimed 68 degree range of motion which is split evenly 35/33 front and back. I generally start my tour with the spider buckle completely open. Then after warming up a bit, or reaching a side hill portion, flip it over into the walk position.
Transitions are a breeze, and on my first day I was ready to drop in to the cold early season powder. The spider buckle clamped my foot much better than any BOA has pretended to and the upper was plenty stiff to drive my Dynafit Beast 108s. There was something missing though, a familiar hole in the downhill performance of 1 kilo boots. It skied like a light boot — upright and rigid. I found myself really having to work to stay in the sweet spot even with the forward lean adjustment maxed out. I adapted my skiing style and ripped around in the powder, but figured that I had not found my new favorite boot.
On the final lap of my first day in the Skorpius, I left the power straps loose, half out of curiosity and half out of laziness. Wow, what a difference! I drove my knees into the fall line and the boot flexed beautifully into the perfect position without collapsing. Though I had a noticeable gap behind my calf, I was beyond stoked on the Skorpius and couldn’t wait to get to the work bench and capitalize on this finding.
As I mentioned before, I am a power strap addict, generally bolting on tighter, taller, and beefier straps to all of my boots, as seen in this Alien RS concoction. In a huge departure, I pulled the straps from the Skorpius. I did not want to be ratcheted against the upright design and stiff rear spine. I then set out to pad up the rear of the liner even further. I placed a roughly 11x6cm piece of the dense 4mm foam on the rear of the liner between the flex point and the top of the shell. Still not quite satisfied with the lean, and feeling some friction between the foam and shell in walk mode, I scrounged up a tapered 1.5-3mm hard plastic spoiler from a Head alpine liner. The spoiler took care of that last bit of desired forward lean and eliminated the friction.
Lo-fi photo for Hi-fi times. Skorpius matched with Dynafit Beast 108 makes for a light amateur freeriding setup.
Many boots in this class would simply bottom out if they were shimmed forward into an alpine position and used a single velcro strap across the mid shin. The yellow bit of plastic in front of the ankle is a softer durometer that backs up the very thin “EZ-Flex” zone in the otherwise stiff and tall tongue. That combination is supportive and progressive. We have heard reports of this flex point cracking in other boots, but there are no signs of it here so far. The build is laterally stiff, but I think the power strap might be missed in steep and firm snow where skis are loaded while across the fall line more often. We just started skiing steep in these parts, the single upper strap felt fine in high angle sun softened alpine neve snow and early stage melt freeze snow (cream corn if you will) while driving the new Atomic Backland 100 in a 180cm length.
Steep, sunny, alpine skiing. The shimmed forward and power strapless Skorpius was fantastic.
The Skorpius CR competes with the Scarpa Alien RS (or forthcoming F1 LT), Atomic Backland Carbon, Fischer Traverse Carbon, etc, and does so in terms of range of motion and weight. I am getting a next-class-up ski performance out of this boot, something more like the F1. The Scarpa F1 has better cuff and shin feel than the Skorpius, but bulges noticeably in the lower when fully taking advantage of the upper boot’s power. The Skorpius’ foot retention is much greater, thanks to the spider buckle and fully carbon reinforced plastic lower. Given this nearly even trade off in ski performance for a light guy like myself, and the huge uphill range of motion, I prefer the Skorpius CR over the F1 as an every day boot. Spanning two boot classes in the ideal directions? That’s a great achievement, I’ll take the extra 200+ grams over it’s lighter competitors.
SPECS
Weight: 1195 g
Shell and Cuff: Carbon Reinforced Polymer (Grilamid® / Carbon)
Flex: 100
Available Sizes: 24 – 31.5 (half sizes)
Last: 102
Range of motion: 68°
Forward lean: 3 positions (12°, 14°, 16°)
Buckles: SWING-LOCK Closure System™/ Spider Buckle Evo™/ Optional power strap
Sole: La Sportiva Grip Guard™ (complies with ISMF standards)
Binding Compatibility: TECH, AT & TR2
MSRP: $799.99
Shop for it.
