Boot: 2024-2025 Tecnica Zero G Tour Pro
Test Locations: Chugach Mountains & Alyeska Resort, AK
Test Duration: 20+ days
Stated Flex: 130
Available Sizes: 24.5–30.5
Stated Last (size 26.5): 99 mm
Stated Range of Motion: 65°
Size Tested: 27.5
Blister’s Measured Weight (size 27.5):
- Shells, no Liners: L: 1106 & R: 1101 g
- Liners, no Footbeds: L: 249 g & R: 252 g
- Shells + Liners = 1355 & 1353 g
- Stock Insoles: 48 g each
- Removable Spoilers: 32 g each
Additional Specs
Stated Forward Lean: 14° (16° w/ liner spoiler)
Stated Boot Sole Length (size 27.5): 313 mm
Buckles: 4 micro-adjustable w/ cable latches
Power Strap: 35 mm cam-style w/ hook
Shell Material:
- Cuff: Carbon-reinforced Grilamid
- Lower Shell / Shoe: Grilamid
Soles: full-length rubber (ISO 9523)
Tech Fittings: toe & heel
Binding Compatibility: tech / pin & Multi-Norm bindings
Intro
Since its introduction, the original Tecnica Zero G Tour Pro has been one of the most impressive touring boots we’ve tested, at least in terms of how well it skis, given how little it weighs.
For the 24/25 season, Tecnica announced their first update to the Zero G Tour series, and we were curious to see how they would build on an already excellent design.
We covered the announcement last year, and since then, we’ve been testing the v2 Zero G Tour Pro — including lots of days with the v1 boot on one foot and the v2 model on the other. So, how much did they change, and is this new boot a worthy successor?
The Zero G Tour Series
First, it’s important to clarify that Tecnica offers two very different strains of the Zero G. There’s the Zero G Tour collection, which covers flex options from 105 to 130; these boots are designed to be light on the skin track but prioritize downhill performance more than uphill efficiency.
Then there’s the Zero G Peak collection, which consists of more uphill-oriented boots that weigh around a kilogram. The flagship model, the Zero G Peak Carbon, is a very compelling option within its own class, but the Zero G Tour boots are meant for those who want a boot that skis more similarly to a fixed-cuff alpine boot.
With that sorted, here’s the current Zero G Tour collection:
- Zero G Tour Pro (130 flex)
- Zero G Tour Pro W (125 flex)
- Zero G Tour Scout (120 flex)
- Zero G Tour Scout W (115 flex)
- Zero G Tour (110 flex)
- Zero G Tour W (105 flex)
The ‘W’ models are available from size 22.5–27.5; the non-W models are available from size 24.5–30.5. Also, for the 24/25 season, the Zero G Tour and Zero G Tour W carry over from the previous season (i.e., they’re still first-generation boots).
Shell
Tecnica made minor updates to the Zero G Tour shell. The v2 Zero G Tour Pro still uses a Grilamid lower and carbon-reinforced Grilamid cuff, but Tecnica reportedly raised the instep height slightly and added more of their softer “Quick Instep” plastic in that area to make it easier to get the boot on / off.
The v2 Zero G Tour boots also feature Tecnica’s “Power Frame” construction, which adds targeted material reinforcements (mostly around the boot’s pivot point). The goal here is to improve power transmission without adding significant weight.
Liner
Compared to the first-gen Zero G Tour Pro, version two of the boot comes with a more substantial liner. It’s still really light, but as we’ll discuss below, we’re fans of the new liner.
Walk Mechanism
The v2 Zero G Tour boots feature a similar walk mechanism to the original, but the v2 boots’ revised “T-Hike” mechanism reportedly frees up five more degrees of range of motion (aka, “ROM”) when in walk mode (for a total stated ROM of 65° instead of 60°).
This walk mechanism is pretty similar to a lot of other boots out there, with an external, spring-loaded ‘hook and bar’ connection, though Tecnica’s version connects the lower and upper parts of the boot at two points.
