Hjortleifson has been heard, the DynaFit Vulcan

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LeeLau

Just in the process of getting protos so will be very cursory

---

Lee, my Titans won't make it through another season. I'm looking forward to your impressions, in particular:

Fit: For my low volume feet, the Titans fit well, the TLT5 (shop test only) even better. I've read the Vulcan is higher volume?

Liners: I've always swapped Dynafit's p.o.s. liners out with Intuition Alpines. What are these like, and are they similar enough in volume that the swap to Intuitions will work?

Durability: I'm going to thrash them. Will they last?

The tongue: Swapping the tongue in and out sounds like extra step I can do without. Is it always necessary?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JRainey

I feel ya, there are certain advantage to swapping soles. I don't sled ski so you've got a different criteria for durable boots than me, but I was kinda happy to see non replaceable soles. Keep it simple. I just want a touring boot that rips, is light, and doesn't have extra crap on it. If the soles wear out before the boot or something sexier comes along, then i'll resole them.

---

Yup.
I'm really happy it doesn't have replaceable soles. I don't have a sled. I don't ski-mountaineer or scramble on rocks. I have Maestrales with about 50 days on them and the soles look almost new.

If Vulcans fit, I will buy a pair this fall.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kootenayskier

Lee, my Titans won't make it through another season. I'm looking forward to your impressions, in particular:

Fit: For my low volume feet, the Titans fit well, the TLT5 (shop test only) even better. I've read the Vulcan is higher volume?

Liners: I've always swapped Dynafit's p.o.s. liners out with Intuition Alpines. What are these like, and are they similar enough in volume that the swap to Intuitions will work?

Durability: I'm going to thrash them. Will they last?

The tongue: Swapping the tongue in and out sounds like extra step I can do without. Is it always necessary?

---

Thx. Keep the questions coming. I'll start using them and try to keep questions in mind so the more questions the better. Doesn't matter how picky - keep them coming

Since you asked: most Dynafit boots have an arch that is far too high for my flat feet. Is the Vulcan similar? Low volume is good, it's the arch height that is a problem. (I know I can probably get this fixed by a bootfitter, so it's not a dealbreaker; I'm just curious.)

Questions for Lee

- Tell us about the flex in comparison to the Titan. How does stiffness compare, and is the flex as progressive?

- Many people use the Titans as a one-boot quiver for both resort and touring. Will the Vulcans fill a similar role or should people stick to the Titan if this is what they're after?

- If Titans work well with some punching and I can't even get my foot into the TLT5, how will the fit on these be?

- What is the forward lean like?

- Are they a worthwhile upgrade from the Titan/Titan UL?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by auvgeek

Since you asked: most Dynafit boots have an arch that is far too high for my flat feet. Is the Vulcan similar? Low volume is good, it's the arch height that is a problem. (I know I can probably get this fixed by a bootfitter, so it's not a dealbreaker; I'm just curious.)

---

1. Insert Bontex shim(s) in boot. 2. Enjoy. Did this in my Langes and Factors with mucho success. Haven't had to do it with TLT5s.

You missed step 1.b. Punch 5th met head because the boot is now narrower.

I've used Bontex to take up vertical volume in the Cochise (as per Marshal Olson's advice), but never to fix that problem. Thanks for the tip. :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by auvgeek

You missed step 1.b. Punch 5th met head because the boot is now narrower.

I've used Bontex to take up vertical volume in the Cochise (as per Marshal Olson's advice), but never to fix that problem. Thanks for the tip. :)

---

But you said the arch was "too high" which would be a vertical volume issue, right? :confused: Regardless, the lack of a flex zone should make there more easily punchable I'd guess/hope.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by D(C)

Questions for Lee

- Tell us about the flex in comparison to the Titan. How does stiffness compare, and is the flex as progressive?

- Many people use the Titans as a one-boot quiver for both resort and touring. Will the Vulcans fill a similar role or should people stick to the Titan if this is what they're after?

- If Titans work well with some punching and I can't even get my foot into the TLT5, how will the fit on these be?

- What is the forward lean like?

- Are they a worthwhile upgrade from the Titan/Titan UL?

---

Haven't skied it yet but I've heard it described as stiff as shit, which would make sense as the cuff is mostly CF.

You'll probably still need to punch if you do it on a Titan but the last is wider than the TLT5 so you should be ok.

Forward lean is 15*/18*, same as next year's TLT5's. Currently TLT5's only have 15*.

"gorilla mid"(sp?) plastic...

stretchable/punchable?

Thanks v

Grilamid. A buddy who works at Surefoot says the TLT5 (also grilamid) is pretty easy to punch/stretch, it shouldn't be much of a problem.

I honestly can't wait for this boot. It's the exact thing I've been waiting for.

The only thing I'm skeptical about is the ridiculously high flex of it, hope it won't be too much.

