It looks like you are using an ad blocker. That's okay. Who doesn't? But without advertising revenue, we can't keep making this site awesome. Click the link below for instructions on disabling adblock.
Welcome to the Newschoolers forums! You may read the forums as a guest, however you must be a registered member to post.
Register to become a member today!
They released flexes from 90 to 130. looks like you can also use it for touring. Will this boot feel good with that middle buckle, idk about these boots. Yes they instantly sold out.
Very interested in the boot, slightly apprehensive buying sight unseen. Anyone have any insight how similar the fit is to the old Krypton? Been desperately searching for a replacement. Very unimpressed with the Cabrio.
onenerdykidYeah, I think we may be talking past one another a bit here. Let me start over - what I am saying is that if the profit margin is equal on each level of boot, then you don't get the price points you listed- at least not where I work.
Top end PU is 4x the cost of the lowest end PU, lowest end PU is about double the cost of PP plastic. A nice cam strap is about 5x the cost of a basic velcro one. Our Mimic Platinum liner is almost 3x times the cost of a Bronze. Using screwed hardware isn't much more expensive than rivets, but the labor cost associated with screwed hardware is astronomically more expensive. And so on, and so on. If I built a 110 level boot with all the same trimmings as the 130 but just used softer plastic, then the cost/retail of the boots would be the same. But, since I (unfortunately) need to build the 110 to a lower price point, I need to use more cost effective versions of the boot's plastic, liner construction, power strap, fixation hardware, boot board, and in some cases buckle construction in order to appease the business side of the business.
onenerdykidIn addition to how the boot might fit them, the features you just described would be reasons that someone buys this boot instead of a Dalbello Cabrio.
Probably more applicable - feel free to reach out to Sage Cattabriga-Alosa, Bobby Brown, and Dennis Ranalter for what they think of their Hawx Prime boots.
onenerdykidProbably more applicable - feel free to reach out to Sage Cattabriga-Alosa, Bobby Brown, and Dennis Ranalter for what they think of their Hawx Prime boots.
absolutely, but I'd rather reach out to someone who is not on your payroll.
Are these armada boots similar to Dalbello and Full tilt where you can change the tongue to change to different flex? Or is the flex also contributed from another part of the boot where it isn’t a simple swap?
onenerdykidDepends on the boot. Not all boots are built to be softened and some just don't like it. Sometimes it's quite difficult to get a 130 soft enough to flex/behave like 110 - that's a big jump. With other boots (certain 3-piece boots), it can be a lot easier by just swapping out the tongue. It also depends what you plan on keeping with the boot - if you're going to ditch the stock liner for an aftermarket something and swap the power strap to a booster-style one, then go for the 110.
onenerdykidProbably more applicable - feel free to reach out to Sage Cattabriga-Alosa, Bobby Brown, and Dennis Ranalter for what they think of their Hawx Prime boots.
using athletes to validate a design decision is a logical fallacy. they can all use the worst boots and worst skis and make it look good, they even make ridiculous ramp angles look good (tanner hall in og krypton). And just because they are pro does not mean they have good technique or stance, go watch Alex Hackel ski pow. Athletes will ski a sub-optimally aligned boot as long as their feet dont hurt, and prime is exactly that, super relaxed fit you can live in that boot.
abducted lasts are dangerous for anyone not varus aligned and have no logical use in modern 18-20m skis. to ski every version of a bent or ARV, or like elan ripstick... nobody needs extra torque from the boot design to turn those skis. when the last is abducted it blocks out the 1st met and the result is center of knee mass tracking more over the big toe causing inwards input to the skis. it doesn't matter if its only 2.5* from the heel because the prime last has no 1st met expanded area like a lange shadow, so its effectively like 2.5* plus
so when armada's entire line of skis are based off relatively short radius, early rocker, ease of turn. Using a 2.5* "plus" last is counter intuitive because nobody that skis that boot is trying to turn a 26m radius or make a slalom turn. When you ski more zero'd lasts the initial edge of the turn is more true to the ski's design. Every bit of foot abduction adds some smear early in the turn. A similar, but different sensation to when the heel of the zeppa is too high and it causes initial edge to be over cooked.
eileen gu is over delta'd in the griffon binding and never falls.
when you go to a vail resort and watch people ski, they are all fighting too much ramp and too much delta. they all look like retards squating back and trying to turn.
the normies expose, and the pros compensate and conceal.
