• Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to content
  • Skip to primary sidebar
  • Skip to footer

SkinTrack

  • Lightest Gear
    • Skis
    • Boots
    • Bindings
    • Skins
    • Packs
  • Skimo Training
    • Training Plans + Skimo Manual
    • Transitions Videos
  • Facebook
  • Instagram

Reviews

Review of CEP Compression Progressive+ Ski Merino Socks: Great for ski touring

April 17, 2015 By Stano Faban Leave a Comment

cep-compression-ski-socks-reviewQuick overview:

  • Usual full price: about $69.00 CAD
  • Weight: about 90 g / pair
  • Pros: Fit, Function, Comfort, Odor free
  • Cons: Slightly warm on warm days
  • Suitability: Ski touring, skimo racing, downhill skiing

Bottom line:

Very functional and a very well manufactured piece of gear, little not to like.

Product description and How we tested it:

CEP Compression is known for being one of the best (if not the best) manufacturers of compression products in the world. History of this German brand dates back a couple of decades and quality of their experience comes from healthcare compression garments manufacturing.
CEP describes these Progressive Merino socks as having “clever combination of merino wool and water-repellent synthetic fibers for perfect heat and moisture management” which I found very true, except, my calves felt a bit too warm when I ski toured in them in balmy weather (above zero Celsius) we had this February and March. For such weather, I prefer a much lower or a thinner sock.
As for compression, CEP claims optimum performance and recovery, stability for muscles and joints, and improved coordination. Before trying out these socks, I tried another two brands (Asics and Dynafit) which made me skeptical about the whole compression for performance thing. I do feel (and I believe) that compression socks help me with recovery, especially, if I need to sit or stand for longer periods of time after a hard workout. However, the performance benefit was always lost on me as I never felt comfortable with the pressure around my calves while skiing or running, it felt like too much after about 2h of touring.
The CEP ski socks feel way more comfortable than the other two I tried and my calves feel fresher afterwards, but I cannot say the compression is “helping” or “optimizing” my performance. I would define it more like this – if my feet, shins and calves feel comfortable, dry and happy even after 6-7 hours of ski touring in various conditions then I do like such socks a lot.
Another detail that I think makes these socks great are padded zones or panels that are definitely at the right places, and the fact that they are all blended together with flat seams, thus, providing a nice fit.
Important: As with any other compression garments, make sure to choose the right size for you as that will greatly impact your experience. CEP provides sizing charts on their websites so you won’t have any problems with that.

Pros:

  • Everything a ski sock should be.
  • Heat and moisture management.
  • Fit and comfort.
  • The socks are quite odor-free even after 2-3 days of continuous use.

Cons / What can be improved about this product:

  • If your lower leg never really gets cold then these might be a bit too warm for you for spring touring (around and above zero Celsius).

Product Specs:

  • Materials: 67% polyamide, 23% wool (merino), 10% spandex
  • Sizing: Men’s, Women’s, sizes 2-5

Online stores that carry CEP Compression Ski Socks:

  • $69.99 CAD from CEPcompression.ca (skiing thermo socks model)
  • $69.99 CAD from CEPcompression.ca (race skiing socks)
  • $65.00 USD from CEPcempression.com (the reviewed model)

Filed Under: Reviews Tagged With: CEP Compression, compression socks

Review of Hydrapak SoftFlask: Practical little helper

October 20, 2014 By Stano Faban 3 Comments

soft-flask-250Hydrapak SoftFlask quick overview:

  • Usual full price: $13.99 USD
  • Weight: 24 g (250ml Energy Flask)
  • Pros: Light, Versatile, No Waste, Ease of Use
  • Cons: Durability, Hydration
  • Suitability: Rando racing, ski touring, ultra running, scrambling, alpine climbing, trail running.

Bottom line:

Relatively cheap and an improvement over individual gel packages.

Product description and How we tested it:

Hydrapak is a relative newcomer to the hydration market and primarily a producer of standard plastic water bottles as well as Camelbak-style reservoirs. They also produce a slightly more niche product however, the soft flask. This is a collapsible soft plastic flask in various sizes with a small bite valve at the top. They come in two designs, one in more of a bottle shape ‘for hydration’ and one in a flask shape ‘for energy’. Both types have several size options.
I’ll admit to getting inspiration for this idea by seeing an athlete in one of the ISMF World Cup videos racing with a soft flask taped to their backpack but after a season of running and skiing with versions of these flasks, here are a few of my thoughts:
The 250ml ‘energy’  soft flasks are very useful for skimo races. Around the 2 hr time duration, these races require calorie intake but dealing with the hassle of several gel packets or chewing solid bars is not ideal with gloves and cold fingers. Additionally, cold temps make gels much harder to swallow. My solution has been mixing four gel packs (or using bulk gel from Hammer Nutrition) into a soft flask with water. You avoid any packaging issues and the now slurry like mixture is much easier to swallow. I tape it onto my shoulder strap for no-hand access when it is warm and keep it in my skin suit pocket when it’s cold.
soft-flask-500These flasks are also useful for similar length running races and fit well in a vest pocket or just as a handheld. Once you finish the flask, crumple it up and stick it in your shorts pocket.
150ml soft flasks are less useful, but in a short race, where only one shot of gel slurry is needed, it is sufficient and ultra-light.
The 500ml ‘Hydration’ flask is more of a bottle type design. It has a different shape than the ‘nutrition’ flasks and fits well anywhere you would put a standard bottle (vest pockets). I use these to replace the bottles in my vest primarily because they are lighter. Slightly smaller than a standard bottle, they don’t hold as much fluid but are easier to carry as a handheld, even without a strap.

Pros:

  • Eliminates individual gel packaging. No fumbling with package tops. All ready to go at your finger tips.
  • Allows you to create a gel ‘slurry’ by adding water. Much more friendly for consumption during a race.
  • Ease of access – tape it to the strap of your pack for hands-free, or stick it in a running vest pocket or even the pocket of your shorts!
  • Easy to take apart the nozzle for cleaning out scuzzy old gel.