On March 22nd 2021, Gary Smith tragically died in an avalanche outside of Beaver Creek Resort in Colorado. Since 2018, Gary has been a frequent and insightful contributor to WildSnow. From Christmas Eve spent at the Wildsnow Field HQ cabin, to testing gear and sharing his love for steep skiing around the world, he was a pillar of the ski touring community and will be greatly missed.
27 comments
Great review, thanks. Looks like a contender to replace my black TLT6s when they finally die.
Michael, that is so spot on. I think the TLT 6 was one of the last boots made light enough but with great skiing performance. F1 toes the line but tours sub par. I have several ski partners limping along their TLT 6s as well.
Michael I’d also look at the Atomic Backland Carbon (if it fits your foot). Tours and skis WAY better than the TLT6’s and is lighter.
Dynafit still makes the TLT 6 they just call it the SpeedFit Pro. It’s lighter and stiffer but the stock liner is pretty thin. Shell fit and function is identical to TLT 6. Swap in a better liner and it feels just like you’re used to, only better.
Hi Barry, re: SpeedFit pro, it is lasted slightly wider than the TLT6 I think. I also have not found it to be particularly durable. I cracked my carbon cuffs just skiing along. YMMV.
Wildsnow, how about a review of a SpeedFit model?
I know that Dynafit’s website says something silly for the SpeedFit Pro last width but like most last width numbers it is a lie. I am skiing the Speedfit Pro now after years in a Blue & Yellow TLT 6 Mountain, the lowers on these two boots are identical. I believe earlier TLT 6 models may have had slightly narrower fits than the later TLT 6 I was skiing, that might explain our different experiences. Bummer on the cuff problem, haven’t had an issue with mine yet, knock on wood.
I am also a lightweight dude, and am blessed to be able to backcountry ski pretty much every day. I’ve spent this season splitting time between Sportiva’s Spitfire 2.1 and Tecnica’s Zero G Pro Tour. The Spitfire hits a hair above 1kg in my 25.5 size, and the Zero G is right at 1.3kg. Both boots ski quite nicely, both up and down really, and it seems the Skorp is the update to my Spitfire with more heft and power. Guess I’m wondering, with your modded Skorps coming in above 1.25kg, why would you (or anyone else) choose this boot over the Zero G? The extra 50g of girth isn’t really going to slow anyone down; the fit (on my foot at least) is very similar; price is the same; and I can’t tell the practical difference in ROM at the cuff between my two boots. But I do notice that the ZeroG is definitely a real ski boot, and can be pushed about as hard as I can push a boot out of bounds or even riding lifts, while the Spitfire has a notable speed limit (though I too hit airs with it) and is most at home on huge days in big mountains. While I’m sure the Skorp skis a bit stiffer than my Spitfire since it’s 200g heavier, I can’t imagine it offers anywhere near the performance of the overlap cuff Tecnica, despite being effectively the same weight. If you are shopping for one boot to tour every day, why would you choose this over a boot that does not compromise at all going down, and climbs every bit as well?
@Douglas, I can perhaps answer your question from my armchair.
You are using two different weights: the weight of Gary’s modded 27.5 boots, which he did to improve heel hold and forward lean. Then you are using the weight of your size 25.5 Zero G, to arrive at a difference of 50g.
Comparing 27.5 boots, the Zero G tour Pro is 1415g without insoles or other mods. Compared to Gary’s modded Skorpius at 1265g, that is still a difference of 150g/foot!
In reality, he might have to add the ankle pads or spoiler for forward lean to the Zero G as well, bringing the weight of that boot up even more.
Then there is the walk mode. Although the Zero G walks well, other boots still walk much better, and transitions are not very fast in the Zero G either.
For people who do not need to do any mods, or who would do the same fit based mods to both boots, the weights for 27.5 are
1130g – Spitfire 2.1
1195 – Skorpius
1415g – Zero G tour Pro.
So rather than the Skorpius being 200g heavier than the Spitfire, and the Zero G only 50 heavier than the Skorpius, it is the other way around.
