21/22 Gear Rumors

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SupreChicken

What does it do that a zero g doesn’t do? 40g weight difference. Zero g looks, feels and acts like an overlap boot. That’s a big plus IMO.

So this is 40g lighter and has better ROM.
For some, that would be enough to switch? Definitely good to have another burly boot around this weight class that can (hopefully) drive bigger skis. Maybe will attract some would be zero g buyers. The blue is nice...

I just don’t see it quite fitting? Too burly/heavy/stuff to really be a mountaineering boot. Too much like a mountaineering boot to drive freeride skis.

Who wants one? Where do you see it fitting in?

---

I think people underestimate the value of ROM and place so much emphasis on weight. I bet these ski much better than a 1kg boot, but have the ROM that you would expect from a 1kg boot. They definitely won't ski as well as a ZeroG. To me, that kind of thing would be great on long volcano slogs when you're not sure if you'll get good corn snow, but you've got a loonnnng way to walk. The extra weight also means better durability. I blew up a Fischer Travers shell last year and it was a bummer. I'd take an extra 200g / foot to have a boot that will last me more than two seasons.

I think people have different opinions on whether they'd rather have 200g more on their ski or 200g more on their boot. I think I'm more in the boot camp if it's got the ROM desired.

I personally see a hole in the market that only the Atomic Backland/Hawx almost but not quite fills. I want a Zero G in a narrow fit, with a moldable shell that can be easily heat molded to a wider fit. I could not get the Zero G to work for me because it would blister me badly because it was just too loose on my heel but was correct length wise.

If that is this boot, sweet. If Atomic makes a slightly heavier/stiffer Backland "Free" or something with the narrow fit, sweet. Even if they just add a buckle over the top of the foot to stiffen the boot up, that would be just fine.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by thejongiest

I think people underestimate the value of ROM and place so much emphasis on weight. I bet these ski much better than a 1kg boot, but have the ROM that you would expect from a 1kg boot. They definitely won't ski as well as a ZeroG. To me, that kind of thing would be great on long volcano slogs when you're not sure if you'll get good corn snow, but you've got a loonnnng way to walk. The extra weight also means better durability. I blew up a Fischer Travers shell last year and it was a bummer. I'd take an extra 200g / foot to have a boot that will last me more than two seasons.

I think people have different opinions on whether they'd rather have 200g more on their ski or 200g more on their boot. I think I'm more in the boot camp if it's got the ROM desired.

---

Give me more ROM and more weight, all day long.

If you are concerned about weight, I’d ask you first to check your own body fat


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 123ski

Give me more ROM and more weight, all day long.

If you are concerned about weight, I’d ask you first to check your own body fat


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

---

I agree

But

1lb on your feet is equal to about 9lbs on your back

It's the same reason why cyclists and racecar drivers care about UL wheels

Sent from my Pixel 4a (5G) using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tgapp

I agree

But

1lb on your feet is equal to about 9lbs on your back

It's the same reason why cyclists and racecar drivers care about UL wheels

Sent from my Pixel 4a (5G) using Tapatalk

---

I think the 1lb rule applies to hiking, not gliding - and I think it’s 4.6lbs on your torso generally equals 1lb on your feet. So I supposed 1lb per foot would be 9lbs total, but not if you are gliding, since it doesn’t require you to pick your entire foot off the ground to glide.

Anyway - most of us could afford to lose 9lbs+ so it’s a moot point


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 123ski

I think the 1lb rule applies to hiking, not gliding - and I think it’s 4.6lbs on your torso generally equals 1lb on your feet. So I supposed 1lb per foot would be 9lbs total, but not if you are gliding, since it doesn’t require you to pick your entire foot off the ground to glide.

Anyway - most of us could afford to lose 9lbs+ so it’s a moot point


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

---

I'm 6' and 150 lbs sopping wet

I already lost one kidney

Looking at losing part of my liver

9lbs would be a real stretch. I don't know what else I could lose. An arm?

Also ty for the "per foot" clarification. But I don't know if gliding makes a difference, since you're still lifting the entire boot with each step. The skis stay grounded though.

Sent from my Pixel 4a (5G) using Tapatalk

Better ROM feels more noticeable in the moment but I would bet that weight makes a bigger difference over the course of a day.