Cons / What can be improved about this product:

  • These are not particularly durable – be careful with duct tape and scissors. Also will not cushion a fall very well if you land on it 🙂
  • Some older/smaller models do not have a function to lock the flask shut. This means it could potentially leak in your bag if squeezed at the nozzle properly. I haven’t really had this happen and the nozzle is pretty well sealed. Not a big deal as long as you are careful

Product Specs (250ml Energy SoftFlask):

  • Weight: 24 grams
  • Materials: Silicone/TPU
  • Size: 150ml and 250ml ‘For Energy’, and 350ml, 500ml, 750ml ‘For Hydration’

Online stores that carry Hydrapak SoftFlasks:

  • $13.99 USD directly from Hydrapak
  • $9.95 USD from Hammer Nutrition

Filed Under: Reviews Tagged With: Fueling, Hydrapak, Hydration, Nutrition, Racing, soft flask, Training

Review of Dynafit Pantera and Pantera GTX trail running shoes

May 23, 2014 By Stano Faban Leave a Comment

Dynafit Pantera & Pantera GTX Overview:

  • dynafit-pantera-gtx-both-main-2Usual full price: around $140.00 USD  and $160.00 for GTX version
  • Weight: 410 g and 430 g for GTX (10.0 men’s US)
  • Pros: comfortable, good cushioning, traction in mud/gravel, durable
  • Cons: poor grip on rock
  • Suitability: running any distances and all surfaces but specifically better for lots of pavement or running on rocks
  • How we go it: Given for free (disclosure notices)

Bottom line:

I’ll be using the Pantera for longer trail runs in the valley and the Pantera GTX for days in the mountains where I anticipate encountering snow. A good addition to the Dynafit shoe quiver.

Online stores that carry Pantera and Pantera GTX:

  • $110 – $139 for Pantera men’s at Backcountry.com
  • $127 – $159 for Pantera GTX men’s at Backcountry.com
  • $139 at Pantera women’s at Backcountry.com
  • $111 – $139 for Pantera men’s at CampSaver.com
  • $128 – $159 for Pantera GTX men’s at CampSaver.com
  • $127 – $200 at Amazon.com (various models)

Photos:

Product description and How we tested it:

The Pantera is Dynafit’s newest addition to their summer running shoe line (also available in women’s sizes). It is an interesting departure from their usual minimalist attitude towards endurance gear. Not particularly light but well padded and supportive, the Pantera is very different from the ultra-light Feline Ghost.
I’m not a running minimalist and appreciate the extra padding the Pantera’s provide when running on rooty or rocky trails. My feet feel significantly less beat up than when running the same terrain on a less padded shoe. I’m a toe-stubber so a beefy toe cap is always appreciated. The toe is less reinforced compared to the Feline, likely reducing weight without much loss in protection (it still has the ‘Ballistic Bumper Toe Cap’ to afford good protection).
The deep tread pattern provides good traction on dry trails, gravel, dirt, mud, and snow but the grip fails on wet rock. The rubber compound does not seem well suited for technical rock scrambling where a grippier shoe is required. For days when I know I will encounter wet granite slabs, I fall back on my noticeably grippier Dynafit Feline Ghosts.
The Pantera construction seems of good quality. After several hundred kilometres, nothing has torn or ripped and the lacing system is in good condition. The laces start off slippery and quick to come un-tied but after a few muddy runs, the treatment wears off and they stay done up no problem.
I’m not a huge fan of Gore-Tex shoes except in very specific situations with significant amounts of snow or mud. Unfortunately, as soon as we start getting out of the valley and on some real mountain runs (more like walks), mud and especially snow are commonplace. While breathability is compromised (don’t wear them driving on a road trip unless you want sweaty feet), the protection from slushy summer snow is awesome. When postholing across a snow-field or glacier, slush instantly penetrates most trail shoes but the GTX treatment keeps my socks dry. (A good gaiter is necessary to keep snow from coming in the top!)
The reinforced toe and padded heel also accepts a crampon well making the Pantera a good choice for mountain days.

Pros:

  • Comfortable, wide fit with a decent toe box means they are comfortable on long runs.
  • Solid toe and foot protection mean feet take less of a beating on trails.
  • 8mm drop is reasonable compared to some shoes out there.
  • Have taken a beating and still not fallen apart! Durability is good, improved even over other already durable Dynafit shoes.

Cons / What can be improved about this product:

  • I think a better sole compound or shape would improve traction on granite/wet rock for scrambling. For me, this is an issue. For someone running primarily on gravel or dirt/mud, this would be a non-issue as the shoes excel

Online stores that carry Pantera, Pantera GTX and Feline Ghost trail running shoes:

  • $110 – $139 for Pantera men’s at Backcountry.com
  • $127 – $159 for Pantera GTX men’s at Backcountry.com
  • $139 for Pantera women’s at Backcountry.com
  • $58 for Feline Ghost men’s and Backcountry.com
  • 58 for Feline Ghost women’s and Backcountry.com
  • $111 – $139 for Pantera men’s at CampSaver.com
  • $128 – $159 for Pantera GTX men’s at CampSaver.com
  • $127 – $200 at Amazon.com (various models)

Filed Under: Gear, Tech & Food, Reviews Tagged With: Dynafit Pantera, Dynafit Pantera GTX, trail running

Hydration & Overhydration in Endurance Sports: Book Review of Waterlogged by Tim Noakes

April 25, 2014 By Stano Faban 2 Comments

waterlogged-book-tim-noakesWaterlogged book overview:

  • Usual full price: around $25.00 USD
  • Pages: over 400
  • Pros: lots of details, very useful, fairly easy to understand, chapter summaries
  • Cons: lots of similar stories to drive the point home
  • Suitability: from beginners to serious athletes in any sport, lots of great knowledge and practical advice
  • How we go it: Birthday present (disclosure notices)

Bottom line:

In my opinion, “Waterlogged – The Serious Problem of Overhydration in Endurance Sports” is a must read for anyone that is interested in hydration. Tim Noakes – a well respected and credible sports scientist – effectively dismantles lots of myths and pseudo-science that were promoted onto the sports community in the last 30+ years.
In order to get the most out of the book you do not have to read it cover to cover, unless you need every single detail to convince you he is right.

