Crispi Futura Pro feedback.

[kniepisler]

I bit the bullet and made the transition to Xplore for my light-duty touring setup and can confidently say that it was worth the investment. Previously I was skiing Excursion 88's with NNNBC/Alaska BCs for rolling terrain and SB98's with Voile Traverse/Scott Excursions for the steeper stuff... just added a pair of SB112's with Xplore/Crispi Futura Pros and damn what a combo! The new boot/binding combo gives great control over the fatter ski, similar if not equal to my S98/Scott setup, but also kick and glides and tracks in the flats as good if not better than my Alaska/E88 setup. RE: the latter, the SB112 ski doesn't necessarily K&G better as there is much less camber, but the Futura boot more than made up for it. The slightest leg movement instantly transfers to the ski which made for much greater control and easier tracking in the flats. The exoskeleton of the boot greatly increases the torsional rigidity of the Crispi's and the ratcheting arch strap locks my ankle into the back of the boot and forces the boot to flex at the toes instead of my heel pulling excessively out of the heel pocket...

The cuff height of the boot is just about equal to that my Alaska's and roughly 1" shorter than that of my Scott Excursions. I don't own a pair to confirm, but they appear to be 1-1.5" shorter than the Svartisen's based on the photos I have seen. If I had my druthers, then I would like to see Crispi make an Xplore version of the Svartisen with the two ratchet straps. I think the added control you could get from the cuff height would give even greater control while the ratcheting strap would allow you to fine tune the flex for flatter or steeper terrain similar to the BOA on the Alfa Free's... On a related note about the Scott Excursions, while the cuff height is taller than the Crispi's, the "power" strap is about useless. I put power in quotes because I never understood why Scott had a velco "power" strap that was only connected to the liner and didn't engage the plastic cuff of the boot.. Seems that the boot would offer so much more control if it did...

FWIW, I have a wide foot and both the Alaska and Futura's have plenty of width in the toe box. At the direction of Martin from Telemarkdown, I went with the Crispi's in size 46 even though my Alaska's are 47s. He recommended this based on my Scarpa TXcomps which I absolutely love and are sized at 29.5. I was skeptical at first, but he nailed it.... Who knows, maybe my Alaska's and Scotts are too big and that's causing my blister issues. That's the downside of participating in sports where virtually no local shops stock any gear and you have to play roulette when ordering new gear..

All-in-all, I couldn't be happier and now plan to eliminate my NNNBC gear and stick solely with Xplore. I've got other 3-pin skis so my S98's and Scott's will stay in the quiver, for now anyways,,,,

Hope this helps someone looking to make the jump to Xplore....

Laters, KP

[CwmRaider]

Excellent review!
I got a pair of the Crispi Futura Pro XP, also size 46. The only other Xplore boot I have is Alfa Free and I intend to keep both, the boots are quite different and have different strengths.
I have not had the chance to test the torsional rigidity of the Crispi compared to the Free, but the Crispi Futura seems to flex forwards at the ball of foot more easily and is much more comfortable for XC skiing, but generally I think it is less supportive than the Free. It is also noticeably warmer. The lacing on the Crispi would have benefited from higher top lacing eyelets (others have mentioned this here before). I have not had serious downhill skiing with the Crispi yet. Noot having a ratchet strap at the top is silly, but I cannot say for sure I would benefit from it beyond easier fine adjustments.

[telerat]

Thanks. Matching boot and ski for conditions and personal preference is more important than what others mean. I am a bit surprised that you prefer the SB112/Futura Pro combination ahead of E88/Alaska BC for kick and glide, but on firmer snow with skis swimming a bit from side to side a better fitting/more supportive boot will often feel better. A good fitting boot is paramount to a good experience.

The boot is called Crispi Futura CXP here, while the non-strap version is called Futura CX. There are actually an old and newer version of Svartisen, where the newer one is a bit lower and looks more like Futura Pro, but still with a ratcheting strap. I managed to try on the Futura CX in a shop locally, but they only had a size too large so no first impression of that yet. I hope to try on the Pro/CXP version too soon.

Futura Pro looks like an interesting alternative to Alfa Free, which seems to be the two most supportive Xplore boots so far. I think I would like Futura CXP better if the leather extended slightly higher, had lacing to the top and kept the ratcheting strap from Svartisen, perhaps even had top eyelets enabling double lacing to function a bit like a power strap. Actual use would see how it actually performs and I might get a different opinion than my impressions from looking at it.

