Intuition Backcountry Skiing Boot Liners 2.0
Intuition liner 2.0 is based on the Luxury Liner, but uses even more advanced materials.
It is not surprising that the Intuition 2.0 liner looks like Intuition’s other tongue liners (Luxury and Freeride liners) as they are based on the same panel construction design. I’ve already written quite a bit about Intuition’s other liners in a previous Wildsnow article so please reference that for more gushing praise.
The key difference in the Intuition 2.0 liner is the use in strategic locations a 4mm layer of a new Intuition foam. Intuition is calling this new foam “Enact PE.” Enact PE can be distinguished from the very soft “Flexalon” foam used only in the Intuition Pro-tour liner, which was used in strategic spots in the Pro Tour liner to encourage tourability and walking/striding comfort for backcountry skiing. Enact PE is also differentiated from the standard Ultralon Intuition foam used in its other liners (including the wrap and tongue liners) by a change in thermoforming characteristics.
While all Intuition foam thermomolds somewhat as the liners are used (think sweaty feet and the heat they generate), the new 2.0 Enact PE foam accelerates in-use molding. Intuition anticipates that people who don’t have access to a shop who they can trust to thermomold a liner or who do not trust themselves to undertake a home-based liner bake (move that pie mate, I need the kitchen oven) will be drawn to the 2.0 liner and it’s off-the-shelf fit.
Having said that, the 2.0 liner can be cooked to expedite the breaking-in process. The downside to the accelerated thermomoldable characteristics of the Enact PE foam is that it may not be able to be cooked as frequently as the standard Intuition foam. Where Intuition suggests that its standard liners can be cooked 4 to 5 times, they anticipate that a user who oven or hot-air-blower molds a 2.0 liner might only get 3 or so molding heat/cool cycles out of their liner.
The logical target for the Intuition 2.0 liner is the OE market but this is of puerile interest to Wildsnow readers. In the backcountry skiing aftermarket, I would imagine that people with generic feet (those that fit the Intuition “phantom last”) who do not necessarily need their liners to be cooked might consider the 2.0 liner. Those who have unusual feet or who typically need a lot of boot/liner work would probably be best advised to get standard Intuition liners and liaise with a trusted bootfitter.
Cutout of the 2.0 Luxury liner showing a thicker (9mm) overlay of black standard Ultralon foam mixed in with the white thin (4mm) strip of Enact PE foam which is covered with an abrasion resistant fetching orange cover.
Fit & Performance
I used a size 9.0 and size 10 Intuition 2.0 liner in a Scarpa Mobe and in a soft Atomic alpine boot. I did not mold the liner. My boots are size 27.0 Mondo. I caveat my conclusions with the fact that I am a very generic foot. I find it easy to fit a lot of boots and liners.
I found both sizes of liners to have a comfortable out-of-the-box fit. Both liners had a very roomy toe-box which I appreciate for touring. I am actually testing the Scarpa Mobes and tried to use the stock Scarpa liner (basically OE Intuition luxury liners with custom foam thicknesses for Scarpa) but found the Intuition 2.0 liners to be more comfortable for touring then the OE Mobe liners. I’ve had 9 days on the Intuition 2.0 liners on the Mobe.
Subsequently I have used these same liners for 40 more days of touring in Dynafit ZZeus and Scarpa Maestrale boots. I also have a thin version of the liners which just have 4mm of foam underfoot and are the lowest volume liner ever made by Intuition, I installed these in a Dynafit TLT5 Performance and used for 5 days. My personal Intuition 2.0 liners are still comfortable and do not show any signs of packing out (I compared them to another sample pair which I have in my alpine boots which have only been used 5 days).
Intuition 2.0 liner in Dynafit TLT5. Liner upgrades over OEM are not necessary for everyone, but always something to consider if you have even the slightest problem getting a stock liner and boot to fit and ski well.