**This post was edited on Jan 5th 2025 at 8:10:59pm
sicbithabsolutely, but I'd rather reach out to someone who is not on your payroll.
Fair point and I will address it in a post momentarily. But if you want to (or even could) talk with an athlete who uses a Hawx boot that is not on our payroll, you can try to hit up Eileen Gu. She skis a Hawx Ultra.
scratchskier321no, love your posts & help. proud of my GPT chart
Good conversation for sure. With regard to the Chat GPT chart, it's actually kinda close on a few things - but only a few. It's out to lunch on most aspects and is missing about half of the picture. This is a great example of how AI is still learning the ropes and hallucinating the rest.
scratchskier321using athletes to validate a design decision is a logical fallacy. they can all use the worst boots and worst skis and make it look good, they even make ridiculous ramp angles look good (tanner hall in og krypton). And just because they are pro does not mean they have good technique or stance, go watch Alex Hackel ski pow. Athletes will ski a sub-optimally aligned boot as long as their feet dont hurt, and prime is exactly that, super relaxed fit you can live in that boot.
abducted lasts are dangerous for anyone not varus aligned and have no logical use in modern 18-20m skis. to ski every version of a bent or ARV, or like elan ripstick... nobody needs extra torque from the boot design to turn those skis. when the last is abducted it blocks out the 1st met and the result is center of knee mass tracking more over the big toe causing inwards input to the skis. it doesn't matter if its only 2.5* from the heel because the prime last has no 1st met expanded area like a lange shadow, so its effectively like 2.5* plus
so when armada's entire line of skis are based off relatively short radius, early rocker, ease of turn. Using a 2.5* "plus" last is counter intuitive because nobody that skis that boot is trying to turn a 26m radius or make a slalom turn. When you ski more zero'd lasts the initial edge of the turn is more true to the ski's design. Every bit of foot abduction adds some smear early in the turn. A similar, but different sensation to when the heel of the zeppa is too high and it causes initial edge to be over cooked.
You bring up some great discussion points here. Nothing I’ve said constituted a formal or informal logical fallacy. The closest resembling informal fallacy is called the Testimonial Fallacy, but in order for me to commit that, I need to involve someone who has no expertise in the subject matter, which isn’t the case here. In fact, if someone wants to have an expert level discussion about boots and ski gear in general, they should hit up Sage. Sage is an athlete who doesn’t sugar coat things and doesn’t BS his way through a conversation. He’ll genuinely tell you what he likes and doesn’t like about the gear. Feel free to ask him about his thoughts on BOA. What my post does bring into question is bias and trust – can someone who is an athlete for a brand speak honestly about the gear that they use? It’s totally possible, as long as certain conditions are met. Our society has become so cynical (for a lot of valid reasons too) that people’s opinions are immediately written off simply because of association. So, what it ultimately comes down to is: do you trust what the person is saying? Is their opinion grounded in data or are they just reciting the company line? I think that’s something we all need to be critical of, evaluate based on data, and see who is giving an honest opinion. When it comes to athletes and the gear they use, what I continually see (especially on the competitive side of skiing, both racing and freeski) is that an athlete will only use the gear they trust and will often use gear from other brands because of it. This is not new and is not that rare.
Calling 2.5mm of abduction “dangerous” is so over the top and exaggerated- this amount is so subtle that when I tell most fitters & ski instructors about it, they are surprised because they felt that Hawx's last was straight like a Redster’s. If it were so dangerous there would be so many people complaining about and trying to sue Atomic after 18 years of doing it (the original Hawx was launched in 2007). Every boot fitter can have his/her opinion on any subject, but it should always be grounded in data over dogma, and this industry is so full of the latter at times. Especially certain Lange reps who love to talk shit about other brand’s products. If had a dollar for every time I heard one such rep talk about Atomic’s stance, forward lean vs. their forward lean, how shaped their last is versus everyone else’s, I could retire. It’s kinda hard to think of someone more biased than sales rep – after all their income is directly tied to their ability to convince you their product is better than anyone else’s. They have the most bias of anyone in the ski industry. Furthermore, one of the things no one can do is properly judge the shape of the last by the external shape of the shell (which I know some reps love to say and do). Atomic has lots of medial contouring that is hidden by the industrial design of the shell- the internal shape is there but the external aesthetics are doing something different. Should the brand be doing that? This is a great topic for a discussion, but it’s one about external aesthetics, not last shape because it’s actually very much a part of the last shape. In fact, after scanning all brands’ lasts shape and seeing what they actually do, you’d be surprised just how many boots have external shaping that ISN’T happening on the last. It’s exaggerated on the outside of the boot to make the boot look more anatomic than it actually is. Super dishonest move. I'm not saying Lange does this, but I am saying don't believe what you can see on the outside of the boot and think that it translates to the shape of the last.
