[Elevation212]

At first, your resort boots are just fine. Then some latteral stiffness, wichever way you get it, is really a big plus.

The phantom link lever are really a huge plus for boarding with AT boots: Link Lever - SINGLE
There is a new french brand that has an interesting splitboard specific hardboot: Why Key Equipment — Key Equipment Don't know if it's any better than the Phantoms 🤷‍♂️

Huh the disruptive is challenging my phantom slipper desire, any idea on the difference between the two systems

 

[treehugger]

Huh the disruptive is challenging my phantom slipper desire, any idea on the difference between the two systems

I forget what boot the Disruptive is based on but my impression was it's not as nice as the backland which the Phantom uses. I like that the Disruptive uses a snowboard type tongue for soft boot like flex and that they are looking to blend in soft boot features on a hard boot sole. It is what I was looking for before I tried the Backland. Would like to try them just to feel how their concept works.

 

[Etienne]

I think it's their own boot, design from scratch, not based on an AT one (I might be wrong though).

 

[wrathfuldeity]

Huh the disruptive is challenging my phantom slipper desire, any idea on the difference between the two systems

Get a pair and give us the low down. A lot the boot looks good and actually the lever is my major question. Both the lean adjustment and the fore/aft give in ride mode.

 

[wrathfuldeity]

Backlands are really nice for touring. Ridiculous ankle articulation in tour mode. Super light, shell is 700 grams and 1000G with liner from my Rome boots. That's about 1/2 the weight of my Jones. I can motor in these things! Kick turns and edge hold is really good. It's what I expected but it's going to be hard going back to touring in clunky soft boots.

What I didn't expect was how they would ride. I know you won't believe me but they feel just like snowboard boots. Not even the stiffest boots I've owned. People say they need more lateral flex but I didn't notice. I have canted pucks so maybe that helped. It was just like using soft boots but with better edge control laying into a hard carve. I rode with normal stance +15/-3. Think they would really be nice +/+ for low carves. I was even slashing around on banks and they just felt like normal boots while riding. Of course they're ski boots which suck but they don't feel weird and hard like I expected. I had planned all kinds of mods but don't see the point.

I read a lot of posts on soft vs hard boots for touring. One thing I noticed was pretty much every hard booter switched from soft boots while the soft boots guys would never even try hard boots.

What I don't like:
They are ski boots and ski boots suck.
They look really uncool. Style matters.
They are comfortable but don't have that comfy softboot feel.
They are white plastic and look like they belong on Starwars storm trooper.
At the resort people think you're strange and avoid looking at you. This is actually a bonus.

Nice! I've thought it was an advantage to look like a kook and then blow past their sorry slow asses. They won't even dare talk to you in the lift line...let alone bump in to your board. "Hey brah how's dim softies work'n fo ya?"

 

[Elevation212]

Get a pair and give us the low down. A lot the boot looks good and actually the lever is my major question. Both the lean adjustment and the fore/aft give in ride mode.

Tempting, the nut knocker about hard boots is that the binding systems aren’t universal. If I could grab a system that would work for disruptors or phantoms it would be a lot easier to take the gamble on the boots site unseen. I worry that even with returns being an option I won’t know which boot is for me until I try a tour or two. It’s an expensive test!

 

[Rip154]

arent hardboot bindings all the same and adjustable?

 

[Elevation212]

arent hardboot bindings all the same and adjustable?

I was under the impression they were different but perhaps I am getting wrapped around the marketing on each site, if they are the same it’s a much easier decision

 

[wrathfuldeity]

I was under the impression they were different but perhaps I am getting wrapped around the marketing on each site, if they are the same it’s a much easier decision

The boots are universal, the bindings work with any AT boots (dynafits, backlands, phantoms, disruptors etc.) with tech toes and have the shelf for the toe and heel bails. The binding plates are what are different...how they attach to the board. Both Sparks and Phantoms work and both can do splits and non-split boards. But you have to pay attention to the exact pieces required for splits vs solid boards. A few years ago, when I got into this mess, it was a bit confusing...its better now. But if you have any questions, I'd be happy to help answer them.

Sparks Dyno DH and Phantoms work fine with the same AT boot. The Dyno DH are about half the price the set up for Phantoms. Phantoms are great...more adjustable (more parts), beefier and heavier. But Dyno DH are just more simple and less parts...but take a bit more to get them dialed in and the toe clamps are not as burley. However with some TLC attention they have been fine. For both systems the major (but minor) issues are....taking time to dial in the fit (its not just initial/one and done) and you have got to have the plate cleared of ice and snow when putting the boots in the clamps/bails.

