- 41 Everything
- 34 Reviews
- 7 Questions
- 0 Photos
- 0 Videos
4.5 stars. I've worn them hiking, working out, and casually about 7-8 times and washed them a few times. The good: GREAT stretch and material. No restriction of movement in any direction, ever. Durability seems good so far. Good fit for a guy with a "power base" (read: big ole ass and thighs). I really like the single pull tightening, much better than a draw string. Looks good enough that it can be worn casually very easily. The bad: Main complaint is pockets. The single zippered cargo pocket is pretty small and for season reason has dual zipped entry. It is also kind of awkward to hold anything more than some cash. Because it's placed so far from the pivot point of the hips, any weight like a wallet, phone, or energy bar is quite noticeable. No other pockets have zippers, so if you want to secure something in another pocket, you better hope it doesn't slip out (thanks what she said). The pants don't dry quite as quickly as I'd like (although it doesn't dry too slowly either). If you run hot, I would definitely get it in a lighter shade; I have the charcoal and khaki would be more fun in 90+ degree exposure. Some sort of keeper for the pull end of the belt would be nice. Conclusion: great pants despite some minor issues, I would give them 5 stars with either more zippered or better placed pockets. Ideally both in the next version.
I had the 2010 version of these boots and was pretty disappointed. Those boots had a significant design flaw in that the material used in the toebox and forefoot generally was too soft and prone to warping. This caused a significant loss of response (and in my case, terrible foot fatigue and pain).
I sent them into Burton and Burton replaced them. As always, Burton took care of me.
The 2012 version has the same fit, but the forefoot is MUCH stiffer and less prone to warping. Nice.
I really, really like the flex of this boot. I ride pretty much everything and tend to like my boots at a stiffer than average flex for a supportive feel that still lets me flex the ankles. That describes these perfectly. Keep in mind that I am a bigger dude (200 lbs), so to some these might be stiff boots.
I really like the neoprene notch the boot has at the ankle. It does the same thing as an articulating cuff, causing less shell distortion when you flex the boot.
I dig Burton's Speed Zone lacing system a lot. Very thoughtfully designed, simple to use, and effective. It wraps tight and allows independent tightening of the upper and lower parts of the boot. It doesn't allow QUITE the same degree of customization as laces if you want say them tight at the shin but a little looser at the ankle, but it'll be fine for most. The inner lace lock is also great, and never comes loose.
Burton claims these are comfort-optimized or some such nonsense ("Total Comfort Construction") and will feel comfortable from day one... don't believe the marketing copy. These things killed my feet on day one and will do the same for you if you go for a tight performance fit. But after wearing them around the house a ton, they were very comfortable by the end of day two.
This boot has the EST sole, which is a thinner midsole that has less ramp angle than most snowboard boots (higher heel than toes to put you at a slight incline). I was worried I'd lose toeside power not being propped up onto the balls of my feet. However, I found I didn't notice any loss of power on toeside and felt much more locked in on heelside.
They are really great for hiking because they: A.) SUPER light, B.) have Vibram soles, and C.) the way the speed lace works, you can easily loosen the upper zone but keep your foot more or less secure by cranking the lower zone.
The only complaints I have is that I don't like Burton's dual velcro liner closure (I miss the strap they used to have there) and I can still feel some ankle strap pressure from the binding. Although this is true of just about every boot I've ever owned, it is a touch more noticeable with these because they are so low profile and lightweight.
All in all though, excellent boots and I look forward to seeing where they take me.