Even more illuminating was that Intuition provided my very-fussy-about-her feet-wife some Intuition 2.0 liners. She has used them without complaint regarding fit and has more than 40 days on them. This is in contrast with her standard Intuition liners which required fitting by Intuition. My conclusions from this very isolated single datapoint is that the off-the-shelf fit of the Enact PE Intuition 2.0 liner is indeed remarkable.
There isn’t much to say about the performance that has not already been said. The Intuition 2.0 liner skied like any other Intuition tongued liner; which is to say very well. It’s not as tall or stiff as the wrap liners but is still a best-in-class upgrade over many OE liners.
Of note, Intuition has listened to customer feedback regarding footbeds in liners and has resiled from their earlier recommendation/position that their liners do not need footbeds. While some people don’t need footbeds (I’m one of those), everyone’s feet are different and the Intuition 2.0 liner will be produced with different thicknesses of foam in forefoot and in the foot sections all with the goal of achieving off-the-shelf comfort but room for footbed if desired.
One downside of the 2.0 foam thicknesses is that my feet got cold in the Intuition 2.0 liner during an especially chilly spell this past season. I attribute this to the thinner foam used in the foot section of the liner (4mm and 6mm of foam compared to 12mm in my older Luxury liners). Solution is of course to either use an insulating footbed (most are), or in my case (since I don’t use arched footbeds), just a layer of insulating material under the foot or inside the boot shell under the liner.
Intuition 2.0 liner (left), taller Intuition Alpine Powerwrap liner (right)
Cost and how to buy
Cost of the Intuition 2.0 liner is the same as the standard Intuition Luxury liner – around $180.00. Liners are available either direct through Intuition or at Intuition retailers.
(Guest blogger Lee Lau is an avid skier and outdoorsman embarking on many adventures with his loving, and sometimes concerned wife, Sharon. He has over fifteen years of experience backcountry skiing and dabbles in mountaineering. In the “off-season” he is occasionally found working in his day job as an intellectual property lawyer when he is not mountain biking. As a resident of Vancouver and Whistler, British Columbia, Lee’s playground extends mainly to Western Canada, including South West B.C. and the Selkirks. Lee writes here.)
Comments
40 Responses to “Intuition Backcountry Skiing Boot Liners 2.0”
Got something to say? Please do so.
how well did the thin version work in the TLT5 boots, compared to the Dynafit liners? Were they as wide a range of ankle articulation as the stock TF liners?
Tim – the Intuition 2.0 liners I had didn’t have the same articulation as the TF liners. I lost a whopping 2cms of glide which confirmed to me that the main source of the enormous TLT5 glide was from the almost resistance-less upper cuff. I might recover the glide with an Intuition Pro-tour liner which has the same ankle articulation cut out as the stock TF liners but I couldn’t get my Pro-Tours to fit the TLT5.
Other differences
– The Intuition liners don’t feel like a wet sock which is what the stock TF liners felt like after 20+ days of use
– I don’t get cold feet in the Intuition liners as I did in the TF liners (of course, after I put in a footbed)
As many of you know, I used some Intuition Pro Tour liners in my Dynafit TLT5Ps. Am very happy. They took up more volume and I’m totally satisfied with the amount of cuff movement. I ski them without the add-on fiddly plastic shell tongue, because the liner has a beefed tongue of its own. Interestingly, I’ve skied the TLT5 so much now I’m really noticing how the metatarsal sag translates directly to extra cuff movement in downhill mode. Not usually a big deal, but when needing more forward support I really notice it. The add-on tongue doesn’t make much difference with this, as it is movement caused by the bending of the lower ‘shoe.’
I still really really like the TLT5, so don’t get me wrong. Am just being honest about my observations.
how much do they weigh ? in the size 9 😀
argh – I forgot to put in that important detail – sorry Mike. My sz 26.5s is about 8.5 I think? 205g per liner
I should have caught that omission Lee, sorry!
Lee, Lou,
I bought a pair of sz 28 Pro-Tour liners to replace the crummy stock liners in my BD Factors (sz 26.5) I have put 32 touring days, 1 cat ski day, and 7 resorts on the setup.
