"I'm just trying to understand the boot options out there. I typically ski front side mostly, so not a lot of hiking or walking. However, the idea of increased comfort and flexibility appeals to me and also, the AT boots just look 'cool' to me ... so I thought to ask what the differences are.
From the comments thus far: the AT boots appear somewhat softer flex, heavier weight and walk mode for touring. I'm not sure these are for me, so thanks to the ones for their comments and feedback."
Sorry about the cut and paste... Epic isn't playing well with the iPad at the moment.
Comfort. Like Alpine boots, AT boots come in different shapes and stiffnesses. Some AT boots are stiffer than many alpine boots.
Flexibility. Do you mean 'walk-ability' or flex while skiing? If it's the former and you want walking comfort, there are plenty of DIN sole walk mode 'hike mode' boots out there. If the latter, see my first comment.
AT boots are LIGHTER than alpine boots. Is an AT boot appropriate for resort skiing? Maybe. Hard to say. Most folks I know who ski AT boots exclusively do so because they spend most of their ski days touring and only hit the area on occasion so the cost of two boots doesn't make sense for them. Good enough reason on my book. If one is only area skiing, is there an advantage to AT boots? Unless you ride in a place with a lot of hiking involved, there's no performance advantage at all. I love my AT boots. I've skied and even taught on them, but in no way are the superior in performance to my alpine boots, except for hiking... and après when walk mode becomes beer mode.
Look cool? Maybe. Generally AT boots are more expensive. Buy boots for fit and be a happier camper/better skier.Edited by markojp - 9/20/15 at 10:45pm