Yesterday I found a pair of Lupo Air 130s and spent the better part of an hour in the shop with them on my feet. I can't find much information about these boots, so I thought I would share some information here.
TL;DR - The walk-mode "zero resistance" ankle freedom on the Lupo Air is the best I've seen in a SHIFT-compatible boot. However, for me, I'm not sure the tradeoffs are worth it compared to more traditional downhill inspired boots (HAWX Ultra XTD, Zero G Tour), which only weigh ~100g (8%) more. I'll update when I make a decision.
------------
What am I looking for?
I'm in the market for a SHIFT and tech-splitboard compatible boot for foot powered cardio ascents. Most of my use will be in Lake Tahoe California, where we have pretty heavy snow and variable conditions. It would be amazing if the boot was comfortable enough for a few days of resort riding, so I could use it as a 50/50 travel boot, but it's not a must.
I have 300+ days of snowboarding over 20 years, ~50 days of skiing mostly in the last 7 years, and ~5 full days of XC. I love boarding in fresh snow, but snowboarding-prohibited mountains, family-days, kids, and ice (sierra cement) have brought me increased appreciation for alpine skiing... A few years back I carried my 5 y/o son, wearing his skis, down a blue groomer too steep for him, on my snowboard.. and after that I promptly bought skis, and my board has been on a shelf since.
I need SHIFT compatibility, because alpine quality lateral tow-release is a must for me. A casual ski fall is closer to ligament injury than my worst snowboarding fall. I actually find snowboarding falls fun... skiing falls, not so much. Being 45 y/o, I already know 6 friends who have had surgery for ski-related injuries even using high-quality alpine release bindings. Plus, 20+ years of snowboarding has made me a "try it and see what happens" kind of rider, so I ski relatively low DIN for my weight, and I'd rather pre-release and tumble than have a ski tear a joint lose. I'm watching the Fritschi Tecton innovation, but the SHIFT toe release seems more forgiving and reliable, and that's for me.
What did I think of the Lupo Air?
The most remarkable thing about the Lupo Air isn't just having great range of motion in a boot that still has stiff downhill support, it's how freely the ankle moves in "walk mode". (latch up and top-ratchet loose) This isn't like downhill derived boots, where there is still notable resistance through the range of motion as one forces the cuff to move and bend. With the Lupo Air rear-cuff unlocked and the top ratchet loose, there is nearly zero resistance in either direction. It's like wearing a hard low-cut shoe. In fact, I would tightly lace-up the liner for more "basketball shoe" style ankle support.
I see people asking about the walk-latch being a one-way stop. The rear cuff has zero forward motion whether locked or unlocked, so the latch only has to impede rearward motion. Of course this means to get any forward motion, one has to open the top-ratchet, leaving that front partial cuff open -- as is typical of many touring boots.
I like that the soles are replaceable, because the rest of the boot will last much longer than the rubber. While I don't think of the Lupo Air as 50/50, there are a few potentially 50/50 capable boots with non-replaceable rubber soles that boggle the mind. If one actually uses them in a resort, cement and metal grates are going to chew up that rubber pretty quickly.
I also identified some tradeoffs compared to more traditional downhill inspired touring boots.
(1) When leaning forward, I could feel a pretty distinct pressure point at the bottom-outside of that top-ratchet wrap-thing that serves as the forward cuff. It wasn't painful, but it was certainly noticeable. For some reason I felt this much more on my right foot. That forward-cuff does have an alternate mount angle, so maybe that would alleviate it somewhat. However. my takeaway was to disbelieve one Dalbello markarter who suggested he would "use these boots for everything". I'm pretty skeptical of these as 50/50 boots, as I think resort skiing with a forward stance on that forward-cuff for too long would become quite irritating. That said, it wasn't painful or biting, so I doubt it would bother me for backcountry use or for neutral stance riding.
(2) I couldn't make the bottom buckle tight enough to make the Lupo Air feel "tight and snugged" like I can with pretty much any other boot, and this was in a size 27.5 boot my toes were gently touching the front of. (there is no way I could size down.) This is partially a liner/fit issue, as the stock (unmolded) liner is very thin and low volume. However, it's also caused because having only one foot buckle means there is no way to use two buckles to "ratchet" each other tighter. With the Lupo Air, I would make the bottom ratchet as short as I could with the buckle in the open position (not working too hard, as this might need to be done with gloves on and in the snow), then close the buckle, and that's all the tightness I could get. For the cuff ratchet this was more than sufficient, but for the bottom buckle, not so much. If I was on the Lupo Air design team, I would have made the bottom-buckle cinch-clasp longer, to provide more tightening distance from open to closed. Cooking the liner into higher volume (or using a higher volume liner or double socks) would probably fix this.
(3) The Lupo Air 2-buckle system has no redundancy. The use of plastic ratchet straps doesn't bother me, as I've used them extensively in snowboarding, and I've driven equipment into the ground without ever having one fail. However, buckles and ratchets and rivets do fail, and with only two buckles, if one fails at speed, I think it would cause a crash and/or injury, and even if it didn't, it would be impossible to ski on. Compare that to 3/4 buckle+strap designs, where one can generally lose any one fastener without catastrophe.
Those are my observations and conclusions from an hour of shop time. Not the same as actually riding on them, but I can't find any rider reviews of this boot, so I thought I would share what I could.
No comments:
Post a Comment