Seth Ferguson

It all depends on what you are looking for in a boot, and if this particular boots properly fits your foot. There is truly no substitute to being properly boot fitted.

They are very similar in size, so I would imaging that they would have no trouble fitting. These Dragons come with their own goggle bag.

It might be a little stiff for effortless butters, but I think you could probably muscle some butters, because they really aren't THAT stiff compared to a lot of other park skis. If you want a really buttery ski, the line invader is as soft as it gets.

173 would be a solid size for you. 181=too big, 166=too small.

173 would be a solid size for you. 181=too big, 166=too small.

I own anthems, and I'd say afterbangs are more snappy, and a little stiffer. Anthems are just soft and buttery. And DEFINITELY get 177's. 166 is TINY.

I own anthems, and I've flexed afterbangs, and I'm pretty sure they are a little stiffer than anthems...

I highly recommend the Marker Jester binding. It has proven to be very reliable and durable over time. I have had the same Jesters since the 07/08 season (I probably have 200+ days of park skiing on these), and they have held up well and feel great every time I step in.

Are you going to be skinning on your new skis in the backcountry, or just hiking, etc...

Because it kind of depends if you are using skins, I'll assume you're not.

Have you looked at this years JJ? Steller all around ski, you should put some consideration into that. But EP pros are gonna be way softer than hellbents, both do alright on the hardpack, and survive the park. I'd say the main difference, is that the EP is way more forgiving, and playful, and the Hellbent is stiffer and can charge harder. I'm almost positive the EP pros are lighter than Hellbents just for reference. Hope that helps a little.

A bit wide, but I've seen people ski the park on them. They are actually pretty close to symmetrical, so I'd imagine they wouldn't be half bad. A lot of people rep fat skis in the park nowadays, you could give it a try.

There are a LOT better park skis out there, and if you're spending about half your day in the park, you'd probably want something better. There are a LOT of choices of skis that fit what you're looking for.

I would recommend the Line Chronic for a similar type of ski, but a lot better than the S2. I have had experience with them and they do really well all around, and kill the park.

But I personally ski about 90% park 10% mountain, and I ski the Line Anthems, which hold up actually pretty well all around. I've skied them in waist deep fresh at Snowbird, and I got to the bottom, so they must be alright.

Bottom Line: Money better spent elsewhere.

The size for you would really be a tough call, because k2's run pretty long. The 169's would probably run about as tall as you, or a little shorter. The 179's would be above your head a good amount. I found from experience that k2's generally run around 3-4cm longer than printed. I think you'd be happy with both sizes, but I think the 169 will be enough ski for you. The 179 might just bog you down.

I'm 5'10 180lbs, so that's pretty close to you, but I would definitely recommend the 179 size for you, the 169 would feel too short because of the rocker. As for a mounting position, if you are planning to ride switch in the pow, mount center, if you are planning to ski it mainly forwards, a good safe call is around 2 or 3 cm back from center, because the ski is designed to be ridden more in the middle, it just skis better like that.

I'd go griffon or jester. But anything that holds your foot to the ski works.

I don't know much about skiing east coast, because I live in Utah, but I actually have both of those skis laying around my house, and I have a lot of experience with both. They are both super solid skis, they have similar flex, and are very similar on the snow. The Chronics really pull ahead in the park, because they are closer to symmetrical than the Extremes. Chronics do a lot better center mounted, and overall are more of a park ski than Extremes. You really have to decide if you would rather have a ski more oriented towards the park, or more all-mountain. The Chronics can still rip the whole mountain, but the Extremes are more oriented to it. If I were to buy either pair, I'd go with the Chronics, becaues I'm willing to give up a bit of all-mountain performace for a better park ski. There is not really a ski out there that is "best for doing everything". And also, a lot of what your ski does best depends on where you mount your binding, which is a whole different topic. But the bottom line is, if you choose a ski that is "better for everything" that kinda means that it "sucks at everything" too. Because the best skis in every category are super specific to what they're designed for. Just choose something that you want your skis to be good for, then live with them when your skiing everything else. Thats what it really comes down too. Wow, long rant, Hope it helps a bit.

Definitely get the 161's. Especially if you are planning to center mount the ski, because they will feel a lot lighter and shorter when they're mounted center. 151's would seriously be too small.

+2 is honestly where the ski is designed to be mounted.

