Solar Tsunami - Waves in the Sky

From Thursday night's Aurora event, this photo was made at the moment when the Northern lights transitioned from being "so-so" to SPECTACULAR. The colors and movement started on the left side of the frame, and within seconds a line moved very quickly all the way across to the right, then upwards into the sky. Along the bottom edge of the lights was a line of purple and white color, everything above that was green. The bottom edge of the aurora was waving up and down and back and forth. The whole sky was shimmering with waves of light. It is a memory and image that will live in the forefront of my mind for a long time to come!

Petunia detail

I had some fun today taking pictures of the flowers Jessica recently planted around the yard. This is my favorite shot of the bunch that I took today. I need to buy a macro lens again for my big camera, I haven't had one now for a few years and I miss it. This was taken with my small point-and-shoot camera, a Canon PowerShot G11. It does nice macro work!

Regular Wool vs 'Technical' Wool

Despite this winter being colder than last, I am finding cycling in freezing temperatures easier this time around. The reason, is that I have finally surrendered to wool. Clad in head to toe wool, I no longer complain about the cold and life has gotten easier. Pictured here: a long sleeve wool t-shirt from Icebreaker (the red bit sticking out), wool sweater and gloves from Jigsaw, wool skirt and hat that I knitted myself, and wool coat (folded over the back of the bike) from Benetton. Not visible here are Icebreaker leggings, Smartwool socks, and I/O Bio underwear and bra - also all wool.




I've certainly worn wool in the past, and - like Dottie from Let's Go Ride a Bike - I have always loved sweaters with enormous turtle/cowl necks that can be unfolded over my face to protect against the frost. But before this year, I have limited wool clothing to outer layers, and did not think I was tolerant of wool right next to my skin. That was why I repeatedly ignored advice that was given me last year to buy lightweight "technical" wool. I remember trying to wear wool shirts and tights next to my skin before, and finding them irritatingly itchy. Today's manufacturers of technical wool - the most popular being Smartwool, Ibex and Icebreaker - promise featherweight, itch-free garments. But they are also super expensive. It took me a long time to suspend my disbelief and commit to giving these things a try, and it also took me a long time to find everything I wanted on sale. But now that I have, I can never go back. The stuff works, and it really is non-itchy - even for someone whose skin is normally sensitive to wool.





I am not sure how exactly "technical wool" is made, and most likely every manufacturer's version is different. But the idea is, that the merino fibers are kept super fine, but made to interlock in a way that results in efficient temperature regulation. In comparison, if you examine a "regular wool" garment - like the sweater I am wearing here - you will find that it is more porous, not quite as smoothly textured, and thicker. Even the finest merino and cashmere sweaters do not have the same tissue-weight quality and smooth, dense texture as the technical wool garments.



All this makes it possible to wear "technical wool" next to one's skin, and for those struggling with the cold, I would highly recommend it. Wearing a wool sweater and overcoat did nothing for me last year, when the stuff I'd wear underneath was made of cotton or some other fabric. My underlayers would get soaked with sweat, and then the wind would chill me to the bone when I would stop at intersections. The feeling of my skin being covered with frozen sweat underneath three layers of clothing was just awful. But wearing wool underwear, bra, tights, and long-sleeve tee, has solved this problem for me completely. As far as the difference between the popular brands, I think they are all pretty good and I just get whatever is on sale. For ultra-thin layers, I prefer Icebreaker. And I also love Icebreaker leggings - they are gusseted, whereas Smartwool leggings are not.





For layers that are not directly next to the skin, I find "regular" wool sufficient - either store bought wool clothing, or things I knit myself. While Smartwool, Ibex, Icebreaker and others do offer technical outer layers, I think it is just too expensive for most people to amass an entire wardrobe out of that stuff. And, of course, it is also stylistically limiting. For me, as long as the layers next to my skin are the technical garments, I can wear pretty much anything over them and it will feel fine. I like to knit my own hats and skirts, because making them is fairly easy and I can invent my own styles. But sweaters are complicated, so mine are all store-bought.





One thing to keep in mind, is that thin merino sweaters are usually warmer than chunky sweaters, because the tightly-knit merino is less porous. Unfortunately, I have noticed lately that even stores that used to sell simple wool sweaters no longer do: I could not find a single sweater at our local Gap, Old Navy,or Banana Republic stores that was 100% wool over the past couple of seasons - and I checked at various points in time out of curiosity. Several years ago, you could walk in and buy a wool sweater without a problem, so I wonder what accounts for this change. Has the price of wool risen?J. Crew still offers a good variety of merino sweaters, as well as cashmere, but I wonder whether that is on its way out as well. It would be a shame, since it seems that an increasing number of people are re-discovering the benefits of natural fibers over synthetics - particularly in the winter. What are your experiences with "regular" wool, "technical" wool, and other fibers?

Lettuce in a Cage

Sometimes we need to go to extreme measures to protect our crops from squirrels. My crop happened to be lettuce. And the protection happens to be a rabbit cage.

The Gardens of The French Laundry

These are some of the vegetable gardens in which The French Laundry (the 4th best restaurant in the world) grows produce.

What Does 'Commuting' Mean to You?

Some of us have conventionally structured jobs, where we ride our bikes to the office, stay there for a given period of time, then ride home. Others might move from site to site throughout the day, or work from home, or go to the office and back several times.I've had lots of conversations with friends in both job categories, and it's clear that there are benefits and drawbacks to each: With a conventional schedule, you get a sense of structure, and once you leave the office you are done. On the down side, sitting in the same building for an entire day can feel constricting. With a non-conventional schedule, there is a greater sense of freedom and you can organise your time to suit your needs. On the down side, it can feel as if the work never really ends and that you are chained to your laptop or phone 24/7.



Most of my jobs have fallen somewhere in the second, unstructured category. Even while working in a university setting - probably my most "normal" employment - it was always a back and forth between different locationson and off campus. Now that I have transitioned entirely to freelance work, it is up to me how to organise my time - which is nice in theory, but can work against me if I am not careful.



Finding it nearly impossible to work from home, I like to leave the house for the day and transition between one setting and another - coffee shop, studio, supply store, meeting, park bench. My laptop perpetually in tow, the nomadism is my means of staying both sane and focused.



Cycling back and forth between these locations and home is my version of commuting - though it is disheartening when those with structured jobs say things like "Oh, but then you don't have to commute, do you." I know what they mean to say: There is no pressure for me to arrive somewhere at exactly 9am every day. While this is mostly true, I do have meetings where I am expected to be on time. I also make more trips per day than they do and don't really have a concept of week-ends. But it is not a competition and I think that whatever one considers to be "commuting" is valid for that person. The term is a strange one for non-English speakers anyhow, as they struggle to understand why a special word is needed for traveling to and from work!



For those who do commute in a nomadic fashion, and do so by bicycle, there are some helpful posts about establishing a mobile office (via Girls and Bicycles) and an outdoor office (via Simply Bike). And for those who work 9-5 jobs, there are some great posts by Dottie from Let's Go Ride a Bike on how to take a refreshing joyride on your lunch hour. Cycling can function both to infuse a conventional job with a sense of freedom and to bring structure into a more chaotic work situation. What does commuting mean to you, and how (if at all) has it been affected by cycling?

Bella Ciao Superba: Ready and Available!

Fashionably late and appropriately glamorous, the Bella Ciao Superba is here! I was nervous up till the moment I saw it, but the bicycle is perfect. The pre-ordered bikes should be off to their owners very soon.



To recap for new readers, this is the result of a collaboration between myself and Bella Ciao, and you can read about it here and here. Twelve bikes were made as a special edition and they are available exclusively at Harris Cylery in West Newton, MA. I know that a good portion of them have already been sold, so please check with Harris for availability. The price is $1,495. I am not the one selling the bicycles (and I do not receive commission on the ones sold), so please contact Harris directly with all sales inquiries.



The Bella CiaoSuperba frames were handmade in Italy, using Columbus Thron tubing. The frame size is 54cm, with 700C wheels. Tires are the cream Schwalbe Delta Cruisers, 700Cx35mm. The wheelsets are proprietary to Bella Ciao, made inhouse.



The Superba includes all the components and accessories pictured here, which I will detail below. It is a 3-speed bicycle with a rear coaster brake and front handbrake, internally routed dynamo lighting front and rear, leather Brookssaddle, natural cork grips, chaincase, and a handmade rear rack.