I do think Alfa Free is a more interesting and exciting boot, but it has some issues that have prevented me from buying it before. The rubber only covering the toe and stiff material on the rear part both makes it flex in a more forward position than other Xplore boots, as well as bear down a bit on the toes when you flex it. I think I would also like it to be slightly higher and even more supportive, so I have waited to see if it was upgraded or a more tempting boot was released. Futura Pro/CXP did not tempt me and last month I did buy a pair of used Free that I will use with my Falketind 62 XP, especially on firmer conditions. I also have Alfa Skaget which is actually slightly higher and quite supportive, but Free is significantly more supportive. I have only used it on one tour so far, which was cut short due to high winds, and I did not switch to the hard flexor either. It remains to be seen how it performs, but first impressions are good.

Regarding Excursion and power strap position; I think that is so it gets less resistance backwards for better striding and thus making flat or mellow uphill more efficient/comfortable, while keeping some of the forward support. It is a great boot though, well worth keeping and using for wider skis if it fits well. I would probably use that with SB112 and Xplore with the SB98.

[lilcliffy]

Thank you for the info on the new Futura Pro XP!

The new boot/binding combo gives great control over the fatter ski, similar if not equal to my S98/Scott setup,

This is very interesting and valuable testimonial...

The slightest leg movement instantly transfers to the ski which made for much greater control

I have the same experience with Xplore- it has the most rigid boot-binding interface of all current Nordic touring bindings (ie NN-3pin; NNNBC; Xplore).

I don't own a pair to confirm, but they appear to be 1-1.5" shorter than the Svartisen's based on the photos I have seen.

I have the Svartisen and the Futura Pro- they are identical (other than the upper ratchet vs power strap). I will take a comparison photo when I get a chance.

If I had my druthers, then I would like to see Crispi make an Xplore version of the Svartisen with the two ratchet straps. I think the added control you could get from the cuff height would give even greater control while the ratcheting strap would allow you to fine tune the flex for flatter or steeper terrain similar to the BOA on the Alfa Free's...

I think that there are pros and cons to the ratchet vs power strap on this boot design...
Depending on skiing context (and ratchet tightness)- the thin plastic ratchet strap can SEVERELY rub/chafe/pressure your shin...The power strap may not facilitate micro-adjustments, but at course tension it enables the same level of support, and it is MUCH more comfortable to ski with- in all modes.

FWIW, I have a wide foot and both the Alaska and Futura's have plenty of width in the toe box. At the direction of Martin from Telemarkdown, I went with the Crispi's in size 46 even though my Alaska's are 47s.

I am still struggling to understand how this works for some.
The footbed length of my 42EU Alaska BC and 42EU Crispi Svartisen/Futura Pro are identical- there is no way I could fit into a 41EU Svartisen/Futura...

He recommended this based on my Scarpa TXcomps which I absolutely love and are sized at 29.5. I was skeptical at first, but he nailed it.... Who knows, maybe my Alaska's and Scotts are too big and that's causing my blister issues.

Yes- perhaps that is it-
and perhaps you needed to size-up in the Alaska to get a good fit (fairly common)...

Regardless- based on my limited experience- I would not recommend sizing down with the Svart/Futura boot, unless one could try on both sizes to compare. Again, in my example, if a "42" Svart/Futura is a performance fit in terms of length- you will need to cut off your toes to fit into a "41".

All-in-all, I couldn't be happier and now plan to eliminate my NNNBC gear and stick solely with Xplore. I've got other 3-pin skis so my S98's and Scott's will stay in the quiver, for now anyways,,,,

Hope this helps someone looking to make the jump to Xplore....

Laters, KP

Good stuff!
I am VERY impressed with the performance of Xplore as well!

[lilcliffy]

The only other Xplore boot I have is Alfa Free and I intend to keep both, the boots are quite different and have different strengths.

Agree!

I have not had the chance to test the torsional rigidity of the Crispi compared to the Free, but the Crispi Futura seems to flex forwards at the ball of foot more easily and is much more comfortable for XC skiing, but generally I think it is less supportive than the Free.

Agree- even with the Futura Pro all strapped up- my current experience is that the Free boot is more supportive as well- and- YES- waaay more comfortable for my feet when XC skiing! (I actually cannot personally use the Free boot over any significant distance without hurting my feet...)

Not having a ratchet strap at the top is silly, but I cannot say for sure I would benefit from it beyond easier fine adjustments.

See my comments on this above.

