Hawx Ultra XTD

[onenerdykid]

Hey NS,

We've made a fun new range of boots called the Hawx Ultra XTD ("extended"). If you have any questions about them, drop your queries here and I will do my best to answer them.

Here are some general details:

[img=]855572[/img]

Das Range:

[img=]855573[/img]

FAQs

Who is this boot for? Literally, the skier who wants one boot for almost all types of skiing. This boot is the ONLY touring-mode boot that flexes and feels like a real alpine boot, yet has 54° of cuff mobility, lightest-in-category weight (1.42kg), and fits better than anything else.

How is this possible? By combining the best of Hawx Ultra and the best of Backland. We use all of our alpine know-how to make sure it skis the best, and we use our touring know-how to make sure it tours the best.

Does skiing performance change because of this boot’s low weight? No – our main goal in making this boot was that it skied just like normal Hawx Ultra. Progressive and powerful, no compromise.

How do I set up the boot for touring? Unlike Backland, you will need to unbuckle the cuff and loosen the power strap in addition to disengaging the Free/Lock 2.0 mechanism. Position the buckle catcher into the hook on the tooth plate, and “close” the buckle. This will open the cuff enough to provide all 54° of cuff mobility.

What kind of sole is that? All models utilize an integrated WTR rubber sole. The sole is integrated (glued on) in order to save weight, provide the best traction, and reduce stand height. WTR is a type of Touring Norm (ISO 9523) that uses hard plastic AFDs in the toe & heel in order to provide a TÜV-approved safe release and 100% power transfer to the binding. It fits all pin-style bindings (including Kingpin), all WTR bindings, and any binding that accepts an ISO 9523 sole (Warden, Marker Duke, Marker Griffon ID, etc.). It does not fit standard alpine bindings (Z-series, X-series, Lithium, Mercury, etc.) nor Grip Walk bindings.

Why not just use a “normal” full rubber sole? While full rubber soles are great, they have their drawbacks. First, in an alpine-style binding (i.e. Warden), rubber soles will compress during skiing causing a loss in power transfer from the boot to the ski. This means your “130” flex boot isn’t behaving like a 130. Secondly, we wanted to ensure the safest release from the binding possible and this means adding plastic AFDs. Jamming your full rubber sole into an STH2 16 binding is a really good way to injure yourself.

Can I heat the Platinum/Gold liner on its own? Yes – if you don’t want to do Memory Fit, you can heat the liner on a hot-air blower for 15 minutes or in a Memory Fit oven for 3-4 minutes.

How do I wash the Platinum/Gold liner? As with Backland liners, hand wash only in 30°C/86°F water and air dry only.

What tech inserts are used in the boot? All Hawx Ultra XTD models use Dynafit Certified tech inserts.

What plastics are used in the boot? All lower shells are Grilamid, one of the lightest, strongest, and best skiing plastics available. The cuffs of the 130 & 110 W are also Grilamid, while the cuffs of the 120, 100, and 90W are PU.

 

[patagonialuke]

Looks awesome, and I'm very excited to see it in person.

What do the weights of the 120 and 100 look like with the PU cuffs?

 

[CheddarJack]

and fits better than anything else.

Is this a total gimmick or is there any data to back up this outlandish statement?

 

[.MASSHOLE.]

Since the sole is glued on, is it easily replaceable?

Not that it matters for me, but any cuff alignment ability?

What is the BSL for a 26/26.5 or 27/27.5?

For those with small feet, what is the smallest size?

Price point?

 

[onenerdykid]

Looks awesome, and I'm very excited to see it in person.

What do the weights of the 120 and 100 look like with the PU cuffs?

120 = 1470g

100 = 1586g (also uses a standard Ultra liner with a flex zone)

Is this a total gimmick or is there any data to back up this outlandish statement?

Bold statement backed up by fit testing against every other boot in this category and asking testers which boot they would actually spend money on. Of course, being dependent on foot shape, there are going to be people which prefer a different boot. But statistically, we do have fit test data to back up this statement at least.

