Видео

@@OscarBaldizon I would say you are "average." For reference I am 6'1 anywhere from 180-200 and wore a 26.5 quattro. All you have to do is modify the buckles and get some longer screws. It does require some creativity.

@@Matthias-gd9is I decided that the boot wasn't for me given the amount of much more powerful boots that are within 200g for the types of skis I like so I am unsure of its long term durability.

@@thicccboyztv why did you decide the boot was not for you? What did you go for instead?

@@NB-ski quattro pro. I find that it essentially walks as well with the buckles undone, so really the only advantage to the ridge is that it transitions faster, but I also find that the ridge tends to fit differently based just off of how much the tongue gets sucked in which with the boa makes it hard to get the same fit every time, whereas traditional buckles I know what fit I'm going to get every time. Not to mention that the Quattro pro is significantly stiffer. If I was going to be skiing skis that were chin to forehead level and around 100 underfoot and mostly focused on covering distance It's a great Boot. But I like skiing, overhead fat skis and as I did not grow up skiing, I prefer more support.

@@TheWiffi123 absolutely the 191cm.

@@thicccboyztv okey thanks, it won't be too rigid I've never skied carbon skis so I'm wondering about the reaction of the ski does it pivot easily between the fir trees even in wet snow? because 191 is still long right? regarding the assembly I thought I saw that you advised an assembly at +3 +4

@@TheWiffi123 yes mount forward 3-4 cm. It pivots incredibly easy for the size. Not too rigid, nice solid supportive flex. At 90kg you shouldn't have a problem. I'm 85 kg and 185cm.

If you like a more traditional feel then go with recommended mount which is pretty far back and expect a more demanding game on experience.

no, I would really like it to be similar to the 100 eight that I had in 189, did you put 3 or 4 cm exactly? or 3.5? does it not come out of the mounting area of ​​the binding? and above all the ski at the back does not lift too much and does not become insensitive? because it remains huge as a 3cm adjustment but it is you who have it so I am listening to you 👌

@@marynowany20 I have not skied either. Based off my experience with dynafit in the past and reviews that I've seen. I suspect both to be stiffer and less easy going. Of the two that Tigard is going to be the higher performer as far as free touring is concerned, but I've heard the ridge is good. It's just more of a general do everything ski instead of a heavier free touring type. Although they might have the same stated radii, dynafits tend to have more pronounced distinct shovels that I've found to have a hooky sensation in variable snow. I found the machines nose profile to do significantly better those types of conditions. So in other words the machine is going to be not as stiff, better in variable conditions, and less demanding overall, and because of that will not have as high of a speed limit in good snow.

@@thicccboyztv any chance on video on your experiences lighter/narrower rockered skis? I'm planning on buying something like this for the season, currently leaning towards the Mini, but it would be nice to hear some thoughts on the topic in general, as this is quite a niche :D

@@marynowany20 The only other ski I have experience with in this realm is heritage Labs bc90. I typically don't find a use case personally for narrow rockered skis. For true all snow type skiing having a little extra width is just a nicer platform and helps to smooth out the irregularities of funky snow. Also more supportive to land on. I only wanted to make a video on the machine because it surprised me. I would place the BC90 in the same category but I felt like it's width was even more prohibitive. Essentially if I'm already near 100 mm I might as well just go 110 and be able to have fun more conditions.

@@danielgrazioli1601 The zero g95 feels more hooky and less playful. It's not a "fun" Ski. However, it is lighter and stiffer by memory. So if you want your ski to be more demanding but reward you for solid technique and saving you a few grams then it's the way to go. The faction is definitely a nicer ski to have in variable conditions and is not going to punish you like the zero will. Although the zeros have apparently gotten easier over time.