Re the Abduction thing. Boots that are abducted on the heel are better for pronated feet, as when a foot pronates the forefoot abducts. Feet that pronate slightly to severally are far more prevalent than the opposite, feet that supinate. Consider how many people need a sixth toe punch? Way more than need a medial hallux punch.So the forefoot abducted boots often work better for most feet. Please explain the varus knee line of thought, that doesn’t compute for me.
Boots that are abducted on the midfoot are a whole different creature. Really only suited for people that stand abducted due to hip retro version or tibial/femoral torsion. Although I do know one fitter who had great success fitting knock kneed woman with Fischer Somatec boots. This was before my time as a bootfitter so I won’t comment any further on that approach.
“It’s kinda hard to think of someone more biased than sales rep – after all their income is directly tied to their ability to convince you their product is better than anyone else’s. They have the most bias of anyone in the ski industry.”
HaHa. Every rep says their shit is the greatest!
Best ones can actually explain it without trashing other brands.
No-Skill-PhilWas kinda interesting, but I find Ellsworth… painful to listen to. Also “dampening”? If these boys be talking about bikes you should maybe learn them a bit ;)
It's the 5minute long introductions to those podcasts that make me cringe. Otherwise, the interviews are pretty awesome, for example @thatonenerdykid drops some serious info on the Gear:30. Super good stuff.
onenerdykidYou bring up some great discussion points here. Nothing I’ve said constituted a formal or informal logical fallacy. The closest resembling informal fallacy is called the Testimonial Fallacy, but in order for me to commit that, I need to involve someone who has no expertise in the subject matter, which isn’t the case here. In fact, if someone wants to have an expert level discussion about boots and ski gear in general, they should hit up Sage. Sage is an athlete who doesn’t sugar coat things and doesn’t BS his way through a conversation. He’ll genuinely tell you what he likes and doesn’t like about the gear. Feel free to ask him about his thoughts on BOA. What my post does bring into question is bias and trust – can someone who is an athlete for a brand speak honestly about the gear that they use? It’s totally possible, as long as certain conditions are met. Our society has become so cynical (for a lot of valid reasons too) that people’s opinions are immediately written off simply because of association. So, what it ultimately comes down to is: do you trust what the person is saying? Is their opinion grounded in data or are they just reciting the company line? I think that’s something we all need to be critical of, evaluate based on data, and see who is giving an honest opinion. When it comes to athletes and the gear they use, what I continually see (especially on the competitive side of skiing, both racing and freeski) is that an athlete will only use the gear they trust and will often use gear from other brands because of it. This is not new and is not that rare.
Calling 2.5mm of abduction “dangerous” is so over the top and exaggerated- this amount is so subtle that when I tell most fitters & ski instructors about it, they are surprised because they felt that Hawx's last was straight like a Redster’s. If it were so dangerous there would be so many people complaining about and trying to sue Atomic after 18 years of doing it (the original Hawx was launched in 2007). Every boot fitter can have his/her opinion on any subject, but it should always be grounded in data over dogma, and this industry is so full of the latter at times. Especially certain Lange reps who love to talk shit about other brand’s products. If had a dollar for every time I heard one such rep talk about Atomic’s stance, forward lean vs. their forward lean, how shaped their last is versus everyone else’s, I could retire. It’s kinda hard to think of someone more biased than sales rep – after all their income is directly tied to their ability to convince you their product is better than anyone else’s. They have the most bias of anyone in the ski industry. Furthermore, one of the things no one can do is properly judge the shape of the last by the external shape of the shell (which I know some reps love to say and do). Atomic has lots of medial contouring that is hidden by the industrial design of the shell- the internal shape is there but the external aesthetics are doing something different. Should the brand be doing that? This is a great topic for a discussion, but it’s one about external aesthetics, not last shape because it’s actually very much a part of the last shape. In fact, after scanning all brands’ lasts shape and seeing what they actually do, you’d be surprised just how many boots have external shaping that ISN’T happening on the last. It’s exaggerated on the outside of the boot to make the boot look more anatomic than it actually is. Super dishonest move. I'm not saying Lange does this, but I am saying don't believe what you can see on the outside of the boot and think that it translates to the shape of the last.