The stainless steel racks were designed by me and handmade in Dorcester, Massachusetts by Trimount Ironworks. They are rated to carry 18kg (40lb) of weight, provide attachment for bungee cords, and will accommodate a variety of pannier systems.



There is a provision for attaching a battery-operated tail light to the rack, for those who wish to supplement the dynamo lighting.



One thing I like about the stainless rack with its thin tubing, is that it has the effect of being "invisible" on the bike. I've played around with a number of different racks, and this definitely suits the bicycle best. I may write a separate post about the rack design in the near future.



The high-polished alloy handlebars are made by Bella Ciao. I would describe them as a hybrid between North Road and Porteur style bars, and they are possibly my favourite handlebars on the market today.



The bike is fitted with natural Portuguese cork grips from Rivendell and elegant Tektro city brake levers. The cork grips will be left unfinished, but they can be shellacked by the owner - which will make them darker. The brake lever can be placed either on the right or on the left.



Brass bell, of course.



The dynamo-powered lighting is by the German manufacturer Buechel.



It looks fairly classic and unobtrusive, and works nicely.



The dynamo hub is Shimano. The wiring is routed externally up the fork, then internally through the frame, exiting through one of the chainstays.



Sturmey Archer3-speed coaster brake hub.



Front caliper brake.



Brown Brooks B72 saddle.



Non-slip platform pedals.



And the fork ends/dropouts (I like to remove those black dust caps, but forgot to do it here). You can also see the bungee cord attachment point on the rack here.



The colour of the bike as it shows up in the pictures here is fairly accurate. It is not the same colour as my own bike, but a more vibrant, saturated pastel green. If you have any questions about the features, I will be glad to answer them here. I hope that the owners of these bicycles will be pleased with them - I am very happy with how they came out. There is some talk of more bikes, but nothing is certain yet - so your thoughts are welcome. Many thanks to Bella Ciao again for the opportunity to work on this project, and many thanks to Harris Cycley for all of their help.

The Dynafit TLT6 ski boot, shake and rebake!

Lets see if I can sort through some of the early Internet misinformation and misrepresentation on the TLT6. Admittedly some of it clearly my fault here @ C-T no matter howunintentional.



First up lets talk shells and add some definitivecomparison numbers to the older TLT5.





My boots are 29s. BSL are the same @ 317mm

Power strap is 30g with out hardware. One rivet in the Mtn, two bolts in the P version.



Shells, no tongue but with power strap, one shell



TLT6 P CR 1050g



TLT5 P TF 1010g



TLT5 Mtn TFX 1000g



Liners: for one liner

TLT6 P CR 288g



TLT5 P TF 186g



TLT5 Mtn TFX 326g



*Intuition Pro Tour* 278g



Boots total weight, shell and liner, no insoles, oneboot:



TLT6 P CR 1338g



TLT5 P TF 1196g



TLT5 Mtn TFX 1326g





All are actual weights as delivered by the factory in the US with the available liners.







Walking? Yes there is a difference and you will feel it immediately between walking in a TLT5 and a TLT6. One is a full on lwt ski boot as predicted previous. The older boot is something special and "in between" a mtn boot and a full on ski boot. Because the sole flexes even that tiny 5mmI get substantially less heel lift in the TLT5. Less heel lift walking and skinning means you don't compact your liners as quickly in that same area.And you will have less heel lift on the down skiing I'd bet.The longer you walk on a hard surface in a TLT6 the more you will notice the lack of flex at themetatarsal that the earlier TLT5 boots has.If you are use to walking in a rigid ski boot then the TLT6 will be oflittle notice, easy enough to walk in and likely lighter than anything you have experienced prior, short of a full on Rando race boot. The shorter BSL will help as well for walking. If you have a TLT5 and thought of replacing it with the"better" TLT6 you might want to rethink that. Less difference between a Dynafit ONE and a TLT6 than the TLT5 and TLT6 series IMO. TLT6 might as well be a ONE to walk in. The slightly longer toe on the ONE makes it just that much more clumsy.