While a beefier Backland would probably be an awesome boot, I doubt there are many people who want an "in between" 1250g boot. The gram counters will get the Backland, and the Hawx can be 1400g with a light liner and walks damn well for what it is.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Benneke10

Better ROM feels more noticeable in the moment but I would bet that weight makes a bigger difference over the course of a day.

While a beefier Backland would probably be an awesome boot, I doubt there are many people who want an "in between" 1250g boot. The gram counters will get the Backland, and the Hawx can be 1400g with a light liner and walks damn well for what it is.

---

I’d be more than happy to tour all day in the ranger 130 at 1230g and I still would want it to have more ROM, but ultimately I never want to point my boots downhill with less than a 130 flex


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Seen on onenerdykid. Is there a new MNC compatible STH binding coming out?

Attachment 357868

Cool, but also lame.
I swear if they fuck up the pivot over this I'm going to cry

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mr_pretzel

Cool, but also lame.
I swear if they fuck up the pivot over this I'm going to cry

---

I think the flatter ramp because of the GripWalk AFD is pretty questionable in and of itself.

Looks like a slidey AFD on the STH2... probably not a bad idea. They can only make the post so high with out the adjustment screw coming out the top; I would guess there's a separate AFD adjustment, maybe that's the "transfer switch" label at the bottom?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ZomblibulaX

I think the flatter ramp because of the GripWalk AFD is pretty questionable in and of itself.

Looks like a slidey AFD on the STH2... probably not a bad idea. They can only make the post so high with out the adjustment screw coming out the top; I would guess there's a separate AFD adjustment, maybe that's the "transfer switch" label at the bottom?

---

The flat ramp sucks dick already yeah.

I'm not a fan of the slidey AFD, it did not ski well on the WTR P14 toe.

Looks like maybe it slides down to a different spot for the touring soles. Kind of like the attack AFD

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mr_pretzel

The flat ramp sucks dick already yeah.

I'm not a fan of the slidey AFD, it did not ski well on the WTR P14 toe.

Looks like maybe it slides down to a different spot for the touring soles. Kind of like the attack AFD

---

The P14 sliding AFD was sloppy and terrible, but I think that had more to do with the dual position height adjuster than the slideyness. The Warden toe uses a sliding AFD, but does adjusts toe height by moving the rest of the toe up and down (like the STH) and it's solid.

I like the flatter ramp too, but that's obviously a personal preference deal.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HAB

I like the flatter ramp too, but that's obviously a personal preference deal.

---

Which is why it was great when it was an option.
I don’t want some crazy 15mm dynafiddle drop. Just 5mm like STH’s have.
I really notice the difference with the 1mm drop on the GW AFD.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mr_pretzel

Which is why it was great when it was an option.
I don’t want some crazy 15mm dynafiddle drop. Just 5mm like STH’s have.
I really notice the difference with the 1mm drop on the GW AFD.

---

Very fair. The older alpine-only AFD, plus the option of the included shims was a good solution.

Let’s also not forget that the tongueless design of the Lupo Air means they put bumpstops in the rear, effectively killing any forward range of motion. , which makes it useless in my books.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by burrito

My guess is that the Lupo Air is either on its way out (and only still in the line to get rid of excess inventory), or it will get beefed up next year (ladder buckles, improved flex, etc.)

Regardless of what Dalbello does, I'm just generally skeptical that you'll ever get anything resembling a 130 flex cabrio boot without a tongue. The vast majority of the flex of any boot, cabrio or overlap, is driven by pushing against and deforming the front of the boot (the tongue or overlap, respectively.) I am not an ME, but I don't see any way similar flex properties can be achieved by essentially pulling against the back of the boot, as all of these tongue-less boots do.

That's not to say there's not a place for them. If I were to build a lightweight setup today the Scarpa F1 series and the Atomic Backland series are the first places I'd look, but let's stop pretending they're 130 flex boots.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ZomblibulaX

Looks like a slidey AFD on the STH2...?

---

I used to install a slidey afd under the toes of sth14s (shout out to 1000oaks) so I could ski tech boots on an alpine clamp without buying a marker lord. Then the warden came out and I stopped tinkering. Always wondered why the made a whole new toe piece instead of just making the AFD slide.

So hey! What a great solution 6 years later.