Be that as it may. My ideas hold merit on their own and are well explained.
Will explain this another way because ski specific points aren’t communicating.
Nike used to make golf equipment, the club was called the “nike covert” cavity back driver. Mcilroy & Koepka performed really well with it and won multiple majors using it. A lot of other players used it.
Shortly after, nike closed down their equipment business and all their sponsored players had to use Taylormade or Callaway drivers the next season.
That next season the pga tour ball speeds and carry numbers increased significantly outside the norm and further statistical analysis showed nike players had gained 5-10 yards after the switch.
Why is this important? Because you can be most the successful & influential company in the entire world and still make mid product that “performs well” and “look XYZ athlete loves it”
If performance & comfort actually sold ski boots the Dahu and Upz ski boots would sell great.
I have like 15 pairs of boots and keep trying every single boot to figure down what skis. I don’t have to carry water for design choices.
Nobody sued nike (lol), and nobody cared, everyone was in the dark.
You don’t have to defend why the prime is abducted, so is tecnica & nordica etc. It is what it is and has its use case.
The prime plastic has great snow feel, great ramp. The Lange last sucks because it’s so navicular tight, it's also late to engage with the shin because the front cuff is angled pretty forward. When you drop the 13* shim into the prime it comes alive. Boots like Dalbello DS (green/neon green 130 & Asolo 98mm) ski a level above prime & ultra. The ultra skis kinda close to it, but I’m dead in the size gap and the ultra 25.5 is so small and the cuff is short.
The internal/external shell design conversation is for noobs. The updated external shell on the prime skis way better than old, same with ultra. It is obviously the right choice to design boots that way.
all that said, the AR boot should've been straighter lasted than prime.
TurnfarmerRe the Abduction thing. Boots that are abducted on the heel are better for pronated feet, as when a foot pronates the forefoot abducts. Feet that pronate slightly to severally are far more prevalent than the opposite, feet that supinate. Consider how many people need a sixth toe punch? Way more than need a medial hallux punch.So the forefoot abducted boots often work better for most feet. Please explain the varus knee line of thought, that doesn’t compute for me.
Boots that are abducted on the midfoot are a whole different creature. Really only suited for people that stand abducted due to hip retro version or tibial/femoral torsion. Although I do know one fitter who had great success fitting knock kneed woman with Fischer Somatec boots. This was before my time as a bootfitter so I won’t comment any further on that approach.
from a varus position your knee COM tracks outside the 2nd toe for longer before it crosses inwards of the 2nd toe.
from a valgus position your knee COM tracks inside the 2nd toe a lot earlier.
outside 2nd toe is called over-edged, and inside 2nd toe is called under-edged.
so when the last is abducted outwards you increase the divergence between knee COM and 2nd toe which causes an inwards torque on the ski, also known as under-edged, which is basically just like a smeary inside edge feeling. too much of this turns your tips inwards.
the varus person can manage that divergence better, because their knee starts from outside 2nd toe as they flex. whereas the valgus person is instantly cooked traveling inside the 2nd toe.
this video on reddit is a super extreme case, but it highlights the mechanics. you can see how this girl's insane valgus alignment affects the turn.
scratchskier321from a varus position your knee COM tracks outside the 2nd toe for longer before it crosses inwards of the 2nd toe.
from a valgus position your knee COM tracks inside the 2nd toe a lot earlier.
outside 2nd toe is called over-edged, and inside 2nd toe is called under-edged.
so when the last is abducted outwards you increase the divergence between knee COM and 2nd toe which causes an inwards torque on the ski, also known as under-edged, which is basically just like a smeary inside edge feeling. too much of this turns your tips inwards.
the varus person can manage that divergence better, because their knee starts from outside 2nd toe as they flex. whereas the valgus person is instantly cooked traveling inside the 2nd toe.
this video on reddit is a super extreme case, but it highlights the mechanics. you can see how this girl's insane valgus alignment affects the turn.
Adduction, duckfooting, straightfooting, ramp/canting. This thread is going deep. Still hyped on the new boot. I got two different sized feet, and this whip takes the different sized tounges from the atomic liners. I think I'm gonna be a customer if I get along with the MV. I'm in an old Lupo SP. Any idea how the volume's compare?