Since the sole is glued on, is it easily replaceable?

Not that it matters for me, but any cuff alignment ability?

What is the BSL for a 26/26.5 or 27/27.5?

For those with small feet, what is the smallest size?

Price point?

Sole is glued on and would need to be removed by shop proficient in resoling boots. Same goes for any boot with a glued on sole, i.e. MTN Lab, Maestrale RS, Khion/Beast, etc.

No cuff alignment through cuff hardware, but the cuff will shape to the leg during the Memory Fit process. Cuff alignment via cuff hardware does not work with ski/walk mechanisms- as soon as you tilt the cuff, you misalign the cuff portion of the mechanism from the shell portion. Cuff alignment is unfortunately the destroyer of legit ski walk mechanisms.

Sizing for men= 24/24.5 - 29/29.5

Sizing for women = 22/22.5 - 27/27.5

True shell sizes and liners on all sizes

For the US, 130 = 799$, 120/110W = 699$, 100/90W = 599$

 

[auvgeek]

My wife is in the 23 Backland, and they're definitely the best-fitting touring boot she's ever had. But she would like something burlier, too.

What's the last width on the 110W? How much stiffer would you say the 110W is compared to the Backland?

 

[.MASSHOLE.]

Will bootfitters suggest people downsize like they do with the Backland? My friend managed to cram his feet into a size 26.5 Backland with a BSL of 308 when he usually skis around a 318

 

[onenerdykid]

My wife is in the 23 Backland, and they're definitely the best-fitting touring boot she's ever had. But she would like something burlier, too.

What's the last width on the 110W? How much stiffer would you say the 110W is compared to the Backland?

Like Backland, Hawx Ultra XTD is a 98mm boot in size 26.5. As this liner is snugger than Backland, she will have a more performance oriented fit in comparison. The 110W is slightly stiffer and more powerful than the Backland Carbon. Part of this is due to it being taller on the leg than Backland, but also being an overlap construction. It is also more progressive than Backland, again due to the overlap construction.

Will bootfitters suggest people downsize like they do with the Backland? My friend managed to cram his feet into a size 26.5 Backland with a BSL of 308 when he usually skis around a 318

You should be able to shell fit this boot the same. Backland has a very short sole, but a relatively normal last length- despite its incredibly short BSL, Backland is not downsized. 9/10, if someone is comfortable in a size 26 Backland it will correlate to a size 26 Ultra XTD.

But it just depends on type of fit someone is trying to achieve. Some people might size their Backland more normally (2cm shell fit) to maximize comfort while touring but want to downsize on the Ultra XTD for downhill performance reasons. I personally have the same shell fit on both. YMMV.

 

[cydwhit]

Ugh. Things I want on my feet very badly!

 

[gapersarefriends]

What's the last on these? I do have swim fins instead of feet and these look quite spicy...Currently in Panterra's and they fit right in between the 100mm-101mm and the adjustable last bothers me, tech fittings look enticing too

 

[onenerdykid]

What's the last on these? I do have swim fins instead of feet and these look quite spicy...Currently in Panterra's and they fit right in between the 100mm-101mm and the adjustable last bothers me, tech fittings look enticing too

These are 98mm in size 26.5, but they also feature Memory Fit which allows for a lot of expansion. Hard to say without seeing your foot, but swim fins might be a tall order. But, with that said, I have seen some surprising wide feet get comfortably Memory Fitted in the normal Hawx Ultra.

 

[gapersarefriends]

These are 98mm in size 26.5, but they also feature Memory Fit which allows for a lot of expansion. Hard to say without seeing your foot, but swim fins might be a tall order. But, with that said, I have seen some surprising wide feet get comfortably Memory Fitted in the normal Hawx Ultra.

I say swim fins but they're not that big. Wearing a 28 right now, 98mm sounds painful. Do you guys have dealers in boise?

