The New Sole of Skiing: Part 2

[markojp]

Switching to Cochise freeride boots for multiple reasons. Last years treks had me walking for hours in boots before and after the slopes. Europe and Canada I noticed a ton of freeride boots around town, heck even in the grocery store.
Finding as my bones and joints age the range of motion a boot like that offers is all good. In discussions with my boot fitter I can always swap out the soles for the vibram alternative as needed as I phase in bindings over the next few years depending on how the bindings evolve.

There is certainly a place for boots that are easier to walk in. I might suggest them to race parents, and even coaches/techs will sometimes use them. Other places, better traction for safety while boot packing is absolutely a consideration especially for longer and more exposed hikes. I'm not against a third way between DIN and AT, I guess it's the silliness of groups of manufactures unable to work together to make one 'third way' standard and the inevitable problems this is going to cause consumers in both the new and especially the used gear markets.

 

[Greg Whitehouse]

I know @Greg Whitehouse and his team at California Ski Company put a lot of their eggs into this basket with many of their boots being WTR/GripWalk and AT. Let's see if we can get him to chime in.

Thanks Phil for asking me to jump in here. I feel it is an important subject and appreciate the complexity of the issue. Phil is right. We are early adopters and have decided to put a lot of our inventory dollars into "walkable sole" boots. The industry recognizes that walking in boots is problematic. It is clumsy and dangerous. Rockered soles are easier. Rubber on the sole helps. If you don't think it makes a big difference then I believe you probably have not tried the WTR or Gripeslk models. I am absolutely sure that I am personally at higher risk for injury in a parking lot, bathroom, or bar than I am on the ski slopes. Industry data shows that it is not just me. Walking in ski boots on slippery surfaces is dicey.
The manufacturers are not going to change this new direction. They make it understood that in five years or so there will probably be no flat DIN spec boots readily available on recreational boots. Their rhetoric is altruistic but they also know that they stand to make a lot of money if everyone that buys boots needs new bindings. Retailers understand that too so may be more inclined to say "yes to safety and comfort!".
The different approaches is currently our biggest issue as an industry. Multiple types of incompatable soles are not in our best interest as a skiing community. It can lead to unsafe situations. Touring, WTR, and Gripwalk are all out there and compatability is tricky.
Touring soles are not going to work well for non touring applications for a variety of reasons. What comes out of the Gripwalk vs WTR battle is the big question. Phil has a strong opinion backed up with valid points on this subject- as he always does in head to head comparisons. Maybe he will share those. I have already taken up too much page space. I have met with the top insurance companies, individuals that sit on the DIN board, the head of Ski Industries of America (SIA) and engineers from most binding companies on this subject. There is a LOT of information being batted around. Let me know if you have any other questions and I will answer them as well as I can.

 

[fatbob]

@ Greg Whitehouse I can also see customer backlash - I like that boot but you're telling me I need to change my perfectly good bindings - no thanks. More pointed once the customer realises they are restricted a couple of brands of bindings as well. Otherwise - no point in me buying these new boots if I have to swap the sole for a DIN std.

The real fiasco is however divergent standards.

BTW Not a personal knock, I realise as a retailer you have to take bets on which way the market will go and back certain systems. Seems kinda risky to me that you might get a lot of previously happy customers returning pissed from their vacations because they didn't take on board the message that their new boot might restrict their choice of rental skis etc.

 

[Started at 53]

“Marry your boots, date your skis”

I see this more from a ski rental issue for people that have boots with the WTF/GripWalk soles. Of course this issue is more of an in the future issue, but it is on the horizon.

Rental skis/bindings are going to be a limiting factor

 

[karlo]

Hi. I am confused. To simplify, I'll ask in the context of only GripWalk.

Will my 4-year old alpine boot fit in a GripWalk compatible binding?

Will my AT boot, that clicks into a tech binding, fit a GripWalk binding?

Is there a boot design that will fit in both GripWalk binding and in a tech binding?

Thanks

 

[KevinF]

Do the various new soles work with canting, grinding and other modifications to fix alignment issues?

i.e., I have a 3mm lifter attached to one boot to fix a leg-length discrepancy issue. I consider boots that can't be modified in that form to be useless.

 

[Philpug]

Hi. I am confused. To simplify, I'll ask in the context of only GripWalk.

Will my 4-year old alpine boot fit in a GripWalk compatible binding?

Yes.

Will my AT boot, that clicks into a tech binding, fit a GripWalk binding?

no, but an MNC(salomon/Atomic) or AT (Tyrolia) binding. Look and Marker do not offer an MNC/AT binding. Marker used to offer the Lord, but that has been discontinued.