Adduction, duckfooting, straightfooting, ramp/canting. This thread is going deep. Still hyped on the new boot. I got two different sized feet, and this whip takes the different sized tounges from the atomic liners. I think I'm gonna be a customer if I get along with the MV. I'm in an old Lupo SP. Any idea how the volume's compare?
haha ya im hyped on the boot too, will buy it no matter what. It's bigger in basically all ways than a lupo, but it should be fine, its not that big.
Might cop some full tilt non grip walks just from hearing this podcast. Didn’t know there was that much difference between the grip walk and non gripwalk version.
Adduction, duckfooting, straightfooting, ramp/canting. This thread is going deep. Still hyped on the new boot. I got two different sized feet, and this whip takes the different sized tounges from the atomic liners. I think I'm gonna be a customer if I get along with the MV. I'm in an old Lupo SP. Any idea how the volume's compare?
Jimmer369Might cop some full tilt non grip walks just from hearing this podcast. Didn’t know there was that much difference between the grip walk and non gripwalk version.
I just happened to be switching from First Chairs (slightly too big but not enough to size down. Also no GW soles at that point, just replaceable din soles) to Drop Kick Pros (Solid sole/lugs) when that episode came out. Having held both in my hands at the same time, I can pretty much confirm everything Bode's saying. Swapped the wrap liners for their Pro Tongue liners as well as stiffer tongues, and there was a noticeable improvement in performance over the first chairs. For me at least.
I would also love to know more about this coffee can hack he mentions to get more lateral stiffness out these boots. Afaik, the mods I've seen of his are: plastic cutting board bolted to the soles as lifters for when he was still trying to race in them. Some sort of carbon fiber spoiler screwed on to the opening flanges of the lower throat (pic was kinda hard to see so I could be wrong on this), and that coffee can hack mentioned above.
Kinda surprising FT/K2 hasn't developed an 'all mountain' version of their Original shell boots, when the shell is stiffer and has a more snug fit at the toes. Wouldn't these be considered 'performance' properties in the industry? I wish I saved a pic but I even recall seeing a random shop that posted on FB photos of Karl Fostvedt visiting to get work done on his boots, where I spotted a pair of dropkicks that had replaceable soles (don't recall if they were GW) basically directly screwed on.
@tomPietrowski would love to hear any of your thoughts on this.
OhJayI just happened to be switching from First Chairs (slightly too big but not enough to size down. Also no GW soles at that point, just replaceable din soles) to Drop Kick Pros (Solid sole/lugs) when that episode came out. Having held both in my hands at the same time, I can pretty much confirm everything Bode's saying. Swapped the wrap liners for their Pro Tongue liners as well as stiffer tongues, and there was a noticeable improvement in performance over the first chairs. For me at least.
I would also love to know more about this coffee can hack he mentions to get more lateral stiffness out these boots. Afaik, the mods I've seen of his are: plastic cutting board bolted to the soles as lifters for when he was still trying to race in them. Some sort of carbon fiber spoiler screwed on to the opening flanges of the lower throat (pic was kinda hard to see so I could be wrong on this), and that coffee can hack mentioned above.
Kinda surprising FT/K2 hasn't developed an 'all mountain' version of their Original shell boots, when the shell is stiffer and has a more snug fit at the toes. Wouldn't these be considered 'performance' properties in the industry? I wish I saved a pic but I even recall seeing a random shop that posted on FB photos of Karl Fostvedt visiting to get work done on his boots, where I spotted a pair of dropkicks that had replaceable soles (don't recall if they were GW) basically directly screwed on.
@tomPietrowski would love to hear any of your thoughts on this.
The hard part with this style of boot is the market is just so small. We have had many conversations regarding if we can expand the 3-piece market to be more than it is currently but it’s just such a big shift to try to make especially when we already have overlap boots doing really well in those categories. If we try to expand 3-piece into these categories it’s unlikely we would actually expand market share as much as retailers would change up their buying and just sub in some 3-piece instead of some overlap.
Because of this it’s really hard to justify investing in what is currently a pretty niche segment. But we are developing a 3-piece boa solution which could potentially solve some of the 3-piece fit issues and could potentially be an interesting boot to move forward with.
a_pla5tic_bagI hate this so much. I'm small and light, no matter how hard I ski I just don't need the worlds stiffest boots all the time. That doesn't mean I want worse softer boots though.
