What are the similarities and differences between Lange's RS model and RX model boots? I've learned already as much as I could reading the descriptions on Lange's website, which as far as I could tell, did not provide a boot vs boot comparison. Thanks.
Lange RS vs RX boots
ok trying to keep this simple
97mm.... Lange RS, RX lv, XT lv
100mm RS wide, RX, XT
other than that the XT/RX has a slightly softer feel to the liner and comes in a colour which is not blue, the XT (hike/ride boot) will feel softer in a 130 than the RS or RX as it does not have a bolted spine
what more can i say! if you want the exact modulus of the plastic i am sure someone call lange for you to find out
other than that the ONLY differences are as in the post above,
missed one thing, the RX and RS wide have replaceable sole pads
CEM: I liked your comment about the modulus of the plastic, but that wasn't what I meant. I was referring to being schooled in skiing technique. My problem is that I don't have a way to demo each model in order to make an on snow evaluation. So I'm trying to make an educated guess here. I hope that understanding the performance characteristics based upon the manufacturer's design features will help me to do that.
it goes like this, traditional marketing of skis and boots followed a similar path. with boot marketing they design a boot last/mold and then inject that mold with decreasing levels of stiffness and cheaper inner boots as the price declined. skis worked the same way, you design a GS sidecut and a SL side cut, then you build the race models in stiffer more exotic materials and then decline the stiffness by removing pieces and parts.
this concept of vertical marketing of ski products allowed for manufacturers to build an entire boot or ski line out of one set of molds. the investment cost was minimal and the output of marketable models and price points came down to flex, color, and price. the downside to this marketing method is that you had limitations to how many high priced high performance products you could push into the market. meaning that there was only 1 top of the line boot and 2 top of the line skis.
what the industry did in the early 90's is the basis of how all manufacturers market to you today, which was to flip the the vertical line-up of products to a horizontal line-up. in doing so they invented new category groups which they could then delineate by flex features and price points. and at least in boots they could produce dozens of different boots that were actually all the same, but because the groups were laid out horizontally it allowed them to have 6 to 8 top of the line models instead of 1. so the marketing guys helped to invent all of these ridiculous categories like race, all mountain, freeride, freestyle, side country, back country, alpine touring and then build multiple models within those categories. all they have done is change colors and bits and pieces like buckles, boot boards, power straps, liner finishes and materials, etc. in the end they are all just hard plastic shells with differing degrees of comfort.
what can you do to solve your dilemma? go into the ski shop that has your size in all of the models that you are interested in and try them on. buy the one that fits the best and seems to flex closest to what you believe that you are looking for. then buy that boot. or you could just get the one whose color matches your jacket.
Jim: Thanks for that very insightful explanation, especially about the impact of marketing. I've been around long enough to remember when the ski/boot lines were marketed vertically (which made some sense to me back in the day); this switch to horizontal lines having confounded me before you put it in to perspective. I'm glad to know that the basics for choosing the best boot are still a matter of fit and flex. That seems to cut through the morass.