While I’m very happy with Intuition liners (My toes weren’t frostbitten after a rather artic -25 F touring day and they don’t give me blisters) , I find that the BD Factor’s w/ Pro-Tour Liners can’t match the Heel Holding ability of my Salomon X-Wave 10 boots.
Is it an unreal expectation of my touring boot setup to have same heel hold as my alpine race setup?
BTW, It annoys me that I have to buy a $250 liner to replace the liner on a $700 ski boot in the first place. Boot manufacturers need to step up with they’re liner quality and performance!
Thanks, David
David,
Fit is a really really tough thing. I never fit Salomon boots so I can’t comment on their fit but I know that a bootfitter can tweak boots (yes even AT boots) so they approximate alpine boot feel. But I’ve yet to get the kind of fit on alpine boots on AT boots. I can approximate the feet with all sorts of tweaks (eg pads glued in appropriate places, shims etc) but its just an approximation.
And yeah – I’m going to quote Louie Dawson on this “AT boot companies should give up on making their own liners and just use Intuitions”. But then I admit to being a proud drinker of the Intuition kool-aid. Frankly they’re the best liners out there. By far.
I too was disgusted when I had to chuck the POS liners in my expensive Garmont boots. The Intuition OE equipped boots are no more, and in many cases not as, expensive as other boots.
I have a pair of Dynafit boots, and the liners are better than the Garmont OE liners, but still not as warm/comfortable as the Intuition liners that reside in the shells now.
David, heel hold is as much a function of custom fitting as anything else. There are a ton of factors that influence it. One of the biggest problems is you can tighten up a liner in that area all you want, but in many cases that’ll cause blister issues during longer walks. It can be a compromise. Another thing that can really help is paying attention to where your instep buckle is located. Sometimes moving one side or the other (or both) back just a bit can make a huge difference in your perception of heel hold-down. Likewise, adding padding over the instep can create more of a feeling of heel hold.
What’s probably helped me the most with heel hold is simply downsizing most of the boot shells I end up with, and if necessary blowing out the toe for toe room. In some cases that is SO much easier than taking a boot that’s too sloppy and trying to make it fit…
P.S., It is SUPER important to realize that if you use a liner with softer foam, it will never feel as solid as a liner with denser foam. Hence, if you change to Pro Tour from a more downhill oriented liner, there may be little to no solution for more heel hold as your heel lifting feeling might be simply coming from the foam compressing and allowing your foot to move.
I’ve been thinking about heal blisters a bit lately, and am curious if anyone thinks that technique as well as boot fit might be a factor. Specifically, I wonder if a tele influenced climbing technique– climbing off the ball of the foot– might cause heal friction in AT gear where the sole doesn’t flex (unlike a tele boot).
Also, +1 for Intuition liners.
My foot is EEE wide, but narrow at the heel. Boots that were side enough in fore-foot allowed my heel to ride all over the place. So, I went with a narrower boot (Garmont as opposed to Scarpa at the time) and created more room up front. Took some trues to get the boots dialed, but was worth the effort.
… and by “heal” I mean “heel.”
See, most certainly, how you move your foot can have a huge effect, as will how your boots are buckled, and even what socks you’re wearing. Temperature is even a big thing. Warm sweaty feet blister easier, for example.
Bottom line, however, is if blister problems persist with a given boot, it’s best to first try a different liner, and if that doesn’t work, cut bait and go to a different brand/model, or different size shell.
(Above after you toughen your feet up a bit, of course).
Is there a heel toughening product/process? Having issues with the inside of my heels. Plan to do a re-mold of the liner as I think it is a little ‘scrunched’ (technical term), which maybe from not getting the side of the liner clean and crease free when entering boot or initial molding (zipfits). Not skinning in alpine boots would be another option….
Cheers.
Frame, a few things.