Just a note about the Dyno DH...during my inbounds solid board testing, I came out of the bindings/bails several times and I had to keep adjusting the bail attachments shorter to be quite snug...and this is where a set of the toe bail/clamp levers failed. In part because I was not clearing the snow off the plate and the underside of the boot welt...just a little packed snow or ice...it really needs to be ALL cleared off. Once I've attended to this, there have been very little issue...but I did have to get a new set of toe bails and also had some welding done to beef-up the old ones.

The Phantom system does have more parts, but more beefy and more adjustability. Also the fitment, tolerances of the system are more tight. Which results in a more solid feel but also results in more fiddly-time during transitions and requiring more attention to get ice/snow cleared off of the bits to get things to fit back together. Which if its a spring sunshine tour...not much of an issue. But if its cold, howling wind and snowing...taking your gloves off to get everything cleared and fit back together its a pita.

With the sparks, you need the splitboard pucks (and a set of solid board pucks to ride your non-splitty), the climbing heel wires, tech toes and the Dyno DH plates (and the "D REX" crampons if you want). Ime, don't do the dynafit tech toes...because then you will need the adapter plates...just more fiddly parts.

As for long term durability a nod goes to phantom by a small measure...however you got to have a fair number of spare parts in the field, just in case. Sparks are certainly useable and work well, but I don't think will last as long. If sparks beefed-up and used a more hardened aluminum and did some type of ny-lock nuts (there is an inherent deficits ((and possible stripping)) when just putting bolts threaded into aluminum) and along with improving the toe bail levers...it would be on more equal footing with the Phantoms.

My 2 cents of having both. So I use the Dyno DH for solid board inbounds riding and the Phantom system for BC touring/riding.

 

[treehugger]

Tempting, the nut knocker about hard boots is that the binding systems aren’t universal. If I could grab a system that would work for disruptors or phantoms it would be a lot easier to take the gamble on the boots site unseen. I worry that even with returns being an option I won’t know which boot is for me until I try a tour or two. It’s an expensive test!

Note: I was already writing this when I saw the wrath's post above which covers it pretty well.

I bought Sparks Dino bindings and they worked with my pucks setup for Arcs. I could get solid boards pucks for a resort board too but will stick to soft boots for resorts. Phantom bindings have there own attachment which is why I got the sparks. Cheaper and simpler. Didn't even look at weight difference since you carry them in backpack when touring. Binding are universal to any AT boot.

I don't have many days on the Dino's so can't speak to durability that wrathfuldiety discusses above. I thought they were easy to adjust, quick and easy to lock in, and very solid connection.

 

[Elevation212]

The boots are universal, the bindings work with any AT boots (dynafits, backlands, phantoms, disruptors etc.) with tech toes and have the shelf for the toe and heel bails. The binding plates are what are different...how they attach to the board. Both Sparks and Phantoms work and both can do splits and non-split boards. But you have to pay attention to the exact pieces required for splits vs solid boards. A few years ago, when I got into this mess, it was a bit confusing...its better now. But if you have any questions, I'd be happy to help answer them.

Sparks Dyno DH and Phantoms work fine with the same AT boot. The Dyno DH are about half the price the set up for Phantoms. Phantoms are great...more adjustable (more parts), beefier and heavier. But Dyno DH are just more simple and less parts...but take a bit more to get them dialed in and the toe clamps are not as burley. However with some TLC attention they have been fine. For both systems the major (but minor) issues are....taking time to dial in the fit (its not just initial/one and done) and you have got to have the plate cleared of ice and snow when putting the boots in the clamps/bails.

Just a note about the Dyno DH...during my inbounds solid board testing, I came out of the bindings/bails several times and I had to keep adjusting the bail attachments shorter to be quite snug...and this is where a set of the toe bail/clamp levers failed. In part because I was not clearing the snow off the plate and the underside of the boot welt...just a little packed snow or ice...it really needs to be ALL cleared off. Once I've attended to this, there have been very little issue...but I did have to get a new set of toe bails and also had some welding done to beef-up the old ones.

The Phantom system does have more parts, but more beefy and more adjustability. Also the fitment, tolerances of the system are more tight. Which results in a more solid feel but also results in more fiddly-time during transitions and requiring more attention to get ice/snow cleared off of the bits to get things to fit back together. Which if its a spring sunshine tour...not much of an issue. But if its cold, howling wind and snowing...taking your gloves off to get everything cleared and fit back together its a pita.

With the sparks, you need the splitboard pucks (and a set of solid board pucks to ride your non-splitty), the climbing heel wires, tech toes and the Dyno DH plates (and the "D REX" crampons if you want). Ime, don't do the dynafit tech toes...because then you will need the adapter plates...just more fiddly parts.