Skiing? I don't claim to be any great skier just been doing it a long time now. And to date the most difficult/steepest terrain I have ever skied has been on a TLT5. (Ps and Mtn btw) And I have been veryhappy with the TLT5as a ski boot. Only for durability and small fitissues have I slighted the TLT5 but neverhow the bootsskied.



The TLT6 however is a step up on skiing performance. The distinct lack of metatarsal flex which made walking and climbing more enjoyable in the 5s, is missing in the 6 and sucks by comparison. Please note I said "by comparison". As in a comparison to of 5 to 6. I am a 190# guy and more with kit on. The 2nd turn on a TLT6 I noticed the lack of sole flex. The TLT6is a better ski boot because of the new lower shell and no toe bellows.



Snowboards? Come on guys these are both rigid ski boots by a snow boarder's standards. Both the Mtn and the P versions. And either will rip on even a fat 110mm+down hill ski. If a ski boot is your thing on a snow board I suspect either version will work. You have the option of removing the tongue of this boot in any version. Same with thepower strap. Remove it andmake the forward flex a little softer in either boot. So there are options. Laterally they are both stiff boots. I don't see how the added metatarsal flex of the TLT 5 would add anything to a snowboard unless you actually do a lot of boot packing.











Climbing? I'll say it again. In my experience the TLT5 is undoubtedlya better climbing boot. If you are climbing in a ski boot now there is little incentive to change to the TLT6 IMO unless you are looking to drop weight or better your walk modestrike. Harsh but the TLT6 is not the boot (or it's near cousin IMO) that so wowed me in Chamonix a few years ago. But there it is. I'm not being a hater here. Just giving a honest commentary on the newest TLT6 as I see it. The early bootI was more than willing to fork over a $1000 for. So ya, I am still pissed the design effort went as it has. No one gave me either of these boots. I boughtthem with my hard earned cash. Just to reinforce the fact on how the fit differsI am typing this with a TLT5 on one foot and a TLT6 on the other at this very moment. When you can tell the difference walking down the drive way to the mail box in the boots you can only image how that will sort itself out in the hills. It is not a good sign when a few hours in the boots one is beginning to be painful and one isn't.



One of the things that the earlier TLT 5 series had for the moment was a bit of flex
that not all AT boots have. And now no ski boots use that I know of. It isn't much (5mm?) but it is enough to notice
after a long day in stiff boots. The newest DyNA version had alreadyleft the
flex feature out. It is an advantage in a climbing boot imo. Disadvantage in a
ski boot, plus the added weight is the reasoning behind that
change in the new DyNA EVO and now the TLT6. If you took note you saw thatchange coming.














The Dynafit toe
flex design that allows for a rigid sole boot for skiing, but flexible boot for
walking. And imo the missing link for plastic climbing boots Simply
brilliant..








FIT? Lots of Internet chatter on how wide and nasty the new last was going to be. My first pair of 6s were not my exact size. But I had the suspicion that even in my perfect 29 shell I wouldn't be able to tell the difference between 2mm in the arch/ ball of the foot and 1 mm on the outside ball of the of the foot. And I speculated no one else could tell the difference either. Liners will eat that all up and then some. Nice fit aid though. As are the same two extra insoles that still come in the boot box.



May be we need a world wide "Pepsi Challenge" to see what others come up with for "feel" on the new shell sizing internally?



So I took both myold and worn TLTP TX Palau liners andmy previously heat formedMountain's TF, orthotics installed and slid them into the TLT6. Amazing enough not only was the TLT6 not wider for my foot and fit but noticeably smaller! Yes smaller! Think not? Well same liners, same Super feet and same 29 shells. I have a TLT5 on my left foot and a TLT6 on my right. Been typing for an hour or so and getting up to walk around some.My arch is just starting to cramp and the outside ball of my foot is getting uncomfortably tight in the TLT6. Same old linersTX Palau liner mind you. Same result but a little more comfortable with the Mtn's TF-X. And some how I am not noticing that extra, huge, addition of3mm in the new TL6. I think I know what they did to improve the fit on the TLT6 shell and the added insole might well be appreciated at some point. But the 6's instep is really tight no matter what insole I am using. Funny how I was just warned about that exact same issuethis morning via email. And that owner of a TLT6 hasn't even molded/used his boots yet. For now at least I am not happy with dropping in my old inner boots and orthotic. It is not"happily ever after". The following day I spent a full 7 hours walking around and doing almost every thing you can do in a ski boot with out snow or skiing. Some where along the way the older TF-X liner loosened up enough in the TLT6 shell that it at least felt very close to the TLT5 shell for sizing.But the TLT6 always stayed a little tighter ...like one had added a mid sole to take up space in the TLT6. Which is exactly what Dynafit did to add some warmth to the boot.






A look at the bottom of the TLT5 boot shown above.

This always reminds me of a mid '80s boot maker's unfinished answer.











A look at the bottom of the TLT6 boot shown above..

I like the additional insole and certainly makes the boot appear more finished.

No question it has changed the fit for me. I get a tighter boot despite the added volume internally.




I also tried the unmolded CR liners for a little over ahalf day in both boot shells. 6 hrs total in that combo. Again no skiing just trying to figure out what combo of what I have will fit me the best for the intended use. For the third time I still give the nod to what feels like a smaller volume internally with the TLT6. I'll repeat the the specifics of my observation. I have less room in my TLT6 than I do in my TLT5s using the same minimalistic Palau/Dynafit TF foam liner or the TF-X andmy cork Superfeet. YMMVbut that is my personal experience to date. If I didn't know the inner volume had changed I would guess that Dynafit made no changes in the shell pastadding the new, warmer insole.






left to right TLT5 and aTLT6


I have since heat molded the CR liner on a tower heater/blower. I found the CR liner to mold much easier and quicker than the previous TF-X liner. I also felt it compressed easier while molding. And I'll need toqualify in more detail to be surebut suspect the additional boot shell insole has compressed as well with the little extra heat the "hot" liner transfered to the foot bed of the boot. With my Super feet corks installed during fitting process by the time I was done itfelt like I actually did indeed have more internal space compared to the TLT5.



I have no doubtthat teh tLT6 will be easier to fit customers in the store. How all that wiull work out for a performance fit on the hill I have yet to see.



Bottom line on fit? No matter how good you think your boots fit in the store. Be sure to have them heat molded by a boot fitter you trust. The difference is signifigant everytime. And seemingly always a better fit as the end result..





and

External volume?The cross section of the TLT6 shell at the ball of the foot is 6 or 7mm less thanthe TLT5. You can see it easily with your eye on a side by sidecomparison ofshells, less so in a picture. In the world of climbing, generally less volume is a good thing. Not that it will matter from what I can see at this point but I'll take it.







Tongues? Now you get a pair of tongues with the 6. A black *stiff* and a lt green *soft*. I thought I could tell the difference between a hand flex ofthe black P and the green Mtn tongues on the 5s. You most certainly can tell the difference hand flexing the TLT6tongues! And as I had hoped softer and harder than the original TLT5 tongue of any color. The newest TLT6 tongue is ever so slightly shorter in height but works just fine in the TLT5 for those that wondered. I couldn't tell any difference rug flexing/testing the black tongue in my TLT5 Mtns compared to the standard green MTN tongue however. Much as I wish it might be so.



Power strap?The TLT 6 has a new power strap. Gone is the big bump that kept the strap caught by the metal loop. I always just cut mine off. Now they have two small bumps on the strap end and you can take it out of the loop easily if you want to and the bumps keep it retained if you would prefer that option. Nice detail addressed from the previous boot. The strap however is much longer now than previous. (at least mine are) With ankles and the bottom of my calvesthe size of an 11 year old girl's it is now unworkable for sizing. Way too big with the Velcro barely engaging on full wrap and no tongue installed. It is slightly better with a tongue installed. If anyone has a pair of TLT5 power straps in decent shape that are two small I'll trade you straight up!?? These (the new longer ones) are now virtually unusable for me.



Liners?






left to right, CL and CR liners

Photo courtesy of http://mountainski.eu/






TLT6 P CR 288g



TLT5 P TF 186g



TLT5 Mtn TFX 326g











On the left is the TLT6 CR liner. PreviousTF-X liner on the right. Lower positioned sock "stop", fewer laces but covering more on the inner boot. Almost a full inch taller and a much beefier tongue. And still the new CRliner is 38g lighter.


That pretty much says it all. Newest liner is not much lighter but it is some lighter. Impressive with the added features and hight. I don;t question it will be themost comfortablefor skiing up hill or down. I am a big fan of the last generation of TFX lines as well. And as much as I like the original,the Palau TF liner, it could be more comfortable. I use an even lighter version in my PDGs and have similarissues on fit. Good but they could bothbe better. I have to use a customorthotic in both shells to keep my feet happy for the day. Easy enough to mix and match or add a after market liner. Be sure to heat form your liners if you want the very best fit. No matter what Dynafit suggests. If they can be molded...mold them. No one in their right mind would ski a Intuition without heat molding/forming them. Get on that clue bus for all of Dynafit's liners as well.



Comparing the TF-X liner to the the newest CR liner? Besides the drop in the weight on the CR you get a slightly taller inner boot, much more reinforcement in wear areas and a deeper throat for easier entry and exit. The laces have eyelets higher on the inner boot and lower as well. The idea is a better fitting inner boot. The tongue of the CR inner boot resembles a full blown ski boot now. It is stiff and reinforced although you have to look closely if you don't have it at hand.



The flex portion of the cuff is more flexible going back wards and as rigid or more going forward with a limiter strap on the back of the inner boot. Not sure it works as they intended but no question Dynafit has made areal effort at having offering amuchbetter all around inner boot.



Shell mods/boot fitting: At least now folks will not be so hesitant about blowing out the boots for fit issues. The metatarsal bellows made that all rather problematic on such a thin boot. A good boot fitter should be able to do it with rather easily now by comparison.



Variations? To date I have seen 5 versions of the TLT6. and 3 models. By levels of stiffness in the cuff material, more to less.. Carbon cuff, Fiberglass cuff and a Pebax cuff. Two liners, (maybe even three) which are the CR or Comfort Ready and the CL or Comfort Light. I am still a little unsure what we will see for actual liners but those are suppose to be their names with actual liners pictured below.






Photo courtesy of http://mountainski.eu/




TLT6 P CR

TLT6 P CL

TLT6 C-ONE CL

TLT Mtn CR

TLT Mtn CL













Durability? Guy have been getting a couple of years from the boots generally. Some are still on the same boots from Fall of . That amazes me. I am gentle on my gear for the most part and was worried about my own TLT5s in either version from theski cutting I experienced on theboot shell. I have been reassured the Grilamid is more than up to the task. But then I have neither the desire northe pocket boot to test them to failure. Seems a silly thing to worry about in a $1000 boot. I have not had problems with the hinge rivet however. Or the buckles for that matter other than not always wanting to stay shut.



The Buckles? The new buckle system for the most part are a nice improvement. More of them however. Still only 2 but they have added more adjustments and hinge points on the buckles that are there and an extra latch over the instep. Only a tiny gain in weight because of it. I really like the "snap" of the lower buckle and it now dbl pegs to lock it down. The first TLT had no peg on that buckle. The 2nd gen boots offered a single peg in the same buckle which helped. This new dbl peg buckle should have that issue sorted out. So I am hoping the instep buckle now stays shuton the crusty boot packs.The shell has a "dam" built around the lower instep buckle as well. That will help keeping the buckle closed as well.












Last year, Dane's new G20s and
a perfect fit!


Crampons? Grivels seem to be made for this boot. They fit like a glove out of the box. The others? Not so much. I've use the G20 and G22 on different occasions and prefer the G20s. Unusual as I am not generally a fan of mono points.





A BetterComparison?

A better comparion now on ski boots instead of the TLT5 and 6 IMO is the TLT6 and the ONE PF-TX. Just 5.5oz/156g between the two boots, and $450.



It has been nawing at me for a week or so. I seem to rememebr Lou over at Wild snow "asking" for a TLT ONE at some point in the recent past. Without a doubt that is exactly want theTLT6 is now.

Not sure what the weight is of the third buckle and two added Pbax straps are. The liners are off by one ounce. Add the spoiler,bigger power strap and extra sole lenghtand the grams add up quickly.

Sometimes it is easier to just ignore the obvious in front of your eyes.











More?



I've written a lot on the TLT Series of boots over the last couple ofyears. If the TLT6 is your introduction to the TLT family you have some catching up to do. I have no doubt the TLT5 Series of boots was a "game changer". The TLT6 may well be yet as well. The jury is still out. More here:



http://coldthistle.blogspot.com//06/part-2.html



Finally?