Pre-taping your feet. And look at your custom footbeds see if they’re “posted” up in such a way at the heel that they tilt your heel and cause the inside of the heel to press harder at an angle. Hard to describe but if you look at the footbeds, easy to see. If you don’t have custom beds, then probably no issue with this. If posted, try skiving a bit to drop your heel into a more natural angle inside the boot. Just a tiny bit can make a big difference in blister action.
Beyond that, just using the boots up to the point of getting a blister will toughen your skin in the blister area. But such use has to be quite frequent.
It’s also said that using athlete’s foot medication on blister prone areas will cause callus to build up faster because it kills little critters that gnaw away at your callus. Not sure that’s true, but I’ve done that occasionally when I’ve had boots that were blister prone, and it seemed to help. Again, done days BEFORE getting blisters to help toughen feet.
@See: I changed my climbing method quite significantly after switching to AT from Tele. I was used to the ball-of-the-foot bending and bending of the bellows (most of my tele bindings were pre-tour-mode types). When beginning AT, I loosened all my buckles so I could bend my foot. That has changed with 50 days on my TLT5s. Now, I use the thigh muscles to lift my heel just enough to allow the knee to act as a hinge allow the ski to swing forward and then, when conditions are good, just a tiniest kick to lengthen the stride. Now on both my TLT5s and Zzeros, i leave the forefoot buckle buckled, I don’t bend my forefoot, my liners stay in place in the boot, and my feet stay in place in the liners–saving wear on the liners, friction on the feet, and strain on the knees.
Andy, good point! I’ve always thought that the non-free-pivot tele bindings could result in some inefficient climbing habits, am now realizing those habits can cross over into AT. Something to be aware of, but easily corrected.
Leuctoplast or moleskin over an area will help avoid blisters. The advanced care bandages are good for the blisters, with Lectoplast over or waterproof tape..
^ I can highly recommend Fixomull Stretch tape ( a Leuko product). It’s thin, and because it stretches it can be applied with no wrinkles. I used to use two layers of this preventively on my heels, and also on my shins with boots that attacked them. It will stay on indefinitely, and will re-stick when it dries if not disturbed. On shins it will stay on for weeks(!) even after showering, but will wear down on heels (needs an extra layer every few days). As feet sweat more than shins I find I need to reapply it more there.
Are these geared for the touring market? I’d like to try them in a downhill performance boot (Head Raptor 120s). I’m wondering if they’re beefy enough for that boot? Thanks
John, they make some liners that are alpine specific, some that cross either way.
Is the Dreamliner one of those, a crossover? The intuition site seems to indicate its for downhill skiing, but it’s not entirely clear. If so I wonder how it compares to the HD and FD race liners
I’m a little confused, when I look at the Intuition website I don’t see a 2.0 liner, is this now called the Dreamliner that is on their website? Would the Dreamliner be a good replacement for a Scarpa Maestrale stock intuition? Is the Dreamliner higher than the protour liner? Would medium volume be a good choice for the Maestrale?
Mike – somehow I missed the questions so this is probably too late
1. 2.0 liners are now called Dreamliners. The name changed after I wrote this article
2. Maestrale stock liner is a Scarpa – branded Intuition Luxury liner made out of the first generation foam. Dreamliner is a good replacement if you don’t want to thermomold the Maestrale stock liner
3. Dreamliner might be higher than the Pro-tour liner. (don’t have the Protour in front of me to compare) It’ll be slightly stiffer.
4. Medium vol would be a good choice if you have medium volume foot but I have no idea about the volume of your foot so am just guessing
Enact Pe systems are much more cheaper than Eva systems…
I keep in mind that Intuition and Ultralon have some long time licence agreements with Eva Foams.
Does Ultralon foam (New zealand) is higher in price than many other sources ?
Does Intuition get some pressure to reduce costs ?
Intuition is selling dreams and is providing us a conventional stock liner at big price…
Save your money, http://www.palau-boutique.com
Question here…
I have an older pair of Scarpa T2s (the blue ones), and I am considering swapping out the original liner to an intuition liner. I experience pain right on the bottom of my big toe, usually towards the end of the day. Not sure if it’s from bad form (which I surely have) or that the boots are too packed out/don’t fit properly. I skied the boots a lot 4-5 years ago, but am only just now getting back into more regular skiing.