[lilcliffy]

The boot is called Crispi Futura CXP here, while the non-strap version is called Futura CX. There are actually an old and newer version of Svartisen, where the newer one is a bit lower and looks more like Futura Pro, but still with a ratcheting strap. I managed to try on the Futura CX in a shop locally, but they only had a size too large so no first impression of that yet. I hope to try on the Pro/CXP version too soon.

I have both the Futura Pro XP and the Futura XP (as well as the Svartisen BC)-
the Futura Pro XP is essentially identical to my Svartisen- other than the powerstrap vs ratchet strap.

The Futura XP is a completely different design (and is not made in the Crispi factory in Italy- it is made somewhere in Romania). Overall, though the Futura XP seems well made- it is a much lower end (ie less heavy-duty) boot than the Futura Pro XP. The Futura XP is lighter; lower-cut; is much softer; and has a softer sole. In some ways it is very similar to a boot like the "Alaska" XP (NOT the Alaska BC) in upper- but it has a signficantly softer sole-flex than the Alaska XP. I was surprised by the Futura XP- I was expecting a "Stetind" XP- not so- it is a lighter-duty boot than the Stetind.

I will take some comparitive photos of these boots when I get a chance.

I think I would like Futura CXP better if the leather extended slightly higher, had lacing to the top and kept the ratcheting strap from Svartisen, perhaps even had top eyelets enabling double lacing to function a bit like a power strap. Actual use would see how it actually performs and I might get a different opinion than my impressions from looking at it.

Yes- I was hoping for a bit higher cuff, and lacing to the top- disapointed with this actually...

It is a great boot though, well worth keeping and using for wider skis if it fits well. I would probably use that with SB112 and Xplore with the SB98.

Yes- to consider- and if you are thrilled with XP on the wider S-112- curious as to whether you would consider the same boot and binding on your S-98?

[telerat]

...
Agree- even with the Futura Pro all strapped up- my current experience is that the Free boot is more supportive as well- and- YES- waaay more comfortable for my feet when XC skiing! (I actually cannot personally use the Free boot over any significant distance without hurting my feet...)

This was ambigious; Which boot is more comfortable and which boot hurts you feet? Is Free bad, but better than Futura Pro?

I have both the Futura Pro XP and the Futura XP (as well as the Svartisen BC)-
the Futura Pro XP is essentially identical to my Svartisen- other than the powerstrap vs ratchet strap.
...
The Futura XP is lighter; lower-cut; is much softer; and has a softer sole. In some ways it is very similar to a boot like the "Alaska" XP (NOT the Alaska BC) in upper- but it has a signficantly softer sole-flex than the Alaska XP. I was surprised by the Futura XP- I was expecting a "Stetind" XP- not so- it is a lighter-duty boot than the Stetind.

You sound like a boot hoarder lilcliffy, but it is nice to get your experiences with different boots, so I have a few questions:

Can you feel any/much difference in sole stiffness between Futura Pro and Svartisen? The upper looks the same and will of course add to and affect the overall boot/sole stiffness.

You also own Skaget. Is the Futura XP sole much softer than Skaget? Is Alaska and Skaget comparable in sole stiffness? My wife's and my experience is that we too have to size up on Alaska, but our feet also seems to fit Alfa Skaget better.

I have no experience with Crispi Stetind, but I assume that it is the softer upper that makes Futura XP lighter duty (=less supportive?) or is also the sole stiffness?

Do you have a favorite between the soft soled Futura XP and the stiffer soled Alaska XP for flatter skiing and walking/hiking?

[kniepisler]

Thanks. Matching boot and ski for conditions and personal preference is more important than what others mean. I am a bit surprised that you prefer the SB112/Futura Pro combination ahead of E88/Alaska BC for kick and glide, but on firmer snow with skis swimming a bit from side to side a better fitting/more supportive boot will often feel better. A good fitting boot is paramount to a good experience.

I don't think the ski is superior at K&G, but overall it is a better K&G combo as the boot and ski track better in low-snow hard-pack conditions (which unfortunately seems to be the norm the last few years in my area). The torsional rigidity allows me to set a better edge and keep the skis pointed forward without skittering left and right. The relative slop of the Alaska boot allowed for much greater twist in the ski and thus more wasted effort. As I mentioned in the OP, maybe my Alaska's are a size too big and that could be what's creating too much play in the system....

But as of now, I am thrilled enough with the new boot/binding combo that I've tracked down a new pair of Excursion 88's in 199cm and am having them mounted up with Xplore bindings and am looking forward to seeing how they K&G....