I was skeptical of the flex issue being high as well, so I hopped Titan UL for reference. My Krypton Pros with stiff tongue are way stiffer than the Titans, which felt around 100 or so. I'm glad to hear they'll be stiff, the ULs are too soft for my liking.

If the Vulcan is too stiff it seems like the glass?/ polymer? cuffed Mercury would be the ticket, i like their equal weights and decent price difference.

Only testing will tell, but the mercury/vulcan comparison will be of interest to me. As will the suitability as a holy grail type frontside/ sidecountry/ backcountry/ ski mountaineering boot (and how long it will last if used for all those things...)

^^ I think the rockered vibram sole precludes using it as a frontside boot, at least for me. I assume it's rockered somewhere in between the Titan and the TLT5, and that will make it difficult to use in any binder without an adjustable toe height (FKS/Pivot).

Will not change it, luckily when we do something we are sure we are doing it in the right way ;-) ...
The swappable sole is something from the past... or something which the alpine industry likes a lot now.
We are now sure that reducing 150gr in the construction, plus building a MUCH more solid construction was a clear differentiation point for a boot like the Vulcan vs. the Titans and Similar.

So if you think tha swappable sole are a must just buy the titans... they will be still in line.

A Vulcan with Swappable sole will weight very similar to a Titan UL so ... will not make much less sense to exisit. As I said a lot of times... we wanted no compomise for this new line... so lightness, touring abilities similar to a TLT5 and downhill performance like an alpine boot was the goal... and looks like we are there ;-)

Moreover it's proven that the swappable soles... always have some small play... noticeable only from few... buyt Hoji for example was gluing the soles on his titans as he was feeling it ... so again we wanted no compromise and no excuses ;-)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Atrain505

This boot sounds rad minus the non removeable/non replaceable soles.
A couple months sled skiing and a new sole is needed. A big issue with this boot for people looking to cross over. Fredrico change the boot to have replaceable soles and you may have a lot more customers. Otherwise crossed off my list.

---

VERY IMPORTANT!!!!

All the feedbacks and report you're reading are done on several rounds of test boots... NOBODY has ever skied the final versions or neither Vulcan or Mercury... as they will be sent out tomorrow.

Please for anybody writing aroudn consider that the difference to final production will be MASSIVE so don't spend to much time on testing or writing report about it.
There will be many improvements on shell thicnkess/Stiffness, on cuff, on bukles, on the tongues, on the liners ... so everything will be different in a few words.
So if you like the proto samples you will love MUCH more the final boots ;-)

Plese for all writers... keep in mind that normally it's not alowed to test and write reviews about proto boots 8 months before the delivery of the final products... so everybody which gave you boots will be hardly punished ;-)

Athan - I know its kinda goofy but I've seen other people who use their boots on sleds use cat-trax. I know sled decks chew up my boots but then i figure I'm such a hack on a sled that it must be.

My boots === customs hell. So not sure when i'll see them


Feddy!!! I understand and no problem. On another note I'll be biking in sued tirol next september. I come visit ok?

No Dynafit is not using Vibram soles and will not as well in the future... as well because Vibram people are promoting a lot other boots brand using Vibram soles ;-)

Dynafit is using premium rubber outsole built on the higher possible standard of grips and durability, tested in labs.

When evaluating the grip and durability of outsoles there are other factors to consider, not only the brand sticked under the rubber, but as well how the sole is constructed.
If somebody complains that "modern" soles on touring boots are lasting last then some on older boots it's right but not because of bad rubber.

There are a lot of technical limitations to respect on the toe/heel area of a rubber sole for touring boots, limitations given by the UNI/ISO norms for the compatibility with touring and freeride bindings and as well the public construction limitations on how to buid a boot to make it working on a dynafit binding properly.
The mix of the two things is the reason why there is so less rubber on a very critical point like the toe area. That's why the TLT5 for example which is not following the UNI/ISO norms has more rubber and a ZZero or other touring boots.

Don't forget as well that the durability of a touring outsole is much lower than a mountaineering/trekking outsole... again not because of the rubber quality but beacuse it's stick on a very stiff base (plastic shell) and not ona soft midsole. That means that the rubber in contact with very sharp rocks might brake and not abrade as there is not absorbption given by the midsole.

All outsoles can be easily resoled by any shoe maker, just make sure to do it before starting to grind the plastic shell... it's getting more complicate in that case.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by verbier61

So far, dynafit soles are not made by vibram.

---

I will not be living in Italy anymore in September ;-) but I can give you good recomandation anyway, I was born as a biker and did only that for most of my life... I started skiing not long ago ;-)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LeeLau

Athan - I know its kinda goofy but I've seen other people who use their boots on sleds use cat-trax. I know sled decks chew up my boots but then i figure I'm such a hack on a sled that it must be.

My boots === customs hell. So not sure when i'll see them


Feddy!!! I understand and no problem. On another note I'll be biking in sued tirol next september. I come visit ok?

