Scarpa Phantom Tech Boot Height

So I climb with Nepal Cubes and I tried on some Phantom techs but the boot had a lower height than I was used to. To me it felt like that would make it harder to ice climb in since there’s less leg support. I know a lot of people love them so maybe it’s just me and they’re amazing. Are the G5’s the same?

What are your thoughts on the matter?

Once you get enough ice mileage, your ankles should be strong enough to keep you on your feet. You don't need high boots.

Ha! I noticed the same thing. What really got me on the phantoms was that the crampon heel tab pinched my heels. I personally like a more “solid” feeling boot, and so prefer the G5 (previous model). Phantom techs arent bad though, for sure. I guess I just have soft heels 

The first gen techs (spiral zipper) had a higher cuff and were indeed a dream for endless front pointing, as well as warmer. But with the downside of a spontaneously exploding zipper...

The new/current gen are lighter, with a lower cuff making them more flexible. So they walk way better, and climb harder mixed terrain better as well, but are not nearly as warm. 

They are reportedly working on a slightly beefed up version to fill the void but I doubt we'll see that until next fall at the earliest.

MauryB wrote:

The first gen techs (spiral zipper) had a higher cuff and were indeed a dream for endless front pointing, as well as warmer. But with the downside of a spontaneously exploding zipper...

The new/current gen are lighter, with a lower cuff making them more flexible. So they walk way better, and climb harder mixed terrain better as well, but are not nearly as warm. 

They are reportedly working on a slightly beefed up version to fill the void but I doubt we'll see that until next fall at the earliest.

Have you compared the regular to the 6000 for warmth/weight/comfort?  I am debating the two.
chris

Chris W wrote:

Have you compared the regular to the 6000 for warmth/weight/comfort?  I am debating the two.
chris

I had the old version of the Phantom 6000.  I also have the old version of the Phantom Guide.  Put thousands of vertical feet on both of them.  

Both boots were comfortable and climbed well.  The Guide was a bit more dextrous, but I only really noticed it when climbing rock in them.  In crampons, they were pretty close.  Either one was very capable of climbing the (moderate) climbs that I do.   

My new boot is the Mammut Nordwand 6000.  I haven't climbed in it yet, but stomping around the house, it feels a lot like the old Guide, but should be warmer.  It also fits my foot really well with zero heel lift without squeezing my feet.  (But it's a bitch to put on.)  It has a dual BOA system instead of laces, which I really like, because laces always seem to loosen up as the day progresses.  I'm hoping that these will become my "do everything" boot for cold conditions.  

If you're debating between the two Scarpa tech boots, I'd suggest you consider the Mammut as well.  

The Phantom Tech and 6000 are completely different boots with almost no overlap in application (vs the previous Phantom Tech, which was a bit warmer and could get away with a bit more). If you need a warm double boot that still climbs well on moderate terrain, the 6000 is great. If you are climbing in the lower 48 and Europe etc then the Phantom Tech is a much lighter, nimble boot that climbs technical terrain really well.