Amazon carries the Waterlogged:

  • $16-25 at Amazon.com

Book description and Our review:

The book was published on May 1st, 2012 and the 400 pages make quite the bible! However, once you start reading you quickly understand that Tim Noakes spent over three decades to research hydration and overhydration himself as well as he reviewed over thousands of scientific papers and books published on these subjects to present us with his conclusions.
Noakes mostly wrote the book to prevent any future deaths from overhydration during endurance sports but in the process he also answers why, what, and how much do we really need to drink to maximize our performance.
He also exposes the hydration industry for its misleading information:

Dehydration in those who drink ad libitum (at one’s own thirst) has no proven detrimental effect on athletic performance. – Tim Noakes in Chapter 5 where he discusses Gatorade at length
Neither muscle cramps nor heat illnesses are caused by sodium deficiency. – Tim Noakes

Waterlogged chapter list to show you everything Noakes discusses:

Chapter 1 – Perspectives on Human Physiology and Hydration

Chapter 2 – Thirst as a Signal for Fluid Intake

Chapter 3 – Water’s Role in Thermoregulation

Chapter 4 – Salt Balance in the Body

Chapter 5 – Emergence of the Sports Drink Industry

Chapter 6 – The Shaky Science of Hydration

Chapter 7 – Early Drinking Guidelines

Chapter 8 – Discovery of Exercise-Associated Hyponatremia

Chapter 9 – The Biology of EAH

Chapter 10 – EAH and EAHE on a Global Scale

Chapter 11 – Guidelines for Fluid Intake

I went on to read this book some months after watching couple of Tim Noakes presentations that I found on YouTube. Through those videos as well as further reading-up on him as a scientist I opened the book with great enthusiasm and a general belief that what he concludes should be true. This allowed me to skip pages occasionally as Noakes, for me, went into too much detail and repeated similar examples/stories too many times.
Each chapter seemed to be constructed roughly the same – he presents what he found or thinks, then provides overwhelming evidence to support this, dismantles old beliefs, and nicely goes onto summarizing the whole chapter knowledge and recommendations on just one page. So just like a I said above, if you believe him as a scientist, you do not have to read every single paragraph or even page.
In this 4 min video Tim Noakes discusses basic principles of hydration:

And if you care, in this 15 min TEDx talk Tim Noakes discusses his body of work which also includes Central Governor theory that basically states that not (only) muscle fatigue but brain regulates athletic performance:

Pros:

  • Tons of detail and scientific evidence.
  • Lots of practical advice and knowledge you can apply to your every day life and training.
  • Superb value for the buck.
  • Fairly easy to understand.
  • The summaries at the end of each chapter are well done and easy to understand.

Cons:

  • It’s long.
  • You might need to look up some medical and biology terms, but not too often.

Waterlogged on Amazon.com:

  • $16 – $25 at Amazon.com (various models)

Filed Under: Gear, Tech & Food, Reviews, Training, Tricks & Tips Tagged With: dehydration, Hydration, Tim Noakes, Waterlogged

Dynafit TLT 6 Mountain Review: First impressions and comparison to TLT 5

December 17, 2013 By Stano Faban Leave a Comment

Dynafit TLT 6 Mountain Boot quick overview:

Dynafit TLT 6 boots review

  • Usual full price: $749.95 USD
  • Weight: 1225g per boot (size 27.5)
  • Cost per gram: $0.31 / g
  • Pros: Light, comfortable, easy touring, stiff
  • Cons: Yet to find out
  • Suitability: Ski touring, ski mountaineering
  • How we go it: Paid prodeal price (disclosure notices)

Bottom line:

A clear improvement from the Dynafit TLT 5. The buckles work better, the toe box has more space for wide feet, the boot is stiffer, and it still walks and climbs well.

Photos:

Here are some photos also of my old TLT 5s for comparison.

Product description and How we tested it:

I got Dynafit TLT 5 boots and thoroughly abused them for two full seasons. The cuff rivets are working loose, the lower buckle has all but fallen off (cord replaced the original wire long ago), and the shell is plain beat up. That’s not to say that the boots didn’t serve me well or performed up to expectations, they just saw a lot of use. However, I was pretty excited to try out a shiny new pair of TLT 6 Mountain boots.
The TLT 6 address several complaints about the TLT 5. The toe box has been widened to allow a little more space for the metatarsals to expand while walking. This is a noticeable difference for me. I should probably be in a size 29 shell but opted for the 28.5 “performance fit” in the TLT 5 and stayed at the same size when I upgraded to the TLT 6 (BSL is the same).
With the new version, I have experienced no metatarsal pain. The toes are still a bit tight but a small punch will hopefully solve that for me. The metatarsal flex zone was eliminated, probably saving a bit of weight while improving stiffness and very insignificantly affecting walking. Simpler is better.
The upper buckle retains the classic Dynafit style with one throw to lock the cuff into ski mode but a double hinge sets the buckle closer to the cuff to keep it from basing on rocks. With the buckle closer to the shell, I can also now tuck my pant collar over the boot top to keep snow out. The lower buckle has been beefed up significantly and no longer pops open while post-holing (or just randomly while skinning). The wire is permanently attached so no risk of smashing it off.
The boot comes with two pairs of removable tongues: soft and hard. I have only carried the hard tongue. And if I’m not worried about stiffness or want to be quick, I just go without a tongue altogether.
I have put just shy of 10,000m vertical ascent and descent (and a bit more lift served descent) into the boots and couldn’t be happier. They drive fatter skis (196cm Huscarans) and still feel good doing jump turns on skinny skis in steep terrain or scrambling on rocks. The TLT5s worked great but the improved TLT 6 is worth the upgrade.
Crampon compatibility seems similar to the TLT 5, with BD Sabretooth Clip, Grivel Air-Tech Strap, and CAMP Race 290 Dyneema  crampons all working well.
The TLT5 and now the TLT6 are available in both a “Mountain” and “Performance” model. The Mtn version has a softer plastic cuff while the Perf model has a carbon fibre cuff. The weight difference seems negligible but carbon fiber appears to be somewhat stiffer. As I am not a particularly talented skier, nor skiing not particularly spectacular terrain, stiffness is not a huge concern for me so the carbon version was not worth the extra cost. Others may disagree.
On the downhill, the TLT 6 is comfortable and with the tongue in way stiffer than I need (more so than the TLT 5 I think). On a bigger ski, without the tongue, you can definitely feel the shell flex.

