This thread is cool.
Thanks for taking the time to give us this information.
Printable View
This thread is cool.
Thanks for taking the time to give us this information.
Cost on the hawx mimic professional?
Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums
Red is faster. Even within the same boot line…
Attachment 443631
Attachment 443632
Love my Hawx Ultras, keep the info flowing OneNerdyKid!!
These changes look great and answer most of my concerns I had with the original XTD 130. Even the taupe color scheme looks cool, even if I think there should be a Redster freeride boot (maybe we can get a XTD 140 in Red, I know wishful thinking). Although, it will take some serious reviews before it gets me to switch back from the current Cochise that replaced it. I’m guessing with the switch to PU, it should be a consistent 130 flex with good rebound as I used to blow through the flex when I hit a mogul on the OG XTD. 1800 grams is about right for the category, which I will describe more as 80/20 than what everyone calls 50/50. Let’s be honest, very few who get a boot to use in the resort uses it 50% in the backcountry. Most who ski that much BC have a dedicated boot for it.
^or they tour to things where access isn’t long or they prefer ski performance. Keep in mind that these boots walk better than most things ten years ago and ski ten times better. Most people around here don’t tour on ultralight boots.
I'm confused about the fit of the new Hawx Ultra XTD.Quote:
Originally Posted by onenerdykid
I have a 20/21 Hawx Ultra XTD 120 and a first-gen 130 XTD. I like them for touring. 120 even more - I came to the conclusion that I don't need the stiffest boot for touring. But they're weak for regular resort use.
But their fit is almost excellent.
If I want to add a new Hawx Ultra XTD as a resort and travel boot to my quiver, what changes should I expect in terms of fit?
Already is in 22/23!Quote:
Originally Posted by TexasGortex
Slightly more toe room but still feeling like you are in the correct size & overall fit.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sashko
Sounds like an interesting idea...Quote:
Originally Posted by XavierD
Thanks! Including the 130? Both Evo and Backcountry list the 130 as PA but the 120 as PU. Atomic’s website (at least on my phone) doesn’t seem to specify unless I’m missing something. Prolite is a construction technique not material, right?Quote:
Originally Posted by onenerdykid
Mat. As our insider with the brand that seems the most committed to and most successful in developing and selling ski boots in every niche from resort uphilling to WC slalom, are you able to share your perspective on why there isn’t a business case for adding a genuinely low volume (for arguments sake assume this would be equivalent to a Redster CS fit) version of your most popular touring boots. I don’t pretend to understand the economics of this, it’s just that I’ve been playing this game for a long time, and for myself, my wife, and a significant proportion of my skiing partners, we know what it’s like to have a great fitting lift serviced boot, but are forced to tour in boots that have way too much volume in all the wrong places. Will this ever change?
Our new website has some growing pains it seems. The 22/23 all black/rust colored Hawx Prime XTD 130 is full PU, and so are all of the other models in the range. Correct- Prolite is a construction technique.Quote:
Originally Posted by TexasGortex
Has the lever attachment on the walk mode on the Ultra XTD 130 been beefed up at all? I've had issues with blowing the lever out of walk mode (flexing it into walk mode), and ultimately stripping the screw holes which made the boot unusable. This was all on cliff landings. I really liked the boot, but it didn't even last 50 days, but maybe that's expected for a freerider? I'm about 190 w/o gear, so not small.
Unfortunately, it's an ROI problem. Going narrower than Ultra (i.e. Redster style fits) means producing very small quantities in relation to how expensive a boot is to make (ski boots are roughly 1 - 1.5 million € to develop). Combine that unfortunate reality with the fact that the touring market is a fraction of the size of the alpine market and it becomes quite hard to justify spending all that money to sell a few thousand pairs of boots globally. Sadly (and I am in this camp too) - don't hold your breath.Quote:
Originally Posted by kootenayskier
Yes - it's a more bomber new ski/walk mechanism and a better interface to the cuff. Some of the studio images are from an early sample round and we had to use different parts (just for that photoshoot), but the image I posted and the on-snow images in the latest Blister reviews show the new ski/walk mechanism.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lindahl
Just be aware that if screws start to loosen, then things can shear and fail. If you are changing forward lean settings or anything that involves removing the screws, always add some thread lock to the screws before you reinstall.
Awesome, stoked to try it out then. Excited that it moved to PU, as the old one definitely didn't flex as nicely as the Cochise. Curious to see how the new one compares now.Quote:
Originally Posted by onenerdykid
Yeah, I always made sure the screws were tight and secured with locktite in the morning after having a screw rattle loose on my Backlands (never adjusted the lean on either boot).
Would a new Ultra XTD with Gnarbar behave similarly to current year Hawx Ultra S in the resort?
Sent from my Pixel 7 Pro using Tapatalk
Great! What are other differences between 130 and 120 apart from the obvious one - the flex?Quote:
Originally Posted by onenerdykid
YessirQuote:
Originally Posted by Robik
Agreed. I felt the XTD was undergunned at the resort so only used it touring or when I was doing sidecountry with longer walks that justified a true touring boot. At the same time, it only walked marginally better than the Cochise with an intuition.Quote:
Originally Posted by Benneke10
I also felt the class of 1400g boots never really walked that great, but the 1200g class didn't quite ski well enough to be an everyday touring boot. Hoping the Backland XTD fills that gap that walks like the old Backland, but skis (and weighs) closer to a 1400g boot.