 

[onenerdykid]

I say swim fins but they're not that big. Wearing a 28 right now, 98mm sounds painful. Do you guys have dealers in boise?

Memory Fit definitely allows 4mm of shell expansion, and in size 28, you have a 102mm last width out of the box. I would bet there are some in that area, but I can't say for sure (I'm in Austria). Try typing in your info here and see what comes up:
https://www.atomic.com/en/dealerlocator

 

[gapersarefriends]

Memory Fit definitely allows 4mm of shell expansion, and in size 28, you have a 102mm last width out of the box. I would bet there are some in that area, but I can't say for sure (I'm in Austria). Try typing in your info here and see what comes up:
https://www.atomic.com/en/dealerlocator

Oh fuck there goes my wallet...What are you guys gonna charge over here

 

[onenerdykid]

I say swim fins but they're not that big. Wearing a 28 right now, 98mm sounds painful. Do you guys have dealers in boise?

Another point- these boots don't come out until Fall 2017. But you can try on a normal Hawx Ultra and see how that feels. Liners are different but it will give you a good idea.

 

[gapersarefriends]

Another point- these boots don't come out until Fall 2017. But you can try on a normal Hawx Ultra and see how that feels. Liners are different but it will give you a good idea.

Yeah i figured that...gonna cost more than the normal ultra 130?

 

[Pegleg]

Are the bsl's going to be the same as the regular Hawx Ultra, 290, 300, 310, etc.?

 

[onenerdykid]

Are the bsl's going to be the same as the regular Hawx Ultra, 290, 300, 310, etc.?

Ultra XTD sole length is 2mm longer than normal Ultra. This is due to using the same last length as Ultra but adding tech inserts in the toe area. If we kept the BSL the same, the last would need to be shorter by 2mm and that wouldn't be good.

 

[paige.]

Sizing for women = 22/22.5 - 27/27.5

True shell sizes and liners on all sizes

Ooh now we're talking about something that may work for me. Is the malleability in the fitting process comparable to the Fischer vacuum fit? Because their stuff was the only thing we could get to work when I was last looking at boots, but the Ranger doesn't go down to a small enough size.

 

[wrenegade]

Compatible with FKS180/p18s with Cast touring WTR AFDs?
http://casttouring.com/collections/accessories/products/look-pivot-18-wtr-afd

 

[cobra_commander]

Yes, comparable with the WTR P18s

 

[.[sanhedrin].]

When will you launch a product video?

 

[onenerdykid]

Ooh now we're talking about something that may work for me. Is the malleability in the fitting process comparable to the Fischer vacuum fit? Because their stuff was the only thing we could get to work when I was last looking at boots, but the Ranger doesn't go down to a small enough size.

The plastic is very moldable, I have been quite surprised by the types of feet that comfortably fit into the shell after molding. But it is hard to say without seeing your feet. Definitely discuss the option with your boot-fitter and give it a look.

Compatible with FKS180/p18s with Cast touring WTR AFDs?
http://casttouring.com/collections/accessories/products/look-pivot-18-wtr-afd

Yep, as Cobra said.

.]When will you launch a product video?

Very soon and I will add it to this thread

 

[LeeLau]

Onenerdykid I am going to be reviewing/testing these boots for Atomic North America.

You inspired me to sign up for NS and posting. Gotta say what a breath of fresh air it is to have the designer answering questions like this. It's awesome.

Going to be trying these with the Backlands and Atomic tech bindings as a system. Am only 165lbs 75 kg so will probably find some bigger guys in Whistler to try out the boots to also give impressions

 

[onenerdykid]

Onenerdykid I am going to be reviewing/testing these boots for Atomic North America.

You inspired me to sign up for NS and posting. Gotta say what a breath of fresh air it is to have the designer answering questions like this. It's awesome.

Going to be trying these with the Backlands and Atomic tech bindings as a system. Am only 165lbs 75 kg so will probably find some bigger guys in Whistler to try out the boots to also give impressions

Hi Lee, always nice to be noticed! I sent you a PM with my email, let's stay in touch.

 

[.[sanhedrin].]

What is the weight difference between the 120 and the 130? Most people think they need a 130 but probably don't. But, if the weight savings are greater going the route of the 130 then the decision becomes tougher.

 

[onenerdykid]

.]What is the weight difference between the 120 and the 130? Most people think they need a 130 but probably don't. But, if the weight savings are greater going the route of the 130 then the decision becomes tougher.

Weights are in one of the first replies to the thread, but the difference is negligible. I would equate our 130 to like an S-Works bike from Specialized- no expense spared, squeezing out every last drop of performance possible. To get lighter and more powerful than the 120, the gains are small but expensive- just like in the high end bike world. The 120 is definitely one of the best performance to value ratios out there. Even our heaviest model (the 100) is lighter than most companies' lightest option in freeride touring.

Quick model distinction:

130 flex

Grilamid shell

Grilamid cuff

Platinum liner (Backland on steroids construction, light, moldable, and breathable)

50mm power strap

1420g / 26.5

120 flex

Grilamid shell

PU cuff

Gold liner (same fit & construction as Platinum, but not breathable)

50mm power strap

1470g / 26.5

100 flex

Grilamid shell

PU cuff

Silver liner (alpine construction with touring flex zone)

40mm power strap

1586g / 26.5

 

[n3vrast]

Hi, absolutely love the stats on this boot. But I am wondering a bit on where Atomic aiming with this boot.

Since the Scott S1 Carbon, the new Mastreale RS2 and the New Salomon/Arcteryx boot is coming out next year, I am in a bit of a twist of what to go for (taking fit out of the equation).

Is this a light slack country boot like the Lange XT Freetour, or a direct competitor to the boots mentioned above. I currently ski on the Quest Tr Pro, and I find that overlapping boots have limited ROM forward. When I unbuckle the boot to get the ROM its not tight enough in the heel pocket.

Have you experienced this the XTD?

In short, can I tour long days with this as good as with a Vulcan?

 

[cobra_commander]

Stance and forward lean?

15deg? Any adjustment?

I know you love your 17deg, but some us us have shit ROM, and don't really like skiing anything more forward than 13.

 

[n3vrast]

Sorry, I meant when Im skinning/walking. The cuff will then jam between my shin and the top of my wrist/boot.

 

[onenerdykid]

Hi, absolutely love the stats on this boot. But I am wondering a bit on where Atomic aiming with this boot.

Since the Scott S1 Carbon, the new Mastreale RS2 and the New Salomon/Arcteryx boot is coming out next year, I am in a bit of a twist of what to go for (taking fit out of the equation).

Is this a light slack country boot like the Lange XT Freetour, or a direct competitor to the boots mentioned above. I currently ski on the Quest Tr Pro, and I find that overlapping boots have limited ROM forward. When I unbuckle the boot to get the ROM its not tight enough in the heel pocket.

Have you experienced this the XTD?

In short, can I tour long days with this as good as with a Vulcan?

The short answer to our aims is to provide a touring boot that flexes and behaves just as well as a traditional alpine boot. You get the light weight and range of motion you want but without sacrificing the feel and performance of the boot. All other boots current favor one or the other. Boots you should compare against are the S1 Carbon, Maestrale RS, MTN Lab, Guide Pro, etc. Not the new Salomon X-Alp or Arc'teryx Procline- those are in a different category of touring boot than the aforementioned boots. Ultimately our goal was to make a boot that offered a true no bullshit 130 progressive flex but weighed less and toured better than anything in its class. So far, I think we deliver exactly on these points. I've stopped skiing my normal Hawx Ultra entirely. I will leave it up to you guys to judge the rest.

The heel pocket is narrow and the instep height is relatively low, both are what is required for keeping the heel in the heel pocket. As the boot is unbuckled to maximize cuff mobility, you will have less heel hold than fully buckled but so far none of our testers or athletes have mentioned it as a negative.

Stance and forward lean?

