New Garmont Axon — Another Dynafit Compatible Beef Boot

Post by blogger | November 1, 2007      

(defunct Garmont links removed)

Not to be outdone by stiff Dynafit compatible boots such as the Dynafit Zzero line, Garmont has entered the fray. We’ll be publishing a hands-on first look of these in a few days, and will have a pair out for testing. Till then, here is a teaser. One of the more interesting things about this model, aside from it being a high performance boot with Dynafit fittings, is that it has a footboard that levels the shell arch so it’s flat, meaning it can be configured with custom foot beds just like an alpine boot — without endless grinding and other compensations for the shell’s footboard shape. Interesting that it has a cant mechanism as well, and the promo text mentions friendliness for customization. More info below photo, taken from press release so weights and such have not been real-world verified.

Garmont Axon backcountry skiing boot

Stiffness: Endorphin polymers; stiff forward flex and torsional rigidity

Weight: 2075 grams, 4.57 pounds (1/2 pr size 27.5).

Fit and Volume: Similar to the Endorphin, improved to include the flat footboard.

Micropore inner sole for warmth and shock absorption. This inner sole (zeppa) is removable and, like an alpine boot, can be customized by bootfitter.

Walk mechanism: Three-position cuff lock and walk mechanism: 20º, 25º, and free for walking

Rear Spoiler Removable with adjustable height.

Double Injected Cuff – The front of the cuff is injected with a softer durometer that wraps closely and around the lower leg for the quickest response, the sides and rear of the cuff are a stiffer durometer for lateral stiffness and support for leverage.

Double Injected Broadband Tongue – Creates a smooth, progressive forward flex, and disperses buckle pressure. Asymmetrical shape disperses shin pressure.


Please Enjoy A Few Suggested WildSnow Posts


9 Responses to “New Garmont Axon — Another Dynafit Compatible Beef Boot”

  1. Dave F. November 1st, 2007 7:31 am

    Interesting to note the disparity in US and Canadian Dollar prices given the current exchange rate. If I were possessed to have these and pay full pop retail, I would save money by converting Canadian cash to US dollars and saving on both the exchange rate and lower $US price!

  2. Lou November 1st, 2007 9:01 am

    Dave, that’s just what was in the PR, who knows what the street price will be. I publish the MSRP simply to give a general idea of the pricing.

  3. Dave F. November 1st, 2007 10:28 am

    I’m sure they set those retail prices months ago when nobody knew that the Loonie would rise in value to exceed the Greenback. The current exchange rate is having a real impact on Canadian retailers who haven’t been able to drop prices accordingly to discourage Canadians from shopping across the border and realizing huge savings. Its also making that BC hut trip 20% more expensive for the US based skier.

  4. Justin November 1st, 2007 10:39 am

    The word from Garmont insiders is that there will be no pro-form or shop-form discounts for the Axon this year due to very limited numbers of the boots being distributed in the U.S. They do look burly, but they are a pound heavier per boot (not per pair) than Megarides or Zzeros.

  5. Tom Gosiorowski November 1st, 2007 8:54 pm

    I have been interested to learn more about these boots since I started seeing spy photos on some of the forums a few weeks ago. Definitely looks like the highest performance dynafit boot in terms of downhill performance, but it has some big numbers in terms of both price and weight. I wonder if it really weighs that much as I think the Endorphin is lighter. I’m in the market for a high performance downhill oriented Dynafit boot, but I’m not sure I could bring myself to pay that much. One has to wonder if it really skis that much better than a Zzero, Spirit 4, or modified Megaride. Also wonder what the price will be from the online euro retailers.

  6. Marc November 2nd, 2007 10:12 am

    Another fine entry for the downhill oriented dynafit compatible boots… It’d be nice if a thorough review was done on all these “beef boots” to see how they stacked up to one another in terms of weight, flex, stiffness, fit, etc. As it is, one must sift through lots of forums to get any information and it’s never all on the same page, nor is it objective. I still can’t figure out what’s stiffer: the zzero c, the zzero u or the spirit 4; and how do they compare to something like an adrenaline, which is what I have used for the last 3 years. These new beef boots are in a legue of their own, and the comparisons to the megarides only go so far. Lou, can you help us out?