Pros:

  • Significant upgrades to the TLT 5. (Buckles, toe box)
  • Lightweight boot that is stiff and walks well!

Cons / What can be improved about this product:

  • Tongues are a bit of a hassle to get in and out.
  • Ice can accumulate between the cuff and the liner on the laces which jam up when trying to lock into ski mode.
  • I don’t have any great suggestions for improvements so it is hard to call these “cons”. Merely limitations based on the design.

Product Specs:

  • Weight: 1225 grams per boot
  • Materials: Grilamid / Pebax
  • Size: 25-30.5 (Available in half-sizes but the shell breaks on the full size with half sizes happening in the liner)

Online stores that carry Dynafit TLT 6 Mountain boot:

Dynafit TLT 6 boots review

  • $749.00 at Skimo.co
  • $749.95 at Backcountry.com
  • $749.95 at CampSaver.com
  • $749.95 at OMCgear.com

Filed Under: Reviews Tagged With: Dynafit TLT 5, Dynafit TLT 6

Detailed review and direct comparison of Dynafit DyNA Evo vs Scarpa Alien 1.0 skimo racing boots

November 16, 2013 By Stano Faban 29 Comments

From mountains to pubs to bedrooms, currently, no other question dominates the skimo racing boots debate more than “How does DyNA Evo compare to Scarpa Alien carbon one-O?”
The big problem with answering it is that very few people actually used both boots, used them extensively, are not sponsored by either company, and have a detective-like obsession for gear testing.
The comparison follows our standard review format but otherwise it’s all Jonathan Shefftz evaluating his long term experience with these boots!

Scarpa Alien carbon vs Dynafit Evo
Note: Do not compare cuff heights, other dimensions, forward-lean or angles based on the above images. As two separate photos they might not be the same scale and were likely taken from slightly different angles.

Dynafit DyNA Evo and Scarpa Alien 1.0 quick overview: 

  • Usual full price: $1700 and $1800 USD (respectively)
  • Weight: With some liner variations, both models are almost exactly three pounds for size 26 – 1360g per pair (680g/boot).
  • Cost per gram: $1.25/g and $1.32/g respectively for size 26.
  • Pros, both: Stunning range of resistance-free motion while skinning, transforming into equally stunning rearward support and lateral control when skinning.
  • Pros, Alien 1.0 only: Astoundingly stiff in forward flex.
  • Cons, both: Shells do not seal up the liners against the elements, and limited potential for fit modifications.
  • Cons, Alien 1.0 only: Can such a light boot really be too … stiff?
  • Cons, Evo only:  Sole lugs shear off after only a few hours of off-snow travel.
  • Suitability: Rando racing but also just general ski touring if you can tolerate some of the inconveniences.
  • How we got it: One boot was bought from a European etailer and another via pro-form, but they came out almost exactly the same. (disclosure notices)

Bottom line: 

Even if you are coming from a prior generation race boot like the Dynafit DyNA or Scarpa F1, or the race-derived Dynafit TLT5, you will still be amazed at both the uphill and downhill capabilities of these boots.
Despite the similar bottom lines, their names accurately highlight the differences.
The Evo is an exquisitely slimmed-down rendition of the original DyNA boot (which is very similar to the Dynafit TLT5/6 design).  To quote Antoine de Saint-Exupery:  “A designer knows he has achieved perfection not when there is nothing left to add, but when there is nothing left to take away.”  Dynafit has perfectly stripped out every possible bit of superfluous weight while still preserving an amazing amount of skiing performance.
By contrast, the Alien 1.0 really does live up to Scarpa’s alien technology marketing theme, with an impressively crafted design incorporating many innovative parts and exotic materials.  Plus if you like the feeling of getting your money’s worth in terms of carbon fiber, then this is definitely your choice.
The two boots do deviate from each other in two areas:
The Evo sole is simply incapable of sustained off-snow travel, as merely a few cumulative hours of off-snow travel will shear off or significantly damage most of the lugs; and, the Alien 1.0 might feel overly stiff in forward flex for very lightweight skiers without significantly loosening up the cord.

Photos:

How we tested them:

I bought the Dynafit DyNA Evo toward the beginning of the 2013 season and loved it so much that I have used it for over 247,000’ vertical, so almost half my earned vertical for the 2013 season.  But toward the end of the season I bought the Scarpa Alien 1.0 for any tours with off-snow travel, so only a relatively modest 77,600′ vertical thus far.
Evo ski/binding setups have been a mix of Movement Fish-X + Plum 165, Hagan X-Race + Dynafit Low Tech Race, Hagan X-Ultra + La Sportiva RT, and Hagan Cirrus + Plum 165.  I did not try any wider setups only because I did not have enough binding length adjustability for any of them last season.
Alien 1.0 setups have been mainly the Hagan Cirrus on spring and summer snow, except for one surprise late-season “winter” powder outing on the Movement Logic-X (remounted with the greater adjustability of the Plum Guide so as to try the Alien 1.0 in powder), plus a couple times on the Fish-X.
I haven’t used either boot for extended periods in extremely cold temperatures, plus I always keep moving anyways and find all thermo liners to be warm, so I can’t comment on their insulating properties.