---

Re: posts 116, 117, 119

Sounds like it will be a good idea to wait a couple years on this boot, and I question how ready the design is for public testing.

I don't really see people crying over the 150 grams added for swappable soles. Alpine soles are a big deal to people who appreciate using high retention dynamic bindings. Also any play between the boot and the lug will be no worse than the play inherent in the interaction between the boot and pins for a tech binding, or the play between a rubber sole and the AFD...

As for the weight issue... I suspect that if people spent less time worrying about how to cut 150 grams, and more time focusing on staying in shape and becoming a better skier they would have more fun. I am a huge gear whore, but loosing sleep over 150 grams in a stiff high performance free ride boot is straight gear queer stupidity. The lack of swappable soles, as allready shown, will lead to a lot of people looking elsewhere for boots.

As for people just choosing to go with the Titan. What if they want the feature set of a cabrio boot rather than a two piece overlap.

MOO, but the collection of posts on this page reak of PR scripted fluff to defend initial design ideas that may have led to inside regrets.

Regardless of how hard you try, there will always be design flaws that do not get exposed until there is large scale public testing.

This boot sounds like a great milestone, but is far from perfect, and post 117 suggests that the version that hits shoppes in a few months will still have some room to go.

Just my, very American, opinion on the matter. As allways, your mileage may varry (and probably will).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by XavierD

Re: posts 116, 117, 119

Sounds like it will be a good idea to wait a couple years on this boot, and I question how ready the design is for public testing.

I don't really see people crying over the 150 grams added for swappable soles. Alpine soles are a big deal to people who appreciate using high retention dynamic bindings. Also any play between the boot and the lug will be no worse than the play inherent in the interaction between the boot and pins for a tech binding, or the play between a rubber sole and the AFD...

As for the weight issue... I suspect that if people spent less time worrying about how to cut 150 grams, and more time focusing on staying in shape and becoming a better skier they would have more fun. I am a huge gear whore, but loosing sleep over 150 grams in a stiff high performance free ride boot is straight gear queer stupidity. The lack of swappable soles, as allready shown, will lead to a lot of people looking elsewhere for boots.

As for people just choosing to go with the Titan. What if they want the feature set of a cabrio boot rather than a two piece overlap.

MOO, but the collection of posts on this page reak of PR scripted fluff to defend initial design ideas that may have led to inside regrets.

Regardless of how hard you try, there will always be design flaws that do not get exposed until there is large scale public testing.

This boot sounds like a great milestone, but is far from perfect, and post 117 suggests that the version that hits shoppes in a few months will still have some room to go.

Just my, very American, opinion on the matter. As allways, your mileage may varry (and probably will).

---

Totally American view - glad you recognize it. Also recognize that the weight weenie gear-queers dominate this market. Look at wildsnow and look at ski-running in Europe. The scholler skin suit crowd view dominates. TGR feedback is useful but is just one datapoint among many. Having said that, I do agree (on this board and my reviews) that some of the slipups in boot design are not explained by the purported extensive testing. No disrespect intended to Federico.

How many guys ski-running in skin suits are going to chose a vulcan?

The idea of needing a stiff freeride boot to do any skiing that I am touring for a few hours to get to is, in my opinion, dumb. The ability to handle injuries with heavy trauma is not there, and you are looking at a long, slow trip to medical treatment outside of the group. If it takes two guys 4 hours to get out there, I would plan on 8+ to get back with a broken leg. If I am touring for over an hour to get on site, I don't see myself skiing anything requiring a boot like the vulcan.

I just see this boot getting lost in the medium between the light, and the burly cross over.

Again, MOO, and no disrespect to the Dynafit crowd, since it seems that they took the feedback of what EH wanted, and designed it, which I respect.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by XavierD

How many guys ski-running in skin suits are going to chose a vulcan?

---

I can't answer that question. The Rando-queens have way more insight into that than I do. I'd be curious how many TLT5 wearers also pick up the Vulcan.

Quote:

---

The idea of needing a stiff freeride boot to do any skiing that I am touring for a few hours to get to is, in my opinion, dumb. The ability to handle injuries with heavy trauma is not there, and you are looking at a long, slow trip to medical treatment outside of the group. If it takes two guys 4 hours to get out there, I would plan on 8+ to get back with a broken leg. If I am touring for over an hour to get on site, I don't see myself skiing anything requiring a boot like the vulcan.

I just see this boot getting lost in the medium between the light, and the burly cross over.

---

I think we can agree to disagree here - again respectfully. If this boot is all its cracked up to be then it can be a backcountry quiver of one. Perhaps not a do-it-all boot like the Titan UL, or Mobe or Radium tries to be (ie inbounds and b/c).

I don't understand the reference to getting injured and how you tie it to a boot - elaborate?.

I see it as the perfect boot to drive big, wide, light skis on a tour. If i can have all that stiffness for less weight, that's just a bigger bonus. Now i just hope they'll fit.