Hybrid vs pin only boots

[hi_vis360]

How big is the difference in downhill performance?

 

[hi_vis360]

Some more info: considering getting a touring only setup, skiing on the east coast. Would be nice to have a boot that I could hike over dirt and rocks with in the spring and not have to switch boots. Not dropping cliffs or anything but still want to have a good time making turns on the downhill

 

[cydwhit]

I'm not sure what you're asking here? Do you mean boots that won't work with MNC bindings, but will only work with pins?

It's hard to make sweeping generalization on downhill performance when the only factor you're looking at is binding compatibility.

 

[hi_vis360]

I'm not sure what you're asking here? Do you mean boots that won't work with MNC bindings, but will only work with pins?

It's hard to make sweeping generalization on downhill performance when the only factor you're looking at is binding compatibility.

Yes like the difference between a shift pro vs a mtn lab boot, if we were talking sollys, def not set on that brand though just an example

 

[hi_vis360]

I guess what I’m asking is getting a non MNC compatible boot worth it

 

[cydwhit]

I guess what I’m asking is getting a non MNC compatible boot worth it

Yeah, you still need to narrow it down haha. A non-MNC compatible boot is totally worth it, if it fits your foot. But it's far from the first thing to consider.

When shopping for a touring boot I would look for (in approximately this order):

-Fit

-Weight

-Flex, will it support my skiing style/weight?

-ROM - if it's light it will probably have totally adequate ROM

-Fiddle factor - will this boot transition efficiently

-Color will this boot match my kit?

-Sex appeal: Will all my friends thing this boot is cool

-MNC compatibility

If you don't know, and this is a first touring boot, you should just buy an MNC friendly boot. For folks coming from alpine boots, full weeny touring boots will probably feel too foreign, and will be less versatile. So just buy something along the lines of a Radical Pro, Hawx XTD, Maestrale, MTN Lab, whatever, over an F1, Backland, S/Lab Summit, TL, etc.

Yes, those non-MNC boots walk on rocks/etc marginally better, but that's as much a product of the weight and walk mode as the sole. Anything with a rockered sole walks fine.

As a rough rule, non-MNC boots are for folks who aren't planning on skiing them inbounds, unless it's fitness groomer laps or a return from a tour. There are tons of MNC boots that are nice and light, and walk well, that you can ski inbounds occasionally. For you, it sounds like the later category makes more sense.

 

[hi_vis360]

Yeah, you still need to narrow it down haha. A non-MNC compatible boot is totally worth it, if it fits your foot. But it's far from the first thing to consider.

When shopping for a touring boot I would look for (in approximately this order):

-Fit

-Weight

-Flex, will it support my skiing style/weight?

-ROM - if it's light it will probably have totally adequate ROM

-Fiddle factor - will this boot transition efficiently

-Color will this boot match my kit?

-Sex appeal: Will all my friends thing this boot is cool

-MNC compatibility

If you don't know, and this is a first touring boot, you should just buy an MNC friendly boot. For folks coming from alpine boots, full weeny touring boots will probably feel too foreign, and will be less versatile. So just buy something along the lines of a Radical Pro, Hawx XTD, Maestrale, MTN Lab, whatever, over an F1, Backland, S/Lab Summit, TL, etc.

Yes, those non-MNC boots walk on rocks/etc marginally better, but that's as much a product of the weight and walk mode as the sole. Anything with a rockered sole walks fine.

As a rough rule, non-MNC boots are for folks who aren't planning on skiing them inbounds, unless it's fitness groomer laps or a return from a tour. There are tons of MNC boots that are nice and light, and walk well, that you can ski inbounds occasionally. For you, it sounds like the later category makes more sense.

Cool thanks for the info! I’m still trying to figure out exactly what I want and I know very little about touring gear, all I really know is what type of skiing I’m going to be doing. Def not going to be an inbounds/sidecountry setup. Main reason I’m curious about MNC compatibility is cause I can get a pair of shifts for wicked cheap, but I’m not sure if I want a binding/boot that heavy. Good to know about the rockered soles/walkability

 

[cydwhit]

If it's gonna be a pure touring setup, then yeah, skip the Shift and get something lighter, and easier to use. That solves your boot question at the same time!

 

[hi_vis360]

If it's gonna be a pure touring setup, then yeah, skip the Shift and get something lighter, and easier to use. That solves your boot question at the same time!

Ok word, there are tons of MNC compatible boots that are good for pin bindings too though right? Or would that not make a difference performance wise and just be extra weight? Cause as you said fit is obviously most important

 

[50Kal]

Ok word, there are tons of MNC compatible boots that are good for pin bindings too though right? Or would that not make a difference performance wise and just be extra weight? Cause as you said fit is obviously most important

Fit is gonna be the most important especially if you gonna start hiking/touring distances.

Performance/capabilities vs weight will all be your preference and objectives.

Example, I have some Atomic Backland carbon boots that are awesome for the up but skis like a wet noodle in most conditions. Recently bought Atomic XTD Hawks and while the range of motion is less and weight is heavier, the performance waaaaay better on the way down.

Be realistic of what your trying to accomplish goal wise in the BC. Sounds like your gonna be doing day stuff so getting something that performs better/will be a little heavier won't hold you back at all.

Also if this gonna be your only boot, your gonna want a better performance boot that is MNC compatible, so heavier it is.

Also when AT people talk heavier, they are talking half pounds / ounces heavier not double digit pounds.

Don't get hanged up on weight. Performance will matter more unless your planning on some multi day ski mountaineering trip.

The weight of even high performance/heavy Pin/MNC compatible is light compared to traditional alpine ski boots.

 

[hi_vis360]

Fit is gonna be the most important especially if you gonna start hiking/touring distances.

Performance/capabilities vs weight will all be your preference and objectives.

Example, I have some Atomic Backland carbon boots that are awesome for the up but skis like a wet noodle in most conditions. Recently bought Atomic XTD Hawks and while the range of motion is less and weight is heavier, the performance waaaaay better on the way down.

Be realistic of what your trying to accomplish goal wise in the BC. Sounds like your gonna be doing day stuff so getting something that performs better/will be a little heavier won't hold you back at all.

Also if this gonna be your only boot, your gonna want a better performance boot that is MNC compatible, so heavier it is.

Also when AT people talk heavier, they are talking half pounds / ounces heavier not double digit pounds.

Don't get hanged up on weight. Performance will matter more unless your planning on some multi day ski mountaineering trip.

The weight of even high performance/heavy Pin/MNC compatible is light compared to traditional alpine ski boots.

Word this is very helpful! This will be my touring only boot but also I’m def not going mountaineering for multiple days, so sounds like more of a hybrid boot with a good sole is the move

 

[cydwhit]

Ok word, there are tons of MNC compatible boots that are good for pin bindings too though right? Or would that not make a difference performance wise and just be extra weight? Cause as you said fit is obviously most important

Yep. I'd say it feels like 70+% of boots with tech fittings on the market right now will fit in MNC bindings, and 20-30% won't. So chances are you end up in an MNC friendly boot without even trying to.