TLT6 with the unavailable currently CL liner
My TLT6P came with theCR liners which I really like btw.
Everyoneistrying to figure out the actual weight difference of the CL and CR liners.
Edit:
Turns out some of my comments here were based on a preproduction sample.
For the most part the info is accurate but not always on the minute details. An example is the One and TLT6 buckles are very similar but not exactly the same. The last PF-X liner is close but not exactly the same as the production CR liner. My impressions habven't changed o nthe TLT6 but I strive to be accurate in the deatils so you cna better make up you own mind what is important to you.
If you want more detail worth a look here as well on an additional review of a production sample:
http://coldthistle.blogspot.com//09/the-dynafit-tlt6-ski-boot-shake-and.html
The original review below, written in June after a couple of weeks with the TLT6:
OK, I'll admit it, I am a little pissed.
In late winter and earlySpringof Dynafit started deliveringon something special fewof us hadseen before. That was the TLT 5 ski mountaineering boot.
Finally a ski boot that would climb ice almost as well asa decent ice climbing boot and in the right circumstances may be better than some.
So why am I pissed andpointing all this out? Because as everyone knows or should know by now there are plenty of really good ski boots in the world. And damn few, real ski mountaineering boots. Light weight boots you can ski and climb in without your foot wear ever coming to mind. The emphasis is on the mountaineering not the skiing so much.
Dynafit buckled (forgive the pun) under the pressure to build another ski boot and as a result, for the most partfolded up the TLT5 and put it away.
My suggestion if you want to climb technical ground in your ski boots? Hunt the TLT5s down now and buy a pair while you still can. Either model 5, it doesn't matter.
No question the the newest TLT 6 version is a better ski boot than the original TLT5. But sweet Mary!!!....I wish Dynafithad gone in the opposite direction and built a better technical ski mountaineering boot instead of a a "better" ski boot. The public's voice was clear. There are a lot more skiers than ski mountaineers. Even if they aren't reading about it here on Cold Thistle most asked,"Build us a better ski boot!" And Dynafit did just that.
Now, would someone build us abetter climbing boot that skis well?
Overall boot weight is claimed the same on a 27.5 TLT even with the heavier warmer/better fitting TLT 6 inner boot.
Dynafit's published info fro a 27.5:
1050g tlt 5 P
1050g tlt 6 P
"Chris said...
TLT5Ps. In a 29.0, the TLT6 shell weighs about an ounce more than the 5. The
TLT6 CR liner weighs 2.5 ounces more than the flimsy TLT5 P-TF liner. Total weight
difference is 3.5 oz (100g) per boot." TLT5 P being lighter."
Sorry, I don't have comparable sizes yet to weigh. There are subtle changes in the bootsbut the weigh stayed the same mostly by droppingthe LTW inner boot of the TLT 5.
For most of us skiing is the priority on a $1000 retail boot. Which with the carbon Performance version skiing is clearly the priority. $750 for the Mountain version. If the previous boots are any example both ski much better than any light weigh boot has a right to. They simplyski very well. I found a preference in the TLT5 for no tongue or power strap on the carbonPerformance and use the tongue and power strap on the Mountain version unless I amin really light weight skis. I also found I liked the Mountainversion just a tiny bit better for booting and climbing because it is just a tiny bit softer and a more progressive flex when skiing when all buckled up and strapped in.Both are very good boots.
I found the TLT6 version every bit the ski boot and then some of the TLT5.
Eliminating the forward foot flex makes the TLT6 a better ski boot no doubt. But any hiking or climbingin mixed terrain makes me miss that feature immediately. I suspect having a size 29 shell andjamming my footinto it makes that flex something I notice and like. Others simply riveted the TLT 5toe solid their first season if not week. Those that did will really like the TLT6. Smaller toe profile on the TLT6a result of loosing the hinge.
Buckles have changed some but not always as one might assume. Certainly not lower profile in every case. Hopefully they will stay buckled now on breakable crust of the nasty boot packs or even moderate skin tracks. The fist generation TLT5 hasn't. One of the TLT5's few faults imo. Teh nect generation forward buckle with a "stud" did better. The new buckles are a different profile and shape which should solve the problem. The spring snow conditionsI skied the TLT6 in didn't allow me to test my theory on a "better buckle system" for staying shut. I suspect Dynafit did. I did however use pretty much the same two buckles on my Dynafit Onesall of last season and was pleased with them. Although the One's instep buckle is higher up on the foot and better placed to lock in the heel in I think. If the performance on the One is any example it is a better buckle system on the TLT6 by comparison to the TLT5.
If you are looking for a "better AT ski boot" with an emphasis on skiing,the Dynafit One is a pretty good answer btw. I've been very pleased with the One PX TF when used on my 190cm and longer, 100mm+ skis. No lack of power in reasonable conditions and very comfortable. I have a comparison I have been working on since mid summer between the Dynafit One and the Scarpa Maestrale RS. Short version spoiler? "Both are very good ski boots!" :)
The real find here IMO is the boot Dynafit has yet to build. A stripped TLT6 with a fiberglass cuff, the One's upper two buckle sytem and a Pebax lower. I want that boot!