Forward Lean
The v2 Zero G Tour boots ditch the (slightly) adjustable forward lean of the original for a fixed setting of 14° (the prior boots could be set at 12.5° or 13.5°). Tecnica says that, if you use the included liner spoiler, that brings the forward lean of the v2 boot to 16°.
Buckles
Not much change here. The v2 Zero G Tour boots use four lightweight magnesium buckles with wire loops in place of traditional, bulkier buckles.
Power Strap
The v2 Zero G Tour Pro’s power strap is nearly the same as the original’s. The v2 boot comes with a 35mm-wide strap that’s quite thin and is tightened via a cam-style buckle that doubles as a hook so you can fully undo the strap.
Soles, Tech Inserts, & Binding Compatibility
The Zero G Tour boots feature a full-length rubber sole and fit the ISO 9523 (aka, “touring”) norm. Combined with the Zero G Tour’s toe and heel tech inserts, that means it can be used with tech / pin bindings and multi-norm bindings that can be adjusted to fit ISO 9523 soles.
Weight (and Comparisons)
The v2 Zero G Tour Pro may not be much lighter than v1, but v2 is still the lightest “130-flex” boots we’ve weighed — at least, the lightest that actually skis somewhat similarly to a “130-flex” alpine boot (more on that in a moment).
For reference, below are our measured weights for some comparable boots. Each number is the average weight per boot for the stock liners and shells. Pay attention to the size differences to keep things apples-to-apples.
1319 g | v1 Tecnica Zero G Tour Pro (size 26.5)
1354 g | v2 Tecnica Zero G Tour Pro (size 27.5)
1367 g | Dalbello Quantum Free Pro (size 27.5)
1372 g | Atomic Backland XTD Carbon 120 (size 26.5)
1376 g | Dynafit Ridge Pro (size 27.5)
1380 g | Scarpa Maestrale RS (size 27)
1483 g | Dynafit Radical Pro (size 26.5)
1484 g | La Sportiva Vanguard (size 26.5)
1531 g | Scarpa 4-Quattro Pro (size 26.5)
1568 g | K2 Dispatch Pro (size 27.5)
1580 g | Roxa R3 130 T.I. (size 26.5)
1702 g | Dynafit Tigard 130 (size 27.5)
1772 g | Fischer Ranger Pro 130 (size 26.5)
1777 g | Lange XT3 Free 130 LV (size 26.5)
1791 g | Atomic Hawx Ultra XTD 130 BOA (size 26.5)
1799 g | Salomon Shift Alpha BOA 130 (size 26.5)
1832 g | Tecnica Cochise 130 (size 26.5)
1885 g | Dalbello Cabrio LV Free 130 3DWrap (size 26.5)
1961 g | K2 Mindbender 130 BOA (size 26.5)
FULL REVIEW
Fit
Paul Forward (6’0”, 200 lbs / 183 cm, 90.7 kg): I don’t have much to add here on top of what I first wrote in my Flash Review, so I’ll start with what I said there:
“Given this boot’s cult following, I suspect that many readers here will be very interested in how similar or different the Zero G Tour feels from a fit perspective (and I’ve heard a few friends lament the fact that it’s supposedly now a higher-volume boot).
Ski boot fit is always highly subjective, but my experience (using the stock liners) is that the heel and ankle hold that many of us liked in the first-gen Zero G Tour is well maintained in the second-gen boot. With one foot in the 24/25 boot and the other in the 23/24 version, I can’t identify any major difference in heel / ankle snugness, security, or (lack of) movement. If anything, I noticed slightly better hold in the new boot, but that could be due to its newer, less skied-out liner.
Instep height in the new boot feels slightly higher, which is a good thing for me and my high instep, but it’s still low enough that I can barely buckle the second buckle on the lower shell, so I don’t think there’s a big change there.
