2009 vs 2010 Salomon Falcons CS & CS Pro

 Hi guys,

I just tried out the 2010 Falcons CS  with 100 flex and they fitted me great. I thought the flex could be a bit stiffer, but I assume that it will be just right when I ski in cold weather. I was wondering if there is a difference between the 2010 Falcon CS that I tried and the 2009 Falcon CS model that can be found a bit cheaper online. I know that 2009 Falcon CS had a 90 stated flex, but otherwise they seem identical. If anyone has any experience or knowledge of the 2010 and 2009 models and their difference, then I would really appreciate their advise/feedback.

Also I found a great deal on the 2010 Falcon CS Pros online with 120 flex and I have read that if I were to remove the back screws that the flex would be nearly identical to the Falcon CS. The Falcon CS Pro also has  Race liner versus the Pro liner in the CS model and has an elastic strap. What are the differences in liners and straps and in your opinion is it a good choice to get the CS Pro and to just remove the screws if necessary.

I am new to this board and  any feedback would be greatly appreciated.

Thanks is advance!

all the falcons fit the same,

higher end ones have the MUCH nicer leather liner, and a stiffer flex.

Thanks for the reply.

Do you know if the Falcon CS Pro with the screw removed is comparable in flex to the regular Falcon CS?

I've also read that Falcon is pretty cold boot. Can you comment if one liner is warmer then the other?

Also if you know of any other boots that have a similar fit to the falcons, but that also have some vibration reduction built in then that would be greatly appreciated.

Yes, the Falcon is a cold boot.

If you remove the bolts on the back of the Pro, it has the same flex as the CS

The 2010 CS Pro liner is different than the 2009. I have the 2009 CS Pro and Salomon just replaced my liners with the 2010 due to a defect. The newer liners appear to have a bit more padding and a few other changes - but nothing real significant and I don't expect them to be any warmer.

Hotronic boot heaters, for me, are not optional with my Falcons. My feet freeze if I don't have them on.

 Another plug for the Pro.

Tried on the CS on a whim last season, and after a bit of conversation on this forum, opted for the Falcon 10, (same liner as the CS Pro and vastly superior to the CS.)

I was initially concerned that the 10 would be a bit stiff for me without removing the bolts, but found that not to be an issue. Nicest fitting boots that I could imagine owning and they perform flawlessly. I, unfortunately, do not.

There was at least one thread on this forum last season loaded with information about the Falcons. Try a SEARCH and see if you can't find it.

 Thanks for your input!

I am leaning towards getting the 2010 Falcons Pro and removing the screws if I find it too stiff. The only thing that I am worried about is that it does not have any vibration reduction gadgetry - I have some knee and lower back problems. Are there any other boots that you guys can suggest that I try out. Also is there a way to add some vibration reduction stuff to the falcon?

Any type of "vibration reduction" provided by a ski boot is minimal at best. It's not like having a full suspension mountain bike

Edited by The Squeaky Wheel - 10/28/09 at 11:49am

 That's a good point. Question for you TSW, what Hotronics do you use with Falcons and do you use a separate attachment bracket?

I have a set of 6 year old Hotronics which are still going strong. The new m4s are sweet and I'll likely get a set this season and pass my older ones to my 10 year old.

I use the clip that mounts the battery to the powerstrap. I keep the battery to the outside of the boot so that a chairlift doesn't knock it off (which can happen if placed just behind the boot by the calf).

Hi guys - I'm in need of a little advice on these as well, and have been comparing 2009 v 2010 Falcon CS & CS Pro.

My priorities are:
1) ultimate comfort
2) performance (I'm expert-level skier, but have toned it down since my 20s / early 30s. I'd say I'm now really looking for a great All Mountain Boot - something that will perform well in steeps, bumps, crud, and powder black / double-black terrain).
3) cost / value - based on the differences in features/functionality (like liners, stiffness, etc etc) between the 2009 and 2010s, I'd like to get the best overall value all factors considered

Lastly, a few other random questions. I have a 9.5 size foot, which I see is a 27.5 size boot. However, checking my old-school salomon boots, looks like they are 27.0 (but these have minimal liner that has been pounded out from 10 years of use). Let me know if you suggest going with my actual foot size considering new liners are probably bigger / will mold to my foot exactly?

