![]() They were my last pair, and despite being branded as "Off Track" IMO they are really a boot for light off track use only, and are better on packed trails. I will echo comments from others here that the OTX5 is a very soft boot. They a fairly wide up front, which I prefer, On a fit note, I usually take an EU size 43, but the 42 fit me perfectly. I would not hesitate to take them on a backcountry trip like the Chic Chocs in Quebec. They are full grain leather and quite stiff but very comfortable - no heel lift, no blisters. After a few days of use I can report they are a great boot for my needs, which is 99% backcountry skiing, mostly in eastern woodlands, with some moderate tele turns along the way when snow and site conditions permit. They were available at a local retailer, fit me well, and felt like they would be stiff enough for my needs. I personally prefer the sole flex, power transfer and ankle support of my heavy-duty backpacking boots for even light-duty walks in the woods.Īll of the boots you list are going to offer more support than the OTX boot. Although I regularly seek out steeper terrain than you describe- I personally much prefer the more supportive boots in this BC-XC spectrum- even when I am backcountry skiing on gentle terrain. None of these boots are "too much" for the skiing you are doing IMO- they are all designed for backcountry striding. Regardless- the design-intent of the BCX6 is for it to be more supportive than a boot like the Alaska. I have no knowledge of the design and support of the current BCX6. BUT- Fischer keeps endlessly redesigning this boot and at least two of the more recent BCX6 models have such poor lacing systems that they are not very supportive. The Fischer BCX6 theoretically offers the most support of NNNBC boots in this group.I have an older model that is akin to my Svartisen BC in terms of ankle support. The Fischer BCX5 is more supportive than the Kikut- similar to the Alaska. Don't get me wrong here- the Kikut is a wonderful BC-XC boot! I own a Kikut and a Guard Advance- the Guard Advance has both a more supportive sole and much more ankle support than the Kikut. The Kikut is on the light-duty end of this spectrum- I think of it as akin to a "day-hiking" boot- as compared to the Alaska which has the support of a backpacking boot. What you want is a boot that is designed for hiking in rugged terrain.īTW- I don't think that the Alaska is too much for what you are doing. I thnk of it as the difference between a trail shoe (i.e. You are on the right track- what you are looking for is a true backcountry Nordic touring boot. They are warm soft cushy XC touring boots- really just a more insulated version of a standard Classic touring boot. My clan has a couple of the Fischer Offtrack boots- both 3 and 5- that were bought on clearance for young growing feet. Any thoughts out there on the options I am looking at? I know the FIscher lasts on the OTX-5s are a good fit for me, so I'm assuming the BCX-5 or 6 would be the same, and from what I have read the wider toe box on the Alfa's should be to my liking too. Also, I have found Alpinas a bit narrow for me. I'm currently ruing out the Alpina Alaska as it appears to be more boot than I need. skis.Īfter reading several of the threads here I I'm focusing on the Alfa Kikut Perform GTX or perhaps the FIscher BCX 5, or BC-X 6. I've found that the OTX-5ts are very soft all around, mushy inside, and are marginal for the type of skiing that I do, and they are next to useless for the occasional tele turn unless conditions are ideal. ![]() I like to drop in a few tele turns when conditions allow, but that is mainly some frosting on the cake. Most of my skiing is off track on moderate rolling terrain in Eastern hills and woodlands. ![]() I am currently running a pair of Fischer OTX-5s on a pair of Rossi BC 65 scaled skis.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |