or Connect
EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Ask the Boot Guys › Rossignol Experience SI 130 2013 vs. Head Raptor RS 115
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Rossignol Experience SI 130 2013 vs. Head Raptor RS 115

post #1 of 19
Thread Starter 
Hey everyone,

INFO: I am 6'1 168 lbs athletic. I ski 15 times a year if conditions merit. I ski pretty hard, No park. Bumps and powder always when available.
I wear a size 10.5/11 sneaker and have a very low volume foot.


Looking for some info on boot characteristics. Trying to get this figured out so I can get my equipment ready for that first good snow. I tried a Head Raptor RS 115 27.5 at Ski Stop outside of Boston. Great service there, wanted to buy, but didn't feel sure and I don't have $ for mistakes. The boot felt quite comfy. I wear a size 10.5/11 sneaker and have a very low volume foot. The Raptor was about the lowest volume men's boot the shop had. I read online that they would pack out and start to feel big. I was a little bit worried that it would pack out and start to feel big because it was totally comfy in the store, no pressure points at all, no bad feelings under flex (I know it all sounds good, right).

Anyways, I noticed that the Lange RX 130 LV is a 97 mm last and that the Rossignol Experience 130 is the same shell with some slight modifications. Are these boots lower volume than the head raptor 115 RS? I don't care about the 15 flex difference?

Additional Info - I tried my friends atomic hawx 100 26.5 and they were ok except I my toes touched front until max flex. I don't think the fit was as good as the raptors.


Thanks
post #2 of 19
Thread Starter 
I didn't like the buckles on the Raptor. they felt gimmicky and I read about them popping while skiing.
post #3 of 19

and what was the shell fit like on any of the boots?

 

my guess:  if you wanted a great fitting boot, and where willing to work with a store to get this (not always a fast process) a 26 is the best bet.

 

both are great boots, it just depends on what fits YOU the best

post #4 of 19

Don't go by shoe size---don't go by the number marked on the shell---do a shell fit as suggested in the following article---just click on the address below and it will walk you through the process.

 

http://epicski.onthesnow.com/a/boot-fitting-which-boot-will-work-for-me

 

there is also a list of boot fitters in a WIKI at the top of Ask the boot guy's section.

 

mike

post #5 of 19
Thread Starter 
Shell fit was done on every boot I mentioned above except Rossi and Lange, because I haven't had an opportunity.

Shell fit on raptor left me with just about 1cm room with toes against front of boot.

I asked for a comparison of the boots inner dimensions and how they would work for a LV foot. I am wondering about the small differences between the boots, heel pocket, instep height ,ect.

Thanks guys.
post #6 of 19
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by mntlion View Post

and what was the shell fit like on any of the boots?

my guess:  if you wanted a great fitting boot, and where willing to work with a store to get this (not always a fast process) a 26 is the best bet.

both are great boots, it just depends on what fits YOU the best

I'm quite certain 26 will require punching out the toe but may help elsewhere. I suspect that I didn't try a 26 on because the boot fitter at Ski Stop thought it would be too small for me. My understanding is that they have 1 boot fitter on the list here.
I know not to go by my shoe size or boot numbers, I just included that information for the purpose of informing you as to what was going on.

Thank you.
post #7 of 19

I sell both and they fit very differently.  The Raptor series has a lower instep and is very slightly narrower I would say in the forefoot.  I like the ankle design of the Raptor better but that doesn't mean it is better for you.  

 

You should also find a shop (may not be easy) that sells the the WC version of the boots in the 96 and 92mm version and try them.  Especially in the case of the Raptor B5 it is a great boot for narrow feet.

 

Lou

post #8 of 19
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lou Rosenfeld View Post

I sell both and they fit very differently.  The Raptor series has a lower instep and is very slightly narrower I would say in the forefoot.  I like the ankle design of the Raptor better but that doesn't mean it is better for you.  

You should also find a shop (may not be easy) that sells the the WC version of the boots in the 96 and 92mm version and try them.  Especially in the case of the Raptor B5 it is a great boot for narrow feet.

Lou

Lou, thank you very much for the info, that is what I was looking for. I have some concerns about the raptor being too unforgiving based on what I have read. If I ski a lot of bumps and non groomed trails, I wonder if it is the right sort of boot. Can you comment on the nature of the 2 boots? I have seen some reviews on the rossi that seemed to imply it would be more forgiving. Thanks again
post #9 of 19
Thread Starter 
Lou, could you comment on the ankle design difference, and heel pocket by any chance?
post #10 of 19
Thread Starter 
Another Question, Does the Lange RX series run true to length/size?
post #11 of 19
Thread Starter 
Ordered several boots
Lange RX 130 27.5
Atomic burner 120 27.5
Nordica Enforcer Pro 27

Will shell fit them, flex them, and see how they feel and report back. If nothing feels as good as the raptor, i'll probably go that route.

I measured my foot. It is 99mm wide and 280-281 mm long.
Edited by flightschool - 11/2/13 at 1:20pm
post #12 of 19

Not certain what you've read about Raptors, but unforgiveness in a boot is a function I would say of flex.  The raptor is a 98mm last from 90 flex to 130 flex so pick your poison and you should be fine skiing all day regardless of terrain you choose.  I've found them to fit very true to size and rarely have to sell a different size than customers measure. 

 

The ankle pocket in the Raptor is quite well formed and fits many people very well.

 

Lou

post #13 of 19

REgarding Raptor buckles, I ski the boot and don't have any problem with buckles.  the Spine Tec buckles on the 115 aren't my favorite and can be a little difficult at times but I've never broken one or had a problem with them coming undone.  The 130 raptor Spineflex buckles are excellent.