Generally any youth specific ski binding. Such as, the Marker M7.0 EPS Ski Binding - Junior.

http://www.backcountry.com/store/MRK0014/Marker-M70-EPS-Ski-Binding-Junior.html

It really depends on your weight. You should look up how high of DIN you are with a DIN calculator (you can find these searching in google) to see what setting you need. If it's not too overkill for your weight, I recommend the Marker Griffin binding.

The Marker Jester RULES!!! I've been on mine for 200+ days and I love them.

I've seen people ride these in the park all the time here at Park City Utah. You definitely can't treat them like a normal park ski, because they are HUGE and rockered. I saw some guy throw a sick front flip on a 60 foot table though wearing these skis. I've seen people hit rails with them too, they actually do alright, but the fact of the matter is that these are not park skis. They are big huge powder skis.

The recommended or, possibly +2 cm forward, would be a good choice for you, because if you mount it too far forward, it will be harder to land the big stuff riding forwards. You'll also float easier when you're mounted farther back.

I wouldn't give them a weight limit at all. You'd just have to try them out and see if they feel too noodly for you. Everybody prefers a different flex for their weight, you just need to find what you like.

The 171 would be big on you, but if your still growing, it's do able. The 166 is probably the better size for your height/weight right now. My little brother skis these in a 166 and he's taller than you and weighs 150 lbs. He thinks they're awesome skis.

For bindings, my favorite would be the Marker Griffin. But if that's too much I'd just go with a Rossignol or Look binding with at least DIN 12.

Good Luck with your new set up!

Yes, the 178 will be your best size, and I've seen people carving it up on the groomers with these skis, and they have a good side cut to them.

you can really use almost any goggle with a helmet... and if it doesn't work, just exchange them for something different.

If you can wait till next year, the new Marker Jester Schizo, bindings and compatible skis, can move back and forth on the ski so you can have the prime mounting location for all conditions. The new K2 Kung Fujas for 2010's are also freaking amazing and they work with the Schizo bindings. The Kung Fujas ski is newly ROCKERED for 2010!

Yeah dude these should be pretty good for you. Make sure they come up to almost the top of your head when you're sizing them out. They could even be above your head. You're gonna need the extra length to progress to the bigger spins, etc...

I'd go AT LEAST a 169 if you're 5'9'... you could even get away with a 179. 159 is going to be tiny and crappy, and it will hold you back, because you won't have swing weight to throw down the big spins. Also, a center mounted ski like this will feel way shorter than it really is.

It really depends on if you are using it for a jib ski, or just a normal ski. If you are going for a lot of switch riding and jumps, spins, etc... then I'd go anywhere from +6 to dead center. For a normal feel, I'd mount em up at no less than +2. All the k2 demo skis are mounted up at +2, so you know it's legit.

Hotdogger is a WAYYYYY better boot. Full Tilts dominate every other boot in the park. My foot didn't work with the hotdogger, so I got the booter. I couldn't be happier with them. I had Dalbello Rampages last season, and I got super gnarly shin bang and stuff... It was bad. I've been skiing my booters this whole season (2-3 times a week at Park City) and my feet/shins are so happy.The booter didn't work for me because your foot has to be really flat on the top, like literally on the top of your foot (i don't know what it's technically called) but on my feet the top of my foot it really tall, and I couldn't even get the hotdoggers to buckle up... Also I have huge muscular calves, and they didn't fit so well either. I was bummed at first, but the booters were golden for me. Also, check out next years full tilts, because they are SO crazy lookin. Also, get a 28.5. I have size 10 feet and I have a size 28.ONE MORE THING----Full Tilts are CRAZY light

I've always worn K2 helmets, I just like how they fit. You should look at the Clutch or the Indy or the crossfire etc... but I'm not a fan of the edge. It's way too light weight and flimsy feeling. The most comfortable+bomproof=CLUTCH. Speakers are actually alright too. I prefer skullcandy for skiing audio though. K2 integrated speakers don't sound as good as skullcandy.

I would guess they would fit fine, but your best bet would be to try them on. But you could always return them to backcountry if they don't work out for you.

If it's not listed, it's out of stock. The pictures are just still up for reference.

I imagine you could, if your pair has the same snap in lens. But it would probably be more cost effective to just buy new goggles.

I AGREE 100%. I've held this ski in my hands.

Dude it's way fun to float in powder. And yes, it floats good.

Oh yeah dude. These would be great for you. I see people riding these in the park at Park City (my mountain) all day long. And they throw it down too.