As for long term durability a nod goes to phantom by a small measure...however you got to have a fair number of spare parts in the field, just in case. Sparks are certainly useable and work well, but I don't think will last as long. If sparks beefed-up and used a more hardened aluminum and did some type of ny-lock nuts (there is an inherent deficits ((and possible stripping)) when just putting bolts threaded into aluminum) and along with improving the toe bail levers...it would be on more equal footing with the Phantoms.

My 2 cents of having both. So I use the Dyno DH for solid board inbounds riding and the Phantom system for BC touring/riding.

Appreciate the write up! Per your earlier post I am at the “transition” stage of BC. Today I am running a Jones Solution 169w with a carbon karokoram prime binding/riser/pick set up. I use my K2 Thraxis 11.5s for both my splitting and solid set up and am beating the shit out of the boots outers and liners. This has gotten me thinking of getting a dedicated BC/Split set up

The simplest move I suppose would be to consider a soft boot which is more AT friendly and leverage the Karakoram setup I have but I’ve also noticed that on longer tours (recently completed AIARE 1 so going further out) I’m falling behind my generally AT Ski touring buddies when it comes to technical ascents, pitched traverses and short downhills in touring mode. My competitiveness is rising and I’m wondering if I should just plunge into the world of hard booting to keep up with the skies jones.

From your write up the phantom setup sounds a bit more ideal, I’m 6’5 230-260 with gear and beefier may make more sense for me given the additional weight strain I’ll be putting on my rig.

What would you suggest for my scenario, as of now this would be solely focused on BC splitting as I have too many solid/traditional binding decks in the quiver to fully cut over (also not sure if I’m ready for my hard boot old man at the resort phase quite yet)

Edit: In a perfect world I would prefer a option with a bit more play when converting. I find myself getting mildly annoyed with my current set up when converting back to solid in deep snow, may have to do with touring with mainly skiers but i generally find myself the last to be ready to drop which again bothers me (I know I should seek counseling) but if
I could speed up the conversion and lock in process I’d see value in it

 

[Rip154]

You likely won’t speed up the conversion process any with hardboots, and the hardboots wear out fast enough, but they have their benefits. The skiing thing is hard when manufacturers set touring inserts way forward, but at the point when that is more important, should you look into skis instead? There are still some splits that are better than others for touring though.

 

[deagol]

my 2 cents as a soft-booter who has toured mostly with skiers but also hard-booting splitboarders: Hard boot splitboarders, all else being equal, will be faster than soft-booters but still not quite as fast as skiers. It's been a while since I've been out with a hard-booting splitboarder, but when I did, the speed gap between them and skiers was less than the gap between them and soft-booters. Hard-booters were closer to the skiers in speed than the soft-booters were to them. YMMV.

I have a friend (who lives in CB) who has been a splitboarder for several years and I was always about 10% faster than him (an estimation, of course) but he switched over to AT skis on a super light tech setup and on a recent hut trip, he blew by me on the climbs and flats (which was the majority of the time).

I believe hard booting, as it continues to evolve, will be the future of splitboarding, but the $$ will slow the adoption of it. As for me, I have a dedicated pair of stiff softboots for inbounds and my splitboarding boots are a hodgepodge of new liners in old boots and stiffening inserts I had from older boots. I wanna try hardboots, but they most definitely are not in the budget for now and some time into the future...

 

[Elevation212]

my 2 cents as a soft-booter who has toured mostly with skiers but also hard-booting splitboarders: Hard boot splitboarders, all else being equal, will be faster than soft-booters but still not quite as fast as skiers. It's been a while since I've been out with a hard-booting splitboarder, but when I did, the speed gap between them and skiers was less than the gap between them and soft-booters. Hard-booters were closer to the skiers in speed than the soft-booters were to them. YMMV.

I have a friend (who lives in CB) who has been a splitboarder for several years and I was always about 10% faster than him (an estimation, of course) but he switched over to AT skis on a super light tech setup and on a recent hut trip, he blew by me on the climbs and flats (which was the majority of the time).

I believe hard booting, as it continues to evolve, will be the future of splitboarding, but the $$ will slow the adoption of it. As for me, I have a dedicated pair of stiff softboots for inbounds and my splitboarding boots are a hodgepodge of new liners in old boots and stiffening inserts I had from older boots. I wanna try hardboots, but they most definitely are not in the budget for now and some time into the future...

my 2 cents as a soft-booter who has toured mostly with skiers but also hard-booting splitboarders: Hard boot splitboarders, all else being equal, will be faster than soft-booters but still not quite as fast as skiers. It's been a while since I've been out with a hard-booting splitboarder, but when I did, the speed gap between them and skiers was less than the gap between them and soft-booters. Hard-booters were closer to the skiers in speed than the soft-booters were to them. YMMV.

I have a friend (who lives in CB) who has been a splitboarder for several years and I was always about 10% faster than him (an estimation, of course) but he switched over to AT skis on a super light tech setup and on a recent hut trip, he blew by me on the climbs and flats (which was the majority of the time).

I believe hard booting, as it continues to evolve, will be the future of splitboarding, but the $$ will slow the adoption of it. As for me, I have a dedicated pair of stiff softboots for inbounds and my splitboarding boots are a hodgepodge of new liners in old boots and stiffening inserts I had from older boots. I wanna try hardboots, but they most definitely are not in the budget for now and some time into the future...

I might end up going this way, 1 set of boots for inbounding and splitting is more wear then I want to put on them

 

[treehugger]

The simplest move I suppose would be to consider a soft boot which is more AT friendly and leverage the Karakoram setup I have but I’ve also noticed that on longer tours (recently completed AIARE 1 so going further out) I’m falling behind my generally AT Ski touring buddies when it comes to technical ascents, pitched traverses and short downhills in touring mode.

Problem is there aren't any soft boots that excel at touring. That's what I was looking for when starting this post. I think my 32 Jones TM2 are as good as anything else. I hoped getting rid of the binding weight would help so I stripped down one of my arcs to just a toe strap with a voile strap around my heel. It was about 1/3 of the weight of full binding. While I could feel the difference it just made me realize how bad snowboard boots are for touring. Even if there was a soft boot with AT toe you would still be dealing with a bulky heavier boot that has a stiff ankle. Opening up the cuff like some of new touring boots help but not the same as articulating ankle of a hard boot which maintains lateral control.

As another option I started searching for mountaineering boot options and ran across suggestions for the Backland as an ice climbing boot that guys are going out on very technical hikes with, where ski touring is also required. So I checked around for a used boot I could carve up and got lucky with NOS Ultimates. I think any used ultra lite skimo boot would get someone started. Just need to swap liners from snowboard boots or buy pro-tour liners for $200.

When I started this post I figured some jerk would turn it into another discussion on the virtue of hardboot touring. Surprised I ended up being "that guy."

 

[wrathfuldeity]

Appreciate the write up! Per your earlier post I am at the “transition” stage of BC. Today I am running a Jones Solution 169w with a carbon karokoram prime binding/riser/pick set up. I use my K2 Thraxis 11.5s for both my splitting and solid set up and am beating the shit out of the boots outers and liners. This has gotten me thinking of getting a dedicated BC/Split set up

The simplest move I suppose would be to consider a soft boot which is more AT friendly and leverage the Karakoram setup I have but I’ve also noticed that on longer tours (recently completed AIARE 1 so going further out) I’m falling behind my generally AT Ski touring buddies when it comes to technical ascents, pitched traverses and short downhills in touring mode. My competitiveness is rising and I’m wondering if I should just plunge into the world of hard booting to keep up with the skies jones.

From your write up the phantom setup sounds a bit more ideal, I’m 6’5 230-260 with gear and beefier may make more sense for me given the additional weight strain I’ll be putting on my rig.

What would you suggest for my scenario, as of now this would be solely focused on BC splitting as I have too many solid/traditional binding decks in the quiver to fully cut over (also not sure if I’m ready for my hard boot old man at the resort phase quite yet)

Edit: In a perfect world I would prefer a option with a bit more play when converting. I find myself getting mildly annoyed with my current set up when converting back to solid in deep snow, may have to do with touring with mainly skiers but i generally find myself the last to be ready to drop which again bothers me (I know I should seek counseling) but if
I could speed up the conversion and lock in process I’d see value in it

Knowing what I know now...I'd go right to AT boots and Phantoms.

After finding AT boots fitment dialed were so great for riding...that's when I went for the Dyno DH bindings for riding in-bounds.

For moi, being older, its become more about just being out and minimizing hassles. Which not having equipment failure due to durability is a prime consideration. Besides there are many other factors to pay attention to. . Btw, skiers are always going to be faster.

 

[treehugger]

Just a note about the Dyno DH...during my inbounds solid board testing, I came out of the bindings/bails several times and I had to keep adjusting the bail attachments shorter to be quite snug...and this is where a set of the toe bail/clamp levers failed. In part because I was not clearing the snow off the plate and the underside of the boot welt...just a little packed snow or ice...it really needs to be ALL cleared off. Once I've attended to this, there have been very little issue...but I did have to get a new set of toe bails and also had some welding done to beef-up the old ones.