 

Lou

post #14 of 19
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lou Rosenfeld View Post

REgarding Raptor buckles, I ski the boot and don't have any problem with buckles.  the Spine Tec buckles on the 115 aren't my favorite and can be a little difficult at times but I've never broken one or had a problem with them coming undone.  The 130 raptor Spineflex buckles are excellent.

Lou

Thanks Lou. If I were to get raptors I would buy the 115 so buckles are a bit of a concern. Hoping one of the boots I purchased will be good. I thought the raptor felt great and the heel pocket felt good, so I agree with what you say.

Does it make sense that my foot measured 99mm wide yet the 98mm last boots feel good to me? Is that common?
post #15 of 19

Hey fightschool,

I am one of the fitters at Ski Stop. I believe you worked with one of the other fitters. When you came in did you have an entry level Dalebello boot with you? I believe you may of come in early Fall with a pair of boots you bought. Not sure if it was an on line purchase or not but the boot did not fit at all. Trying to put pieces together. I am getting old memory fading. If this is you a 26.5 boot would be a very snug fit which we believe would not be in your best interest. Good luck with your boot quest. Think Snow..,

post #16 of 19

Absolutely normal and not untypical.  Everyone has a different tolerance and desire for compression.  We have customers come in with 104 mm that like the feel of 98 last and remember the beginning point is only that.  We look at instep height, length ankle location, room around the medial mid foot area and medial malleolus and go from there.  If everything lines up well but we simply need more space, we make more space but don't typically go to another boot.

 

Had a girl 14 year old racer in yesterday with EE foot width and large calf.  She was 5'4" or so and I would estimate her weight at around 160.  Last year she skied in a 90 flex boot that she could obviously crush.  She left in a 98mm 115 flex.  I'm not saying that is the recommended procedure for recreational skiers only pointing out what is possible.

 

So in short 99mm foot in 97/98 mm last, absolutely.

 

Lou

post #17 of 19
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by BurgMan View Post

Hey fightschool,
I am one of the fitters at Ski Stop. I believe you worked with one of the other fitters. When you came in did you have an entry level Dalebello boot with you? I believe you may of come in early Fall with a pair of boots you bought. Not sure if it was an on line purchase or not but the boot did not fit at all. Trying to put pieces together. I am getting old memory fading. If this is you a 26.5 boot would be a very snug fit which we believe would not be in your best interest. Good luck with your boot quest. Think Snow..,

That's me. Good memory. Boot was not an online purchase. Was bought at a ski shop in NY when I went in 2 going on 3 years ago when I was taking the sport up again. They sold me a pair of E-flex 4 as well, which was horrible, and I realized were useless within 2 days on killington. That's what happens when you don't do a lot of research online. In all fairness though, I'm not sure I conveyed properly my ski level because I have a kind of skewed representation of levels from who I ski with.

Burg Man thanks for letting me know a 26.5 will be too small. I had a feeling that was likely the case if you look at my earlier posts.
post #18 of 19
Thread Starter 

Update!

 

Sitting here with the Lange RX 130 LV on.  Damn it is a nice boot.  Flex is quite stiff but definitely loosening up as they warm with my feet in them.  Initially when I put it on 15 minutes ago it felt really tight over the top of my foot, a little pinchy.  That is improving with time and I have buckled the second buckle up.  The toe pocket very nice, can move them but they are snug at the same time.  The length is perfect I would say, the heal pocket is very nice.  Overall, like it very much.

 

Nordica Enforcer Pro - this boot felt very good as well.  Flexed easier than the lange.  The toe pocket was smaller but there was little bit more room for the top of ones foot.  Overall, the fit was narrower on the sides despite it being a 98 mm last and the Lange being a 97mm last.  The difference was the instep height with more room in the Nordica for sure.  Also, the nordica seemed a bit shorter with my toes touching the front of boot until I flexed. This i'm nearly certain will go away as liner packs in and the heel pocket pushes back.

 

Atomic Burner 120 - BROKEN?  Not sure what happened with this boot as I could not get it on.  The boot would not accommodate my foot no matter what I did and I pushed myself through a lot of pain to try to slide in.  I think the flex was broken as I could not flex the boot and it seemed to be stuck in a permanently forward flexed position.  The box they came in was beat up so perhaps this was not a new boot after-all.  Who knows.

 

I don't know enough about boots to know which boot is better, the Nordica or the Lange.  Going to wear them both for several hours each and flex them and assume athletic stances. 

 

I would say neither boot is as perfectly comfortable as the Head Raptor RS 115, but the Lange is very close.

 

I took off the Lange and put the Nordica back on.  I think the Lange has a better heel pocket and toe pocket.  The Lange's moldings fail to seal which can be seen easily when boot is buckled.  It is between the 2nd and 3rd buckle, there is a couple mm gap.  Not sure what nasty will come of that, but I can guess.

 

By the time I got down the stairs to take the Lange off, all of the instep pressure was gone and the boot was just money.  I can see why people recommend the Lange.


Edited by flightschool - 11/12/13 at 7:30am
post #19 of 19
Thread Starter 

Update - I decided to keep the Lange.  Very good fit.  To my feet, the liner is much stiffer than the liner in the Head 115 RS while the footbed still has some decent cushion.  The flex is way, way stiffer than RS115.  I have no removed either flex screw but might take out the top one.

 

The boot opened up a little bit while skiing 4 hour straight on a warm day.  But I was able to ski moderately hard with the buckles not tightened up much at all.  If I needed to go tighter, I could comfortably, and that seems like a good thing to me.  This boot communicates what the ski is doing so much better than my nordica boot, it is awesome.

 

Thanks to whoever chimed in to help.

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Ask the Boot Guys
EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Ask the Boot Guys › Rossignol Experience SI 130 2013 vs. Head Raptor RS 115