15deg? Any adjustment?

I know you love your 17deg, but some us us have shit ROM, and don't really like skiing anything more forward than 13.

Out of the box geometry is the same as Hawx Ultra (and all other Hawx boots): 4° ramp angle, 15° forward lean, 3° abducted stance from the heel (translates to 1.5mm in size 26.5). The ski/walk mechanism mounts to a metal flip chip that when flipped 180° will offer a 17° forward lean instead of the stock 15°. If you feel ok with normal Hawx Ultra out of the box, this will feel the same.

 

[cydwhit]

Out of the box geometry is the same as Hawx Ultra (and all other Hawx boots): 4° ramp angle, 15° forward lean, 3° abducted stance from the heel (translates to 1.5mm in size 26.5). The ski/walk mechanism mounts to a metal flip chip that when flipped 180° will offer a 17° forward lean instead of the stock 15°. If you feel ok with normal Hawx Ultra out of the box, this will feel the same.

Oooooh! Walk mode flip chip is one of those simple but brilliant ideas I've wanted to see for a second!

Almost put something like that together for my Fischer Travers Carbon last year.

 

[onenerdykid]

Oooooh! Walk mode flip chip is one of those simple but brilliant ideas I've wanted to see for a second!.

Word! Backland and Ultra XTD use the same exact ski/walk mechanism but with different mounting plates (for strength/stability reasons).

Backland comes out of the box at 13° and can be changed to 15°

Ultra XTD comes out of the box at 15° and can be changed to 17°

There was really a big push from Benchetler, Sage, and Daron to offer a 17° forward lean option on the new Ultra XTD. They all wanted more support when things got steep and rowdy.

 

[cydwhit]

Word! Backland and Ultra XTD use the same exact ski/walk mechanism but with different mounting plates (for strength/stability reasons).

Backland comes out of the box at 13° and can be changed to 15°

Ultra XTD comes out of the box at 15° and can be changed to 17°

There was really a big push from Benchetler, Sage, and Daron to offer a 17° forward lean option on the new Ultra XTD. They all wanted more support when things got steep and rowdy.

Interesting. What are the chances you guys ever sell aftermarket chips? Guess it probably doesn't make much sense to?

I'm gonna have to steal my roommate's Backlands and play with them. I was damn close to machining a new walk mode bar for those Travers's and now I find out you've been doing one better already....!

 

[n3vrast]

The short answer to our aims is to provide a touring boot that flexes and behaves just as well as a traditional alpine boot.

Great, thank you for answering!

One question tho, the range om motion forward when walking, I could not find a specific answer for that. Do you know the amount of degrees forward and back for the boot? 54 degrees is pretty good, but is this frictionless unretricted wow tlt6-degrees? Or is this a "I guess it works-K2 Pinnacle ROM"

Probably a stupid question, but there is a lack of videos from SIA this year!

 

[wilcox510]

Onenerdy- What size boot is that weight based on?

 

[onenerdykid]

Interesting. What are the chances you guys ever sell aftermarket chips? Guess it probably doesn't make much sense to?

The chips only differ in material thickness, they move the cuff the same amount (2°). The difference is in the actual shell & cuff. Backland comes out of the mold at 13°, so the 2° flip chip causes it to go to 15°. XTD comes out of the mold at 15°, so the chip causes it to go to 17°.

Great, thank you for answering!

One question tho, the range om motion forward when walking, I could not find a specific answer for that. Do you know the amount of degrees forward and back for the boot? 54 degrees is pretty good, but is this frictionless unretricted wow tlt6-degrees? Or is this a "I guess it works-K2 Pinnacle ROM"

Our 54° breaks down to 44° to the front, 10° to the back and is noticeably more "active" than the other boots in this category without pinching your Achilles or anything like that. It won't be as smooth/free as a cabrio style boot without the tongue (like Backland or Fischer Travers), but it is much better than any overlap we have tested. Legit 54° without needing to contort your leg to get there. The Frictionless Pivots cuff hardware from Igus helps tremendously to achieve this.