Me: intermediate-advanced, riding 5 years, ~20-30 days per year. Prefer charging steeps, trees, and open bowls, but opening it up in the park and expanding the skill set lately, mostly on account of moving from the Bay Area to Minneapolis (steeps and Midwest do not get along). I have been between 190-200 this season and ride the 156W. I put about six days on this thing, mostly in hardpack conditions.I've been a fan of the standard Destroyer for the a couple seasons, so I decided to give this badboy a shot. The Destroyer Chilly is a really fun, versatile board. I have ridden a Banana and owned a TRS BTX and hands down prefer the Destroyer Chilly. Compared to the BTX, the continuous chilly rocker seems to give a bit more power and bite closer to the contact points. It's pretty burly in the middle, but softer in the tips, so it holds a surprisingly solid edge at speed but is still plenty playful in the tips for butters and presses. At my size, I was pretty impressed at how well it held up at speed when I took it out to Snowbird and the Canyons in Utah, both in softer snow and hardpack/ice. It is an absolute BLAST in bumps at speed. The base is pretty fast and I was pretty impressed at how it held edge without any sort of help from magnetration or similar sidecut gimmicks. I (unfortunately) haven't had the chance to ride it in powder, but being reverse camber I have little doubt that it'd perform well relative to size.The biggest weakness, like a lot of rockered sticks, is pop. It's better than a lot of reverse camber boards I've ridden, but nowhere close to a solid cambered stick. On the plus side, it's easier to kind snap an ollie since you don't have to fight the flex of the board as you would on a cambered stick.I enjoy it and was very surprised at how well-rounded it was. I bought it with the intention of having a board that would be a bit jibbier than anything in my quiver, but still be able to handle the mountain, and it actually turned out to be quite a lot more aggressive than I had expected. As the other review says, if you're looking for a versatility, cannot afford multiple snowboards, and want some rocker, this is a great option.
As the title references, these don't fit my face quite well. 95% of the days they are perfectly fine, but my nose is just a hair too narrow/small to fill out the nose piece and occasionally on windy days I get a terribly jet stream into my eyes at speed.However, if they do fit, you're in for a treat. They have fantastic field of vision, great optics, great aesthetics, and a fantastic assortment of lenses. My favorite lens is Ignitor Mirror, which is great in pretty much every condition except for blizzards and night riding. I love that they are lower profile, very sleek and simple, yet Smith always finds a way to kill it with spiffy graphics year after year.The lenses can also take a beating. I ride through trees quite often, so my helmet/goggle are always taking swipes from branches, and these have held up quite well. They are nicked for sure, but nothing that bothers me while I'm riding. And even if they get beat up, Smith's replacement lenses are readily available and quite reasonably priced compared to the competition. You can get a regular lens at $24 and a fully mirrored lens for under $45 retail, which is ver nice if you do happen to beat one to hell.As I said, they don't fit my face, so I'm unfortunately no longer using them as my primary goggle. But I wish I could, and if I can ever get my hands on the Asian fit at a good price, I'll be right back on them.
I'd give it a 4.5 if I had the option. I ride with Smoke Grey Chrome most days and have a Nightstalker Blue lens I haven't tried yet. These are extremely comfortable, provide excellent visual acuity, and great field of vision. Pretty much everything you could ask for in a goggle as far as that stuff goes. The star/half-star gets knocked off because the lenses have been fragile in my experience. I have owned two pairs with Smoke Grey chromes and both times have gotten visually noticeable scuffs within 10 days of riding without any major faceplant falls, dropping them on concrete, or anything like that.
Keep in mind, I do NOT baby my goggles (I pop through trees quite a lot and don't always bag immediately), but I have been similarly harsh on a couple pairs of Smith Phenoms and a pair of IS Design Formas, which have held up much better. It might be pure coincidence, twice having hit the goggles JUST right, but it having happened twice already, I'm a little wary. Replacement lens don't come cheap. All in all, though, these goggles fit my face the best amongst those I've tried, so they are my go-to set.
Just a general question about Salomon bindings, does anyone know if they've upgraded their ratchets at all? I have a pair of Relays from 2008 and I love them, but their ratchets are garbage, to the point that they're a deterrent in buying another pair.
I've owned a couple different compact snowboard tools (this, the Burton bullet tool, and one other I can't remember offhand) and this is my favorite. It has a ratchet and plenty of torque. It's compact. The only issue I have is that as it's designed, it comes with 3 bit (#2, #3, and flathead) and only 2 storage spaces, so as designed you'll have to keep one mounted in the main socket. Keeping that in your pocket while snowboarding would be a TERRIBLE idea. My suggestion would be to throw out the flat head.
Anyone know how the fit on this boot compares to the Ozone? I notice they both have "Flex" liners. I demoed a pair of Ozones last season and dug the fit, but they were a little too soft for my liking. These look pretty promising.
These things look nice and their audio seems pretty clear, certainly better than the cheapo earbuds I've been using. But the cloth material transmits a TON of sound. Anything I could tell this even from walking around my apartment. So they sound great, but you can't move while you're wearing them. Hmm. They're going back.