Tongue Stiffness (and Forward Flex)
The Vulcan tongue is quite stiff, stiffer than a Full Tilt #10 tongue. (I actually have a set of Full Tilt #10 tongues that have been worked by a Dremel to fit into a Vulcan or TLT boot. In their slightly-pared-down form, the Full Tilt tongues are slightly stiffer – and much heavier – than the original Dynafit tongues, but the difference is minimal. I only used the Full-Tilt tongues a few times before returning to the stock Vulcan tongues that are easier to use, lighter, and ski just as well.)
I also have some TLT tongues that were carbon fiber reinforced/laminated using a vacuum bag setup which fall significantly short of the stock Vulcan tongue in terms of forward flex. (As an aside, the Vulcan tongue can be easily modified to fit into a TLT6 which provides a markedly stiffer forward flex for the TLT6.)
Fit
As with almost every boot I’ve used in the past decade, I added an Intuition Powerwrap Plug (now called “LV”) liner to my Vulcans. The stock liner created a lot of instep pain / pressure for me, and the Powerwrap is both stiffer and warmer than the stock liner. It also creates a slightly more precise fit for me.
That said, the heel pocket of the Vulcan is still probably the best one I have found for my foot. This fit may be aided by the Vulcan’s instep strap, but even in walk mode, I get essentially zero heel lift. When I pull them on, I almost feel like I’m slipping into a suction cup for my heel.
I had a chat with Leith Rhodes last year, a very experienced bootfitter at Gnomes Alpine Sports outside of Christchurch, NZ, during which she agreed with my assumption that the Vulcan has one of the better heel pockets out there of any ski boot—not just AT boots.
The rest of the boot is pretty high volume. I have not had to do any 6th toe / fifth metatarsal work on these, which is unusual for me. If you do need such work, I would speculate that a toe punch on these boots should be relatively easy, although your bootfitter will have to be careful not to interfere with the forward part of the boot where the tongue interfaces.
I have not measured the ankle width, but it seems to be on par with the alpine boots I’ve used recently, including the Tecnica Cochise Pro 130 and the Salomon X Max 130.
Of note, I ski a size 27.5 Vulcan and typically find myself skiing the 27 / 27.5 shell in almost any alpine or AT boot. The Vulcan is the best fitting boot I own for my foot. Interestingly, I have had to upsize to a size 28 in both the TLT 5 and the TLT 6, but not the Vulcan.
Uphill Performance
With the tongues removed, the Vulcans tour uphill almost as well as the TLT 5 and 6, which I find to be the best uphill touring boots I’ve ever used. The only difference is the rather significant increase in weight over the TLT 5 and 6.
I love the short, rockered soles of the Dynafit boots. They’re nice for walking and climbing without skis on, but also place the pins of the bindings at least a few millimeters closer to my foot than longer-soled AT boots, which creates a more comfortable and natural stride.
As I’ve written in my past reviews of AT boots, I don’t have any need for a large range of rearward motion while skinning. I tend to take shorter strides, and typically prefer a mellower angle skin track when the terrain allows. Rare bouts of walking downhill while wearing ski boots are the only times when a large amount of rearward motion seems useful.
All that said, the Vulcan has gobs of rearward motion, and I doubt anyone could find issue with it. The Powerwrap liners I use do decrease the reward motion some, but it’s never been an issue for me.
NEXT: Downhill Performance, Flex, Etc.
I own a pair of Dynafit Mercuries that I use for 80 percent of my ski touring and on hill days. I have a few observations to share.
Regarding:
“The only downside is that it’s not possible to have the cuff buckled and be in walk mode, or to be in ski mode with the cuff unbuckled. This is rarely an issue for me, although occasionally it’s nice to have these options when touring out of an area with a lot of rolling terrain (where you have to skin / ski downhill)”
This was also an initial issue for me until I discovered the boots skied perfectly fine for these scenarios by leaving the power strap engaged and unbuckling the cuff lock/upper buckle. (“…cuff buckled and be in walk mode”…) In fact, I kinda like the old school extra soft flex fore and aft for perfect powder low angle meadowskipping runs to rekindle nostalgic ‘good old days’ memories of skiing in leather boots.
