Check Out Our Shop
Page 24 of 24 FirstFirst ... 19 20 21 22 23 24
Results 576 to 579 of 579
  1. #576
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    34
    Been in a 27.5 Hawx Ultra 130 BOA this winter and had a good fit. Thinking of picking up some Backland Carbons for multi day touring and just wondering how the fit compares? A 27.5 Backland Carbon has a 14mm shorter sole length, is this still going to be a similar length internally or does it feel shorter?
    Thanks for any input from anyone who has tried both boots.

  2. #577
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Alta
    Posts
    2,972

    The Atomic Ski Boot Thread

    My main touring boot has been the hawk xtd ultra. I have the same size in the carbon backland, which I haven’t put much time on yet. Fit seems good but the backland has noticeably less heel retention, which I solved with old school Nordica heel cups. Other than that fit is fairly similar. Backlands have crazy amount of ROM, like as much as a pair of running shoes. I do wish the cuff was higher for ski performance, but it’s a light weight skimo boot so compromise is expected

  3. #578
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Seattle
    Posts
    5,369
    Quote Originally Posted by altacoup View Post
    My main touring boot has been the hawk xtd ultra. I have the same size in the carbon backland, which I haven’t put much time on yet. Fit seems good but the backland has noticeably less heel retention, which I solved with old school Nordica heel cups. Other than that fit is fairly similar. Backlands have crazy amount of ROM, like as much as a pair of running shoes. I do wish the cuff was higher for ski performance, but it’s a light weight skimo boot so compromise is expected
    Where did you get the Nordica heel cups?

  4. #579
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    西 雅 圖
    Posts
    5,371
    Quote Originally Posted by scottishrider View Post
    Been in a 27.5 Hawx Ultra 130 BOA this winter and had a good fit. Thinking of picking up some Backland Carbons for multi day touring and just wondering how the fit compares? A 27.5 Backland Carbon has a 14mm shorter sole length, is this still going to be a similar length internally or does it feel shorter?
    Thanks for any input from anyone who has tried both boots.
    IME the fit isn't that similar, but it works because you don't expect the same level of downhill performance out of the two boots. My foot is quite wide, and I needed a heat mold and big punches at the fifth met heads/little toes to make the Ultra XTD Boa work. I was able (with a bit of discomfort) to ski the Backland XTD Carbon 120 out of the box (not a full day, but impressive given my wider foot measures 117mm at the met heads). Heat molding the Backland XTD Carbon and light punches at the apex of my fifth mets gave me "multi-day" comfort, but the fit will never be as precise around the ankle or midfoot as the Hawx Ultra XTD.

    If you have an average or higher volume foot, the Backland XTD Carbon should be fine. If your foot is on the narrow / low volume end of the spectrum, you'll likely find it roomy.

    As for internal length, I have both boots in 26.5 (foot measures 27.8 on a Brannock) and they feel about the same - you can (and most manufacturers do) shorten the BSL drastically while keeping the internal length more or less the same - saves a bunch of weight.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •