Alfa vs Alfa

[randoskier]

My wife loves the Alfa Skaget, says it is super comfortable, warm enough, and supportive downhill- she previously had the Svartinsen in 75mm and had a lot of blister problems (she had a Lisfranc fracture a few years ago so has a special foot).

I thought they did not make an NNN BC version of this boot, but on closer examination the Alfa Outback APS 2 BC looks an awful lot like it (?).

Reading the Norwegian forum a lot of people like the Outback 2. It apparently fixed the heel-blister problem of the original. In fact heel blisters from Alfa are quite notorious on that site, one Outback 2 user says she hopes they use this solution in all Alfa boots.

[Theme]

My wife loves the Alfa Skaget, says it is super comfortable, warm enough, and supportive downhill- she previously had the Svartinsen in 75mm and had a lot of blister problems (she had a Lisfranc fracture a few years ago so has a special foot).

I thought they did not make an NNN BC version of this boot, but on closer examination the Alfa Outback APS 2 BC looks an awful lot like it (?).

Reading the Norwegian forum a lot of people like the Outback 2. It apparently fixed the heel-blister problem of the original. In fact heel blisters from Alfa are quite notorious on that site, one Outback 2 user says she hopes they use this solution in all Alfa boots.

Outback 2.0 is the best on par with Skaget in terms of heel shape. Zero blisters ever on it. All other boots have some odd shape in the heel that just does not work for me and many others I know. Some folks have heat molded the back plastic cup to fit their heel successfully though

Outback is nothing like the Skaget in terms of fit other than the heel, and shaft height. Outback is wider, warmer and less supportive, will not be laced as tight.

Unfortunately seems like the XP version received no updates. Would have loved it to be based on the fit of Skaget instead, and stiffer.


Thanks @Capercaillie for the insight on Nordland boots. Would you say, that the fit of sizes is similar? You mentioned it is less voluminous but how about the length/shape? Wider/narrower?

[randoskier]

@Stephen Thanks for that input. What immediately came to mind with the Lundhags Guide was- if I was trying to put this boot on my foot after waking up in a frozen tent a stream of Bronx-worthy obscenities would echo into the morning. Just too hard to enter. I am interested to try their higher volume Expedition.

I am really thinking of flying up to Helsinki (about 150 EUR RT) and hitting Varuste who have a shop 22 minutes from the airport, spend the weekend in Helsinki (a very nice city 20 minutes the other way from the shop), have dinner with Finnish friends, and leave with boots in hand...err..on foot.

I want to try on the Alfa Guard and Alfa Outback BC APS 2, the Lundhags Expediton BC , and possibly a size 46 (I have 45s) Alpina Alaska. I love the Alaska except for that toe box (and the raised creases it developed inside on top of the toe-box, made an old post on that phenomena).

Probably worth the trip because it adds up sending all these boots back and forth, plus I get to try several models, and sizes side by side. But for this to work they need to have stock in my size! I hope they do when get there in January. I will also try to locate other shops in the Helsinki area for a plan B. If Aventure Nordique carried Lundhags I would just drive out there (I love the Vercors!), sadly they do not.

Thanks to everyone for their advice and opinions, it is really helpful.

[randoskier]

]

Outback 2.0 is the best on par with Skaget in terms of heel shape. Zero blisters ever on it. All other boots have some odd shape in the heel that just does not work for me and many others I know. Some folks have heat molded the back plastic cup to fit their heel successfully though

Outback is nothing like the Skaget in terms of fit other than the heel, and shaft height. Outback is wider, warmer and less supportive, will not be laced as tight.

Unfortunately seems like the XP version received no updates. Would have loved it to be based on the fit of Skaget instead, and stiffer.


Thanks @Capercaillie for the insight on Nordland boots. Would you say, that the fit of sizes is similar? You mentioned it is less voluminous but how about the length/shape? Wider/narrower?
[/quote]

Hej Theme,

If that is the case with fit, it is odd that Alfa states in their description of each boot on their website:

Skaget Perform: Fit: Wide

Outback APS 2 GTX: Fit: Regular

https://www.alfaoutdoor.com/products/ou ... tx-m-black
https://www.alfaoutdoor.com/products/sk ... rm-m-black

Of course boot-makers are not the best communicators...

Theme in the outback what size are you wearing? What is your normal hiking boot or shoe size?

[Theme]

@randoskier why I feel Outback may be wider is possibly due to limited range to tighten the boot. You can't get the forefoot very tight on Outback. Skaget I can get tight on my narrow (but wide toes) foot.