First impressions – out of the box:

Actual weight for both boots is very close but not quite at spec, since my size 26 is pretty much spot-on for the 27 spec. Both boots have Dynafit’s “Quick-Step-in” toe inserts. Scarpa includes a fairly substantive user manual with actual useful information (e.g., the BOA adjustment can be disassembled for cleaning).
The fit is accurate on both boots for the interior length of my size 26, as I can just barely accommodate (sort of) the toes of my 26.5cm foot, which is therefore only slightly shorter than the 279 mm exterior BSL (base sole length).  Note that the Evo’s 279 is about 1.5 mm longer than the Alien’s 279 for binding fit, although about 1.5 mm shorter for crampon fit.
For the Alien, the BSL changes in 8 and 9 mm increments, so the interior length’s relationship to stated mondo size might become skewed a bit the further away you go from my size 26. For the Evo, if you are coming from a TLT5/6, note the different shell break:  my 25.5/26.0 Evo feels a bit shorter than my 26.0/26.5 TLT5, but not the full 5 mm as would be implied by the stated sizing difference.
The fit modification potential is limited for both boots.  For the Evo, my favorite boot guy was able to remove of bit of excess foam (relatively speaking) from the top of the liner toe box, thereby providing my big toes with a few critical extra mm. He successfully heat molded the liner, although given its thin profile, I didn’t notice any differences after molding.  The Grilamid nylon lower shell has a good record for punching/stretching in the TLT5/6 boots.
The current Evo liner is essentially a more minimal version of the already minimal TLT5 Performance TF liner (now continuing on as the European-only “CL” Custom Light, as opposed to North America’s only option of the “CR” Custom Ready).
For the Alien, the stiff foam bootboard is easily removed, and by playing with the heel height I was able to alleviate some pinching/banging of the lateral side of the back of my heel. The current liner is neither overlap nor tongued, and instead is essentially a pull-on sock with (minimal) padding in key areas.
I have not yet tried to heat the liner, and given its thin profile, its moldability is probably modest at best.  And after my modest usage so far, my boot guy thought I had already essentially molded them through use.  He is also fairly confident in his ability to stretch the problem area in the back of my heel.
The Evo’s partial-carbon upper cuff is shared with the TLT5/6 Performance, with the same swap-able plate for adjusting the forward lean.  (Evo and TLT5 boots before the 2013 season lacked the swap-able plate, yet can be easily retrofitted with the new part.)  But no optional outer tongue, no plastic fixed inner tongue, and no power strap.
The cuff provides complete coverage in back, yet leaves a large gap in front.  The lower shell has a fabric cover, but if you tighten up the lower buckle, the fabric tends to sag open a bit, acting as a scoop.  Plan either on wearing a race suit with an integrated gaiter, buying the Dynafit Racing Soft Shell Pant (or its Movement pant predecessor), or bringing some of the snowpack along with you.
The Alien’s forward lean is adjustable by changing a bolt position.  The cuff height matches the Dynafit TLT5/6.  In front, the cuff is taller than the TLT5/6 shell, but lower than the TLT5/6 optional external tongue.  (The cuff of my 26 boot is shared with the 25; I don’t know if the size 27/28 cuff is even taller.)
The cuff leaves a large gap in the back between the lower shell, and a cavernous opening in the front.  (The lower shell is sealed up better, although the thick fabric tongue unfortunately overlaps inside the lower shell, i.e., the reverse of the ideal overlap arrangement for sealing out water and snow.)  Plan either on using the very nicely designed (and nearly weightless, yet unfortunately not costless) Alien lycra gaiter, wearing a race suit with an integrated gaiter, or bringing even more of the snowpack along with you than with the EVO.

Second impressions – in use:

For both boots, in walk/tour mode, you’re in for a shock, as the upper cuff pretty much just disappears.  Flip down the Alien lever (which instantly self-aligns) or throw the Evo side lever (which sometimes requires a second of fiddling to engage), and you’re in for another shock:  rearward and lateral support are both outstanding, identical to the TLT5/6 Performance.
Evo’s forward stiffness is fine for narrow skis on consolidated snow.  I haven’t skied the Evo on bigger skis in unconsolidated snow, but only because I wasn’t able to adjust any of my bigger setups for the shorter BSL.  Obviously this isn’t the boot for high-speed lift-served skiing on cut-up chowder, but I’m thinking it should be sufficient for use this season with a new setup somewhere in the high 80s waist width.
Alien 1.0 forward stiffness is … maybe too stiff, if that is possible for a three-pound/pair boot?  Unlike Dynafit’s carbon boots, the carbon on the Alien 1.0 upper cuff wraps all the way around, while the inside of the lower shell also wraps your foot in carbon from the cuff rivets out to the heel and forefoot.  And the mode switch vertical-throw lever has less than a millimeter of slop.  (By contrast, Dynafit has about half a centimeter with its lateral-throw buckle.)  That kind of rigidity is outstanding for lateral and rearward support, but is it too much for forward flex?  I know one racer who admits to keeping the cord a bit loose to allow a little more give before the cuff locks up on him.
In the field, the Evo provided cord has a sheath that can be a bit slippery, so I advise setting up the cord first with a double fishermen.  Although the lower shell buckle has only two micro positions on the lever and two macro positions on the medial side, after I had the length dialed in just right, I found the adjustability to be sufficient even with those limited options.
The fit seems a bit more generous than the notoriously slim TLT5, although hard for me to tell for sure, since I had to go from a very thin sock to an essentially negligibly thin sock to buy a bit more room for my toes.  The cord on the upper cuff is attached to a very long velcro strap with a consequently wide range of adjustability.
In the field, the Alien’s  BOA system quickly tightens up the lower shell in increments as small or large as you want.  However, when I’ve overcompensated for my low-height foot (although my C-width matches up well with the shell), the placement of the BOA on the tongue (as opposed to off on the side like on my mountain bike shoes) can create pressure. Backing off the tension inevitably entails overshooting and having to dial it back it in – but still very quick, and also very easy even with numb fingers.
The upper cuff is all or nothing, so you have to set up your knot length just right by experimenting inside (or in warm weather).  With some extra 3 mm accessory cord, you could try setting up a system with multiple knot positions if you really wanted different upper cuff tightness options.