@@thicccboyztv thank you! very kind of you 🙏

@@alltoone while it is upsetting for long time users who got accustomed to a higher volume option, back when the maestrale was newer all the other options were very narrow and very low volume. Now it's the opposite and I think scarpa recognized that. Now almost all boots have pretty accommodating fit overall with brands like dynafit going from making one of the lowest volume narrowest boots to the widest. Tecnicas have moderately high instep, I think Scotts is even higher. In fact this era has the most selection of high volume boots available. If you need even higher try something where you can mold the entire shell like atomics memory fit. Roxa also is high volume instep. Good luck! Dynafit users said the same but opposite going from the tlt 5 and 6 to the 7. 5 and 6 were quite narrow and low volume and the 7 became super high volume and very wide.

@@robclark46036 thx bud, the free is a beefier ski. Itll be stiffer and damper but not extreme. The free was based on the beast which was designed by a 4frnt designer if memory serves so it's definitely designed to be a skiers ski first, and uphill secondary. The machine mini is more of an in between- little lighter, little lower speed limit. I've not skied the free but based on what I know from folks that ski it and the fact that it's heavier is that it will be damper and stiffer (I have hand flexed it). Neither will be particularly demanding but dynafits have generally hooky noses that require a little more attention in funky snow compared to the machines which have a straighter shovel. The free design though has probably the least hooky shovel of a dynafit, however, and isn't extreme.

The fit is different and the liner of the RS is beefier than the tecnica. Overall I'd say maestrale is lower volume. So it depends on where your foot is big. The length on the 26.5 zero g was slightly short for me, but had too much volume in the heel. The maestrale is more appropriate length for me, but is a more secure fit overall. I would go true to size for all day comfort fit or size down for an aggressive fit that may require boot work.

I think I may revisit the peak carbon. I tried it on initially and it just seemed very cheaply made. However, ski alpers data shows it being the stiffest of the lightweight boots by a large margin, competing with some soft 4 buckles! Ultimately I just rarely use lightweight boots anymore as my lightest ski that I enjoy skiing is 1700g without binding.

Yeah I've been trying other things. Still liked those skis tho!

@@thicccboyztv Were you able to get them out on any firm snow? Do you find them confidence inspiring for both skinning and skiing on hard, frozen snow? I’m considering these for my wife. For her spring, purely ski touring ski (no lift served). Looking for something easier to pivot in trees in slush or powder than what she has now. But, still need to handle ice as well. We ski slow, so speed doesn’t matter, just control, ease and predictability.

@@tjb8841 it depends on what you mean by confidence inspiring. They are incredibly predictable, so very confident in that regard. But they are still light so I would not say that they are confidence inspiring in regards to trying to ski fast in those types of conditions. But for typical Backcountry skiing where people are just trying to negotiate such conditions then they are excellent. Skinning is no problem with them

@@thicccboyztv thanks, yes, totally willing to slow down in tougher snow conditions.

It's good, next year it will be more katana esque. The current version was a little soft, talking to Marshall about it sounds like he is gonna make it stiffer next year for more chargability. The shape is excellent though. If you watch my video "we almost had no winter" I was skiing the 113s.

I also noticed that it just requires more faffing overall. With a buckle you know exactly how much tension it's going to provide, but the boa redistributes pressure as you move or as tension is placed against it and so you end up messing with your boots way more.

Scarpa Quattro XT was measured 5.3 ° by blister. Unsure how they measured it and was unable to find any explicit data from scarpa. By my very calibrated hand, the Quattro has a more abrupt drop off in the mid foot heading to the toe, and I recall preferring the F1 xt with more heel shims so I suspect that the F1 xts ramp is less, I'd guess 4 degrees.

@@thicccboyztv did some digging on scarps UK website. For the Quattro they claim 5.3 for f1 xt 3.2.

@@svsanchago Good to know that I could actually feel a difference! Haha

@@svsanchago and also, if you were not aware, the Quattro XT comes with a couple mil heel through mid-foot shim on the half sizes. I think that they did that specifically for volume reduction for the half sizes, but for those sensitive to ramp you can just peel it off and drop the heel down another couple mm.