The only area where a difference was immediately noticeable (but still fairly subtle) is the toe box. The new boot’s toe box is now a little roomier, which is a huge plus for me since I want touring boots to allow for warm, comfortable toes during long days out in cold conditions. I also don’t believe that a really tight toe box (i.e., distal to the metatarsal heads) provides many real performance benefits.”
So, that’s what I thought after my first couple weeks with the boot. After almost a full season with it, I stand by what I said earlier. Essentially, my relatively skinny heel and ankle still feel a little more secure than they did with my old Zero G Tour Pro, but it’s fairly subtle. It’s still possible that this is related to the new boot’s less-used liner, but my new ones now have enough vert that I would expect them to have packed out a little bit, and they still feel pretty good in this regard.
The instep is generally my problem area because I tend to have issues with pressure in this area of my foot (navicular and cuneiform areas), but I got along fine with the previous Zero G Tour and continue to do well with the newest one. There may be slightly more room in the new one, but it’s very subtle.
As I said before, I’m sure there will be skiers who will find that the new fit doesn’t work for them as well as the old one, but I’d be surprised if that’s a common sentiment.
New Liner
The new Zero G Tour Pro’s liners have started to pack out a little bit, but they continue to be excellent. Overall, I think the liner is one of the more obvious improvements of the new boot compared to the previous version. The new liner has a much more supportive and padded tongue and nicer contouring around the heel and ankle pocket (at least for my feet).
The more robust tongue, in particular, feels really good to me; when skiing with the v1 boot on one foot and the v2 on the other, it’s one of the most obvious initial differences.
Walk Mechanism & Transitions
Again, I don’t have a lot to add here from my Flash Review. The v2 Zero G Tour’s walk mechanism is very similar to the previous version, which I consider a good thing.
I’ve never had an issue flipping the boot quickly from walk mode to ski mode, and I generally appreciate how the lever sticks out on the outside of my pants cuff, where I can easily reach down and flip back to ski mode.
There is little to no discernible play in the cuff when in ski mode, and unlike some other boots I’ve used, I’ve never had an issue with it popping back into walk mode while skiing. Overall, I think this is a class-leading walk mechanism.
The one place where I do wish they had followed suit with the previous boot is in offering adjustable forward lean. I’ve been skiing with the stock liner spoiler attached; with that configuration and most ski / binding setups, I get along fine with the (non-adjustable) forward lean of the Zero G Tour Pro (for reference, Tecnica claims it’s 14° stock / 16° with the spoiler). However, with skis with very rearward mount points and bindings with a relatively small heel / toe delta, I would like a little more forward lean. I’ve tried a thicker spoiler but have found that a little bit uncomfortable since I can feel the larger spoiler on my leg on the skin track.
(For reference, the v1 boot’s shell was adjustable between 12.5° and 13.5° forward lean, and it seemed the vast majority of people ran it in the 13.5° setting. From a stance / forward lean perspective, I’d say the v2 boot with its included, thin liner spoiler feels similar to the v1 boot in its 13.5° setting with its own spoiler. I.e., not a huge change there.)
Hardware
The v2 Zero G Tour Pro’s buckles are similar to the previous version and work okay. I understand that the cable buckles are durable and save some weight, but they are a little more fidgety than traditional buckles.
It also seems that the v2 boot’s cuff buckles don’t offer as much of an adjustment range (via the various mounting positions on the cuff). In the v1 Zero G Tour, I was always able to easily get the cables in the ladders. On the v2 boot, even with its ladders in their widest settings, I still have some trouble getting them to fit my lower leg. I rarely have that issue with any other boot with a stock liner, so that might be something to keep in mind, particularly if you have a high-volume calf / lower leg.
That quirk aside, the v2 Zero G Tour Pro’s cam-lock power strap is an excellent choice for this boot. It’s a great balance of weight, power transfer, and pressure distribution, and I’ve had
zero issues with it.
Getting Them On / Off
I rarely include this section in a boot review, but I’ve been asked about this a few times while wearing these boots because some folks struggled with getting the last generation on and off.