Hey man, We've heard this a bunch and its why we went with a fully spec'd 110 flex in the AR ONE line. Not sure if that is the correct flex you are personally looking for but maybe?? It was important to us as a brand to have a softer flex boot maintain top of the line build at a price that makes sense for a 110. cheers!
Jimmer369Are these armada boots similar to Dalbello and Full tilt where you can change the tongue to change to different flex? Or is the flex also contributed from another part of the boot where it isn’t a simple swap?
Yo! Since our boots derive their flex from the connection between the cuff and shell of the boot, the tongue does little to affect flex. And since that is the case, we currently aren't offering stiffer tongues than what are already provided. Thanks!
I've try the ar 130 today, it's a good boot for sure but i find it too roomy.
I'm coming from a krypton 130 and i prefer the fit of the krypton.
I think the cortex will be "the" boot of 2025.
extremejuI've try the ar 130 today, it's a good boot for sure but i find it too roomy.
I'm coming from a krypton 130 and i prefer the fit of the krypton.
I think the cortex will be "the" boot of 2025.
Were you in a Krypton LV, Krypton MV, or the previous KR2?
it has the same feature as hawx prime where you flex forward and the outward angulation of the heel pocket shifts your forefoot outwards. boot looks cool though.
scratchskier321
it has the same feature as hawx prime where you flex forward and the outward angulation of the heel pocket shifts your forefoot outwards. boot looks cool though.
FIFY:
That's much closer to reality and why it's not nearly as big of a deal as you are making it out to be.
It's not dangerous. It doesn't cause skier's tips to cross. It doesn't add smear into the turn. You make these claims but have zero data backing up your claims- you have ideas that kinda sound plausible but they don't track in the real world. Your claims are simply not confirmed by the actual data we actually have: millions of skiers liking their boots, who are not complaining that the boot is dangerous, who are not complaining about the mysterious reason why their tips keep crossing, who are not complaining about the flex being brutal. There is no data to support your claims, just semi-plausible sounding statements that are not confirmed by those who are skiing the boots.
Just was on the new AR110 for about 10-12 runs. Really, really pleased with it. My daily boot is an Atomic Redster CS... soo yeah, pretty narrow but I've done a lot of work on it. The MV fits really well, especially for more freeride/jumps. Not as wide as an MV from Tec/Nordica and not as wide as a Recon from K2. It's been a year or two since I've tried on a Mindbender, so I honestly can't compare right now.
Super stoked on it. Will write up a better review later in the week when work lets up. But fit out of the box was really good for an MV! Heel lock was way better. No need to add a wrap behind like in other boots I've used. Liner was really nice, and I like that they decided to put the same liner in the 110 and 130. Stoked to spend more time on it... It just skis and feels way better than my Dalbello Il Moros I had previous as a rec boot. Seriously, the fit on the AR is much better than a Cabrio from Dalbello.
AR110 @$549 is super obtainable and I'd pick this any day over an Il Moro or Revolve Pro. F*ck yeah.
I know it's not the same liner, but having an option at $399 is going to be such a sick option for groms and newbies trying to get legit set ups on a budget. More people on more legit gear is always a good thing.
Can't wait to spend some more days on it.
Like @onenerdykid said early on, if you're interested in it or critiquing it hard without trying it on...listen to that Blister Podcast.
Stoked that the boot work fine for your foot, but for me its not the same.
Ordered the Armada this week to test and (subjective) verdict: -the boot seems of good quality, good plastics -the liner is fine but I find it a little soft being used to the intuition wrap of my dalbellos -the tightening system with the cable loop is rather effective but I haven't seen any real improvement compared to my dalbellos (krypton 130 not the new cabrio) -overall I find it more "roomy" than my dalbello, especially at the front of the foot Conclusion no real added value according to me and my dalbello, so back this week...
ChucktheweaselJust was on the new AR110 for about 10-12 runs. Really, really pleased with it. My daily boot is an Atomic Redster CS... soo yeah, pretty narrow but I've done a lot of work on it. The MV fits really well, especially for more freeride/jumps. Not as wide as an MV from Tec/Nordica and not as wide as a Recon from K2. It's been a year or two since I've tried on a Mindbender, so I honestly can't compare right now.
Super stoked on it. Will write up a better review later in the week when work lets up. But fit out of the box was really good for an MV! Heel lock was way better. No need to add a wrap behind like in other boots I've used. Liner was really nice, and I like that they decided to put the same liner in the 110 and 130. Stoked to spend more time on it... It just skis and feels way better than my Dalbello Il Moros I had previous as a rec boot. Seriously, the fit on the AR is much better than a Cabrio from Dalbello.
