or Connect
EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Member Gear Reviews › Atomic RT CS 100/110 boot review
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Atomic RT CS 100/110 boot review

post #1 of 9
Thread Starter 
Boot Make: Atomic
Boot Model: RT CS 100 ('06) RT CS 110 ('07)
Snow Conditions Used In: Groomed, bumps, powder, late season conditions
Number of Days Used: 30 or so
Your Ability: Advanced
How Many Years Have You Been Skiing: 31
Avg. Days per Year Skiing: 120
Previous Boots: Tecnica XT 17, Head RS 96
Your Height/Weight: 6' 170#

My feet: 10.5 US (right), 11.0 US (left), in between A and B width, high instep, very narrow achilles area, narrow heel.
Previous boot: Tecnica XT-17

Pros (as compared to XT-17):

1. Stance geometry. Instantly, I was a much better skier in this boot, able to make more effective use of ski design, create greater angles, get the feet much farther away from the body. Dramatic improvement in crud skiing. I simply felt centered like never before over the skis.

2. Warmer liner.

3. Adjustable forward lean.


1. Fit. This boot is a poor fit for my foot. It is much too tight over the instep, and too loose everywhere else. I had material removed from the tongue (better, but still too tight) and installed two heel wraps on each liner to snug up the ankle/heel area, which still isn't enough. Also, the toe box is too roomy above the foot.

2. (2006 CS 100) Cuff not removable.

3. Forward lean adjustment won't hold. I would set the cuff to upright, ski a few runs, and notice that it was now at full forward. Perhaps the second spine bolt is supposed to be installed after the forward lean preference is determined.

3. White shell. Bleah.

The flex on this boot works well for me. It is not too soft even on warm days. However, I do not race and prefer off piste soft snow conditions.

The liners on these boots packed out dramatically in only three days, and Atomic replaced them under warranty for the '07 RT CS 110. The new boots have conformable factory footbeds (irrelevant for those of us with orthotics), a detachable cuff, and a removable spoiler. However, the shell and liner appear unchanged except that the tongue on the '07 boot is not removable, which it was on the '06. I expect the '07 boot to ski and fit the same. (Time to order more heel wraps...)

Conclusions: The XT-17 fits like a glove. Put it on, buckle to the first notch and never touch them again for the rest of the day. I've even tried to drive out of the parking lot forgetting that they were on. The CS 100/110's fit is a pain - unbuckle for every lift ride and hope for footrests. But, darn it - they ski so much better!

If ski boot technical specs (ramp angle, forward lean, etc) were published, it would be much easier to find the right boot. But, such seems to be a secret in the ski boot industry. When I can afford another pair of boots, the Doberman WC (higher instep, tight heel pocket, easy to soften, and BLACK) is first on the list. But will it ski like the Atomic?

I recommend this boot for a medium volume foot with a low instep. Not for feet with narrow ankles/heels.
post #2 of 9
if you wanted a narrower version then the TI is 3mm narrower, not that this would solve the instep problem
post #3 of 9
The Heads have a higher instep, They are just about as narrow.

I have Atomic RT Ti 100's and love them. Buy a plug for the versitility you are looking for. Get them fit by a pro. Not knocking you but why did you buy these if they fit so poorly. The instep is something you should known about right off. FWIW- the TI's liner won't pack out, on the other hand, its not warm!

3- Yes, it is supposed to be installed after the lean is established.

Flex is ideal for all mountain, off-piste. Even for aggressive carving it's fine. I am 178#. On extemely cold AM's( negative temps to about 10) it is much stiffer but not rock hard.

White Shell, Ok, yes blah, but does it matter? Wear longer pants

Bottom-line, the proper fit means everything, These are the most comfortable boot I have evere owned. All day comfort. If you are having to unbuckle, they are not fit properly. These boots are for medium to narrow with thin heel and low instep. Ti's are for narrow and low.
post #4 of 9
Stvbck, the Atomics you tried were the same size as the XTs? Maybe you did not know that the Atomics run BIG. That is extremely important. I have <1 finger shell fit with the XTs. I tried on both the Atomic RT CS 100 and Ti Soft in the same size as my XTs and they were too big! I had almost 2 fingers behind my heel. I would have to downsize if i got the Atomics. That could explain why the CS felt too roomy in the ankle and heel area. I don't want to speculate but the fact the you found them roomy in the ankle/heel is unusual.

IMO in the correct size the Atomics will be tighter than the XT in the heel/ankle area. They are built differently. Both the Atomic CS and TI are narrow in the heel and have ankle pockets. The XT doesn't have ankle pockets. Theoretically, the Atomics offer a superior fit compared to the XT in the ankle/heel area but there are many other factors we should consider when we compare these boots: stance geometry, boot design, cuff tracking, plastic compound, flex.
post #5 of 9
Good point. I am a 10.5 street and my Atomic TI's are 308 shell, 26 mondo.Yes, very deep and tight ankle/heel.
post #6 of 9
Thread Starter 
Thanks for the comments -

I got these boots at a good price and gambled on buying them sight unseen. The stance geometry is very good for me, otherwise I would have resold them.

The shell size is correct. I ran across a pair of CS 130's in a 27.5 and had maybe 1/16" behind the heel.

I have boots that fit perfectly - the Xt's. The Atomics, in spite of the fit problems, ski much better. Now if I could only find a boot with an XT shell and an Atomic stance, and be able to afford it.

post #7 of 9
Originally Posted by Finndog View Post
Good point. I am a 10.5 street and my Atomic TI's are 308 shell, 26 mondo.Yes, very deep and tight ankle/heel.
Our 26 Ti's are 304mm and our 27's are 314.
post #8 of 9
I have a 26 CS and its a 304mm shell. Love the boot. However, I have an extremely tight heel fit and have had both boots ground in the heel and they are still very snug in the heel and I'm out of material to grind. It's kind of wierd, because I have thin heels to start with. I have lots of toe room, but probably not enough length. I was in a Atomic R 10 304 mm shell before the CS. with absolutely no rubbing- pinching in the heel. I;m thinking maybe my heel is still rolling over a bit causing the rubbing on the side of my heels.
post #9 of 9
OOPPS! yup, they're 304. I've been out of them too long! Roundturns, if you are not too far from Phili area, check out Billy Kaplan, "Cantman" who is an incredible fitter. He did my boots. PM me for his info if you like.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Member Gear Reviews
EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Member Gear Reviews › Atomic RT CS 100/110 boot review