Full Tilt Classic Vs. Level1/Tom Wallisch

Low

Low

Member
Hello everyone! So with my old boots finally falling apart on me I have recently entered the Boot market again. After some shopping around I have decided to go with fulltilts as they were the best fit/feel for my foot type. (Low, skinny, etc)
My question is this. Of all of the full tilits i have tried on, to me the classics felt the best. They just felt the best. That being said, there is just aspect of them i have a question about.
The level 1/tom wallisch boots spec wise are pratically identical to the classics(weight, dimensions, etc), however they feature active footboards while the classics has a rigid footboard.
As a pure park skier is the active vs rigid footboard a big deal? Will i bruce my heels with a rigid footboard more often? Any opnions on this matter?
 
you should consult a boot fitter..... they are the ones that really know what they are talking about and can give you the best boot possible
 
I have already consulted many boot fitters hence my "shopping around". They have helped me with the fitting of the boots however I currently live in missouri and this is most of the shops around here first year carrying full tilt boots. Most of the fitters know little about the models let alone park in itself.
 
im confused to why this bothers you? if he wants to listen to a bunch of 12 year olds babble about how they "know all about boots". thats fine. im only suggesting that he should listen to what a professional says rather than a ton of teenagers have to say. also, boots are specific to everyone, it is hard to know what to get when we can actually see how each boot fits. do whatver you want OP.
 
classics and level 1's are the same boot with different colours, and the level 1 has cable covers. The wallisch is similar but with a bigger toebox and rubber soles, they all have the same tongues, which is 6 flex.
 
but he should go to a bootfitter... even though those boots fit the same, ns shouldnt be telling you what boot to get
 
Yes, and no. He isn't asking about the fit at all, he wants to know if there is actually a difference created with the boot boards which is why your comment was unnecessary.

Personally I couldn't tell you even though I have used both I have so far not noticed a difference. I imagine the rubber to make for a softer impact but also create a loss of power when carving but I am just assuming that.
 
i just feel like a boot fitter will know as much (probably more) than anyone on NS and can clarify any questions. of all the posts i have seen on NS, i would rather go to a boot fitter then listen to these people, half of which are complete trolls. just my opinion though.
 
also keep in mind that out of those 3 boots the new tom wallisch boot comes with the toe and heel replaceable soles.
 
to answer the actual question here:

i had the same curiosity about FT bootboards a couple years back. the general consensus I received from the community was that rigid bootboards are supposed to provide ultimate responsive feel from the snow to your feet. Conversely, the active bootboard provides the cushion for stomps and other impacts.

from the mouths of people i know, there's a slight difference in better response with the rigid bootboard over the active. the cushion of the active bootboard is definitely debatable though.

in my experience, having stuck with the rigids in my classics, they're totally fine. if you're hitting hard impact without much finesse, perhaps the active bootboard could be beneficial. However, the few times that i've felt it in my heels, I don't think any bootboard would have helped.

and above all else, if you find out you need a different bootboard, they're pretty cheap off of full tilt's parts shop.
 
Thank you.
And yeah I probably should have simplified my question a bit.
I'm really just trying to get info about active/rigid foot boards at this point and if anyone has had trouble in the park with a rigid footboard.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top