A fixture at the head of any skimo race, the original Alien 1.0 established a higher performance-to-weight benchmark. It’s difficult to imagine improving on a winner like this, but no one is arguing the reformulation doesn’t do just that. We’re calling it the Alien 1.1 (SCARPA still calls it “1.0”, but hey, that’s confusing. Maybe the Alien 1.0 v2?).
Keeping the full-carbon cuff, single throw ski/walk mechanism, and BOA instep closure that gave the 1.0 its racing and adventure successes, SCARPA smartly didn’t change what wasn’t broken. Instead, they’ve taken the minor areas of weakness and turned them into strengths, which is sure to continue this boot’s legacy performance. The lower is now made of Carbon Grilamid LFT material (from the Alien RS) which brings levels of stiffness and support at a low mass. The BOA closure system remains over the instep but is now internal, providing a closer fitting and more secure closure over the foot. A pain point of the original 1.0 was the difficult-to-enter sock-style liner; SCARPA has replaced it with a Crossfit Intuition BT liner featuring a full-length tongue that provides additional support and comfort. Some folks will be most excited by the integrated gaiter which increases the weather resistance and decreases instances of soaked feet. The SCARPA Alien 1.1 is an even better ski boot than the original, at a better price to boot (yay, puns).
- Carbon Grilamid LFT shell increases stiffness and responsiveness.
- Integrated gaiter keeps your feet dry and warm, a novelty!
- Vibram UFO sole provides lasting traction on ridges and boot packs.
- Internal BOA system provides better foot hold for precise edging.
- Proven Alien ski/walk lever is still the quickest way to transition.
Update 2021/22: An updated color scheme and slightly thicker liner for comfort and performance will accompany the model.
|Rope plus BOA, single throw latch
|Carbon-reinforced Grilamid lower, carbon cuff
|Intuition Cross Fit BT
|Skimo Co Says
|Skimo racing, training
|Integrated gaiter means less wet-feet
|Next level Alien!
|Compare to other Race Boots
Questions & Reviews
I was worried that these wouldn't ski well, but I've been pleasantly surprised. Yes, there definitely is a difference between these and a "beef" boot. But the tradeoff downhill is very manageable and is much less than the improvement in uphill performance. In addition to racing, I've started picking these for longer touring and ski mountaineering missions. They're probably at their best driving a ski 80mm or narrower, but I felt that they also did a pretty good job with a 96mm ski.
I would want them for daily training, as well as for longer, more traverse-like and off piste, projects.
I already have a Scarpa Alien 3.0, but I find them a little bit too cold and the lack of waterproofness annoying. Also, I hope to get better downhill skiing performance, especially in more technical terrain, with the new boots, but I still want them light enough for my daily training.
The mountain is a little bit lighter, I think, and the downhill should be more controlled too. Are there any cons of choosing the Pierre Gignoux over the Scarpa?
Do you think the approximately 150g more (compared to my Alien 3) per foot make a huge difference in training?
For your use, I would lean towards the PG Mountain, for sure. The Alien 1.1 still has a backless liner, so it will not be the best for keeping snow out unless paired with a race-style pant with stirrups. Even then, not as warm as a full liner. The PG Mountain will be more waterproof, warmer, and with the full cuff and buckles, should be a more secure fit on the downhills. A better choice for adventuring in the backcountry.
In terms of fit, the Mountain is a little wider, and a little lower volume over the foot, than the Alien 1.1.
You could consider the 150 grams training weight :) I don't think it will make a huge difference. And for on-piste where weight is a priority, you still have your Alien 3.0s.
So would you then agree that the PG Black would be similiar to the Alien 1.1? Just that it's much less in weight? Are downhill performance and warmth comparable?
Also, when you recommend me to go with the Mountain one - what would you say would be the major benefit over the Black one?
I am little bit sceptical because I am afraid the Mountain could actually be a bit too warm for me or simply way too downhill-heavy for my everyday normal use...
The Black may be a better choice for you if you would like something lighter than the Mountain but still with a full height liner.
I think I am simply looking for shoes that are a little bit better in the downhill than my Alien 3.0 and also a little bit warmer, so that I can use them for longer ski traverses as well. That's why I am trying to decide between the 1.1, the Mountain and the Black. The Black seems like the perfect match, but I am just not sure about the downhill benefit over the 3.0...
I've tried the Scarpa F1 LT in a 29. Too small and a poor fit for me. Care to offer any feedback on getting a decent fit from a Alien 1.1 in a size 30?
For the record, I am 180, 68kg.
The only major fit problem I have with them is the midfoot/arch area, which feels a bit aggressive to my relatively flat foot, and if I run or otherwise do skimo intervals, my arches get really sore for a few days.
Since these seem more narrow, I'm wondering if I should maintain the F1 LT BSL ~295mm and size up to a 28 here, unless that might give me too loose of a fit? Foot length is 268mm, and width is 102mm with thin race socks on.
The Alien is a bit narrower than the F1 LT, I'd recommend possibly having a look at the DNA, which is a bit wider. I'd avoid getting a bigger, longer boot to accommodate for width. If you'd like, fill out our boot fitter and we can get you some recommendations!
I love the BOA, I love love love the weight, I heat molded and they're uber comfy . I think my only gripe is the walk/ski mode bar when it's up (walk), my pants get caught on it, and also when I'm ready to switch, I have to pull my pant leg up to the top of my boot then pull it back down, which in the spring I'll probably just leave pants rolled up but in powder I think it's particularly important to keep some of the snow off these boots since it's hard to imagine they're fully waterproof (although I haven't had wet feet yet)
One comment on sizing if it helps anyone because these seem small to me compared to other scarpas, my foot is 22 centimeters, I generally wear a 23.5 mondo (in other Scarpa boots), or 37.5/6.5 in running shoes (sportiva, scarpa, salewa), 37 in sportiva mtn boots. These I got a 24 and they fit perfectly after a heat mold (with the lightweight Darn Tough merino ski) but there's no additional room for thicker socks when it's cold.
I currently have the Fischer Traverse CS Boot in 25.5 (great fit) and I was wondering how will this compare with the Alien 1.1 in size 26?
So my main question about the Aliens 1.1 is whether the gaiter effectively blocks outside moisture from penetrating the boots and wetting out your feet. I want a very light boot that simply has me managing my sweat.
The Alien 1.1 isn't perfect for staying dry in deeper snow as it is a tongueless gaitered race boot, but the taller gaiter is fully sealed to the scafo and will do much better than your OG Alien 1.0 at keeping out snow and moisture.
Any other suggestions for big, but lightweight boot? It seems that most boots in this category only come up to size 30.
Finally, for the first time in skimo history, there may be size 31.0 race boots next season: the Dynafit DNA and Mezzalama are planned to be offered in that size. Note those would also be available in size 30.5 with the same shell, and they are narrow and seem to run a bit small.
The foam pads that included in the box are intended to help with filling out areas that are too high volume for your foot. For example, adding foam behind your calf in the cuff to ensure a more snug fit in the cuff area. Another option could be using that pad in the ankle/heel area to increase heel hold. If you have further questions, feel free to reach out to firstname.lastname@example.org!
Earn store credit by writing reviews. Learn more.