2015-2016 Fischer TransAlp Vacuum TS Boot

Fit

The real value of the TransAlp lies in its vacuum fit capability. Initially, Jonathan had them molded to his foot (which is pretty similar to mine), and I’ve been able to ski them like this all season. But as spring approaches and warm weather can amplify boot pain, I’ve felt the need to get them re-molded to my foot. I’ll report back shortly with an update as soon as I’ve had a few days in them with the new fit.

[Jonathan: I’m very curious to hear the results Cy gets after re-fitting the boot. I found the TransAlp to be pretty roomy out of the box—roomier than a Scarpa Freedom RS (especially instep volume), and wider than the Salomon MTN Lab and MTN Explore, though comparable to the MTN Lab and Explore in instep volume.

But again, I’d argue that the single most valuable thing about this AT boot is that you can get a custom shell fit via the vacuum-fit process. So the weirder your feet are, or the more problems you tend to have with out-of-the-box boot fit, the more compelling the case is for the TransAlp.]

Hiking & Touring Performance + Range of Motion

On the skin track, it’s immediately obvious that this is no Backland Carbon or Travers Carbon. It’s much heavier, and has a much smaller ROM. That said it’s no slouch on the up, and I think should be more than adequate for most skiers.

I have noticed the shorter ROM more on dry approaches and when scrambling. If there is going to be more than half an hour of dry hiking, I’d opt for approach shoes, or a lighter boot with greater ROM like the Travers Carbon.

[Jonathan: Cy cares more about ROM than I do; his ski tours often involve more dry approaches and scrambling than mine, so he really values very light, uphill-oriented boots like the Backland Carbon and Travers Carbon. By comparison then, the TransAlp is merely “fine” or “okay.”

I, on the other hand, am still kind of terrified of boots like the Backland Carbon and Travers Carbon, and will very happily drag “more” boot uphill to be able to go downhill in something burlier. And given that, I was pretty damn delighted by the walking and touring performance of the TransAlp. My reference touring boots are the Scarpa Freedom RS, the Salomon MTN Lab, and the MTN Explore, and I’d say that the TransAlp walks and skins much better than the Freedom RS, better than the MTN Lab (ROM), and at least as good as the MTN Explore — which is the most ‘walkable’ of my reference boots.]

Downhill Performance

On the way down, I’ve found that in soft snow the TransAlp performs very well. It’s a little more upright than an alpine boot, but not as much as the Fischer Travers Carbon, and it took me very little time to adapt to the change of stance.

For the first half of the season, I used the TransAlp as a one-boot touring quiver, for both long days in the alpine and shorter mini-golf missions. I’m used to softer boots—I don’t mind skiing a Full Tilt 6 or 8 flex boot inbounds, so I didn’t feel like I was overpowering the TransAlp too much in the backcountry.

However, I took the TransAlp inbounds for a few runs on a very wind-affected day at Targhee, skiing the Revision Subtraction (not a ski that shines in these conditions) with a G3 Ion binding. Here, I immediately felt myself flexing through the boot, causing the shell to deform around the ankle.

To think of the TransAlp in terms of mountain bike forks, I’d describe it as very progressive through the beginning of its travel—it does a good job of absorbing smaller impacts, and ramps up to take the bigger ones. However, there is definitely a blow-off point where it loses that progressive feel and mushes out to the point that I was worried I’d go over my tips. I’ve only hit that point 2-3 times this winter, but when I have, it’s been unmistakable.

I found the rear flex to be very supportive, and though on that firm day inbounds I was overpowering the boots, I have never run into the same issue in softer backcountry conditions, and I’ve been very happy driving wide, heavy skis with the TransAlp in at least semi-soft conditions, and hitting in them some of the biggest jumps and airs I’ve ever attempted, inbounds or out.

[Jonathan: Again, Cy gets along well with “less” boot than I do, so it’s no surprise here to say that I was looking for something more substantial and supportive than the TransAlp with the stock liner. In soft conditions and mellow terrain I’d be just fine in the TransAlp, but in variable conditions and / or on bigger lines, I’ve wanted more boot.

Long and short: if I were going to use the TransAlp, I would definitely swap out the stock liner for a stiffer liner, and I would be inclined to add on a Booster Strap to beef up the boot’s downhill performance. (Cy, on the other hand, is sticking to the stock liner.)

Again, this comes down to your reference points. If Cy is fine in a 6- or 8-tongue Full Tilt, I’m still wanting my AT boot to feel at least somewhat familiar to the 130-flex, low-volume dedicated alpine boots I ski inbounds. So this is one of those “Know Thyself” moments—how much boot do you want or really need in the backcountry, and how similar to your inbounds boot do you want / need your touring boot to feel in order to be confident in the backcountry?]

NEXT: Durability, Comparisons and Weights, Etc.