AR110 @$549 is super obtainable and I'd pick this any day over an Il Moro or Revolve Pro. F*ck yeah.
I know it's not the same liner, but having an option at $399 is going to be such a sick option for groms and newbies trying to get legit set ups on a budget. More people on more legit gear is always a good thing.
Can't wait to spend some more days on it.
Like @onenerdykid said early on, if you're interested in it or critiquing it hard without trying it on...listen to that Blister Podcast.
That's much closer to reality and why it's not nearly as big of a deal as you are making it out to be.
It's not dangerous. It doesn't cause skier's tips to cross. It doesn't add smear into the turn. You make these claims but have zero data backing up your claims- you have ideas that kinda sound plausible but they don't track in the real world. Your claims are simply not confirmed by the actual data we actually have: millions of skiers liking their boots, who are not complaining that the boot is dangerous, who are not complaining about the mysterious reason why their tips keep crossing, who are not complaining about the flex being brutal. There is no data to support your claims, just semi-plausible sounding statements that are not confirmed by those who are skiing the boots.
you are malingering the photo. anyone can see the projection of the heel pocket is outwards. and feel it while skiing. drive your heel back in prime/armada and you will feel it realign your heel outwards.
i'll explain it again since my previous posts didn't communicate... The turn starts under edged because of the abduction, and then because the medial wall is tight to the navicular it blocks pronation which creates a very direct, strong, connected response to the ski right in the middle of the turn. that secondary response in the middle of the turns masks that it was ever under edged to start with, gives you the illusion your turn is good. The result is that your outside ski has too much angle before the next turn and you compensate for that in all the remaining turns.
the remedy won't have this same last alignment, which speaks for itself.
nothing about my posts are mysterious, they are so well explained that even some random here linked it to bode miller comments.
scratchskier321you are malingering the photo. anyone can see the projection of the heel pocket is outwards. and feel it while skiing. drive your heel back in prime/armada and you will feel it realign your heel outwards.
i'll explain it again since my previous posts didn't communicate... The turn starts under edged because of the abduction, and then because the medial wall is tight to the navicular it blocks pronation which creates a very direct, strong, connected response to the ski right in the middle of the turn. that secondary response in the middle of the turns masks that it was ever under edged to start with, gives you the illusion your turn is good. The result is that your outside ski has too much angle before the next turn and you compensate for that in all the remaining turns.
the remedy won't have this same last alignment, which speaks for itself.
nothing about my posts are mysterious, they are so well explained that even some random here linked it to bode miller comments.
To be fair, I think I heard @onenerdykid address this alignment topic and Bode's take in a subsequent Gear:30 deep dive into ski boots. I think I recall him saying Bode's take was interesting and a way to approach boot fit, but not the only one. Furthermore, his point about consumer experience feedback is valid, if not the whole damn foundation of manufacturing.
If we could get some 3d animation of skeletal anatomy in a boot and on skis through the turn, I think this would be even easier to understand. Not sure if any computer whiz kids have that capacity. I myself always wondered if being a little pigeon-toed or duck footed in your boots would affect performance, and naturally, a boot fitter could stretch a small shell in one direction or another to create that alignment, if your instep height works in the shell that is. It gets complicated when this alignment angle integrates with cuff alignment, canting, etc. Especially when fitting an individual that has a totally unnatural posture or movement pattern. Plenty of consumers are Un-athletic-as-fuck, and plenty of athletes have bizarre compensation patterns for poor posture. Variance from individual to individual notwithstanding, there is a legitimate universal movement pattern on the ski that should be pursued in the design of equipment, which again, to be fair, is what manufactures are always already doing.
The whole physiological dynamic from foot, to ankle, to hip, is critical to visualize. Here are some other resources for you both:
1) Goata Movement - you might think it's a little kooky, but IMO the rotational dynamics of the leg and ankle check out. Their YouTube channel has some stuff worth looking at for sure.