Honestly if you are 6'2 you need a longer size than anything they have in stock in this ski. I wouldn't go less than 178ish. If you go too short, it'll be weird, because people typically mount their bindings forward more than on a traditional ski.

They would be fine, but there are probably better choices out there.

ya dude. Me and my buds ski the park all day, but when there's good snow we rip the whole mountain. You can really ski everywhere even if you went true center. I go everywhere I want to on my true center mount... but I have a friend who swears on mounting 1cm back from true center. I'd say that's your best bet, because you'll still get a good feel on rails and jumps.

Ok, I'm the perfect guy to answer your question, because I ride anthems, and my bro rides chronics... pretty crazy huh. I really like my anthems, and my bro really likes his chronics. Both pairs are mounted at dead center, but he can still butter a little on his skis. If you've seen how Garrett Russell does Nose Blocks (http://www.vimeo.com/2566605) he can still do that on his chronics... so they aren't THAT stiff. I really think you'd really like either of them, but I'm not sure you need the added width of the anthem. We have tons of pow in Utah, so I didn't wanna go any skinnier than my 93 waist. In your case, you could easily like either one. Make sure you get the right size though. Them seem to run big in my opinion... I was gonna get 178 anthems, but they were HUGE, the 171's come up past my forehead, and I'm 5'9". You'd probably be good on a center mounted 178.

It really depends on your ski! But I would recommend a conservative mount, close to the recommended line, unless you know you will be skiing the terrain park, or skiing switch.

The K2 Pontoon is going to be a forward directional ski only, and the ARG is a bi-directional ski. So you can ski switch in the pow with the ARG. If you have no need to ski backwards, I'd probably grab some pontoons, because they just do a really great job in the soft snow, and everyone loves them!

I would really recommend the K2 ObSETHed, as it is such a great ski in all conditions. They just rip anything, and they really do a good job in the softer snow, because of the rockered design. My dad is an intermediate skier, and he skis the Seth as his everyday ski here in Utah, he really likes it!

That's definitely not normal! I've been skiing my Jesters since the beginning of last season, and I have over 150 days on them, and I haven't had any problems like that... If you bought them here at backcountry, I would suggest exchanging them for a new pair. Otherwise, I'm not sure what you could do... I would call marker directly or something.

If you are a fairly advanced skier you will benefit from a ski that is about as tall as you stand, or sometimes even taller. You could possibly look into the 183's.

Definitely a more carvey feel. I have tried 2 sets of the exact same ski, one mounted 2.5cm more forward than the other, and it was an unreal difference. I also ski a center mounted ski this year as my everyday ski, and to carve, you don't even need to lean forwards into your boot to make it carve. I just put my weight on my inside edge, and away I go. This happens because your weight is already forward from the center mount. The only down side, is that you have to adapt your skiing to the longer tails, so in powder you have to lean back more, and sometimes they catch on moguls and stuff. But I'm used to it, and I'll never go back to a traditional stance.

I would recommend the Kiku over this fischer ski, but the ski I would recommend is the K2 ObSETHed. It's about the same width as these two skis you are looking at, but it has rockered tips and tails for great performance in all conditions. The ObSETHed is just a super good all around ski that you could really take advantage of. They actually cost less too!

I would recommend the yellow or persimmon lenses, or you could buy a clear lens and put that in for the really low light conditions. You can find replacement lenses here at backcountry.comhttp://www.backcountry.com/store/OAK1862/Oakley-Ambush-Replacement-Lenses.html

No, if you need to use an AT boot, you will need to get either the Marker Duke, or Marker Baron. They ski about the same as the Jester, they are just lifted a bit more for better edge control, and they are more oriented for the big mountain scene.

The best way to find out, would be to call Backcountry.com directly, or use the chat now button! Good Luck!

You should probably buy a large, because it usually won't work if the helmet is too small. But, I wear my beanie under my helmet, (with goggles under helmet too) and to make mine work, I just took out the liner in the helmet (K2 Indy helmet... very nice fyi). So I'm sure you can find a way to make it work. If for any reason it doesn't fit, Backcountry can exchange you for the one that will be better.

You can always return or exchange anything you buy from Backcountry.com anytime! Whenever I have a problem with a product I buy here, I just send it right back and they refund me in full. That's the beauty and security of buying all your gear here!

I would check out an Oakley goggle with a high intensity lens.

I wear my iCons with my helmet by putting on my beanie, putting on the headphones so the part that goes on top of your head is a little above my neck. Then I put my goggles on over the beanie and the headphones, then I put my helmet on top of it all. FYI my helmet is the K2 indy (with the liner and adjuster taken out) and Oakley Crowbars.