@thicccboyztv I love my Quattro (size 24.5) but can't make the xt (size 24) ski good to safe my life. Never had problems with the f1 Lt

I have not heard that although the Quattro pro is confirmed, which is a 130 plus whatever that means. I think that there is a lot of overlap between the new maestrale and the Quattro so I would be really surprised if they came out with an XT, although anything is possible

That's just a totally different ski. That is a piste ski for carving. The katana provides that level of performance off piste and in soft snow. If you mainly ski piste, then the rtm is far better. Katana is for big mountain off piste/powder skiing.

Quattro pro next year has beefed up upper cuff that has more tongue contact and beefed up walk mode pun receiver area. Couple videos out on em.

@@thicccboyztv ya looks great. Mine got warrantied but I'm still salty a boot marketed as a hybrid solution basically exploded the walk mechanism after like 10 touring days

@@garrettobrien6962 I had a season on mine and broke the cuff. But yeah I feel ya. I'm more of the mindset that with that much lightness and power you're definitely playing with the limits of what the materials can take. I also think it was made for more euro bodies and not thick boys

To be clear, I've not got to ski this boot a lot because our season kind of never showed up in the Pacific Northwest. However, I do not think that this is a wall type feel, Quattro is more wall like, this is a little more supple. In fact, I actually wish that it had a little more responsive stiffness to it off the top. Ultimately, we are talking about lightweight touring boots so dampness and progressivity are not their strong suits as opposed to heavier boots or boots that are constructed differently, ie lange xt3 tour, roxa r3 130 etc. both of those outright are going to have similar absolute stiffness but going to be way more damp and progressive. However, amongst the lightweight category, I would say that the dampness and progressivity is improving. From what I remember of the old version, I do believe that this one is more progressive.

A have a whole video on heritage labs and how they compare to 4frnts and volkls. The mount is further back so it's more directional than raven. A little softer, similar dampening. Handles more like volkl bmt than raven imo.

Thank you!

It's great in pseudo corn. But as to if it's filled in this year is a different question. I would also be advised that moats are probably forming if not fully open and there might even be ones that you can't see until you either punch through with your foot or ski.

@@thicccboyztv appreciate the reply. I drove up and looked at it today after work and it looks to be filled in but certainly could be quite variable. A buddy and i plan to go investigate Saturday

Yep, you said it yourself you're essentially dealing with both the lean and ramp of the boot and the ramp of the binding, all of which affect contact points within the boot. The boot itself is the only thing that contributes to the ankle flexion aspect and if your ankle is either too flexed or not flexed enough, nothing about shimming The binding changes that and that I think is what is most important in regards to that athletic position.

I am reading the English translation and there is no way that it takes that many newton meters of force to get a boot fore and aft in walk mode. Some of the boots are near frictionless.

@@thicccboyztv 20 Nm is 15 foot-pounds. that is very little, especially with your whole leg as a lever arm! If your center of mass is 4 feet up, you would only need to lean forward with 3.75 lbs of force to fold the boot 20 degrees. That's nothing.

@@weisseseis 15 lb of torque is still way too much force to be required to move a boot in walk mode.

Just realized this by accident, from posting on TGR. These are the walk mode numbers, which is what they post in the individual boot reviews. I had not noticed that they refer to walk mode when I looked there before. In the overview article, I found graphs for all the boots, both in walk and in ski mode.

​​@@tjb8841 I looked into this and you guys are correct-however, with the exception of a couple of lightweight boot changes, the freeride category boots all remain similar (tho the roxa instead is normal rather than an outlier) Quattro+ roxa + dalbello cabrio+k2 diverge all the stiffest (all cabrios except Quattro. Highlights of the weight conscious include Scott cosmos and la spo vanguard and zero g peak. Ultimately the top boots (Quattro and dalbello cabrio still require 40 more nm of force than anything else) guess I need to try the Cabrio! It is strange that in the individual reviews they do not make this designation about walk vs ski. And only in the overview article so they differentiate. ironically the conclusions still are similar. The beefiest boots, Quattro and Cabrio showing 200nm of force, both are double the average of "light boots" with an average of 100nm at peak. Whereas touring class boots and most freeride boots average between 140-155 nm. The Quattro and dalbello cabrio are significant outliers in power.