Similar to the v1 Zero G Tour, if the v2 shells are cold, they can be a little challenging to get on. I haven’t yet used them on a multi-day winter tour, but I could foresee struggling with them a little in the tent vestibule in the morning.
I often put my ski boots on at home and drive or bike to the hill / parking lot in them (I’m fortunate to have short commutes), so I have very little issue since I’m putting them on in a warm house. Even when taking them out of the car on a cold day, though, I can’t say I’ve had enough issues that I’d consider it a deterrence to buy them or take them with me.
Uphill Performance
The more I ski the Zero G Tour Pro, the more I appreciate how well they walk — especially relative to the performance they offer on the descent.
Now, frequent readers of Blister will know that I spend a lot of time in very lightweight (900-1200 grams), high-range-of-motion touring boots, and I’ve learned to really enjoy that class of boots. This season, though, I’ve mostly been skiing in the v2 Zero G Tour Pro for a variety of reasons, and I generally feel like this boot’s range of motion is 100% enough for me in just about every situation.
I’ve never been a person who cares a great deal about my boots providing a massive range of motion since I don’t take really long strides when touring and, consequently, don’t often feel limited by most touring boots in that regard. But I would be surprised if many skiers have any issues with the range of motion that the Zero G Tour offers in walk mode.
The v2 boot is definitely better than the previous generation in this regard and is at least as good as any boot in its class (i.e., 130-flex downhill-oriented touring boots). I still prefer to skin with all the buckles completely detached, but I do that with just about all touring boots. The v2 Zero G Tour doesn’t feel as hiking-boot-like as, say, the 1-kilo Zero G Peak, but the v2 Zero G Tour Pro is extremely impressive on the uphill, given what it offers on the way down.
Downhill Performance
Let’s start with some important context. I spend a lot of time in fixed-cuff alpine boots with flex ratings of 130-140; the v1 and v2 Zero G Tour Pro do not ski like those boots. I think that’s worth mentioning, given the “130” rating.
If evaluated purely based on fore / aft stiffness, the v2 Zero G Tour Pro is a little stiffer than the previous iteration. However, the v2 Zero G Tour Pro’s flex pattern is initially more progressive than my favorite 130-flex alpine boots. I.e., the Zero G Tour Pro ramps up very quickly, in contrast to more linear-flexing boots like a Full Tilt (which are often erroneously called “progressive”). Still, there is a limit to the Zero G Tour Pro’s support, and it will fold up more easily than something like the Lange Shadow 130 or Lange RX 140 that I spend most of my days skiing inbounds.
The Zero G Tour Pro’s slightly softer fore / aft flex is definitely part of the reason for this, but I think a bigger part is the reduced suspension provided by the boot’s lightweight Grilamid and carbon-reinforced shell. This is generally not an issue for me in a touring boot because I’m usually using them in soft snow, and I’m happy to accept their less smooth / muted feel for the drastically reduced weight compared to a heavier, more damp boot.
So, no, the Zero G Tour Pro probably doesn’t ski just like your favorite 2000+ gram 130-flex alpine boot. We’ve never tested a boot that accomplishes that while also coming remotely close to the weight of the Zero G Tour Pro.
That said, the overall power and control of the v2 Zero G Tour Pro is still better than any boot I’ve skied that’s within 100 g of its weight. And the Zero G Tour Pro is markedly better than many of the slightly lighter or similarly weighted boots. As a 200-lb skier typically wearing a 20+ pound pack, I’ve never really needed anything more powerful than the Zero G Tour Pro, even when skiing big (120+ mm wide) skis in variable conditions.
In terms of lateral support, I believe these boots are also class-leading, and I think that’s a big part of why they are able to easily drive big skis in most snow conditions. I’ve been skiing a lot weird, somewhat technical exits this year due to our poor low-elevation snowpack here in Alaska, and I have been working on reviews of a handful of skis, all wider than 115 mm underfoot. That kind of skiing makes for a lot of torque on a touring boot, and I’ve been quite content with the v2 Zero G Tour Pro for those scenarios.
