or Connect
EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Ski Gear Discussion › Nordica Dobermann Aggressor 130 dilemia
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Nordica Dobermann Aggressor 130 dilemia

post #1 of 11
Thread Starter 
I picked up the 08 Aggressor 130 this year because I thought I needed "more" boot. I have been skiing the Hot Rod Nitrous for the last year, after having skied strictly race boots before that. I wanted something stiffer so I bought the 130's. Now, when I compare them side by side the Nitrous seems noticeably stiffer, WTF? I added plates to the cuffs on my Nitrous boots, but still would have thought the Aggressor 130 would be stiffer? Now I have brand new Aggressors that I can hardly seem to justify keeping. First, I will need to grind them to fit me right. Second, maybe the duck stance won't work for me (who knows). And third, they don't seem to provide the stiffness I wanted. I am pretty shocked by this. I even had my roommate try both on side by side and he thought exactly the same thing. Does anyone have any thoughts??
post #2 of 11
If you haven't had them ground or stretched, maybe the shop would let you exchange for the 150, which could ultimately be softened if you felt you needed to in the future.

FWIW, I have he WC150 and it changes noticeably once the shell gets cold. Don't know how the Aggressor130 responds, maybe do your same test outside in the cold?
post #3 of 11
The difference is in the fit, the Aggressor will (with work) fit like a sock, the Nitrous will never have the precision that the Aggressor will be capable of. If you are only interested in a stiff boot and like the Nitrous fit, add some rivets to lock the upper cuff and lower together and sell the aggressor.
post #4 of 11
I agree with cgeib... make sure you try them outside before you decide. The 150 definitely stiffens in the cold.

Even so, it's not fore/aft stiffness that's the key to skiing well. It's lateral stiffness and overall precision. The Aggressor will almost certainly be more precise (once fit to your foot!) than the Nitrous. However, if the toes-out stance isn't right for your morphology, it may not be a good choice.

(For example, both cgeib and I were fit into Doberman boots by Jeff Bergeron, he in the standard Dobie, me in the Aggressor, due to the difference in our foot and body shapes and how they move differently.)
post #5 of 11
Thread Starter 
Thanks for the replies guys. With regard to the stiffness in the cold, I think both models will stiffen considerably so I have considered that. I also agree that the lateral stiffness is of great importance too, which the Dobie definitely has. I was just shocked that it would feel SO soft in forward flex. I have an old pair of Tecnica Diablo 130's and they are off the charts stiffer than the dobie in forward flex. Surprising.

In any event, I agree that the Dobie would probably give me a much more precise fit once I put the work in with grinding, etc. I guess I just wonder if it is worth it now given that the Hot Rods fit amazing well out of the box for me (with an added heel hold). Wondering if my cash might be better spend on some Mantras I can always use my old Tecnicas for fun racing, free skiing on my slalom skis.
post #6 of 11
If you don't need/want the precision, then stick with the Nitrous, by all means. The 130s and Nitrous are pretty close in flex, IIRC. I think the Nitrous was comparable to the Speedmachine 14, which shows a flex of 130-120 on their web site.

It is different plastic, so I think the Dobies stiffen a bit more. But, again, the difference is more in precision than flex.

I like the softer, progressive flex of modern race quality boots. Very nice compared to older, stiffer boots, for sure!
post #7 of 11
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by ssh View Post
If you don't need/want the precision, then stick with the Nitrous, by all means. The 130s and Nitrous are pretty close in flex, IIRC. I think the Nitrous was comparable to the Speedmachine 14, which shows a flex of 130-120 on their web site.

It is different plastic, so I think the Dobies stiffen a bit more. But, again, the difference is more in precision than flex.

I like the softer, progressive flex of modern race quality boots. Very nice compared to older, stiffer boots, for sure!
I can handle the precision, and would like it. I am just being lazy I guess! The Nitrous is actually rated at 100 flex as compared to the 130 dobie or the Speedmachine that the list as adjustable between 120-130. I think these numbers aren't all that accurate though . . .
post #8 of 11
They aren't, for sure, and it's all relative...

It's funny... I've been thinking about picking up a more "recreational" boot for teaching days. Haven't done it, yet, though...
post #9 of 11
I think (someone correct me if I am wrong) that the last of the Hot Rod nitrous and the Dobie Pro 130 are exactly the same. I know this was the case for the Hot Rod Top Fuel boot (was a Dobie 130 with a 115 flex due to the softer transparent plastic). The Aggressor boots seem to be the WC last (narrower) with the same plastic used in the Pro 130. The transparent plastic is actually much softer and less tempurature sensitive than the black plastic that is used in the 130 (both are actually different compounds from what is used in the Dobie WC 150). Hearing that the Dobie 130 is softer than the older Diablos is surprising to me because I have tried both on back to back (Pro 130) and when I tried them, the Dobie 130 was the stiffest non-plug boot out there (stiffer than lange 130's, Technica race pro 130's, diablos, etc).

The plates on the cuffs could be making the difference in flex. The plates that are designed to fit on the Nordica cuffs actually hinder the forward flex (make it stiffer, but also block it slightly). I know that the Dobie 150 becomes insanely stiff when you add those cuff insterts to the front of the boot. Try removing them and doing the comparison - or perhaps add them to the 130 and do the comparison. I think the 130 would become close to as stiff as the 150 with the plates attached.

Later

Greg
post #10 of 11
Some more data points to consider re the Aggressor

--If you look on the Nordica website you'll see that the Aggressor 130 has different plastic than the Pro 130. I was surprised by this but apparently its true

--I've heard some people say that the aggressor flex can seem softer than it is. As I understand, the crux of the argument is that the "natural" stance allows you to more easily apply leverage to the front of the boot. You might ask one of the Boot pros whether this is plausible.

--Anecodtally, I thought the aggressor 130 definitely felt like it had a softer flex than the Pro 130 but YMMV. I've heard people say similar things when comparing the 150 WC and 150 Aggressor...
post #11 of 11
Granted this was inside a warm ski shop, I tried on Doberman 130WC side-by-side with the Speedmachine 12s and I felt the Speedmachine 12s were stiffer. I was confused by this.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Ski Gear Discussion
EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Ski Gear Discussion › Nordica Dobermann Aggressor 130 dilemia