Hating, but I bet I end up with a pair.

Salomon Blank
Lengths: 178, 186, 194cm
Shape:
137/112/126 @ 178cm
138/112/127 @ 186cm
139/112/128 @ 192cm
Radius:
15.3m @ 178cm
17m @ 186cm
18m @ 192cm
Core: solid poplar wood

Freeskier Chris Rubens, who spent countless hours with Salomon's ski engineers developing the QST Blank, reports that the design team has combined the best features of two great ski models - the tip of the QST 106 and the tail of the QST 118 - to create an all-rounder -Creating skis that simply initiate turns and floats through the deepest powder, but at the same time reacts precisely when you have to reduce the speed with a quick slide turn.

New graphics for vision 98, 108, sakana and pescado.

So boring, definitely going to miss the pollard stuff
Attachment 357980

New K2 topsheets, reckoner 112 & 122, Mindbender 99, 108, 116
Attachment 357981

New QST 98, another new more playful ski, probably similar to the old rocker 2 100

Lengths: 169,176, 183, 189cm
Shape: 133/98 / 121mm
Shape:
131/98/119 @ 169cm
132/98/120 @ 176cm
133/98/121 @ 183cm
133/98/121 @ 189cm
Radius:
15m @ 169cm
16m @ 176cm
17m @ 183cm
18m @ 189cm
Radius: 17m
Core: solid poplar wood

The brand new QST 98 is playful and powerful everywhere on the mountain. Regardless of whether you want to enjoy the beauty of nature in the morning or plow through forest clearings until sunset, the playful and powerful QST 98 is the perfect companion. Thanks to its new, modern shape and the versatile 98 mm sidecut, the QST 98 is up to all challenges. The Double Sidewalls Technology transfers the power to the edges, regardless of whether you are jumping over rocky slopes or buttering over snowdrifts.

Attachment 357982

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mr_pretzel

Salomon Blank
Lengths: 178, 186, 194cm
Shape:
137/112/126 @ 178cm
138/112/127 @ 186cm
139/112/128 @ 192cm
Radius:
15.3m @ 178cm
17m @ 186cm
18m @ 192cm
Core: solid poplar wood

Freeskier Chris Rubens, who spent countless hours with Salomon's ski engineers developing the QST Blank, reports that the design team has combined the best features of two great ski models - the tip of the QST 106 and the tail of the QST 118 - to create an all-rounder -Creating skis that simply initiate turns and floats through the deepest powder, but at the same time reacts precisely when you have to reduce the speed with a quick slide turn.

---

Interesting!

Some more visual here:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m8-y17i3goE

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 123ski

I think the 1lb rule applies to hiking, not gliding - and I think it’s 4.6lbs on your torso generally equals 1lb on your feet. So I supposed 1lb per foot would be 9lbs total, but not if you are gliding, since it doesn’t require you to pick your entire foot off the ground to glide.

Anyway - most of us could afford to lose 9lbs+ so it’s a moot point


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

---

Actually, since you only lift one foot at the time it's 4.5 lbs

Sent from my Redmi Note 8 Pro using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mr_pretzel

New graphics for vision 98, 108, sakana and pescado. So boring, definitely going to miss the pollard stuff

---

Yeah, it is kinda weird that they did not keep Eric aboard to do graphics, especially as the Season Eqt skis are all black - but it probably makes for too much brand confusion or whatnot. Eric's graphics has just been suge a huuuuge part of their brand identity imho.

QST Blank looks nice, though the short sidecut radius and dropping of qst118s - making a 112 ski their widest freeride offering (?) - somewhat surprising. The Stella looks really nice
Attachment 357983

Somebody shared this link over at NS, where you'll find a lot of the 2022 offerings from Salomon, K2, Line, Fischer and Head here, while info on 2022 Black Diamond Impulse 94/104/112 can be found here - just google translate.

Does anybody know anything about 2022 Dynastar M-Frees, or more specifically if they will introduce a mid 180s M-Free 118? The 9cm gap is too big, and my tiny self should def not be on the same ski as Reine and Richard (but the 180s sre short thoughh) ;)

New Bent Chet 120 Graphic from NS:

Attachment 357985
https://www.instagram.com/p/CJKBwP9B...ource=ig_embed