And on stiffness, based on the above performance notes, let me know what you think is the right flex factor for me. I have heard that the CS Pro has a 120 stiff flex, but you can remove bolts in the back to reduce that to ~100 flex (similar to the CS).

Any thoughts/recommendations would be greatly appreciated.

Marc H.
SF, CA

Marc, do yourself a favor and go over to California Ski Company in Berkley on Gilman.  I just boiught a new pair of 2010 cs pro's there and had them fitted by John.  I spent 1 day in the shop just finding a boot, and a second day getting them fitted.  He truly knows feet and boots, and I can say my feet have never felt this good in a pair of ski boots before.  You can shop around, save a few bucks, then pay sombody way more money to fit the boot for you, or just go to a good, reputable shop and do it right.  The money you save up front on the boots will be quickly lost on ski days cut short by poor fitting boots.  These guys in Berkley are very good, and I am comparing that to Granite Chief in squaw (Gunnar) and Surefoot as previous bootfitting experiences.

Marc:

If your shoe size is 9.5 then your boot size is not a 27 shell size.. You should probably be in a 26 shell. Also, ignore the 1/2 sizes as in ski boots this is irrelevant. 26 and 26.5 should be considered as the same thing.

The boot choice that you make is relative to your foot shape and goals. The Falcon may be the right thing and it may not. Specific model recommendations via the internet are generally near worthless.

SJ

Thanks for the notes back sfjakey and SierraJim. Much appreciated. I will check out the shop in Berkeley and try to get with John - sounds like a good experience. This will be my first boot-fitting, and it sounds like it's more about foot shape and goals than just buying some off the web with a size chart. Sounds like it's worth investing a little extra to do this right to insure ultimate comfort and the right selection. Will take the advice, thanks guys. Marc

Hi- I'm looking to move down a shell size and spent some time in the Falcons today.  Any major differences between the 2010's and the 2008-2009's?  Looks like I can get a prior year boot for quite a bit less but I also don't want to be foolish and get the wrong boot, I've done that plenty of times already..  Any insight?  I haven't bought boots for a while... Thanks

 

Hey Squeaky Wheel, I have the 2009 Falcon CS Pro too, can you tell me a little about the liner defect, thanks.

so the shell for the 2009 and 2010 Falcon CS Pro are identical besides the red vs orange color, its just the shell that is upgraded for the 2010 model?

Both are great fitting go to boots.  The CS shell is great for fitting wider feet.  But really I don't cook that many shells.  It seems as if the same crowd (with the Salomon foot) still chooses it.  It is a hard sell, at least here in JH, when you have to cook the shell to get it to fit.

CS Pro nearly sold out on our wall- heart sizes gone!

We don't do a whole lot of full shell cooks either. Rather we sell the boot for it's fit type and do localized stretches as we would with any other boot. It (is) nice however, to be able to use the CS feature for areas such as the soft tissue region aft of the 5th met. The CS feature seems to deliver a nice general stretch there where specific punches might be too abrupt. (I think I'm doing one tonight)

We like the CS boots a lot.............we do wish they had a true 98 though.

SJ

jim:   the X3 lab medium is the "race" boot and a 95mm.  (but more like most other 98mm)

Yep, got that one. I'd agree it's somewhere between a 95 and a 98. We carry the soft as a "tweener" boot for some juniors. IMO, it's a bit much as a consumer boot.

SJ

Are these best suited for wide feet?

no.

falcon is narrow, but other salomons, and lots of other models make a wide version.

Thanks. I have a pair of 2010 Falcon CS with custom foot beds. They were baked once, during the initial fit, and I've skied them 2 days.

I asked because they seem a tad wide in the toe box, as I can curl my toes pretty easily if I want to. Length is perfect though, and the rest of the boot seems to fit great though (calf, ankle, instep). Just seems spacious up front.

Does that make sense?