I am not a snow boarder but, I was directedto this comment and asked for a rebuttal if I thought it warranted. I'll insert my comments into the body of the original message.



thread in part is here:

http://splitboard.com/talk/viewtopic.php?f=10&t=10958&st=0&sk=t&sd=a&start=234



barrows sez:

>In my opinion, the 6s are going to be better. The only drawback I see is the additional 1 ounce of weight in the shell of the 6 vs the 5.



Actual shell weights with power strap attached

TLT6 P CR 1050g

TLT5 P TF 1010g

TLT5 Mtn TFX 1000g



50g is 1.7637oz per boot



>Personally, I would rather have the extra ounce of weight and the additional warmth and better buckles, both of which were weak points of the 5 which needed improving.



Buckles yes. Warmth?...not if the boot was used as intended and NOT for riding a lift. Classic case of using a piece of gear for something it was not designed for and bitching about it. It was originally designed as a Randoboot made for climbing and skinning UP and skiing DOWN.



>There is no need for the forefoot flex of the 5 in my opinion, in fact, the amount of flex was so miniscule (unlike the Scarpa) as to be almost non-existent anyway.



See my previous comments. Uneducated at best.



> As far as the liners go, all the Dynafit liners are weak



Again uneducated at best and simply untrue no matter what liner you'd like to compare with.



> I use Intuition for more comfort, warmth, and weight savings.



You might gain some warmth although I don't find that to be true if the boot is fitted correctly. No morecomfort either if the liner is heat formed correctly. And that weight savings? Ya, not so much.



TLT6 P CR 288g

TLT5 P TF 186g

TLT5 Mtn TFX 326g

DYNA EVO/PDG liner 150g

*Intuition Pro Tour* 278g



weight is listed for ONE liner boot



49g savings at most or 1.72842oz in my size 29s or a 11.5US with a Intuition. Or using the lwt Dynafit liners as much as 123g saved on the Intuition or 4.3387oz. And that is doubled counting both boots so just over 1/2#. That kind of weightstarts to really count on the up.



> The Dynafit Mountain was also never available in the US with the lighter (and better) Palau made TF liners



That is true but theTF liners alone have been available on occasion as is the Palau DyNA/PDG liner that will work in the TLT Series as well and only 150g.



>you could only get the heavy and less moldable TF-X liners



Ya, flatly untrue on "less moldable: The TFX liner is very moldable and actually more comfortable for most than the TF liner was. Which is the reason we have a new CR liner based on the TF-X liner in the new TLT6. Spares are available as well from your Dynafit dealer. See my previous comments on fit and liners above.



>As for riding performance: the 6 Mountain should be the same as the 5, as the cuff is the same plastic and mold, so will flex the same, and the no tongue option is still available.



Almost right :) The TLT6 liner is beefed up in the tongue quite a bit. Think more of a full on ski boot tongue in the 6. My long time climbing partner and avid snowboarder for the past 30+ years (and in the TLT5 mtn as well for a hard boot which is not typically his fancy)says it won't change how the boot boards very much either way.



Given the choice for a hard shell on a split board bootI'd want the PDG. 2# even per boot in my size 29. No tongue or power strap. It is too thin to ride a lift with on a really cold day. The PDGreally is a "ski running boot".

First Ascent of Kang Nachugo by Climbing Rangers

In mid-September, one of our lead climbing rangers, David Gottlieb, took off for Kathmandu on a climbing trip through the Himalayas. David's climbing partner, Joe Puryear, is a previous Mt. Rainier climbing ranger and friend. Their goal was a first ascent of Kang Nachugo (6,735 meters), found within the Himalayan Valley of Rolwaling. Joe set up a climbing blog, so that friends, fellow climbers, and family can stay up-to-date on their progress. We all waited patiently for news of their climb and verification of their safety. Thankfully, a post on October 25th stated simply that they were successful and were safe. Their blog now has a full trip report, complemented by some amazing pictures - definitely worth a full read-through. We just want to say "Congratulations" to both Joe and David, while wishing them safe travels home. We hope to see you on the Mountain soon!