Is there a boot design that will fit in both GripWalk binding and in a tech binding?

Thanks

Yes, a boot like the Lupo from Dalbello comes to me off the top on my head.[/QUOTE]

 

[Philpug]

Do the various new soles work with canting, grinding and other modifications to fix alignment issues?

i.e., I have a 3mm lifter attached to one boot to fix a leg-length discrepancy issue. I consider boots that can't be modified in that form to be useless.

Yes they do, and actually since the soles are screw on, it makes it easier to add the lifter between the sole and the shell. But becareful, you cannot just add the 3mm in between the sole and the shell then rout the boot with the Gripwalk sole on the bottom, it will throw everything off. Take the Lange you are in and if you are looking at a new Lange that has a WTR sole, the 3mm will have to be added and measured and routed with a regular sole, then then put the WTR sole back on. This method will also be needed to done when canting.

 

[Philpug]

Thanks Phil for asking me to jump in here. I feel it is an important subject and appreciate the complexity of the issue. Phil is right. We are early adopters and have decided to put a lot of our inventory dollars into "walkable sole" boots. The industry recognizes that walking in boots is problematic. It is clumsy and dangerous. Rockered soles are easier. Rubber on the sole helps. If you don't think it makes a big difference then I believe you probably have not tried the WTR or Gripeslk models. I am absolutely sure that I am personally at higher risk for injury in a parking lot, bathroom, or bar than I am on the ski slopes. Industry data shows that it is not just me. Walking in ski boots on slippery surfaces is dicey.
The manufacturers are not going to change this new direction. They make it understood that in five years or so there will probably be no flat DIN spec boots readily available on recreational boots. Their rhetoric is altruistic but they also know that they stand to make a lot of money if everyone that buys boots needs new bindings. Retailers understand that too so may be more inclined to say "yes to safety and comfort!".
The different approaches is currently our biggest issue as an industry. Multiple types of incompatable soles are not in our best interest as a skiing community. It can lead to unsafe situations. Touring, WTR, and Gripwalk are all out there and compatability is tricky.
Touring soles are not going to work well for non touring applications for a variety of reasons. What comes out of the Gripwalk vs WTR battle is the big question. Phil has a strong opinion backed up with valid points on this subject- as he always does in head to head comparisons. Maybe he will share those. I have already taken up too much page space. I have met with the top insurance companies, individuals that sit on the DIN board, the head of Ski Industries of America (SIA) and engineers from most binding companies on this subject. There is a LOT of information being batted around. Let me know if you have any other questions and I will answer them as well as I can.

Thanks Greg, your view is always appreciated, I would also like to see @otto chime in as well as the other fitters, I imagine we will be seeing a different view, with Jim's race background and different from someone dealing with a more recreational skier. I will be bringing this up at MasterFit U. when we attend next week in Colorado.

 

[SkiBigHead]

One note related to the multiple rental/demo questions asked here: Tyrolia Attack Demo (in all paint jobs) will accommodate Alpine (ISO Norm 5355), Grip Walk, Walk-to-Ride, and AT (ISO Norm 9523).

I really think the question will become one of which binding manufacturers develop toe pieces that work with any of the four existing possibilities, rather than a clear winner emerging in the GripWalk vs WTR fight. While there were the clear lines between boot manufacturers and their corresponding binding companies in the beginning, there is enough competition for binding market share that not building in maximum compatibility in the future is going to be a big point of separation.

 

[Philpug]

One note related to the multiple rental/demo questions asked here: Tyrolia Attack Demo (in all paint jobs) will accommodate Alpine (ISO Norm 5355), Grip Walk, Walk-to-Ride, and AT (ISO Norm 9523).

I really think the question will become one of which binding manufacturers develop toe pieces that work with any of the four existing possibilities, rather than a clear winner emerging in the GripWalk vs WTR fight. While there were the clear lines between boot manufacturers and their corresponding binding companies in the beginning, there is enough competition for binding market share that not building in maximum compatibility in the future is going to be a big point of separation.

Yes, we address the Sole Compatability of the Tyrolia based bindings here: 2018 Tyrolia bindings. But the more it is mentioned, the more the information van het out there. Thank you.

On the second point, I agree and with be great if that would also auto adjusting too but at this point it would be great to have less unecessary variable to deal with.

 

[neonorchid]

Whenever I get into a solid sole boot, I will add some sort of walking sole to them, just because it does make it a ton easier to get around in slippery conditions.

