Atomic Backland XTD Carbon 120 Boot
Atomic heard the cry of 1000 aching souls, “I want a boot that walks like a Backland Carbon but skis like a Hawx XTD, why oh god am I left to suffer and teeter on this hideous precipice?!” And lo, they have provided an answer. Boasting both a 74-degree range of motion and a very skiable 120 flex, the Backland Carbon XTD 120 is as capable on the up as it is on the down. The laced lower buckle combined with the hybrid overlap shell construction allows users with medium-large feet to ascend comfortably yet snug things down for committing descents. Much to the chagrin of the bacteria that typically take up residence in well-used ski touring liners, the 3D Platinum Tour liner is hand-washable, keeping your partner and olfactory senses much happier. When scampering along icy ridges in search of the entrance to that "one" couloir, the Skywalk Touring Norm Sole will provide reliable traction. Skin up, ski down, and stop overthinking your boot choices with the Backland Carbon XTD 120.
- Carbon-powered cuff and shell deliver a stout 120 flex rating.
- Memory Fit plastic accommodates a variety of foot shapes.
- Hybrid overlap shell construction allows smooth step-in and a secure foot wrap.
- Frictionless Mirror Pivots offer a smooth 74-degree range of motion.
- Free / Lock 4.5 external walk mode lever allows simple clearing of ice and snow and forward lean adjustment.
- Cross Lace 2.5 “Z” shaped cable and buckle combination on the lower provides a consistent and powerful foothold.
- Supportive, moldable, breathable, and hand-washable 3D Platinum Tour liner.
| Specifications | |
|
Weight |
1410g [27/27.5] |
| Weight (pair) | 2820g [27/27.5] |
|
|
2 + 50mm Quick Release Cam Strap |
|
Boot Sole |
277mm [24/24.5] 287mm [25/25.5] 297mm [26/26.5] 307mm [27/27.5] 317mm [28/28.5] 327mm [29/29.5] 337mm [30/30.5] |
|
Binding |
Tech, Hybrid, ISO 9523 |
|
Cuff |
74° |
|
Forward |
13°, 15°, 17° |
| Specs Verified | Yes |
| Design | |
|
|
Carbon Loaded PA |
|
|
3D Platinum Tour |
|
|
Skywalk Touring Norm Sole |
| Skimo Co Says | |
| Usage | All-day touring and ski mountaineering |
| Notes | A new stiffer Backland |
| Bottom Line | Versatile all-arounder |
| Compare to other Touring Boots | |
Related Products
Questions & Reviews
3/31/2025
I have a pair of these that are practically brand new that have a little play forward and backward. Is there any known fix or something that I can buy to fix this issue? Are the original frictionless pivots defective and a replacement works better? Any other ideas for me? It's rather annoying.
4/1/2025
Hi Jade, if you can try to take a video of the issue and email it to help@skimo.co we can take a look.
Answer this question:
1/6/2025
Is there any fit or function difference between the Backland XTD Carbon 120 and the Backland XTD Carbon 120 GW other than the additional weight added by the Grip Walk compatible sole?
1/6/2025
Hi Monica, the fit is the same. With the Grip Walk sole you lose some walkability provided by the rockered touring sole. Obviously, you gain some alpine binding compatibility in exchange.
Answer this question:
12/5/2024
Hi,
Would you be able to measure the cuff height of both the mens & women version of the backland XTD?
Mens 120 XTD cuff height = ?
Womens 115 XTD cuff height = ?
Thanks!
Would you be able to measure the cuff height of both the mens & women version of the backland XTD?
Mens 120 XTD cuff height = ?
Womens 115 XTD cuff height = ?
Thanks!
12/5/2024
Jim,
Mens 120 XTD cuff height= 31.2cm (from the bottom of the boot)
Womens 115 XTD cuff height= 30.5cm to the top of the spoiler. Spoiler is removable which would lower the height to 29.9cm.
Both measurements are on a 26.5 shell.
Mens 120 XTD cuff height= 31.2cm (from the bottom of the boot)
Womens 115 XTD cuff height= 30.5cm to the top of the spoiler. Spoiler is removable which would lower the height to 29.9cm.
Both measurements are on a 26.5 shell.
Answer this question:
11/26/2024
Hi - am considering this boot as my primary touring boot and wondering how wide a ski it can reasonably drive. I am 5”11 and 160 pounds and don’t ski too aggressively. Would 110mm or even 115mm powder touring ski be compatible with this boot or is that too wide for it drive well.
Thanks
Eric
Thanks
Eric
11/27/2024
Hi Eric,
I would say if you are not a super aggressive skier, this boot could handle those widths. Matching skis and boots is all about expectations! This boot is pretty sturdy and powerful for a touring boot. It will not be able to drive as hard as an alpine-style 130 flex boot, but if you are skiing powder and not trying to charge too hard, I don't think you'll have any issues.