2) Art of Move - a podcast that goes deep in biomechanics, one of the dudes is a skier, not sure if they talk boots though. They address Goata, but go beyond it into spinal engine theory, and a few other functional perspectives.
scratchskier321you are malingering the photo. anyone can see the projection of the heel pocket is outwards. and feel it while skiing. drive your heel back in prime/armada and you will feel it realign your heel outwards.
i'll explain it again since my previous posts didn't communicate... The turn starts under edged because of the abduction, and then because the medial wall is tight to the navicular it blocks pronation which creates a very direct, strong, connected response to the ski right in the middle of the turn. that secondary response in the middle of the turns masks that it was ever under edged to start with, gives you the illusion your turn is good. The result is that your outside ski has too much angle before the next turn and you compensate for that in all the remaining turns.
the remedy won't have this same last alignment, which speaks for itself.
nothing about my posts are mysterious, they are so well explained that even some random here linked it to bode miller comments.
The lines are straight, which don't exist anyway, but mine give a more accurate indication of where things are pointing, especially on the Dalbello.
The Remedy is directly based on our new Redster boot. Redster boots are straight because our race technicians want a neutral starting point and will make athlete's boots either straight, abducted or adducted as needed.
This is where Bode is at these days... I'll let him have it:
onenerdykidThe lines are straight, which don't exist anyway, but mine give a more accurate indication of where things are pointing, especially on the Dalbello.
The Remedy is directly based on our new Redster boot. Redster boots are straight because our race technicians want a neutral starting point and will make athlete's boots either straight, abducted or adducted as needed.
This is where Bode is at these days... I'll let him have it:
Your best explanation for why the last is abducted is because other brands do it too. If an abducted last is good, why are you malingering the lines in the photo to make it appear straight? The photo speaks for itself, even w/o the lines the projection of the heel pocket is outwards. Anyone can see the heel pocket curvature in relation to the spine bolts. My logic is well explained in every post, which you have yet to address on merit.
Posting pictures of bode in old shells does not debunk his podcast logic regarding outward flexing boots increasing edge angle beyond what your knee is doing, the design comes from initiating turn with skis with no sidecut, him describing how true the initial response of his ski is with straighter last and hinge. All of my posts are in more detail than what he described and every time you reply to one, its an ad hominen, red herring, or strawman argument.
I own 2 pair of primes, AR one, and like 12 armada skis. I'm not even bias LOL, armada is my favorite brand.
dubageTo be fair, I think I heard @onenerdykid address this alignment topic and Bode's take in a subsequent Gear:30 deep dive into ski boots. I think I recall him saying Bode's take was interesting and a way to approach boot fit, but not the only one. Furthermore, his point about consumer experience feedback is valid, if not the whole damn foundation of manufacturing.
If we could get some 3d animation of skeletal anatomy in a boot and on skis through the turn, I think this would be even easier to understand. Not sure if any computer whiz kids have that capacity. I myself always wondered if being a little pigeon-toed or duck footed in your boots would affect performance, and naturally, a boot fitter could stretch a small shell in one direction or another to create that alignment, if your instep height works in the shell that is. It gets complicated when this alignment angle integrates with cuff alignment, canting, etc. Especially when fitting an individual that has a totally unnatural posture or movement pattern. Plenty of consumers are Un-athletic-as-fuck, and plenty of athletes have bizarre compensation patterns for poor posture. Variance from individual to individual notwithstanding, there is a legitimate universal movement pattern on the ski that should be pursued in the design of equipment, which again, to be fair, is what manufactures are always already doing.
The whole physiological dynamic from foot, to ankle, to hip, is critical to visualize. Here are some other resources for you both:
1) Goata Movement - you might think it's a little kooky, but IMO the rotational dynamics of the leg and ankle check out. Their YouTube channel has some stuff worth looking at for sure.
2) Art of Move - a podcast that goes deep in biomechanics, one of the dudes is a skier, not sure if they talk boots though. They address Goata, but go beyond it into spinal engine theory, and a few other functional perspectives.
my main point is that abducted lasts & outwards hinge cuff boots are pointless in modern sidecut skis, they don't make sense in nuetral or valgus stance people, it applies too much inwards input to the ski, etc etc
So you can make the point abducted last and more torque from ski boot can be needed racing 26m radius plus or tight slalom turns... but that's not what Amer employee is saying, he's saying I'm wrong because I have no data and I don't ski the boot. Which neither are true because I have 2 primes, AR one, used to have multiple ultras and an XTD prime. He uses to word "data" to dismiss the logical arguments I make about alignment. Even if I introduced strain gauge sensor data to this post, he would dismiss it.
Amer employee says all the people we pay or give product to for free, love it. That is his main argument against mine.