Third impressions – long-term durability:

The Evo rivets/pivots connecting the upper and lower shells prior to the 2013 season notoriously loosened up over time (requiring annual or so repressing).  For the 2013 season, Dynafit added a sort of spacer (“gusset”?) to address this issue, with unknown efficacy.
By contrast, the Alien rivets/pivots connecting the upper and lower shells look very industrial.
I finally snapped one of the cords on my original DyNA boots after about 485,000’ vertical.  Back-up replacement cord is trivial to carry and retie, plus the warnings signs in retrospect were obvious. The Alien’s lower shell tongue and BOA system are replaceable, as is the standard 3 mm accessory cord for the upper shell.
The Evo lower buckle is fairly low profile, although also all plastic.  The upper buckle protrudes significantly when open, which has made for nervous moments when rock scrambling in my original DyNA and TLT5 with the identical buckle – no casualties so far, although for your next mountaineering expedition bring along McMaster replacement parts #s 90596A005, 91785A092, 96659A101 in case the buckle’s attachment rivets are damaged.  Even if the upper buckle suffers irreparable damage, ski mode can be improvised by connecting the two cuff parts with a simple screw rivet and tightening up the cuff with a Voile strap.
The BOA placement on the tongue means the lower shell has no buckles on the side to be caught up in boulders, and the mode switch lever in the rear flips up out of harm’s way.  But I have read of two failures over time from normal use (as opposed to collisions).  This is not very surprising, given the lever’s slender proportions combined with the rigidity of the all-carbon upper cuff, the rigidity of the partial-carbon lower shell, and the very tight tolerances of the connection between the upper and lower.  But as long as the horizontal bar of the lower shell is still intact, a couple Voile straps should suffice for a field repair.
My Evo boots have about five cumulative hours of off-snow travel, roughly split between casual grass/dirt/mud hiking versus more demanding rock scrambling.  Despite such limited off-snow travel, 11 perimeter lugs have sheared off entirely and 8 are severely compromised, meaning that 2/3 of the lugs are simply gone or about to go. This fails the ISMF gear reg and is obviously unsafe for any off-snow travel other than casual walking/hiking.

Dynafit Evo rubber sole damaged.
These Evo boots photos are from Jonathan. Stano’s note: I don’t have any of this happening with my TLT 5 that have been sufficiently abused as well.
Did my particular pair have a bad batch of rubber?  Or has the design been changed since my pair?  I have read a few internet accounts of 2013 Dynafit PDG boots (with identical lower shells) losing many lugs on a single inaugural hike, which would seem impossible were they not matching up with my cumulative experience.  And Dynafit has inspected my boots, concluding that such nearly instant widespread failure of the lugs is simply normal off-snow wear for the Evo and PDG.  By contrast, my Alien boots show only appropriately minor wear after the same amount of off-snow travel.
Scarpa Alien 1.0 boots sole.
Again, photos from Jonathan of his Alien 1.0 boots that seen about the same amount of walking as above Evos.

Product Specs:

For comparing these two boots to other ones on the market see our Lightest ski mountaineering boots pages.
Dynafit DyNA Evo:

  • Weight: 695 g at size 27
  • Shell material: Grilamid
  • Cuff materials: Carbon, Pebax
  • Sole: EVO Race
  • Forward lean when locked: 14° and 17°
  • Cuff range of motion: 62°
  • Sizes: 23,5, 24, 24,5, 25, 25,5, 26, 26,5, 27, 27,5, 28, 28,5, 29 (two sizes per shell, so liner makes the difference)

Scarpa Alien 1.0:

  • Weight: 700 g at size 27
  • Shell material: Polyamide
  • Cuff material: Carbon
  • Sole: U.F.O. Scarpa/Vibram
  • Forward lean when locked: 9° and 13°
  • Cuff range of motion: 58°
  • Sizes: 24-30 (whole sizes only)

Quick overview of their “economy” stablemates – PDG and Alien:

Each boot has a more economy-minded version:  the Dynafit PDG and the Alien sans numerical appendage.  I briefly tried on each of them inside.  Both of them lack any carbon fiber, resulting in a bit more weight, a bit more ski mode flex, and a lot less cost.
The PDG is the closest to its more expensive sibling, as the only differences are the substitution of fiber-reinforced plastic for the Evo’s partial-carbon upper cuff (along with a pre-drilled hole for an aftermarket velcro strap) and a slightly beefed-up liner.
By contrast, the all-plastic Alien “0.0” is more of a contrast to the 1.0’s full carbon upper cuff and carbon-reinforced lower shell.  The “0.0” liner is a traditional contrast to the 1.0 sock-like liner.  The “0.0” upper cuff closure system includes a velcro strap and a buckle that allows adjustment of the tension.