Now, I would’ve said pretty much all of the same things about the v1 Zero G Tour Pro. If I really focus on the flex pattern while applying maximum pressure on consecutive turns, I can tell that the new boot is a little bit stiffer overall, but it has not been a dramatic difference. Both are very impressive on the descent for how little they weigh and how well they walk.
Durability
I think I’ve spent somewhere between 20-30 days in the v2 Zero G Tour Pro, and it’s generally holding up fairly well so far.
Even with this year’s odd snowpack in Alaska, I still spend the vast majority of my time with my boots in bindings and rarely end up walking on rocks in my ski boots, so I haven’t extensively tested the durability of their rubber sole. But, as with pretty much all touring boots around similar weights, the Zero G Tour has relatively thin soles; I’m sure extensive rock travel will wear them down, but I don’t think there’s any particular reason for concern here.
As for the shells, I have used the Zero G Tour Pro in plenty of cold conditions and have bashed them through more alders than usual; I have had no issues so far. I skin with the walk mode lever sticking out behind my pants cuff and have bumped it more than a few times against stuff while bushwhacking, and it’s doing great. For its weight, the boot seems to be quite robust overall.
Who’s It For?
Anyone who loved the v1 Zero G Tour Pro will likely enjoy the v2 boot even more. The differences aren’t dramatic, but they’ll be slightly positive improvements for most folks.
If you don’t already have experience with the previous iteration, know that the v2 Zero G Tour Pro is one of the most impressive boots we’ve tested in terms of uphill and downhill performance. Skiers looking for the lightest boot that will still provide the power to drive big skis at high speed should place this high on their list of boots to try on with a good bootfitter.
Bottom Line
The story of the v2 Tecnica Zero G Tour Pro is one of evolution, rather than revolution. However, the boot that this one evolved from was already a class-leading option, and this new version is even better. It’s an extremely compelling option for those looking to minimize weight while maintaining the ability to ski aggressively in a wide range of conditions and terrain.
Get More Info: Our Flash Reviews & Winter Buyer’s Guide
BLISTER+ members and those who purchase our Digital Access Pass can check out the Flash Review below to read our initial on-snow impressions. Don’t have access? Get our Digital Access Pass to read all of our Flash Reviews and Deep Dive comparisons. Or, even better, become a BLISTER+ member to get that + the best worldwide Outdoor Injury Insurance, exclusive deals and discounts on skis, personalized gear recommendations from us, access to our annual Winter Buyer’s Guide, and much more.
On that note, you can also get our thoughts on 300+ skis, 60+ boots, and tons of other products in our 2024-2025 Blister Winter Buyer’s Guide. BLISTER+ members already have access, or you can purchase the guide on its own to get the the print copy + digital version at no extra cost, or the digital-only edition.
2024-2025 Blister Digital Winter Buyer’s Guide
350+ skis, 65 boots, and 280+ pages of honest, accurate product reviews and comparisons. Order our 24/25 Winter Buyer’s Guide or become a BLISTER+ member to read the Digital Guide NOW.
If you’re already a Blister Member or have purchased the 24/25 Winter Buyer’s Guide and are seeing this message, please log in and then refresh this page.
Flash Review: 24/25 Tecnica Zero G Tour Pro
We’ve been A/B testing the original and updated versions of Tecnica’s venerable Zero G Tour Pro — here are our thoughts so far on how the new boot compares.
Blister’s Flash Reviews and Deep Dives are accessible to those who purchase one of our paid subscriptions
To get our comprehensive Deep Dives and our initial, unfiltered reports on new gear, become a member and receive many other services, deals, and discounts.
If you’re already an active member, please log in.
(If you’re already logged in and a member in good standing and seeing this message in error, please refresh this page in your browser.)
Instep was a little too low for me before, hopefully i can get these to replace my previous gen atomic hawx xtd’s when they wear out, seems like there are very few lightweight low volume 130 flexing boots out right now