I'll be giving my son the old setup as he's got a similar sized foot and doesn't tour enough to worry about minute differences of the setup..

Regarding Excursion and power strap position; I think that is so it gets less resistance backwards for better striding and thus making flat or mellow uphill more efficient/comfortable, while keeping some of the forward support. It is a great boot though, well worth keeping and using for wider skis if it fits well. I would probably use that with SB112 and Xplore with the SB98.

I'm definitely keeping the Scott Excursions as I have other 3-pin mounted skis that I use for the steeper and deeper stuff... I wish they were still in production as I think a smaller shell would do wonders for my blister issues. I had a pair of T4's which disturbingly tore up my feet even worse than the Scott's..

[lilcliffy]

...
Agree- even with the Futura Pro all strapped up- my current experience is that the Free boot is more supportive as well- and- YES- waaay more comfortable for my feet when XC skiing! (I actually cannot personally use the Free boot over any significant distance without hurting my feet...)

This was ambigious; Which boot is more comfortable and which boot hurts you feet? Is Free bad, but better than Futura Pro?

Sorry about that! The Free boot crushes my foot.
My only disapointment with the Futura Pro (and the Svartisen; and the Lofoten) is the lacing.

You sound like a boot hoarder lilcliffy,

Well- I do have access to more boots than I need at the moment! (There are a number of reasons for it, including sharing boots with a couple of others (as well as the fact that I do enjoy trying new boots!)

Can you feel any/much difference in sole stiffness between Futura Pro and Svartisen? The upper looks the same and will of course add to and affect the overall boot/sole stiffness.

The sole of the Futura Pro XP is much stiffer and more stable than my Svartisen BC.

You also own Skaget. Is the Futura XP sole much softer than Skaget?

Skaget sole is significantly stiffer than the Futura XP.

Is Alaska and Skaget comparable in sole stiffness? My wife's and my experience is that we too have to size up on Alaska, but our feet also seems to fit Alfa Skaget better.

I think that the Alaska XP, Skaget XP, and Futura Pro XP all have similar sole stiffness (and are all stiffer than the Futura XP).
(Yes- I had to size up in the Alaska XP as well- it has a very narrow and small-volume toe box!)

I have no experience with Crispi Stetind, but I assume that it is the softer upper that makes Futura XP lighter duty (=less supportive?) or is also the sole stiffness?

I really cannot comment on this one- and perhaps should not have made the comparison...But, all reports/test/reviews suggest that the Stetind is a thick full-grained leather boot with a stiff sole (ie similar leather to the Svartisen, but with a stiffer sole).
The Futura has a low-cut, soft, supple upper. The Futura has the softest XP sole that I have seen/tested.

Do you have a favorite between the soft soled Futura XP and the stiffer soled Alaska XP for flatter skiing and walking/hiking?

I think that the Futura XP is a much better design than the Alaska XP for distance-oriented Nordic skiing.
........
I haven't used the Futura Pro or Futura much at all yet-
I have been focusing on the Skaget and the Abisku this winter.
At the moment I see using the softer Futura on a ski like E99/Gamme/Amundsen- though I have no immediate plans to switch from NNNBC to XP on this class of ski (depends on longterm durability/reliability of the Xplore system...)

[telerat]

Thanks. My Alfa Free felt good on the one short tour I have managed so far, but longer tours and long term as well as turns with the hard flexor remains to be seen. I am skeptical on turns with the hard flexor, as my first impressions when flexed on the floor was that it bears down on my toes when flexed, but I will see.

I got my hands on both Futura CX and CXP/Pro, as well as Alaska XP, Alfa Vista, Alfa Skarvet and Crispi Stetind in a shop today. The only boot I got to try on was Futura CX in a size too large. It was hard to notice any difference in sole stiffness of the Xplore boots with hands, but Alfa Skarvet was significantly softer than all. Stetind's sole was also softer than the Xplore boots, but not as much as Skarvet and the upper/leather felt much stiffer/supportive than Futura and Alaska. It might not be as comfortable and support might diminish when the leather softens.

Is comfort and/or softer sole why you think Futura CX is a much better design than Alaska XP for distance touring? I like the Futura with its smooth and soft leather, comfortable upper, complete lacing with proper eyelets, and that it seemed to fit me better even though it was a size too large, as well as seemed very well made. I have also seen high praise of the Alaska XP though.

I am using my Skaget with Åsnes Ousland (and Fischer E109, as well as Falketind om mellow tours in soft snow), but Futura CX could have been a god alternative if I did not already have Skaget.