Online stores that carry Dynafit Evo and PDG boots, and Scarpa’s Alien family:

Dynafit DyNA Evo:

  • $1699 at Skimo.co
  • $1700 at Boulder Nordic Sport
  • $1,699.95 at Backcountry.com

Scarpa Alien 1.0:

  • $1,798.95 at Skimo.co
  • $1800 at Boulder Nordic Sport
  • $1,798.95 at Backcountry.com

Dynafit PDG:

  • $849 at Skimo.co
  • $850 at Boulder Nordic Sport
  • $849 at Cripple Creek BC
  • $849.95 at Backcountry.com

Scarpa Alien:

  • $798.95 at Skimo.co
  • $800 at Boulder Nordic Sport
  • $849 at Cripple Creek BC
  • $798.95 at Backcountry.com

Filed Under: Gear, Tech & Food, Reviews Tagged With: Dynafit Dyna Evo, Dynafit PDG, Dynafit TLT 5, Dynafit TLT 6, Scarpa Alien, Scarpa Alien 1.0

Ultimate Direction SJ Ultra Vest Review: For runs when you need more than just a water bottle

October 15, 2013 By Stano Faban 3 Comments

Ultimate Direction Scott Jurek Ultra Vest quick overview:

ud-scott-jurek-vest

  • Usual full price: $124.94 USD
  • Weight: 368 g with 2 UD bottles
  • Cost per gram: $0.34 / g (w/ bottles)
  • Pros: Light, High Capacity, Breathable, Versatile
  • Cons: Durability, Protection
  • Suitability: Ultra running and scrambling, but even short rando racing workouts.
  • How we go it: Paid full price (disclosure notices)

Bottom line:

I paid full price and will happily pay it again to replace it when it is worn out. Make sure you chose the model that suits your purposes (AK, SJ, or PB) or get a combination.

Photos:

Product description and How we tested it:

The SJ ultra vest is the middle in a series of three running vest models from Ultimate Direction. The AK comes in as the smallest model designed mainly for racing (review coming soon). The SJ (subject of this review) is the middle-sized model for racing and long runs or scrambles. The PB is the largest capacity for long distance adventuring.
I tested the SJ pack over the Spring/Summer/Fall 2013 running season which included some long races (Squamish 50k) and some runs and scrambles from ~2 to 8 hours long.
The pack is designed to allow quick easy access to essential gear with good weight distribution by putting the water bottles on the front of the vest.  Also on the front of the vest are two large electronics pockets, four gel pockets, and two Velcro pockets that fit a small ipod or electrolyte pills. The sides of the vest have a zippered pocket that overlaps a Velcro opening stretch pocket. (These pockets are hard for me to reach and they overlap so if you put much in one the other becomes useless. I cut out the Velcro to make it easier to get things in and out.)
The back of the pack has a 9.2L main compartment built with cuben fiber to stay lightweight. Two zippers are located on the back. One gives access to the main compartment and the other gives access to a small pocket on the very outside (good for quick access small items like snacks or map). The zipper placement and length limits creativity when packing lots or large items into the main compartment. A cord and drawstring on the inside can be used to hold a hydration reservoir in place but I removed it. Another cord and drawstring on the outside of the pack is used to cinch down extra volume or hold a jacket or crampons on the outside of the pack. Loops on the back are for an ice axe.
I have had good luck with packing a LOT of stuff into this bag. Scrambling up Wedge Mt. early in the season I managed to stuff rain pants and jacket, a sandwich, a spare water bottle, gloves, hat, crampons, and an axe into the back and the rest of my food in front pockets. I usually move one of the water bottles to the back to put my camera into the front bottle holder for easy access.
Having bottles up front is awesome. I hate the hassle of a hydration pouch and filling it on the go. With bottles up front you can pull them out anytime to drink or fill in a flash at a stream.

Pros:

  • Compared to an equivalent “pack” it is crazy light.
  • It can hold as much as you could possibly need for a long run and more.
  • The mesh fabric is extremely breathable and though it seems like it would be uncomfortable on bare skin (scratchy) it has never given me any trouble with chaffing even running shirtless.

Cons / What can be improved about this product:

  • The downside of the breathable fabric is that anything stored in the main compartment is directly exposed to your sweaty back. So, if you pack a spare dry shirt for when you get to the cool alpine temps after a hot run up the mountain it will be soaked unless you take preventative measures.
  • Forget asking a partner to reach in and grab a energy bar for you – gross. Its not really a series drawback but can be annoying.
  • I would prefer one of the upper front electronics pockets to be made of cuben fiber to protect an iphone.
  • The chest orientation of the water bottles can definitely lead to some bruised feeling ribs. It went away pretty quickly for me but certainly could be annoying/a problem for someone else.

Product Specs:

  • Weight: 368 grams
  • Cost per Gram: $0.35/g
  • Materials: Cuben Fiber and Hex Mesh
  • Size: 9.2 L Volume + 2 x 2oz Bottles

Online stores that carry Ultimate Direction Scott Jurek Ultra Vest:

ud-scott-jurek-vest

  • $124.95 directly from Ultimate Direction
  • $149.95 slightly bigger PB Aventure Vest directly from Ultimate Direction
  • $120-125 at Amazon.com and $150 for PB Adventure vest
  • $125 at Backcountry.com
  • $125 at CampSaver.com and $150 for PB Adventure Vest

Filed Under: Reviews Tagged With: Hydration, Pack, Review, Running, running vest, Scott Jurek, Scrambling, Ultimate Direction

Suunto Ambit 2 Review: Multi-sport altimeter GPS watch with heart-rate functionality

October 1, 2013 By Stano Faban Leave a Comment

Suunto Ambit 2 quick overview:

suunto-ambit-2-watch

  • Usual full price: $550.00 USD
  • Weight: 82-92 g depending on the model (mine is 89g for the watch + HR belt 60g)
  • Cost per gram: $3.69 / g (watch + belt)
  • Pros: Battery life, data analysis, TrackBack GPS function
  • Cons: Data transfer, size
  • Suitability: Complete sports watch for outdoor/mountain athletes who want the most comprehensive data to monitor their training with the ability to navigate GPS tracks.
  • How we go it: Bought through a pro-deal (disclosure notices)

Bottom line:

Expensive but it does everything. If you want the best of the best this is it.