I would say if you are not a super aggressive skier, this boot could handle those widths. Matching skis and boots is all about expectations! This boot is pretty sturdy and powerful for a touring boot. It will not be able to drive as hard as an alpine-style 130 flex boot, but if you are skiing powder and not trying to charge too hard, I don't think you'll have any issues.
Answer this question:
11/22/2024
Hi! I got this boot in a 26.5 and it's a bit big. Do you think getting an after market liner would help take up volume? Which liner would you recommend? Thanks so much!
11/22/2024
Hi Jake,
You could take up some volume with an aftermarket liner! However, the stock liner in this boot is already relatively thick, and it wouldn't be a massive change. If the shell is simply too big for you, adding thicker liners is usually only a band-aid fix, and won't ultimately solve the problem. If you know the boot is too big, it is probably better to look for a new boot than invest a further $200 in liners.
If you did want to add a thicker liner, I would recommend an Intuition Tour Tongue in 12mm thickness. The 15mm is too thick for this boot - if you need more than the 12mm, you really need a smaller boot.
You could take up some volume with an aftermarket liner! However, the stock liner in this boot is already relatively thick, and it wouldn't be a massive change. If the shell is simply too big for you, adding thicker liners is usually only a band-aid fix, and won't ultimately solve the problem. If you know the boot is too big, it is probably better to look for a new boot than invest a further $200 in liners.
If you did want to add a thicker liner, I would recommend an Intuition Tour Tongue in 12mm thickness. The 15mm is too thick for this boot - if you need more than the 12mm, you really need a smaller boot.
Answer this question:
In one take: High volume fit. Downhill performance on par with a Fischer Transalp Pro, skis stronger than a Scarpa F1 but not as strong as a Dynafit Radical Pro. Walks much better than the Fischer (which I always felt had some weird resistance either from the liner or gaiter).
I have been in the hunt for a boot that would slot in between my Radical Pro at 1550g and my Scarpa F1 (since replaced by the Ridge Pro) at 1250g. Just due to the crowd I find myself touring with the majority of the time, my Radicals ( which I use with my wider skis) are usually overkill and put me at a substantial weight disadvantage with the Speedy Gonzalez crowd. However, I wanted something that would ski stronger than just using the F1 with my 110mm powder ski.
I thought the Fischer Transalp Pro would be the perfect solution and picked up a pair a season or two ago, but their sizing just would not work for me. 26.5 I was in pain, 27.5 I was swimming, and the last just didn't agree with my high volume foot.
I tried these Backland XTDs on in November and almost instantly knew I had found my powder-setup boot. The length is right on par with most 26.5 touring and alpine boots. The volume is downright plush. I have a widish foot and a very high instep and it was a great fit right out of the box. Weight came in at 1340g shell plus liner.
This has been a great match with my powder setup, a 110mm 1550g ski and 330g binding with a freeride spacer. Initial flex felt a little soft but on snow they had plenty of stiffness and power to ski hard and fast. 1350g is just enough mass to not feel like you need to adapt your skiing style to compensate for a light boot.
The range of motion, and more important, the lack of friction is above average in my opinion. This boot doesn't have a tongue, which really makes it tour exceptionally well (feels free-er than my old Scarpa F1), but again, it's NOT like the original backland carbon that almost felt the same in ski mode as walk mode it was so squishy lol.
So I would sum up calling this an "extra lean beef" boot for the uphill conscious ski tourer with high volume feet. To get more performance I think you need to look at boots at LEAST 150 grams heavier.
I have been in the hunt for a boot that would slot in between my Radical Pro at 1550g and my Scarpa F1 (since replaced by the Ridge Pro) at 1250g. Just due to the crowd I find myself touring with the majority of the time, my Radicals ( which I use with my wider skis) are usually overkill and put me at a substantial weight disadvantage with the Speedy Gonzalez crowd. However, I wanted something that would ski stronger than just using the F1 with my 110mm powder ski.
I thought the Fischer Transalp Pro would be the perfect solution and picked up a pair a season or two ago, but their sizing just would not work for me. 26.5 I was in pain, 27.5 I was swimming, and the last just didn't agree with my high volume foot.
I tried these Backland XTDs on in November and almost instantly knew I had found my powder-setup boot. The length is right on par with most 26.5 touring and alpine boots. The volume is downright plush. I have a widish foot and a very high instep and it was a great fit right out of the box. Weight came in at 1340g shell plus liner.
This has been a great match with my powder setup, a 110mm 1550g ski and 330g binding with a freeride spacer. Initial flex felt a little soft but on snow they had plenty of stiffness and power to ski hard and fast. 1350g is just enough mass to not feel like you need to adapt your skiing style to compensate for a light boot.