It's all a matter of opinion, but I have crowbars, and I really like them. I think they look better than POC goggles too. Keep in mind with the fire iridium that in flat light, you won't be able to see. Good luck picking out colors and stuff!

Any binding with a brake width of more than 80mm will work great on these skis.

The 174's might work for her, but she would have to be a pretty aggressive skier to handle such a big ski. I would strongly recommend the Marker Griffon binding to put on this ski, make sure you get the 110mm size brake.

Yes it should work fine, as it is helmet compatable. If for some reason it doesn't work as well as you would like, the Backcountry.com return policy will take care of you for sure.

Yo! Check the sides of the heel. There should be a number in millimeters (mm). That should help figure out the next size up. A better idea (if you have the time) is to take these pups to a good ski shop and have a boot fitter take a look. You may need just a small adjustment to these boots instead of a whole new size. Ski boots rarely fit comfortably straight out of the box and 'too small' may be 'spot on' once they are broken in properly. For myself, I have a size 8.5 or 9.0 street shoe and go down two sizes or so in ski boots. Sucks to watch TV in 'em, but perfect for arcing big skis thru deep snow! Hope this helps some!---Imparting my wisdom--- You don't need a small boot. Plain and simple. The best boot for you, is the most comfortable boot for you too. No one likes skiing uncomfortably. My boots are comfortable enough to watch TV in, Check them out, FULL TILT BOOTS... www.fulltiltboots.com

They are advertising that the boot is stiff, but without the shin pain that usually accompanies a stiff boot.From my experience, any stiff boot (regardless of what they advertise) will give you shin pain unless you find a way to wear them with absolutely ZERO dead space in between your shin and the inside liner of the boot. This is extremely hard to do, but I have had the most success reducing the space between my shins and the liners with a wrap around style liner, such as the liners FULL TILT BOOTS use. Don't believe crazy claims like no shin bang problems with a stiff boot. If you can find a way to try them on and see for your self, that would be your best bet.

I would definitely recommend the Marker Baron with the 110 brake. I'm not sure what set up you have for boots, but the Baron works with regular alpine boots, and touring boots (I believe). They are definitely not as light weight as the Dynafit bindings, but they are extraordinary for the downhills, and they come in the wide brake version.

No, none of the bindings here on Backcountry.com will be compatible with your binding. Good luck finding something that will work for you.

No, you only have an 88mm sidecut. The brakes will be wide, which means they will drag while you are carving. Also, when you try and lock the skis together to carry, they aren't going to hold together very well. ADD IT! I have the scratch ghetto i got a 84 sidecut and have 100 mm brakes the brake slide in more to the binding when they're on your feet go with a 100mm brake Rossignol suggest's it and Rossi and Look/Dynastar dont make 90mm brakes its 80 100 and 120. ---fixing the answer--- Woah.... I have 110 brakes on my Line Anthems with a 93mm waist, the brakes tuck in so nicely, I'm sure you could use a 110 with a ski only 5mm skinnier. I'm using the Marker Jester FYI.

This binding only comes in the 100mm size brake, the 150 refers to the DIN 15 capabilities of the binding. If you need something that wide, you should look into different bindings, or different brakes you can put on it.

I'm not completely sure, but I have this jacket in a size large, and it fits very true to size in my opinion.

They are good for landing jumps and can be taken in the park, but are not a true twin tip. If park riding and skiing switch is a priority for you, there are better options out there.---adding--- I would definitely recommend a true twin tip if you are planning to do any switch riding at all. Something like the K2 Kung Fujas seems like a better option for you. And the Fujas totally kills it in the park and all over the mountain! And it's a less expensive ski! Look into those a bit.

I would strongly recommend the Marker Griffin (for DIN levels no higher than 12) or the Marker Jester (DIN up to 16). It's the same binding made of different materials. They ski the same for the most part.

This ski, along with the S6, would be fine for your backcountry kicker needs.---Adding--- These are not true twin tips, so you will really want a true twin tip if you are going to be doing a lot of backcountry kickers and possibly doing switch take offs and landings. If you want fat skis, I would recommend the K2 Hellbent or the Line EP Pro, for the best rockered fatty twin tip. They're cheaper too.