Of course, smaller sizes will see smaller absolute weight differences, and bigger sizes more.
So basically,
Hey Douglas,
So great question since the Zero G is my other boot this season, though with a Scarpa Maestrale RS liner and a Salomon S/Lab cam lock power strap. I use it for lift skiing and lift access backcountry. When you cut the junky stock liner (that weighs less than Skorpius’ stock) and the power strap that opens up after one turn, it does gain some weight. But really I care a ton more about touring function than weights. The main thing between the two is range of motion and touring performance. There is no comparison. If you fully blow open the Zero G, it has a passable range but is loose and sloppy. Also the fiddling with buckles. Open the top two, secure the loops in the outer most hooks, latch buckles forward, deal with double bar in back. Pants don’t fit well over it. Don’t get me wrong I think it’s a fantastic boot, I love ripping around in it without holding back at all. If I were good enough to get paid to have pictures/video taken of my skiing, it would be my choice 🙂 I just think it is a very light cross over boot, not an actual touring boot.
Thanks for the thoughtful reply, Gary.
My ski touring intentions perhaps fall toward the freeride end of the spectrum for the most part. I’ve been quite impressed by the Spitfire’s downhill performance for how incredibly it ascends. But it still seems like such a compromise to the confidence I demand for skiing big terrain fast that I see it as a specialized tool only for huge missions, or, conversely, those days where I’ve really been cranking the vert all week and want to take an easy recovery day that doesn’t involve the couch.
I’ve been blown away by the Zero G’s uphill performance/weight this season, as it’s finally a no compromise descending boot that isn’t a chore uphill. I’ll climb 5k’ in that bad boy every darn day and feel totally stoked about it, since I know that when the cameras are clicking on my descent I’m going to be able to push it to the max ? If only they hadn’t put those stupid wire buckles on there…
It’s so lovely that the gear has evolved such that these two boots can offer performance that is nearly comparable, while offering unique advantages to the respective poles of our sport. One boot that allows the backcountry freerider to send it with legs that aren’t too spent from hauling 10lbs of pbax uphill for many miles, and a second for the ski mountaineer to open the throttle and not feel like he’s gonna fall forward through his shoes after a huge approach and climb: it’s exactly the arsenal necessary for the modern, progressive backcountry skier ?
Gary, That is something I have been thinking of lately. As even the beefier boots (like the Zero G) have gotten lighter, I wonder if the biggest reason to opt for a “lighter” class boot, isn’t so much the pure weight, but the touring efficiency, ease of transitions and better climbing performance of the shorter soles of those types of boots.
In that vein, I hope manufacturers continue to work in this category: using simpler shell designs with fewer buckles super short soles and such, like the ultra light boots, but adding some weight back a reenforced shell, with beefier (warmer!) liners, large, easy to use buckles, solid power straps and a bit thicker rubber on the sole.
Slim, I’m totally in agreement, and believe there is a boot category evolving that is exactly as you describe. I would love it if I could just have one ~1300g boot that skis like the Zero G but tours and transitions like the Skorpius/Spitfire. I’m not the only one that’s been thinking this: I recently tried Dalbello’s Lupo Air 130, which would seem to be exactly that boot. Two buckles and powerstrap; a hair under 1300g in my size; progressive, stated 130 flex with 68* of cuff mobility. And you know what? It sucked. A cabrio boot without a tongue molded in very stiff plastic just didn’t feel like there was anything to push the shin against while also feeling like a prison around the calf, the ski/walk mechanism has a ton of fore-aft play right outta the box, crap liner, and wide as a moving van. But the idea sure seems to be out there among manufacturers, and I’m certain that we’ll be seeing more and more…does “freeride mountaineering boots” sounds right? Because that is exactly what I want.
Haha Doug,
I was thinking more of a name like ‘normal touring boot’. You know, for people who don’t want a quiver, don’t race uphill and don’t huck cliffs heading down.
Sort of like a trail bike in MTB terms.