The range of motion, and more important, the lack of friction is above average in my opinion. This boot doesn't have a tongue, which really makes it tour exceptionally well (feels free-er than my old Scarpa F1), but again, it's NOT like the original backland carbon that almost felt the same in ski mode as walk mode it was so squishy lol.
So I would sum up calling this an "extra lean beef" boot for the uphill conscious ski tourer with high volume feet. To get more performance I think you need to look at boots at LEAST 150 grams heavier.
2/12/2024
I wonder if a shim under the footbed can take up some volume for medium volume feet. I skied the Transalp Pro for 2 seasons and I felt like the heel cup was medium volume and too loose for my foot. The Backland XTD felt like it had a slightly tighter heel. Atomic Hawx and Tecnica Zero G both fit my feet well (The instep and heel at least).
2/12/2024
I agree with the heel cup in the Backland XTD securing the heel better. I feel like it's always easier to make a high volume boot fit lower volume feet than vice versa, so might be worth exploring. Obviously I'd always recommend working with a good bootfitter, say, maybe someone at Skimo;)
12/5/2024
Hi Christof, How would you compare Backland XTD to Ridge Pro? You say Ridge Pro replaced F1. I'm looking for a replacement to my F1 in a similar weight class that skis difficult snow better and walks at least as good.
Ridge Pro felt much stiffer than Backland XTD when flexing in the shop. I felt Backland XTD isn't really a step up from F1 and thought Ridge Pro would be.
Cheers
Ridge Pro felt much stiffer than Backland XTD when flexing in the shop. I felt Backland XTD isn't really a step up from F1 and thought Ridge Pro would be.
Cheers
12/5/2024
Hey Viktor. The Ridge Pro is exactly that, a step up in performance at the same weight class as the F1. The backland might ski a little stronger in certain scenarios or with certain skis however (even though it definitely flexes softer than the Ridge Pro) by virtue of the extra 100 grams it carries compared to the F1/Ridge Pro. It might actually articulate a tiny bit free-er as well as the Backland doesn't have a tongue like the F1/Ridge but that's up for debate. Both the Ridge and the Backland walk EXTREMELY well. I actually ski the Backland with my 110mm waisted powder touring setup as I like the little bit more "oomph" I get from the extra mass, but don't want any stiffer of a boot when it's all about the deep stuff. So it just depends on what you're trying to accomplish, but bottom line if you were happy with the F1 and want to just "take it up a notch" in stiffness and performance but same weight, the Ridge Pro is a great option.
Comment on this review:
11/6/2023
Have you had any experience punching these shells? I tried them on (size 27.5), and they fit well all around, but I would likely need a punch to make more room for my pinky toe (unless the liner is just really beefy right there). How much space would you think you can make?
11/6/2023
Aaron,
You shouldn't have any issues making a little room for your pinky, but as with all touring boots, don't count on modifying them too much, as the shells are fairly thin.
You shouldn't have any issues making a little room for your pinky, but as with all touring boots, don't count on modifying them too much, as the shells are fairly thin.
Answer this question:
8/23/2023
Did you guys get to ski these last season? How do these rank as far as stiffness/skiing power? I'm sure they're not up there with a Zero G, but a huge step down? What other similar to the new Transalp Carbon Pro? Other comparisons?
8/23/2023
Justin, I just tried on these boots yesterday to compare. I did get a chance to ski the new Hawk last season, this boot disappeared.
Obviously this Backland 120 is more substantial then the past Backlands and has much more liner too. Without a tongue, and 74 degrees ROM, the forward flex is a bit less then the Zero G, but not a lot.
The TransAlp Pro is a bit stiffer. Not made from Grilimid, they have a nice progressive flex (so does the Backland). The La Sportiva Skorpius also fits in with these for stiffness/ ski ability. Of course fit is all important.
For help to find the one that fits you best, try our Boot fitter.
Obviously this Backland 120 is more substantial then the past Backlands and has much more liner too. Without a tongue, and 74 degrees ROM, the forward flex is a bit less then the Zero G, but not a lot.
The TransAlp Pro is a bit stiffer. Not made from Grilimid, they have a nice progressive flex (so does the Backland). The La Sportiva Skorpius also fits in with these for stiffness/ ski ability. Of course fit is all important.
For help to find the one that fits you best, try our Boot fitter.
Answer this question:
8/2/2023
Any chance that you guys know what the weight of the 25.5 boot is ? The height to the top of the cuff would also be fantastic information to have. Very interested in this one...
8/3/2023
Lance, we have not received the boot in that size yet so we cannot confirm; however, we'd be happy to confirm when they arrive in a 25.5!
Answer this question:
7/11/2023
What is the width of this boot?
Thanks
Thanks
7/12/2023
Hi Allan, Atomic lists the width at 100mm, compared to 98mm for their Hawx and lighter Backland models. Trying this boot on here at the shop, we found it to have a medium volume fit a tad on the roomier side.
Answer this question:
Earn store credit by writing reviews. Learn more.