  7. Mark Burggraff November 5th, 2007 7:47 am

    Do you think the increasingly beefy nature of Dynafit compatible boots will cause reliability issues with Dynafit bindings over the long haul. I guess I think that most of the boots marketed in the past with Dynafit compatiblity have been more touring (hence lighter) oriented. With the heavier, stiffer boots coming out now I would suspect the forces applied to the toe unit would be even greater. Or maybe the increase in force is not as much as I suspect. By the way have you ever had a Dynafit binding fail? If so what is the more common point of failure, the rear of the binding or the front? These questions are coming from a person thinking of joining the Dynafit tribe.


    Mark B

  8. Lou November 5th, 2007 8:52 am

    Hi Mark, this could indeed be a case of chicken/egg escalation — or perhaps everything will work in perfect harmony. I’ve thought quite a bit about the issue, and my main conclusion is that we need to get the beef boots out on the snow, on some charging skiers, and see what happens. As is frequently the case with ski bindings, consumer testing will tell the tale. I think we’ll know the answer in about four months.

    As for Dynafit failures, the three in our family have been using Dynafit bindings for years and we’ve not had one catastrophic failure. But like anything Dynafits can break, yet no more so than any other AT binding. In fact, with the amount of use these things are getting all over the world I’m pretty surprised when someone asks about Dynafit durability as compared to other AT bindings. It seems to me that the jury has reached a verdict on that one. At any rate, info on Dynafit’s rare foibles is here:

  9. Frank November 5th, 2007 9:21 am


    If you haven’t already seen this thread at tgr, it’s about as close as you’re likely to get in terms of an objective AT boot stiffness comparison. Hopefully AT manufacturers continue making boots which at least attempt to approach the performance of alpine boots.

  Your Comments

  Recent Posts

Facebook Twitter Email Instagram Youtube

WildSnow Twitter Feed


  • Blogroll & Links

  • Welcome to Louis (Lou) Dawson's backcountry skiing information & opinion website. Lou's passion for the past 50 years has been alpinism, climbing, mountaineering and skiing -- along with all manner of outdoor recreation. He has authored numerous books and articles about ski touring and is well known as the first person to ski down all 54 of Colorado's 14,000-foot peaks, otherwise known as the Fourteeners! Books and free ski touring news and information here.

    All material on this website is copyrighted, the name WildSnow is trademarked, permission required for reproduction (electronic or otherwise) and display on other websites. PLEASE SEE OUR COPYRIGHT and TRADEMARK INFORMATION.

    We include "affiliate sales" links with most of our blog posts. This means we receive a percentage of a sale if you click over from our site (at no cost to you). None of our affiliate commission links are direct relationships with specific gear companies or shopping carts, instead we remain removed by using a third party who manages all our affiliate sales and relationships. We also sell display "banner" advertising, in this case our relationships are closer to the companies who advertise, but our display advertising income is carefully separated financially and editorially from our blog content, over which we always maintain 100% editorial control -- we make this clear during every advertising deal we work out. Please also notice we do the occasional "sponsored" post, these are under similar financial arrangements as our banner advertising, only the banner or other type of reference to a company are included in the blog post, simply to show they provided financial support to and provide them with advertising in return. Unlike most other "sponsored content" you find on the internet, our sponsored posts are entirely under our editorial control and created by WildSnow specific writers.See our full disclosures here.

    Backcountry skiing is dangerous. You may be killed or severely injured if you do any form of ski mountaineering, skimo randonnee and randonnée skiing. The information and news on this website is intended only as general information. Due to human error and passing time, the information, text and images contained within this website may be inaccurate, false, or out-of-date. By using, reading or viewing the information provided on this website, you agree to absolve the owners of Wild Snow as well as content contributors of any liability for injuries or losses incurred while using such information. Furthermore, you agree to use any of this website's information, maps, photos, or binding mounting instructions templates at your own risk, and waive Wild Snow owners and contributors of liability for use of said items for ski touring or any other use.

    Switch To Mobile Version