Out touring the last 2 days after a foot of light pow couple days ago. After no issues riding at the resort, I noticed one of my boots was a little loose as I locked into Dyno bindings. Later I compared the 2 bindings and the shape of the rods are not exactly the same. Possibly I deformed it with it being too tight? I did a slight tighten with threads on rods and was fine next day out. wrathfuldeity do you think the metal toe/heel rods (bails) were bending on yours? I plan to bring something to shim around rod if it loosens up again when I'm out.

I usually tour solo but went out yesterday with 2 younger guys in their 20's (on soft boots). Being an older guy and being able to leave them behind was totally worth all the money I just spent! Haha. I did relax and slow up, but being fast is a real confidence builder with all the challenges you face out touring. Transitions were also faster even tho I'm not sure why. Riding down I'm past the point of even thinking about my boots. They feel great.

Now that I'm sold on this changeover, I wondering what to do with Sparks Arc bindings. Other than selling them I might get a short fat split for side-country and outer resort access where I will mainly be riding down and ease of touring won't be the priority. I can use Jones TM2 boots for resort and they are also nice hiking to outer areas. I would buy them again just for resort use.

 

[wrathfuldeity]

Out touring the last 2 days after a foot of light pow couple days ago. After no issues riding at the resort, I noticed one of my boots was a little loose as I locked into Dyno bindings. Later I compared the 2 bindings and the shape of the rods are not exactly the same. Possibly I deformed it with it being too tight? I did a slight tighten with threads on rods and was fine next day out. wrathfuldeity do you think the metal toe/heel rods (bails) were bending on yours? I plan to bring something to shim around rod if it loosens up again when I'm out.

I usually tour solo but went out yesterday with 2 younger guys in their 20's (on soft boots). Being an older guy and being able to leave them behind was totally worth all the money I just spent! Haha. I did relax and slow up, but being fast is a real confidence builder with all the challenges you face out touring. Transitions were also faster even tho I'm not sure why. Riding down I'm past the point of even thinking about my boots. They feel great.

Now that I'm sold on this changeover, I wondering what to do with Sparks Arc bindings. Other than selling them I might get a short fat split for side-country and outer resort access where I will mainly be riding down and ease of touring won't be the priority. I can use Jones TM2 boots for resort and they are also nice hiking to outer areas. I would buy them again just for resort use.

Actually, this past Thursday, the first 20 feet after clamping in, I came out of the lead binding. Somehow, I think the whole bail attachment slid forward about 1-2mm. Was able to mellowlly cruise back to the truck, grab my Sparks tool and fixed it in 5 minutes by sliding one side for the bail attachment back 1-2mm and tighten everything down. No further problems and managed to get in 17k vert in 3 hours blasting bluebird packed groomers in slipper comfort boots . Was easily hitting 50+mph with ease, confidence and stability despite it only being day 2 of my fail of a season. The Dyno DH is certainly has more give, looser tolerances and less material than the Phantoms. The sturdiness or burls of the Phantoms is immediately noticeable when clamping in.

Old age and treachery ftw! For me, the AT rig is a significant factor in the energy management game. Glad the boots are working out for you.

 

[treehugger]

Another touring soft boot option with walk/touring mode released by BOA.

 

[wrathfuldeity]

Another touring soft boot option with walk/touring mode released by BOA.

View attachment 162100

I am convinced that Backlands/Phantoms are more precise AND adjustable to almost any riding style/conditions than any soft boot...PERIOD. Just by using one or a combo of the following gives an extensive range of options whether going uphill or down hill. So the options for adjustment are: The top velcro strap to loose or snug for touring and/or riding, tongue stiffeners (or not...I don't use them) and the Phantom link levers for forward lean, touring and riding or non-engaged riding for a no-highback or no-binding pow surfing experience. Also the new and non/boa Phantom Slipper pivot ankle strap and buckle system looks like it can be dialed in for more tweaks and less hassle than the boa thing. These boots can be dialed pretty much on the fly with in seconds for touring and for riding. With all this and the ability to heat mould the shell...its the Frick'n Bomb...my humble 2 cents based on experience and worth every damm penny. Plus, easily takes 1/2 second to pop out when coming in hot for another chair assisted lap (this past thursday, was cruising in hot into the non-existent chair line and merely popping the rear binding toe clamp and going 1 footy while continuing to cruise in, stopping for a moment at the line for the chair to swing around and jumping back on the chair) and a couple seconds to clamp in at the top...no sitting on yer arse.

The few downsides are: Price of entry, they can be a bit cold...some neoprene boot/beer cozy in the pocket and if ur upside down in a tree well, they could be tough to get out of.