Onenerdy- What size boot is that weight based on?

Size 26.5 for men, 24.5 for women

 

[Kbob94]

I just wanna say you completely knocked it out of the park with this boot. I had the opportunity to see/feel it in person at SIA and was completely blown away by it. If my foot wasn't a 102mm last id be all over this boot. I will definitely confirm that this boot will be with ever dime a person spends on it. You absolutely killed it!!

 

[onenerdykid]

I just wanna say you completely knocked it out of the park with this boot. I had the opportunity to see/feel it in person at SIA and was completely blown away by it. If my foot wasn't a 102mm last id be all over this boot. I will definitely confirm that this boot will be with ever dime a person spends on it. You absolutely killed it!!

Wow, thanks for the vote of confidence!

I assume you have too wide of a foot, but were you able to try it on? What is your current boot you are liking?

If you are 102mm in a 26.5, there is a very good chance this will fit you after Memory Fit. And if you are 102mm in size 28.5, it will fit you out of the box

 

[cobra_commander]

XTD comes out of the mold at 15°, so the chip causes it to go to 17°.

Our 54° breaks down to 44° to the front, 10° to the back

Interesting. Do most other 'crossover' boots not make it to vertical on the rear ROM either? It would really call into doubt how much ROM you really need for touring.

 

[Kbob94]

Wow, thanks for the vote of confidence!

I assume you have too wide of a foot, but were you able to try it on? What is your current boot you are liking?

If you are 102mm in a 26.5, there is a very good chance this will fit you after Memory Fit. And if you are 102mm in size 28.5, it will fit you out of the box

You bet! The design and weight are pretty much flawless. Its a killer boot for sure.

Unfortunately I wasn't able to try it on cause it was super busy when i was there. :/ Well idk if id say I'm liking the boot but its what fits. Im using a FT decendant 6 in a 29.5. Next season I'm defiantly getting a new boot. The Hawk is by far the design and type of boot that I'm looking to go to. My days of riding park are few and far between. My focus has defiantly moved more towards free ride/ touring.

 

[cobra_commander]

Interesting. Do most other 'crossover' boots not make it to vertical on the rear ROM either? It would really call into doubt how much ROM you really need for touring.

disregard. Total brain fart from lack of coffee. For some reason I thought the 10/44 was referenced from the ski position, as opposed to vertical.

Still if 10deg of rear ROM is all that is necessary for decent touring, its funny how much effort goes into making boots that have 30deg of rear ROM.

Was the no 5355 option due to weight? I'd pay another 100 grams for a 15XXg boot that can be dropped into my current bindings.

 

[onenerdykid]

disregard. Total brain fart from lack of coffee. For some reason I thought the 10/44 was referenced from the ski position, as opposed to vertical.

Still if 10deg of rear ROM is all that is necessary for decent touring, its funny how much effort goes into making boots that have 30deg of rear ROM.

Was the no 5355 option due to weight? I'd pay another 100 grams for a 15XXg boot that can be dropped into my current bindings.

Yep, -10° is from vertical, not from forward lean. Movement to the rear is really helpful for standing, kicking steps, etc. so you don't need a ton of it. Movement to the front is what is helpful for skinning, especially when it gets steep, so having more of the range of motion geared for this should be the goal.

No 5355 was due to weight, stand height, and mold wear & tear. If we made the mold series capable of having a 5355 bottom in addition, it would have required a lot of sliders/ different bottom pistons in the mold, which when you change these pieces out for each configuration, it will eventually damage the mold and cause tons of issues. So, we decided to focus on a single sole construction thus making it lighter, lower (compare this next to a Guide Pro on a table and you'll immediately see a huge difference), and more walking/touring friendly than 5355.

 

[remer_s]

"Out of the box geometry is the same as Hawx Ultra (and all other Hawx boots): 4° ramp angle, 15° forward lean, 3° abducted stance from the heel (translates to 1.5mm in size 26.5). The ski/walk mechanism mounts to a metal flip chip that when flipped 180° will offer a 17° forward lean instead of the stock 15°. If you feel ok with normal Hawx Ultra out of the box, this will feel the same."