What are the chances that new liners (and a good fitting) will help with my issues?
Thanks.
Any thoughts on a good liner to update my BDel Factors with? The liners they came with are toasted.
Thanks for any thoughts!
#cantwaitforsnow !
Jason, I’d look at all Intuition options, and pick one that either makes the boot stiffer, or is biased more on the comfort side.
Of if you really really liked the Factors as they are out of the box, talk to a BD dealer and see if you can get another set of BD liners!
Lou
Hi Lou,
I recently got a pair of TLT5 boots and recall you saying the Intuition (Protour?) liners take up more volume than the stock ones around the ankle. Could you please tell me what size shells you have and what size liners you used? My shells are 28.0/28.5 and I have a low volume foot, but the length is spot on. The boots are awesome, and the lateral power is massively ahead of my Scarpa F3s. 🙂
Thanks!
Hi Lou, the boot is stiff enough, my main issue is comfort. Which of these options is best for the “slipper” effect? 🙂 Is the Freeride or Alpine a good option? Or… in all reality, I should just go to the shop and look at em… thanks for any input!
stephen – I’m not Lou but I used sz 27 liners in a sz 27 TLT5 boot
Jason -for comfort get either the Luxury or Freeride liners (ie the ones with the tongue)
Does anyone know the difference between the Palau OVPH wrap liner
(http://www.palau-boutique.com/ski-boot-liners-customfit-alpine-freeride,us,3,15.cfm)
and Intuition Powerwrap liners? The Palau’s are about $70-$80 cheaper. I’m wondering if the Intuition liners are worth the extra $$$.
I’m looking to get new liners for my new Dynafit One boots.
Thanks!!
Warning for those, who want to heat mold Intuition liners. When heat molded, they can shrink in length more than 1 cm (0.4 inch)! They shrunk so much, that they are small now, even that I had toe caps when heat molding. By second head molding i tried to stretch them (wearing more toe caps), but the foam on the sides of the foot packed down and cant fill the space now between foot and shell. I payed attention to buckle very loose while heat molding, to enable the foam fill void spaces on the sides. The head molded liner is totally ruined now. Not only is small, but also thinner.
I have Scarpa Rush AT ski boots with original Intuition liners supplied by manufacturer. I used convection oven method.
kubo, — with the greatest of respect you may have screwed up. Lots of Intuition liners get molded with toe caps to stretch the liners.
I’ll second Mr. Lau’s post. I’ve molded intuitions at least 6 times DIY at 240F for 12 minutes, with 2-3mm foam/socks toes/duct tape and had consistently good results. I also use mineral oil and duct tape so heels go in easy. I always mold with foot bed liner in the shell whilst in the oven.
When they’re done right, they turn out good. But a few too many degrees of heat and the foam ends up shrinking instead of expanding. Biggest problem with DIY is making sure you get the exact temperature. Me, I’ve found that the infrared thermometer is essential for consistent results. Oven thermometer tends to be off. Lou
Hi Lee,
Looking to replace liners in my Garmont Radium. Hesitating between pro tongue and dreamliner. What s your take on the diff models. I d like to keep the boot stiff for down but without killing the up.
Thanks, Phil
Hi Phil, unless you are quite demanding on your boots, my take is the Dreamliner provides the best mix of up-down, and the Radium already being fairly stiff and tall wouldn’t need an extra beefy liner. But it depends on your style of skiing. If you tend to feel that most boots are “soft” then I wouldn’t hesitate to stick the stiffest liner possible in there and just accept the slightly more limited uphill comfort.
https://www.wildsnow.com/2057/garmont-radium-boots-review/
Lou
Phil,
I run the Power Wraps in my Radiums, two pair, my originals and a brand new pair I found on Amazon last fall. I’ve a lower volume foot but also appreciate the increase in stiffness in an already pretty powerful boot .. and they climb just fine too ..