True I was going off the assumption volume was being reduced and you keep the same buckle closure. If you do go more open the lean would very subtly change. I don't find these changes to be as perceptible though as adjusting from the ski walk area.

⁠I agree with Weiss, I just think of it the other way around: if you have skinny legs and don’t have a spoiler, when you put the boot on, your tibia will be pulled back towards the spine. In other words, if you have skinny calves, you always have less forward lean than spec. Conversely, people with big/low calves will have more forward lean than spec, because they have to open the cuff, and their calf pushes their shin forward, just like a spoiler would. In the end, what matters is YOUR forward lean at the shin. But spoilers do change that. I just wouldn’t want to use them if I had big calves, because you won’t have enough overlap of the cuff in front anymore.

I think that scarpa agrees that the flex is too dissimilar from the Quattro. They State 125 for the XT and 130 for the Quattro. I find that depending on how I buckle them and how much I attention the booster that they are essentially the same. Which is why I think the Quattro pro is necessary to differentiate and add a stiffer option

Exactly. I too have accidentally left it and you can ski just fine because it's that powerful.

The maestrale runs a thicker liner, so despite the clog sizes being the same between the one size up and the one size down of the two boots, I found my actual fit once I got all my punches and using the stock liners to be essentially the same. That being said, the maestrale is a warmer boot. For the Quattro pro, if I decide to try it, I will likely use my maestrale clog size, so that I will not have to punch as much and so that I am open to more aftermarket liners as I tend to get along really well with wrap liners which will not fit in the smaller Quattro. I do not find that the ridge is dramatically softer. I believe that it is probably somewhere between Scorpius and radical level. And as I've alluded to, if the stance works better for you and where the transmission point of power on your shin hits the boot, the material stiffnesses differences are going to be pretty close. So if I had to put a number I would say that the difference is between them are probably somewhere around like 10 to 15% stiffness wise. And considering how the radical stacks with everyone else, that's pretty dang good. For me, the biggest issue is that they seem to have changed the fit. I used to be able to get along with the radical but the ridge feels like it has slightly more forward stance And because it is a little softer, I feel like it requires a little More knee flexion to get the cuff going and even more to get to the support level that I need so it doesn't feel as natural. But as I said, I think that's very specific to my stance which generally is more upright. Based on how the radical fits you, the ridge is subtly different, which for some people is either going to be a performance boost because it will fit better or worse. To me it makes sense why Christof seems to think this boot is the holy Grail and that's because he liked the original F1 which had dramatic ramp and extreme forward lean of 22°. So the ridge being subtly more forward of a boot than the radical is going to allow for more knee flexion if that's your preferred stance. From an objective place, I still think the ridge is an amazing boot. It's just not the boot that works best for my stance. I really wish that it included a way to change forward lean.

@@thicccboyztv fantastic reply! Sounds like the ridge could actually work great for me then as I do enjoy more forward lean (I could never ski the roxa for example) Sounds to me like you both need a flat ramp and an upright boot, probably why the zero g didn’t work too well for you since it has lots of ramp even though it’s upright. Makes sense why you enjoy the marker alpinist too then. Have you ever tried shimming just your toes in boots with lots of ramp, I know some of my boot fitter friends do this and it can work. I really enjoy your videos, please make more (don’t mean just on boots), you obviously have a lot of information to share and the way you talk and question things gets things going well in my own head!

​@@gnarsharthanks! And yes I have experimented with toe shims to some positive effect. However, it becomes problematic, particularly when constantly trying new skis getting specialty length screws to accommodate the added shim and still achieve the desired penetration into the ski. I definitely will keep making videos, however things will probably be in a lull just given how bad the snow has been this year unless we somehow get some miracle dumps!

zero g has a removable boot board. you can grind it down to change ramp angle.

