NNNBC Touring Boot Question

[rrbryan]

I am currently running a pair of Fischer OTX-5s on a pair of Rossi BC 65 scaled skis. Most of my skiing is off track on moderate rolling terrain in Eastern hills and woodlands. I like to drop in a few tele turns when conditions allow, but that is mainly some frosting on the cake. I've found that the OTX-5ts are very soft all around, mushy inside, and are marginal for the type of skiing that I do, and they are next to useless for the occasional tele turn unless conditions are ideal. skis.

After reading several of the threads here I I'm focusing on the Alfa Kikut Perform GTX or perhaps the FIscher BCX 5, or BC-X 6. I'm currently ruing out the Alpina Alaska as it appears to be more boot than I need. Also, I have found Alpinas a bit narrow for me. I know the FIscher lasts on the OTX-5s are a good fit for me, so I'm assuming the BCX-5 or 6 would be the same, and from what I have read the wider toe box on the Alfa's should be to my liking too. Any thoughts out there on the options I am looking at?

[lilcliffy]

Hello and welcome to the site!

My clan has a couple of the Fischer Offtrack boots- both 3 and 5- that were bought on clearance for young growing feet. They are warm soft cushy XC touring boots- really just a more insulated version of a standard Classic touring boot.

You are on the right track- what you are looking for is a true backcountry Nordic touring boot. I thnk of it as the difference between a trail shoe (i.e. OTX 3/5) versus a backpacking boot. What you want is a boot that is designed for hiking in rugged terrain.

BTW- I don't think that the Alaska is too much for what you are doing.

The Kikut is on the light-duty end of this spectrum- I think of it as akin to a "day-hiking" boot- as compared to the Alaska which has the support of a backpacking boot. I own a Kikut and a Guard Advance- the Guard Advance has both a more supportive sole and much more ankle support than the Kikut. Don't get me wrong here- the Kikut is a wonderful BC-XC boot!

The Fischer BCX5 is more supportive than the Kikut- similar to the Alaska.

The Fischer BCX6 theoretically offers the most support of NNNBC boots in this group...I have an older model that is akin to my Svartisen BC in terms of ankle support. BUT- Fischer keeps endlessly redesigning this boot and at least two of the more recent BCX6 models have such poor lacing systems that they are not very supportive. I have no knowledge of the design and support of the current BCX6. Regardless- the design-intent of the BCX6 is for it to be more supportive than a boot like the Alaska.

None of these boots are "too much" for the skiing you are doing IMO- they are all designed for backcountry striding. Although I regularly seek out steeper terrain than you describe- I personally much prefer the more supportive boots in this BC-XC spectrum- even when I am backcountry skiing on gentle terrain.

It boils down to personal preferences. I personally prefer the sole flex, power transfer and ankle support of my heavy-duty backpacking boots for even light-duty walks in the woods.

All of the boots you list are going to offer more support than the OTX boot.
Gareth

[Tom M]

I haven't skied all the boots you are considering, but I have owned the Fischer OTX 5, the Rossignol BC X-6, and I'm currently skiing the Alfa Skarvet GTX. The Skarvet GTX is my favorite of the bunch.

[jyw5]

That video has me convinced. I'm going to get stiffer boots in a week or two...definitely getting Alfa boots. Costs more but way better.

I have 2 pairs of Fischer OTX5...good fit, skis terribly downhill on anything other than perfect snow, and not durable. I'm about to put a hole in both boots at the widest part of the forefoot. These 2 pairs were used for less than 2 seasons each (4 months, 2 days/wk).

I also have 2 pairs of Alfa Quest Cores that I got for a deep discount. They are slightly better as far as support but much higher quality. Comfort out of the box is noticeably less as break in is required. They look great. I put wool liners in the boots which enhances the fit and makes them more comfortable. I expect these boots to last for many seasons.

I may continue to use my OTX5s for wet warm crappy conditions and flat terrain.

No blisters from any of the boots.

[rrbryan]

Thanks all, good insights.

[CwmRaider]

My better half spent some years on the cheapest Alfa's from 5 years ago, they were very difficult to waterproof and provided very little support on the downhills. She upgraded to Crispi Stetind which are much, much better.
The higher end Alfa boots seem good though.

[rrbryan]

I ended up buying the FIscher BCX5. They were available at a local retailer, fit me well, and felt like they would be stiff enough for my needs. After a few days of use I can report they are a great boot for my needs, which is 99% backcountry skiing, mostly in eastern woodlands, with some moderate tele turns along the way when snow and site conditions permit. They are full grain leather and quite stiff but very comfortable - no heel lift, no blisters. I would not hesitate to take them on a backcountry trip like the Chic Chocs in Quebec.

On a fit note, I usually take an EU size 43, but the 42 fit me perfectly. They a fairly wide up front, which I prefer,

I will echo comments from others here that the OTX5 is a very soft boot. They were my last pair, and despite being branded as "Off Track" IMO they are really a boot for light off track use only, and are better on packed trails. Add to that the liner on one was collapsing after only a few years of moderate use, and cracks were appearing where the upper meets the sole.