Here are my Langes with Head Vibram soles.
View attachment 31444

They look beefy. Aside from possible trimming for overhang and drilling the boot or soles if a different screw pattern, will my Salomon X-Max which has thin screw on soles need to be shaved down to maintain DIN standards?
I have a WTR Pivot binding on the newest and a standard non-wtr Pivot on the older skis.

 

[BMC]

I have WTR boots and normal DIN boots. I can’t discern a material difference while skiing. If the skiing is much the same then the increased walking safety seems to make it a no brainer for recreational skiing.

Pretty much all my bindings are now either MNC or dual WTR/DIN.

To be honest since Salomon provided open access to the WTR technology I don’t know why Marker headed to GripWalk. It’s just resulted in a lesser outcome for consumers (we need an established universal norm). It is what it is I guess

 

[Philpug]

They look beefy. Aside from possible trimming for overhang and drilling the boot or soles if a different screw pattern, will my Salomon X-Max which has thin screw on soles need to be shaved down to maintain DIN standards?
I have a WTR Pivot binding on the newest and a standard non-wtr Pivot on the older skis.

I just looked through Salomon's parts book, I did not see a WTR option for your X-Max (but there is for X-Pro?!?). A sole like the Head might be able to trimmed to fit boot if the screw locations in the sole do not get trimmed away, I don't have access to an X-Max to compare to though. These soles are a few MM taller than your current replacable soles so yes, the lugs would have to be routed to match DIN standards.

 

[neonorchid]

I just looked through Salomon's parts book, I did not see a WTR option for your X-Max (but there is for X-Pro?!?). A sole like the Head might be able to trimmed to fit boot if the screw locations in the sole do not get trimmed away, I don't have access to an X-Max to compare to though. These soles are a few MM taller than your current replacable soles so yes, the lugs would have to be routed to match DIN standards.

Sounds like too much trouble to retrofit because the X-Max is not WTR, it is considered a "race" boot. The screw on sole plates are about the thickness of a nickel. The front of the toe plate where the first set of screws are gets clogged with a clump of snow/ice from walking before clicking in which prevents clicking in and is difficult to remove to click in! Walking on thin layer of snow/ice sidewalks is treacherous. Cat-Trax are not much better. Still I'll see how much longer I plan to keep the X-Max before doing any mods,

 

[Tony S]

I think very few of us race at a level when they can get a huge performance boost from a thicker solid plastic in the sole.

Right. But I've become attached to the fit of my race-ish boots. Really wish they'd make essentially the same boot with a sensible sole for walking. (Mine don't even have replaceable lugs, let alone rubber treads.) Seems like when I look at the boots that are more walk friendly they never fit as closely and/or don't come small enough.

 

[Tony S]

Phill beat me to it on the Head Vibram lifter. Unfortunately they're a bit expensive ($85'ish), and that's before labor charges.

Marko, do you know if these can go on the RS series sole?

 

[AmyPJ]

To be a bit cynical... I understand that walking in ski boots can be a bit awkward. I understand that Western resorts can entail some substantial walks to get from the car to the slopes and back again (*cough* Vail *cough*).

I'm just wondering how much of the "walking is uncomfortable" discussion is rooted in the fact that most people have ski boots that don't fit worth a damn to begin with? This forum regularly dispenses the advice that lots of problems will be solved by going to a good boot fitter and doing what (s)he tells you. Good advice, although "good" boot fitters are few and far between.

I just feel like we're going to have new soles (WTR, grip, whatever) and the majority of the skiing public will still hate to walk in ski boots because, well, their ski boots hurt.

Once your feet start hurting, it doesn't much matter what shoe you have on -- you want it off. My well broken in hiking boots feel super comfy until I get a blister going and then it's pretty much "get this friggin' thing off my foot NOW".

Throw in those (and there are lots of them) who walk with their boots entirely unbuckled, unfastened, etc. From the parking lot, no less.

This is an interesting discussion that has me a bit because my best fit is a junior race boot. I hope the manufacturers continue to make lower and lower volume recreational boots that can be stretched and heated.

 

[Philpug]

Marko, do you know if these can go on the RS series sole?

They ab-sole-utely can. In fact I did @TahoeCharlie's boots. The top of the lugs just need to be routed back to DIN standard.

 

[James]

I had vibram style plates several years ago on a Lange Plug. Then for some reason PJ at Race Stock Sports didn't have them and it was patterened plastic. But the holes lined up with the vibram ones.

Have you already put plates on your RS soles?