Photos:

Product description and How we tested it:

Four months of summer testing, skiing and running the Sea-to-Sky. It is billed as the wrist-top computer for explorers. The Ambit2 is a fully equipped sport watch with an excellent heart-rate monitor and a GPS device. The Ambit2 has a large battery designed to lengthen its life in GPS mode (compared to a smaller version – the Ambit 2S – geared toward multi-sport athletes).
Suunto has stepped up where Garmin models failed to provide battery life sufficient for ultra-endurance and mountain athletes. The Ambit2 can be used over multiple days and for events lasting longer than 20 hours.
The watch casing itself is similarly sized to other GPS models and though slightly bulky, not overly. Screen size is adequate for reading data and simple navigation. Data fields can be customized to any combination of displays to suit your needs depending on activity. I like to see HR while training but am more concerned with elevation and time during hikes – easy to setup using the online interface.
User designed apps allow custom metrics that can be displayed. While I personally don’t find any of the available apps any better than what is packaged on the watch, this idea has potential for the future as users become better app programmers.
Distances during my runs are generally slightly lower than the devices that running partners use but not significantly. The large face is exposed to scratches, especially while using hands on rock but seems scratch resistant.
Moveslink software is intuitive to use but requires an Internet connection and data is stored online. Every variable can be plotted on graphs versus time and distance.
A track is superimposed over a Google Map. Tracks can be exported and saved within Moveslink to be shared with other users. This allows users to download a track in a new area and use the navigation feature to follow it from start to finish.
GPX files can be exported from Moveslink and uploaded to Strava.com and other training software.
Other features include a compass and accelerometer to enhance distance accuracy.

Pros:

  • Fastest GPS connection I have ever had. Always connects faster than the Garmin.
  • Best battery life (50hrs) of competitive GPS watches.
  • Top quality HR signal.
  • Moveslink software allows useful analysis of data after transfer from device.
  • Recently announced TrackBack feature allows user to retrace their route back to the starting point. Useful “breadcrumb” navigation tool. Could be crucial to ski mountaineers/mountain athletes who find themselves retreating in a snowstorm when navigation is difficult.

Cons / What can be improved about this product:

  • Computer connection uses USB cable (compared to wireless ANT connection).
  • Data transfer requires significant time (sometimes >15min).
  • Data transfers failed frequently using early software versions. This seems to have been fixed, though transfer times are still long.
  • Internet connection required to transfer data and utilize Moveslink.

Product Specs:

  • Weight: 89 grams (my model)
  • Cost per Gram: $3.69 / g (watch + belt)
  • Battery life: up to 50 hrs.
  • Water resistance: 100 m / 328 ft
  • Warranty: 2 years watch, 1 year included accessories
  • Critical accessories:
    • HR Strap (Included in HRM version)
    • Computer with Moveslink installed
  • Optional accessories:
    • Running Cadence Monitor (overrides distance data from GPS)
    • Cycling Speed/Cadence Monitor

Online stores that carry Suunto Ambit 2 watch:

suunto-ambit-2-watch

  • $450-600 at Amazon.com
  • $550 at Backcountry.com
  • $450 at GearX.com (Suunto Ambit2 S)
  • $550 at REI.com
  • $450 at CampSaver.com (Suunto Ambit2 S)
  • $550 at MooseJaw.com

Filed Under: Reviews Tagged With: altimeter watch, GPS, heart-rate monitor, Moveslink, Suunto, Suunto Ambit 2

  • « Previous Page
  • Page 1
  • Page 2
  • Page 3

Primary Sidebar

  • Facebook
  • Instagram
  • YouTube
Our Facebook Page

skimo-manual-banner-300px
 

Recent Articles

  • Kilian Jornet Interview: About His New Foundation, His Own Environmental Impact, and How He Wants To Help Athletes and The Outdoor Industry To Protect Nature
  • How Fast Are Glaciers Really Melting? How Will This Affect Your Mountain Adventures? Interview with Pascal Egli
  • Book Review – Art of Freedom: The Life and Climbs of Voytek Kurtyka
  • Forest Skis: Innovative, Custom Build, For Backcountry Skiing and Freeride
  • Lighter and Completely Redesigned: New CAMP Ultralight Ski Mountaineering Ice Axes

Categories

  • Contests & Giveaways
  • Crazy Tracks
  • Events & Races
  • Gear, Tech & Food
  • General News & Articles
  • Industry Press Releases
  • Movies & Books
  • News Shorts
  • People (Interviews)
  • Racing 101
  • Reports & Results
  • Reviews
  • Skimo Racing
  • Training, Tricks & Tips
  • Trip Reports & Conditions

Footer

About SkinTrack

Travelling through snowy mountains on skis is like flying… and experiencing life at its core.

Gear reviews, interviews, adventures, contests, skills, skimo training, race reports – we connect you to all things related to self-propelled skiing.

SkinTrack.com, created by Stano Faban, was born out of passion for ski mountaineering and ski touring. Over the years, it has become one of the most popular ski mountaineering blogs in North America.

Recent Articles

  • Kilian Jornet Interview: About His New Foundation, His Own Environmental Impact, and How He Wants To Help Athletes and The Outdoor Industry To Protect Nature
  • How Fast Are Glaciers Really Melting? How Will This Affect Your Mountain Adventures? Interview with Pascal Egli
  • Book Review – Art of Freedom: The Life and Climbs of Voytek Kurtyka
  • Forest Skis: Innovative, Custom Build, For Backcountry Skiing and Freeride
  • Lighter and Completely Redesigned: New CAMP Ultralight Ski Mountaineering Ice Axes

Useful Links

Comparing the lightest: Skis | Boots | Bindings

Skimo Training: Training Plans | Videos

Stay in Touch

  • Facebook
  • Instagram
  • Twitter
  • YouTube

Copyright © 2023 SkinTrack.com. All rights reserved.