“…to be in ski mode with the cuff unbuckled.” ; one can disengage the wire bail at the ladder, snap shut the cuff buckle while relying on a snug or loosened powerstrap for varying degrees of forward support.
As for the upper cuff forward flex bump stops: In an effort to modify the boots to exhibit less blocky flex, I did an experiment where I modified the bump stops to be bypassed by adding plastic wedges on either side to allow a smooth flex beyond their limitations. I skied a few runs in REALLY bad snow…deep rain soaked coastal cementometers. Without extra tongues inserted the boots basically collapsed while pressuring the tips and on terrain undulations. I had to ski centered/aft for the rest of the run in fear of breaking the boots. With tongues inserted, there was more support, but, the flex felt off…too much initial resistance followed by an ‘anti progressive’ softening feel while driving the shin deeper into the flex of the boot. It was clear that the bump stops were there for a reason; I stopped the experiment before catastrophic failure and have been skiing happily ever after with boots in stock form…mostly sans extra tongues. Yes the flex is a tad non linear but I have since adapted and it has proven to be a non issue.
An aspect of the boot’s performance that doesn’t appear to be widely discussed is their basic walk, hike, and steep snow climbing ability/agility. Can’t comment on ice climbing and crampon work…just snow. I do a lot of varied terrain and surface dry ground approaches, some very low class rock work while scrambling and frequent spring/summer steep snow, couloir uphills. This is where the rear range of motion shines its glory…lots of ankle mobility for sensitivity and balance after carefully adjusting instep and front buckles. For steep kick stepping and french techniquing steep snow of varying hardness, the boots just feel good. Frequently, snugging the power strap but leaving upper buckle in walk mode provides the correct balance. As angles change, simple adjustments of power strap are sufficient to micro tweak the upper cuff fit compression. And full lockdown mode provides bomber support for conditions requiring it.
The only part of the boot that is left wanting, in my opinion, is the durability of the outsole for dry land work…mine are completely trashed after 2 seasons of use, with particularly heinous wear at the toe. The problem has been rectified with a few layers of shoo goo that have been shaped to mimic the factory fresh form. I believe the Vulcans share similar rubber on the outsole, which is why I mention it.
I have the Mercury. Love the up hill performance but don’t like the down hill performance at all. Not even close to a traditional alpine boot. No progressive flex. I am in salomom race boots . Curious to see flex the Solomon mnt lab. The stance and flex don’t inspire confidence when bombing through junky snow.
@Simpson: re: Mercury flex: Personally, I found the boot was/is pretty sensitive to footbed ramp angle in how the flex profile subjectively ‘felt better’ for my personal physiology. This, combine with the forward position of the forward lean option and sometimes some added foam wedges for even more forward lean of the boot cuff seemed to be the best compromise for me. With flat stock footbeds, the sensation of not so progressive flex was more noticeable than with more rigid custom orthotics with higher heel and some simple layers of duct tape added to fine tune the perceived balance point. With a more neutral ramp the sensation of hitting a more abrubt end of flex resulted in a feeling of getting knocked back/backseat when skiing snow that was undulating and provided more tip of ski feedback; i.e. maching through junky, cut up coastal snow and bumpy terrain. With a more forward oriented ramp angle, this tendency was/is perhaps not eliminated but seemed to provide a more positive shin on boot tongue feel and tactile, precise and not AS abrupt end to the forward flex of the boot. Not perfect, but improved. Probably the same with any boot but the Merc was/is the first boot where I’ve done extensive a/b comparisons and fine tuning to dial in the performance… of course, it’s all very subjective and personal, but so far the Mercury has been the best compromise of uphill/downhill performance of any ski touring boot I’ve owned/tried; after spending LOTS of time fine tuning. For the record, I’ve been skiing the boots with Intuition Luxury high volume liners.
sorry, posted the last comment without careful edit…
Are these boots compatible with standard alpine bindings such as the Marker Griffon or Marker Jester?
Hi Greg, The short answer is no, the only alpine bindings that are officially compatible with these boots that I know of are the Marker Lord and the Salomon Warden MNC. I’m sure you’ll see lots of people using boots like the Vulcans in regular alpine bindings but they are not certified to have safe, consistent release. For more details about this check out the recent article we did on AT boots and bindings: http://blistergearreview.com/gear-reviews/skiing-101-at-boots-bindings