2 boots: a compare and contrast

Real reviews by real skiers. What a concept! Add your own today. Reviews only please, questions can be posted as replies but new threads looking for opinions should be posted to the main Telemark Talk Forum.
Post Reply
User avatar
corlay
Posts: 150
Joined: Wed Nov 17, 2021 6:13 pm
Location: central NY
Ski style: Woodland XC-BC tours
Favorite Skis: Asnes Gamme 54, Fischer Transnordic 66, Fischer Traverse 78; Madshus Birke Beiner, Peltonen METSA
Favorite boots: Crispi Norland Hook BC, Fischer BC Grand Tour

2 boots: a compare and contrast

Post by corlay » Sun Aug 21, 2022 12:53 pm

Hello all.

Just bought a second pair of boots, and thought I would compare/contrast them for others considering a new boot purchase.

the enteries:
Fischer BCX GT
Crispi Norland Hok
A03FA9B1-37A9-44E8-8AF9-DA09C3B79342.jpeg
I like both of these boots pretty well - for different reasons.

Cost
Both of these boots are similarly priced right around the $150-$160(USD) mark. (not MSRP, but the deals that are available out there)

Dimensions
The fisher has about a 1” taller cuff at the ankle than the crispi. and also is a bit roomier inside for the foot. Both are spot-on true to size for length.Width-wise they both seem about the same, but the fisher is roomier in height inside.

Stiffness/Flex
The Crispi is the lighter and more flexible of the two - above the sole. Partially due to the lower ankle cuff height, and partially to a bit less “stout” construction overall. However, the Crispi sole feels a bit stiffer than the Fischer - especially near the flex-point towards the front just behind the toes.
(this may change after I get a full season of use on the crispis?)

Insulation/Warmth
The fisher is much more padded/insulated than the crispi. Therefore is warmer. The more spartan insulation of the crispi makes it feel a LOT lighter/more nimble than the fischer

Comfort
The crispi is more comfortable. It just seems to fit my feet/ankle a bit better, This is partially due to the crispi having just a bit better tongue and lacing/eyelet design. not to say the fisher is bad, but in comparing the two, the crispi wins.

Conclusions
I think this new (to me) crispi boot will become my boot of choice for when Im not skiing too many steeps, and just want to cover lots of open, rolling terrain for kick-and-glide speed. I think it will shine with a Gamme/Transnordic (E99) type ski and uses.

for deeper snow/wider or longer skiis, the stoutness of the fisher seem appropriate. Not as nimble feeling as the crispi, but perhaps better for trail-breaking in deep snow and turning skiis picking lines through the woods due to its increased ankle support.

Originally, I was thinking Id get these crispi boots to take the place of the fischers - but that isnt the case. Both will get used this upcoming season, for slightly different scenarios.

Take care All, and enjoy the remainder of summer, while musing of winter snows to come…

User avatar
lilcliffy
Posts: 4156
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2015 6:20 pm
Location: Stanley, New Brunswick, Canada
Ski style: backcountry Nordic ski touring
Favorite Skis: Asnes Ingstad, Combat Nato, Amundsen, Rabb 68; Altai Kom
Favorite boots: Alpina Alaska BC; Lundhags Expedition; Alfa Skaget XP; Scarpa T4
Occupation: Forestry Professional
Instructor at Maritime College of Forest Technology
Husband, father, farmer and logger

Re: 2 boots: a compare and contrast

Post by lilcliffy » Fri Sep 02, 2022 7:09 pm

Thank you for taking the time to write up this excellent comparison review- much appreciated!
Cross-country AND down-hill skiing in the backcountry.
Unashamed to be a "cross-country type" and love skiing down-hill.



Post Reply