Maybe a tough question, but through your R&D, how does these numbers compare to the Solly MTN LAB boot?

Thanks!!!

 

[onenerdykid]

"Out of the box geometry is the same as Hawx Ultra (and all other Hawx boots): 4° ramp angle, 15° forward lean, 3° abducted stance from the heel (translates to 1.5mm in size 26.5). The ski/walk mechanism mounts to a metal flip chip that when flipped 180° will offer a 17° forward lean instead of the stock 15°. If you feel ok with normal Hawx Ultra out of the box, this will feel the same."

Maybe a tough question, but through your R&D, how does these numbers compare to the Solly MTN LAB boot?

Thanks!!!

Kinda similarish, but they have a little less forward lean, and it's non-adjustable. The bigger differences will be in how the boot functions, performs, and binding compatibility.

 

[n3vrast]

Not to go too far OT, but I have one question I would hope you can clarify.

The last 2 years I have been looking for a touring boot that can support my shin fully, from the lover bucke above the ankle and all the way to the power strap. I usually only get that support/feeling from race boots like the RC4 or Langes. I am not talking about flex, just a even snug pressure in the front of my shin. I big design flaw I do not understand (espescially for touring boots with removable toungs) is why the touring boots, like the backland, have so short tongues. Upon flexing a tlf6/tlt7/Backland the boots always dig in to the lower part of my shin because the boot is so short. Why U do dis?!11

I understand the weight concern etc but wouldnt it be better to add 50-100 gram for 5cm of added length to the boot/tounge?

It looks like this is adressed by the XTD, but why not improve the Backland a bit also? I cannot be the only one who feels like this, surely? 0_0

 

[remer_s]

Thanks so much for the quick reply!

So, you would say the MTN LAB is more upright and the ULTRA XTD has a little more forward lean? Do I have that right?

 

[n3vrast]

Not to go too far OT, but I have one question I would hope you can clarify.

[..]

Edit: Onenerdykid, can you please do a little sideproject by making a stiffer/thicker and 5-7 cm taller tounge with a booster strap derivative that can be purchased as spares for the Backland? Pleease

 

[onenerdykid]

I big design flaw I do not understand (espescially for touring boots with removable toungs) is why the touring boots, like the backland, have so short tongues. Upon flexing a tlf6/tlt7/Backland the boots always dig in to the lower part of my shin because the boot is so short. Why U do dis?!11

I understand the weight concern etc but wouldnt it be better to add 50-100 gram for 5cm of added length to the boot/tounge?

It looks like this is adressed by the XTD, but why not improve the Backland a bit also? I cannot be the only one who feels like this, surely? 0_0

Great question and noted. The answer is, as you said, due to minimalism. European ski touring (which is about 70% of the overall touring market) is all about minimalism- what is the absolute least amount of ski boot that I need in order to power a "wide" 85mm waisted ski. Backland and X-Alp are mainly for these consumers, but also why there is a need for a boot like the Hawx Ultra XTD. But perhaps you will see an update on Backland in the future that accommodates this.

So, you would say the MTN LAB is more upright and the ULTRA XTD has a little more forward lean? Do I have that right?

Out of the box, Ultra XTD does have slightly more forward lean than MTN Lab. And because Ultra XTD has adjustable forward lean, it can be increased even further if needed.

 

[onenerdykid]

Here's a little teaser video we shot with Daron Rahlves a few weeks ago when the Hahnnenkamm race was kicking off in Kitzbühel. Also keep an eye on Instagramer for Benchetler, Sage, and Durtschi sending it proper- you're bound to see this boot popping up more on their feeds now.
https://www.atomic.com/en/article/daron-rahlves-and-hawx-ultra-xtd

 

[n3vrast]

Looks good, looking forward to some more videos!