Yes this helmet should be compatible with the Iphone's bluetooth for taking calls, but you might need an adapter to plug the audio jack into your Iphone. The microphone is located on the little black thing coming out of the cord. You can see it on the picture, the thing hanging off the cord about half way down in the picture.

I would say the 168 is going to be a good size for you in this ski, but if you want better soft snow performance (powder), you should look at something wider.

189s are going to be long on you. K2s run big, and that's a lot of ski to be throwing around unless you are used to it. 179s would be better for you.

Definitely get the 181's if you are planning to center mount them because if you get any shorter than that, it will like you have no tip length in front of you and it will be weird. 181s would be fine for you.

I would definitely say that a 189 would be WAY too big. K2 actually run long, so a 189 K2 would be HUGE! If you want more ski for extra floatation or something, you should pick a ski with a wider platform such as the ObSETHed. I'm about 5'10" also, and the 179 is way over my head. If you are getting this ski for sure, the 179 would be a much better option for you. You could honestly get away with a 169 because they run big, but if you want it a little longer stick to the 179. 189 would be ridiculous if you're 5'10". That's not how the ski is designed to be sized.

This will still totally kill it on the groomed runs. I would bet this ski would carve groomers better than your scratches, and it will be a way better ski in the pow. The extra width will definitely help you out. I'd say this is a great ski for you.

No, But oakley makes an O Frame for kids. Let your kid try them on first. They are made for small faces and the strap can get pretty small.--adding--My little brother who is 8 years old, wears the a-frame, and they fit him good. Lots of other kids wear them too.

The A-frame is such a solid goggle that you absolutely can't go wrong with. But the crowbar is my personal favorite, as for the ambush, it's a brand new design that looks like it would probably be fine for you, but I'd go with the curved lens. (a-frame/crowbar/wisdom) As for the lens color, don't go for something too dark, I wouldn't recommend the fire iridium because they suck in flat light. Anything else will be fine though really. I have even used the black iridium in flat light and they aren't that bad.

the 80mm and 90mm are going to mean how wide the ski brake is. For example a 80mm ski brake will fit skis with a waist width of less than 80mm. So you should look at your waist width of the ski you want to mount and buy a binding accordingly.As for your question about using the same brand... There is no reason to buy the same brand because all ski boots work with all bindings and all bindings (with the appropriate brake width) will work with all skis. Also, I would honestly recommend researching what would be good beginner gear, because you don't want to spend a whole bunch of money on stuff that you don't need. For example, In almost all cases beginners use a very very low DIN level on their bindings so the skis will come off very easily. So you wouldn't need to spend extra money on a high DIN rated binding when you would be fine with a cheaper one. Good luck finding gear, and keep asking questions!!!

I've seen these worn with a helmet, if you want them bad enough, you could just buy them, and if they don't fit just return them for a full refund. If there's a local place that has them you could try them on, then buy them here so you can get backcountry's awesome return policy if you have any problems.

The coomba (181) weighs in at 3,620 grams per pair and the ObSETHed (179) weighs 4500 grams per pair. Keep in mind that the ObSethed 179 is going to be as long if not longer than the Coomba 181 because of the way the K2 measures their skis.Honestly either ski (ObSETHed/Coomba) would be a great ski for you. When you say you hike for your turns, are you talking about skinning up and using a touring binding, or do you just go to the top of the lift and carry your skis up to a higher peak. If you're carrying your skis on your back, I'd say it wouldn't be a big deal to have the extra weight of the ObSETHed, but skinning up, you'd feel the weight a lot more. Honestly I prefer the ObSETHed to the Coomba because they just eat the whole mountain for breakfast in any conditions. Bottom Line- Don't get Gotamas.

+2 is a really good conservative mount. K2 mounts their demo skis at +2. You'll like it, unless you're into spins, and riding switch, in that case, mount them at like +5 or even more forward. Seth himself rides his at +5 even though he usually just hits cliffs and shreds it up.

Try the new black diamond megawatt if you don't have a need for a twin tip. Super Duper fun powder ski with an early ride tip (front rocker). Very very very easy to throw around in the pow, read the reviews and check out the skis.http://www.backcountry.com/store/BLD1152/Black-Diamond-Megawatt-Ski-08-09-Model.html

They should be fine for every condition you will se up there. You might experience a little tip deflection and chattering in the real bad crud but it should handle everything else with ease.---adding, Get em, this is your ski.