Instep buckle is larger and has been reversed, then doubled for more adjustment on the TLT6.
New cuff buckle on the TLT6 (lower picture) does wrap around better (one extra hinge point)and offer a lower profile on the boot.
The TLT6 now has a easily adjustable forward lean adjustment in the cuff. Thankfully this is a part you can buy and upgrade your own boots with. Lots of toys to play with on this boot.
TLT5 mid sole or lack of
TLT6 insulated full length insole
I also failed to mention the TLT6 now comes with a soft and a hard tongue at no extra charge. Yellow and green. Easy to tell apart. In my first reviews of the TLT5 Mountain and Performance several years agothat option seemed likea no brainier for Dynafit.
So if you are listening :) How about a Pebax lower and fiber glass cuff TLT6 with a the two upper buckles of a ONE and no extra nonsense. A metal on metal cuff rivet while you are there as well. No tongues, no power strap and a lwt Palau foam liner? Please?
The TLT6 has been widened in the forefoot to enhance thefit for the general public. 2mm on the instep side, and 1mm added to the outside of the boot. I dare anyone to do a blind test and tell me the TLT6 is a wider boot over the TLT5. Helping addressone of the most easily identified complaints from those using the TLT5lift skiing...boot warmth, is a warmer, full length insole has been added. It is easy enough to see.
Inner boot? Late last season I bought a pair of TLT Mountainsthathave virtually the same inner boot that the TLT6 has now. Gone at least in the US is the excellent (IMO) Palau heat moldable and exceptionally light foam liner except for the race PDG version and theDyNA here in North America. Rumors are the RL liner will eventually be avialable. My guess is Dynafit is simply punishing the American's (rightfully so IMO) for complaining toomuch and then adding Intuitions. (Dynafit comment below sums it up "best for this market") Replacing the liner in the TLTP 6 is a slightly heavier (I am saying 100g +/-max) and better fitting (for my feet) heat moldable liner thisseason in both versions of the TLT6. Although Dynafit claims you don't even need heat to mold them. "Just wear them skiing." I am always leery of that as an option. But that seems to actually be the truth from the early reviews I trust. For a $950+ retail boot you would think they could do much, much better. But may be I just don't really understand the technology here. Seriously. It is possible and I could be wrong. because I really like the CR liner. But I also heat molded them.
Did he say?
"more down hill orienteed"
I've used the original Mountain's liner, the original Performance liner, a Intuition Pro Tour linerand now seemingly the newest version ( or at least a very close copy) that comes in the TLT6P. The new lineris heavier by a few grams but is also better in every way but weight for my feet. Likely most feet.
This from Dynafit on 9/16:
- The TLT6s are available in North America with only the CR liner. They are the best for this market, warmer, more downhill oriented, adeguately thermo customizable (in the mean time it's not compulsory to thermo form them, - The fit of the liners is now done without footbed. In this way the skier can adapt the personal anatomy on the soft bottom layer of the liner. This layer changes thickness between the full and half size
Bottom line? TLT6 is an awesomeback country AT ski boot. Better by a fair bit in several ways that the TLT5. Including the new inner boot I think. Smaller over all outer volume. Same weight, wider fit, warmer boot, better buckles. No metatarsal joint to flex on the boot. Loosing the sole flexalone makes it a better ski boot. It is worth repeating again.."better ski boot".
If you really want a climbing boot to ski in buy the TLT5 if you can still find them on discount.
But you aren't loosing much there either with the newest TLT6. I may not like the trend to a better ski boot over "a better climbing boot" butthe TLT6 is without questionan exceptional boot and clearlyan improved TLT5.
Theliner
options? Guess they didn't just drop a PDG or the old P liner in the new TLT6 as the CL liner.
Turns out the CL is very similar but slightly different, withlaces now, more
reinforcement for durability and a bigger flex cuff in the boot shaft.
Thickness of the foam is different (1mm maybe 2mm, I am still checking) as well between TLT and
EVO. PDG and Evo liners are thinner and offer an even easier ankle flex for a
longer stride. But the thin PDG/EVO linermight be an option if you need
more room in your TLT?! Go down a shell sixe on the tLT6 and use the EVO liner? Might be worth a try.
TLT6 liners? CL liner on the left. CR liner on the right.
Photo courtesy of www.mountainski.eu
Great early TLT6 review here as well:
http://www.mountainski.eu/177/several-days-long-testing-of-prototype-of-new-ski-touring-boots-dynafit-tlt6
Interested to see what the foam liner will actually show,if it is ever available in the US...and what else is available in Europe.
Now, how about a real, "mountaineering/ski" boot?
Anyone going to step up and dominatethat market share?
Late '70s Scott ski boot. With a Vibram sole glued on they were a usefulLWT mountaineering double boot that you could actually ski in.
No comments:
Post a Comment