A boot’s range of motion is not some mystical concept. Some do it right, some aspire. Considering your specific needs, the boots in this image land on the do it right side. L-R, Alien 1.0 (yeah kind of specialized), TLT X, and the Skorpius CR II.
Hey readers, we’re looking for basic information and reader input on ski boots, specifically, perceived range of motion (ROM) while skinning, climbing, and hiking. We’re working on a story about such nerdy concepts. Generally, we spend 90% of our backcountry touring time going uphill, so things like ROM matter. (Maybe not in the big Cosmos, but for skintrack efficiency, we are nodding yes.)
Let’s dive into range of motion for a moment. We think of ROM as ski boot cuff articulation. We prefer friction-free pivot/articulation, but physics happens: some boots, most notably those in the speed touring segment, have greater ROM, while beefier boots, think freeride, tend to have more friction and a corresponding smaller ROM. A few things are in play when considering the range of motion. There’s the shell design; does the shell overlap, for example? There’s the liner. Does the liner feature a thick padded tongue or something more minimal? Does the liner feature engineered flex regions?
And then there’s the ski/walk mechanism. Let’s hope this is highly engineered and serves its purpose — to lock the upper and lower boot together to descend and reverse the step when walking.
Further still, some of us compromise ROM willingly on the up-track for a stiffer skiing experience on the downs. Some backcountry skiers want massive ROM no matter what; compromising skiability when descending is part of the agreement.
Let’s get even more granular: binding risers play a part, too, when accommodating for decreased ROM. It goes something like this (which may only apply to some): with lower ROM, some prefer to deploy higher risers more often when the skintrack kicks up. We’ll be asking about risers in the Google Form.
If you have five minutes, we’d love your input by filling out the linked Google Form. We will not be collecting email addresses for participants. Thanks for considering.
You can find the Google Form here too.
— WildSnow
While most of the WildSnow backcountry skiing blog posts are best attributed to a single author, some work well as done by the group.
18 comments
Link is broken for me
Fixed the link in the block quote: let me know if it does not work. Thanks.
Is there a way to enter mullet boots? Many of us own, or have owned, multiple (current) models. Entering the, would provide a better data set.
Hey there, you can enter any boot you want and add the corresponding info, this would include a “mullet, hybrid, modified boot. Just be clear in the short answer for question 3 so we know it is a modified boot with say a cuff from boot A and a lower from boot B. I can see all the details (minus any emails) in a spreadsheet. I hope this helps out. Let me know if it does not. Thanks.
My bad typing. I want “ multiple” boots , so funny that it actually made sense the other way. And maybe it’s useful info for someone.
Most people I know own 2 or 3 pairs of AT boots (I own 4, all get regularly used) and match them to the tour objectives of that particular day. This survey seemed aimed at someone who owns one pair. I will say that the ROM has improved enough across the industry that even my Maestrale XT’s have an acceptable ROM, which means I don’t need the tall heel risers I needed a decade ago. I also think it’s useful to define the ‘ROEM’ — range of easy motion. Some boots have a large theoretical ROM but much of it is in high friction zone.
Hey there, you can enter boot info for several boots…you’ll just need to complete the survey a second/third time…sorry about that.
Yes, I agree , it’s the usable, resistance free range that matters.
Good to know. I thought since it had my email, it would erase the previous entry
ROM of boot is obviously related to ankle ROM. It seems common to hear these days that folks can use a lower riser or no riser if in a boot with a large ROM. I basically agree with that, but feel that ankle ROM also influences when and how much riser to use. For instance, I have somewhat limited ankle ROM, especially in dorsiflexion, and sometimes have tight Achilles, hamstrings. Therefore I sometimes use my low riser when others are using no riser, or high riser when others are using low.
Riser vs ROM is a weird concept for me. I don’t use a riser because my boot has limited range of motion, I use risers because it is more comfortable when ascending rather than constantly putting that strain on my calves and achilles. Who would want to walk up a ramp when you can walk up a staircase? I have plenty of ankle mobility, this doesn’t limit me at all, I’m one of those gifted people with a hypermobile ankle. The caveat, I guess, is most of my touring time is spent trying to climb up steep Tahoe skintracks.
How about throwing a bone to your knee-dropping brethren by taking this opportunity to highlight the sorry state of affairs in the world of telemark boots? The “best” touring boot currently sold, the Scarpa TX-Pro, weighs 1800g and has a whopping 22 degrees of ROM. Just brutal.
Damn, 22-degrees ROM is indeed brutal. I wish I had a bone to throw your way. I do recall when the original plastic-shelled Scarpa T2 (I think it was a T2) arrived and I thought it was divine intervention from the boot makers.
I actually entered my TX Pro Frankenboots into the form (hope that didn’t throw you for a loop Jason!). The 22° ROM on the un-modded TX Pro is probably a bit generous. I honestly had a hard time telling when one boot accidentally clicked into ski mode. That’s how bad the stock walk mode is. With a cuff mod and some work with different buckles and a Dremel I’ve gotten my TX Pros to a workable ~40° (or so?) ROM and down to about 1500g per boot. Still not comparable to a race boot, but getting in the neighborhood of a beefy Maestrale-class boot.
Scarpa keeps saying a new boot is coming out, but the rumor I’ve heard is it’s pretty similar to what tele skiers have been cobbling together themselves for a few years. I’ll believe it when I see it. Until then…sigh…
Thanks Matt, and love what you have been doing with the Hyperlite pack mods and safety pocket add-on. (I think I have the correct Matt.)
You bet Jason! Been fun making them and problem-solving in that way.
@Matt I also entered my Tx-Pro Frankenboots. Tx-Pro lower + Maestrale RS upper. Saved about 100g but dramatically increased the rearward ROM. Forward ROM was never really an issue with the Tx-Pro, but rearward was just pathetic. Agree that I could barely feel the difference between walk/ski mode. So much better now after the cuff swap.
Oh boy, quite a can of worms opened up here. The telemark boot modification scene is thriving, and is well documented on the Instagram account @telemark_is_undead_