Material hardness (flex), power strap, and screwed vs. riveted hardwareQuote:
Originally Posted by Sashko
From a cost standpoint, how much does going riveted hardware save? If you don’t mind sharing.Quote:
Originally Posted by onenerdykid
The screwed parts are marginally more expensive but it's the labor time that creates the issue. It takes way longer to assemble a boot with screwed hardware and this bottleneck during assembly drives up the cost of the boot like you wouldn't believe. Rivets go together far quicker and with less chance to mess it up.Quote:
Originally Posted by XavierD
Looks like a better candidate for something with the CAST for a daily resort with occasional tours use than Dalbello Lupo fit-wise for me.Quote:
Originally Posted by onenerdykid
And I'm probably in minority, but I like BOA instead of buckles on the lower.
Can you share details on the gnarbar?
Sent from my Pixel 6a using Tapatalk
Is there a number you can put to the “slightly more” part? Pricing on all of these?Quote:
Originally Posted by onenerdykid
Last dumb question (for now)… can you soften a 130 to a 120 by removing a screw or anything? I don’t see how but it would be a nice fallback if my “friend” isn’t gnar enough.Quote:
Originally Posted by onenerdykid
I went from having to punch the shit out of the toe box on the originals to comfortable-ish. feeling more like a zero g in length (definitely tighter in width and height). I’d guess 2-3mm in length plus feeling less like the front top corner tapers down on top of your toe nail. My zero g measures exactly the same length as my Hawx ultras that were punched almost to the edge of the toe lug.Quote:
Originally Posted by bean
It’s just from the PU not shrinking so it’s an even sensation everywhere, even in forefoot width.
I'm between sizes on the ZG so that makes me sad to hear. Guess I'll have to shove my foot in a boot this fall. Maybe size down and do some punches. Original Hawx XTD fits me like a glove with just a shell mold and intuition.Quote:
Originally Posted by GoldenBC
I’m not sure why you wouldn’t stick with the same size Hawx then. If you had to do a shell mold, this tiny difference will be perfect and you will have a touch more toe room. Normally people don’t downsize to get less toe room, they downsize to get the rest of the fit right. It’s nowhere near larger enough to justify downsizing.Quote:
Originally Posted by bean
Can y’all come out with a tele boot model (or 3)?
The Gnar Bar is a way to turn your new 23/24 Hawx Ultra XTD or existing Prime XTD into a truly fixed-cuff boot with tech inserts. We really went to town on our new ski/walk mechanism for the Hawx XTD series and eliminated as much play as we could, but there is still a minute, little bit - it's just the nature of ski/walk mechanisms and they all have it. This is ultimately why fixed cuff boots with tech inserts exist. So, if you really want to eek that last 1% of downhill performance from your Hawx XTD boot, then you take off the stock ski/walk mechanism and slap on the Gnar Bar, which fully locks the cuff to the shell, no play whatsoever. And when you want to go on longer tours, just unscrew it and put the ski/walk mechanism back on.Quote:
Originally Posted by rob stokes
Unfortunately, no screw-removal-softening techniques on the XTD boots. Tell your friend to hit the gym ;) But in all seriousness, the unisex boots come down to 110 so most adult men should be able to find a flex that works for them.Quote:
Originally Posted by TexasGortex
I agree with Golden here - your mondopoint size won't change, it will just be more comfortable. You'd only downsize to accommodate a super low heel-to-instep perimeter.Quote:
Originally Posted by GoldenBC
Sorry... there are about 10-12 new alpine boots I want to make before I get to tele.Quote:
Originally Posted by bodywhomper
Is this true for the Hawx prime ultra xtd too? All pu and no grilamid?Quote:
Originally Posted by onenerdykid
Fuckin badass. I will be replacing my xtd and ultra pro with one boot if it’s the best of both worlds. Of course with zipfit gfts (sorry I just don’t want to ski without zip fits - I’ve tried the pro liner and went back immediately).
Do the screws have more thread penetration or surface area? Or is the surface area of the upper lever attachment block larger? Or is the beefinees only added at the bottom part of the lever mechanism? Curious to know if the new beefiness would have prevented me from stripping the screws on landings.Quote:
Originally Posted by onenerdykid
Same screw length (meaning it has full thread engagement with the nut), same cuff interface as Prime XTD (IMO an improvement over first gen Ultra XTD) and all new "arm".Quote:
Originally Posted by Lindahl
FWIW, up until this season, Aymar Navarro has always competed on a stock, first gen Ultra XTD 130. Hasn't broken a mechanism, just either himself or the mountain haha. I think there was just something odd going on with yours, or a screw came loose just before your last drop kind of thing.
Seeing as there are lots of Atomic aficionados here. How does the hawk ultra fit vs Tecnica Mach1 LV? How do the instep heights compare?