All purpose backcountry/bushwack ski

[Cannatonic]

I'm always surprised that Crispi Antarctic and Sydoplen are left out of these conversations - stiffer and more supportive than Alaska or BC1600 for sure. These two have the thicker, welted 75mm Vibram "real" telemark sole on them. The upper may not be as firm as the Svartsen, but the sole will have better torsional stiffness. Not to mention durability and the ability to be resoled for $75.

They're also cheap right now if you can find your size at Telemark Pyrenees (less than $200 shipped). I've been using a pair of Antarctic from them all winter. IMO no other boot in this range comes close. The leather and build quality is excellent, it conforms to your foot and your foot becomes melded to the power of the thick sole. Best for hiking and kicking steps into the snow too.

that said, I wouldn't try any of these boots w/ BC125, just too hard to roll those fatties on edge, probably better to go plastic.

[lilcliffy]

Cannatonic-

Totally agree with your comments regarding traditional-welted construction: durability, repair-ability, and performance.

The new-wave of 75mm-3pin light backcountry Nordic boots not only do not offer the performance strength of the boots you mention- there are also many disturbing reports regarding their durability.

What is perhaps even stranger is the lack of sole-stability and torsional-stiffness in these new 75mm-3pin boots. In recent tests the NNNBC versions all scored higher in stability tests than their 75mm counterparts (e.g. Svartisen NNNBC vs. 75mm; Alaska NNNBC vs 75mm).

From my own personal experience- I find that the Alaska NNNBC sole has strong torsional stiffness. The Alaska is soft and flexible above the ankle, in order to offer classic kick and glide performance from the instep through the full extension of the kick.

Personally, I would put these boots you mention (e.g. Antarctic, Sydolpen) in a different class than boots like the Alaska, and the Svartisen. To me, boots like the Antarctic/Sydolpen are dedicated telemark boots (i.e. mountainous terrain)- boots like the Alaska/Svaritsen are backcountry touring boots (i.e. gentle to moderate terrain).

Totally agree- for anyone skiing on terrain with a lot of vertical, and steep slopes- a dedicated telemark boot has huge advantages.

As the Norwegian UTE magazine states- when it comes to light Nordic backcountry equipment- "boot means more than binding".

[lilcliffy]

Again- just re-read this UTE test/review of light BC Nordic boots:
http://www.utemagasinet.no/Utstyr/Sko-deg

The Sydolpen tied the Stetind in stability!? (both scored "5") Very interesting...challenges my traditional assumptions...the Stetind is clearly designed primarily for K&G touring performance (similar to the Alaska).

The Svartisen NNNBC scored higher than the Sydolpen in stability!?

BUT- the Sydolpen outperformed the Svartisen 75mm in both stability and comfort...

Wish they had included the Alpina Alaska in this test.

[Cannatonic]

that's pretty funny, I read that Ute test also! They like Andrew Expedition above all others. The Alico Double from STP is similar, running $300 these days, wonderful quality and durability (if it fits you). These are heavy boots though. IMO all the Crispi boots are light enough to be used for general XC touring, although I haven't tried the Svartisen.

I like the Alaska but I needed the extra width of the Antarctic. The stiffer ankle really boosted my ability to make turns going downhill too. I had BC1600 and really liked those for NNNBC too.