The Jester would be a good binding for these skis, they cover all around the toe, which provides great turning, and control over the ski, and I would mount it closer to the back (not sure of dimensions) rather than in the middle, for better control in the powpow!adding---Definitely go for one of the Markers (jester, griffin) based on your weight... or if you want to tour grab the duke or baron. Mounting at +2 is a good conservative mount that will give you minimal tip dive in pow.

I think the coombas and the obseth are pretty close in flex, the coomba might have a slightly stiffer tail, but both are WAY softer then the mantra.you prob got tip dive because the mantras tips don't float up because of their stiffness or they could be to short for you, The rocker in the obseth will give you great powder performance, but i think the gotama would be better on groomers, If you have no need for twins i would try and demo the coombas, they are the lightest of the group and seam like they would be a really fun ski. The reason i say this is because they will give you a more traditional feeling ski like your mantras vs the obseth and goat.I would go 179, k2's run long so they will be around 183 to 184, the 189 would be good if you were skiing big open mountain all the time.adding--- You sound like you need the new Black Diamond Megawatt. It matches your exact description for what you want in a ski, (except for bumps probably). But these skis are not twin tipped, and they only have a rocker on the tips. They are plenty wide for the soft stuff, and EVERYONE LOVES THEM!!! What more could you ask for in a ski. You should really take a look at these things! They even come in a 178 for you.http://www.backcountry.com/store/BLD1152/Black-Diamond-Megawatt-Ski-08-09-Model.html

Sage himself is riding these at +3... Here's what he has to say in his review, "I mounted my skis on the +3 line, (3cms) and had improved tail support when landing airs or recovering from the back seat."That's where I would mount them too.

Sounds nicer.so now it says 800? what gives? - mike-------------Must have been a typo. Though wouldn't have surprised me if the women's did have higher loft than the men's given there are studies saying women are consistently colder.Hey they fixed the description, it says 800 fill now!

Ya I have some skis that are 98 under foot and the brakes are 90. You can just bend them it will work fine.Slow down... I ride anthems with jesters and I have the 110 brake. It's not even bad, and I would say to go with the wider brake. The brake tucks in when you are skiing so it's never in the way and it's very roomy. I never have any problems with my 110 brake!

This ski will carve nicely, at speed however it may feel a bit unstable for it is a park ski and might not have the same stability of say a GS type ski (adding) I agree with peppers, they carve pretty good for a park ski in softer snow, it just feels a little different because there center mounted. If your lighter they will even float you in some powder, but they can be scary on ice. (adding) Hey this is my everyday park ski, and they can really lay down some deep carves. I'm 5'11 and 180 pounds, and my 171's still keep me floating good enough in the fresh stuff. As for groomers, they do very well in good snow conditions, and they aren't any worse than any other park specific ski on the icy stuff. Overall, they do well everywhere you take them.

My son rides ar6's and has look px12's on them and loves them, I have px14's (same as rossi 140's) on my line bacon's and i love them. We have both gone away from solomon bindings after breaking them,plus the rossi's are cheaper. (I'm Just adding to this.) Yeah the 140's are probaly the safest out there to ride i personaly love salomon boots and skis but hate there bindings and Atomic has the same bindings as Salomon.(This is a third answer)My friend has these skis 08 model; he rides with the look px 12 (no lift). They lay down a good edge on-snow and feel solid when landing. Whether you get 12 or 14 depends on your weight and riding style, but the px or rossi scratch are solid mounts. If these are going in the park, you may want to at least look at those new markers; idk that much about them but I've heard good things like better flex; they're also WAAYY lighter than the px12/scratch 120 (by a lot)( adding) the only problem with the new markers is that they only have 2 mounting screws in the toe piece so they could rip out easy. but they lighthey, I ride jesters, and i hit the biggest jumps at Park City all day long last season, and my bindings were in such good shape still that I mounted them on my new skis. They are way light, get em.

hot dogger's have a better liner so i'd go with them.Fulltilt boots are Super Narrow..Hey I have the Booters and they are way less narrow because of the thinner liner. I couldn't even fit my foot into any of the other boots and the booter fits fine. If you find the booter too soft for you, you can just buy an after market tongue. Overall, I've skied them 3 times already and I think I like them. I just ski the park pretty much, and they do perform. The bottom line is fit I think, if you have a crazy narrow foot, go with the hot dogger, if you have a regular-ish shaped foot, the booter is probably going to fit better.

Just keep playing with the straps and if worst comes to worst, sund them in and Chaco can adjust the straps to the necissary lengths. It's win win win win win win win win win win win win win win win win etc.......