@@weisseseis so does Quattro, though quattro's is just totally removable

Yes stiffer, but how it fits/stance is most important. They have very different fits

@@thicccboyztv How would you say their fits differ?

@@Ken-rw8os ridge is considerably lower volume throughout. Width maybe equalish in the forefoot but more tapered throughout the mid-foot and heel and less volume vertically as well.

Preaching to the choir. The only time light skis are fun is when you arent there to ski.

I have been experimenting with two buckles as well.

Well, I was able to ski my Backland Carbon (2 buckle boots) with the pulse pro flex tongue in there, and it works great! Barely hampers the walk mode. Biggest issue is it’s harder to buckle the cuff, because of needing to line up 3 layers (left and right cuffs and Pro flex). Skiing is a bit stiffer in both forward and lateral flex, and with a much more supportive, progressive, feel to the forward flex. It’s also a lot taller, which helps make the boots feel better for me, since I have very long legs and this is a short boot. Combining all the small improvements, the end result is a quite a bit better. Is it similar to my Hawx Ultra 130 pu? No, not even close. But, it still walks very well, and it helps me ski quite a bit better in tough snow.

Awesome! I wouldn't say that the BMT is considerably higher than average, but it is a stiff ski and it retains its stiffness throughout the flex is very uniform. It's not like stiff underfoot and soft in the tip and tail. It's just stiff throughout. They will feel a little stiffer than renegades, but I don't think it's because they're absolutely stiffer, but just because they are not as rockered. So you will get more feedback fore/aft. But the renegades are heavier. So if you can handle the 186 renegades then you can handle the BMTs. It just depends on if you want to be working at that level or if you want something more casual.

@@thicccboyztv thanks, looks like it will work. One more question about mounting point: do you went with recommended mark? And what is your preference after skiing it? Rec' point is about -10.5cm from true center, so considering my small boot size (mondo 25) and previous ski quiver I would like to go forward a bit, +2cm at max, so not like renegade's forward which is -5.5cm, but something in the middle: -8cm. Do you think it will be appropriate for BMT109 geometry?

@@akilalika I've tried skiing the BMT at plus one and zero. However I am 185 cm, i preferred it recommended And even messing with different sized boots -1. However, I typically ski the katana which is 191 And I ski that plus three (effective about -10) and the BMTs do measure true to length or even plus one. Needless to say, I find that they are pretty accepting of any Mount point that's not super dramatic, especially if you are used to skiing the more forward 4frnts. That being said, The volkls have a tad more side cut, if you go too far forward they might feel a little hooky. Given your height and history I think that plus two would be fine but if you find it hooky then just back off one, My educated guess though, is that you would find it well within the realm of acceptable at + 2.

@@thicccboyztv Nice, at least looks like there are no strict "no-go"s and there is some room for experiments for me. Thanks for your educated input!

Merlin, looked through LPM, beautiful skis, dude!

I'd go Tigard, Roxa R3 130 TI or Scarpa quattro or atomic hawx. Comfort is based on fit and these all have pretty different fits. They also are all also more supportive and durable for resort riding. The ridge is a great lightweight walking boot. While it's absolute stiffness for it's weight is top notch, it's not the same as skiing some true beef like the above mentioned options. The extra height and mass of these other boots are a lot more suited to higher speed choppier skiing.

I can very much assure you that the first half was blower. Couple sections of wind buff but I've skied low density in Japan and Utah and most of this run was the same quality. I prefer to drift turns rather than harshly make them otherwise every turn woulda been a face shot.

@@thicccboyztvno doubt that it’s fresh, light snow. But I only consider blower pow as snow so light that your tracks are mostly filled in after you ski something. Definitely rare but I almost like this snow more. Wasn’t trying to hate or anything, this line is awesome!

@@colter7300 yeah I see what you're saying. I also prefer a little density, enables more playfulness and support to push off things.

@@thicccboyztv absolutely 🤙

Mine weigh like 1150g without liners. I think the weight is pretty comparable to the zero g. My memory though was that the zero g was not as stiff as this