Thoughtful modifications and a great review! I wish more boot manufacturers would follow Scarpa’s lead and allow a much more aggressive 20deg+ lean angle so we don’t have to fiddle so much with shims, spoilers, and straps. This is certainly inspiring me to experiment a bit more with the rapidly disintegrating powerstrap setup on my old(!) F1s. Great as always to see someone pushing just how hard they can ski the lighter side of compromise boots.
RE: spider buckle. I have experienced pressure on the medial mid foot from the rivet on the Sytron spider buckle. Is this more recessed or modified in some way on the Skorpius to prevent that? Or is it a non-issue? Thanks – great review.
Hi Robyn,
There is a difference in shell positioning for sure. I can’t speak exactly to that. The buckle is in generally the same spot though. I have a mild bone spur on the top of one foot directly under the buckle, and was concerned. The seam of the liner also landed there. I cut the entire liner seem out of that spot and relieved that issue. So many variables since the edges of the liners and shells land on different spots for different folks. Try on the liner outside of the boot, play with marking. Or hit up a knowledgable boot fitter.
Thanks Gary, great review. I’ve also used a similar franken-shim on the back of my A-RS’s, but have found adhesion to be a problem, as they tend to migrate on me with flex. What kind of concoction do you have goin on there? Looks like shim-boot board-tape-pad-cement???
Any pointers?
Hey Mike!
First layer is dense foam with self adhesive. It’s a really big piece so a lot of glue spread out, tape on if necessary. Next layer is doubled over gorilla duct tape from hard plastic to foam. The key here is to have 2 different pieces of double over tape placed in perpendicular directions. Otherwise the tape will migrate in the direction it is rolled. Gorilla duct seems to work much better with liner foam than traditional. Hope that helps!
Hi Gary,
You mention you are a lightweight person, could you list your heigh and weigh?
For those of you who can read German, here is another good review of this boot:
https://www.powderguide.com/magazin/equipment/artikel/materialtest-la-sportiva-skorpius-cr.html
If you don’t read German, the gist of it is he says:
“The boots toured very well, no friction in the range of motion at all. Cuff is stiff enough to control a wider ki on icy skin traverses, In smooth, consistent snow, I could control my skis very well and ski hard. In poor snow I could get down, but it was much more fatiguing, it simply took much more effort to turn the skis than with a beefier boot”
Slim,
I am slim as well ha, just a shade under 6′ and 155 lbs. Ill let you do the conversions 🙂 I agree with the German review. And would offer that poor snow is more difficult in any boot. But ya, exaggerated in a lighter one.
Thanks Gary, good to know, especially when we are talking about how stiff a boot feels.
For example, I am 6’5” and 175, so roughly 22% more torque than you (8% longer lever and 13% more weight).
I would love to see a shoot out review between the Scorpius, TLT8, F1, and the Backland. I think you have to include the F1 because so many people have it that it’s a good reference point.
Yes, Gary, could you offer more comparisons in fit and walking comfort with the F1?
Sure thing. NO comparison in walk comfort. The Scorpius way outshines the F1. Even after further opening of the the silly limiting velcro/buckle on the F1. Skorpius fits a shade tighter in the ankle and wider in the forefoot. I eventually had to punch the F1 6th toe. Will not on the Skorpius.
UPDATE
With heavier spring snow, especially later in the day, I have been looking for a bit more beef. I’ll try synching down the cuff buckle every once and awhile but always regret it and loosen. I did put the power strap back on and keep it super loose. Maybe 1/4″ gap between tongue in non flexed ski mode. It seems to still allow for a soft progressive flex but then catches when needed to limit the bottom out. Helpful on afternoon exits in nasty wet/isothermic snow. Still no durability issues. Liner is pretty well packed out behind the heels. Added a bontex shim under the liner recently to snug it back up. Still very stoked on this boot!
Gary, Updates to the liner mods would be appreciated. Everything about this boot feels good except the exceptional amount of heel lift I’m getting. Any insights on your corrections would be appreciated.
Comments are closed.