I wear a 41 EU everyday, for my hiking trail runners I use sz 42 Altras. In the Outback I use a 41. Fits liner, VBL and thick wool sock. Some of my friends prefer up one or even two sizes for warmth but you lose a lot of control then. I have used 42 on Alpina XP boots but probably go down one next time to 41 for better control in thinner socks, would need 43 to fit same socks in as I can fit in 41 Outback. Skaget I would use 41 as well. Same with Crispi Stetind and Alfa guard if it fit me. For some reference.

[corlay]

another vote for the Crispi Norland.
great boot, and also reasonably-priced, especially compared to an Alfa boot.

Note: Ive never used anything but the Fischer BC Grand Tour and the Crispi Norland - so cant comment on comparisons to the Alfa or Alpina boots.

[lilcliffy]

Nothing compares to being able to try on boots in the shop- multiple sizes and various styles/lasts.

On the topic of trying a larger Alaska BC-
We have a number of people in our ski clan that have this boot (8 I think at last count)-
those with wide and/or large-volume feet have all had to size-up and have gotten an excellent fit-
those with wide, but low-volume feet have also had to size-up, but have also had to add a thicker insole to make up the extra volume.
As I have a medium-width, small-volume foot- I do not need to size-up- the Alaska BC 42EU gives me a perfect performance fit (but I can't put a large-volume winter warmer insole in them).
The last, lacing system and the heel-ankle-achilles contouring, padding and flexible materials make the Alaska BC a very versatile boot. Too tight? Size-up, and get a thick insole if you have a small-volume foot.
(Note that I am NOT speaking of the Cinderella slipper Alaska XP- completely different design- even the 43EU in this boot is murder on my metatarsus.)

BTW- back to your Lundhags Guide- it fits the same profile as the Alaska BC-
I woud definitely try a larger size before you give up on it.
Alternatively- the Expedition may be a better fit overall.

[randoskier]

Nothing compares to being able to try on boots in the shop- multiple sizes and various styles/lasts.

On the topic of trying a larger Alaska BC-
We have a number of people in our ski clan that have this boot (8 I think at last count)-
those with wide and/or large-volume feet have all had to size-up and have gotten an excellent fit-
those with wide, but low-volume feet have also had to size-up, but have also had to add a thicker insole to make up the extra volume.

BTW- back to your Lundhags Guide- it fits the same profile as the Alaska BC-
I would definitely try a larger size before you give up on it.
Alternatively- the Expedition may be a better fit overall.

Thanks for that Gareth. I could get my foot in my Alaksa size 45 very easily, the Guide not.

I am leaning towards the Alfa Outback at the moment. For me the attached gaiter is a plus. I skied the last several years with the Yeti Gaiters glued onto my Alaska's. I have skied as late as 16 May (on the Vindalfjall in Sweden) with the Yetis on my boots and the gaiters never felt the least bit uncomfortable...that was an amazing winter- it was still snowing when I flew out of tiny Hemavan-Tarnaby Airport on 17 May. It was just about 24-hour sun by that date (65°N).

I digress...the Outback sounds like a comfortable long distance touring boot, with out-of-the-box comfort. I might actually mail order a pair at size 45 and take a chance, while they are in stock, possibly avoiding the Finland trip. I don't know why they are so expensive (426 EUR).

If I make it up there I will try the Alpina hack but my street shoe is 44 (10.5 US) and I am already sized up to 45 with the Alaska which fits me perfectly with the exception of the infamous toe-box. Plus try on the Lundhags Expedition.

[randoskier]

Based on the comments by SkijoringGrace I think I can rule out the Lundhags Expediton as a long-range touring boot. She said it rubs the shins the wrong way due to its excessive height, to the point of irritation and chafing. That was my first question t when I saw these boots, she confirmed it. The height also adds useless weight to the boot for my purposes. Too bad they did not make the Guide a higher volume boot like the Expe.

I am quite sure that Lundhags designed the Expedition for hunters and ice fisherman, hence the extended height and thicker insulation. That would make sense for the Scandi market. Probably the same reason it has a roomier fit than the Guide- for big hunting socks.

Again I wish Alfa made a BC version of the Skaget. I think I am just going to bite the bullet and order the Alfa Outback APS 2 BC. Sounds like the best compromise for me.

At the end of the day all boots are a compromise.

[Capercaillie]

Thanks @Capercaillie for the insight on Nordland boots. Would you say, that the fit of sizes is similar? You mentioned it is less voluminous but how about the length/shape? Wider/narrower?

Length in 43 is the same (I wish both Crispi and Alfa made them in 42.5). The Crispi Nordland is much wider than Alpina Montana, a little narrower than Alfa Guard. I have very wide feet and had to use shoe stretchers to widen out the Nordlands a little bit. The Guard is good because it does not just have a wide toe box, but also widens out mid-foot.