SCARPA 4 Quattro XT Boot

This boot is amazing. I'm a classic weight-weenie skimo nerd guy. Before I got these, the heaviest boot in my quiver was an F1LT. The Quattros walk so much better than I thought they could, and their ski performance is unmatched. I take these boots for 8+ hours days of climbing big mountains and never regret wearing them. The ratio of uphill to downhill performance is too good. This boot is now my daily driver in the backcountry unless I'm trying to go really light.

Sizing question: I’m trying to choose between 26.5 and 27. 26.5 is perfect for my left foot 27 is perfect for my right foot. Since they have the same shell what do you suggest? Dunno if you can switch to one of these sizes after purchasing it by changing the boot board or something else. Thanks!

whats the liner thickness on these? wanna swap in an intuition tour wrap and not sure which thickness to go for.

With some patient guidance from the folks at Skimo, I bought these boots because I needed something ISO/GripWalk compatible. I wish I had saved all that advice to share for this review. All my other boots are 26.5. I bought these at 27 (also as advised by Skimo). I find the Skimo product description accurate (I did not confirm the 'relationship' with Bode).

Anyway, this is a burly boot for me. Trust me, I have not, and will not, intentionally throw "a double that didn't quite make it around on the second rotation" [ref: Elias (12/19/23)]. I don't even know what that means unless it's related to drinking. But I like it. I read elsewhere that this boot has a low center of gravity. I agree.

Out of the box, I didn't like these so much. I got what the resort skiers call shin bang (downhill) and heel blisters (uphill) -- and that's after fitting the liners quite well. My foot/calf volume is spot-on for these boots. I replaced the liners with a legacy Scarpa wrap-style liner. Perfect. No complaints. Up and down. I suppose that increases the price of the boots if you need to buy liners. I agree with Anthony (12/10/23): "one of the most painful boots that I've ever removed." I call these boots "bear traps" (see photo). I'm getting better at taking them off without swearing. The Wrap liners help with that, too.

I find the 'GripWalk' toe geometry (extra length? protusion?) fiddly for the vintage tech binding, but that's not really what I bought them for. These are not a quiver killer for me.

Fun fact: the Scarpa blue coincidentally matches the Karpos Grand Mont (Blue Jewel) pants. So, yeah. Five stars.

Boots are all about fit, so let's start there. These are low volume and relatively narrow, so if that doesn't match your foot, these won't work for you. With that said, these don't seem overly narrow to me. As a point of reference, these are much wider than my low-volume Lange alpine boots and only slightly narrower (but definitely lower volume) than Alien 1.1 race boots.

These boots tour pretty well and ski great. They have been completely comfortable for me on 4hr outings, but I had some blisters on a 3-day tour with a LOT of skinning. I think that's more of an issue w/ the "beef boot" category in general, and these seemed to have the best range of motion of all the 4-buckle boots I've tried on. For extensive touring, something like the F1LT would have been a better choice. But for the typical half-day outing with a focus on the downhill, these are great. I also ocassionally use these in-resort if I expect to do some hike-to or side country terrain. They aren't as durable as a "50/50" alpine boot w/ tech inserts, but you can actually tour in these!

Don't buy if you actually ski hard, or want your boots to last. I'm 5' 8", 155lbs, so not a big dude, I skied these for around 15 days, only in the backcountry. Already there is slop in the cuff pivots, which is crazy considering I have mostly been skiing powder. Yesterday, I wound up building a decent sized booter and throwing some tricks, I threw a double that didn't quite make it around on the second rotation and ended up breaking the walk mode lever in half. Considering these are marketed to be able to ski hard inbounds, there is no reason that these should be breaking 15 days in, especially considering I have been using them as a pure backcountry boot. Beyond being as durable as wet cardboard, the way the walk mode is designed restricts the range of motion substantially when using full auto crampons, and these are the only boots I have ever seen that don't play nice with strap on crampons (petzl irvis)

Is the boot board removable to be grinded on in this or is glued down?

I found these boots lightly used. Reason for selling is that they have too high Volume of a foot. I have the opposite problem generally too low volume for most stuff. Would a liner heat mold relax/expand the liner where it had been packed for the previous owner?

Hello, my current boot is a Freedom RS with shell size 290 and liner size 285. The boot sole lenght is 327 mm.
If i look at the same size Quattro boot, the sole lenght is 316 mm which is a lot less…
Should i take a 295 shell size?
Thnaks!

I'm quite interested in this boots and the main reason is (unlike what many others commented) - grip walk soles. Due to the 4Quatro xt soles ISO I am able to pair the boots with Cast Pivot 15 GW bindings without compromising the release values (as it would be the case with the boots I actually almost bought - Fischer Transalp Pro).

My question is - what do you think about pairing this boots with Cast Pivot and Elan Ripstick Tour 94?

I ski/tour mostly in the north east and European Alps and tend to do 50/50 resort/touring. After reading reviews and comments it seems that low volume of the boots will fit me well.

It sounds as if this boot runs narrow, if does not fit at home what is your return policy?

When I got my first backcountry boot 15 years ago I was floored how well it walked and how incredibly light it was. It didn't ski that well though

This is the same weight. It walks BETTER. It skis like a resort boot. It's not upright!

As a guide, my favorite ever boot

I absolutely loved these boots until this happened. I have put these boots through almost 15 resort days, bumps, trees, steeps. Was skiing on a blue and felt a pop when driving a turn. Hopefully this is just a defect in my boot’s manufacturing process and not a systemic problem. I am 6’ -“ and 190 lbs. I’m sure Scarpa will take care of me but bummed that this will be on my mind with my replacement. The stiffness and fit was amazing while it lasted.

Tried these boots and the fit is very different for my feet than the Freedom RS, which would likely be considered it's precursor. The length felt about the same but the Quattro is much narrower around the front of the arch and somewhere in the instep. I think fit around the toes and ball of the foot were similar for me (but I might have just been distracted by the pain elsewhere). The Freedoms fit me pretty well, these boots are probably not even an option.

I've got an 'ancient' Scarpa Tornado Pro (white 3 buckle boot from ~ 2008). Its been solid for me for over a decade, touring and Alpine skiing. I'd like to replace with the Quattro but have questions on fit. Ive got a 28.5 w/ 324mm sole length. The listed sole length on a 28.5 is 316mm. Are these boots true to size? 28.5 in 2023 is 28.5 in 2008? Seems silly but I'm not interested in shipping boots all over the place to get sized appropriately. Any help would be greatly appreciated.

How is the ROM compared to Atomic Hawx and Scarpa F1? (Two other boots that I own)

Hi there trying to grasp the fit of the Quattro XT or SL relative to my current Hoji Pro Tour in a size 28.5. My alpine boots have a 17 degree forward lean but the Hojis with the spoiler (purchased from Skimo) still make the boot feel upright compared to alpine boot and feel strange. Considering the Q XT to serve as one boot (patrolling and touring). Would the Quattro XT in a 28.5 or 28 shell have a similar sizing to the Hoji pro tour and the 17 degree forward lean be accurate? Thoughts?

Let me preface this review with a disclaimer: this is the highest performance downhill boot I've used, that also happens to be light and has a ridiculously friction free ROM. Absolutely 5 star and top of class in those regards.

It is 4 stars because of the gripwalk sole and elongated toe welt which does make it feel clunky when moving on hard surfaces when not skinning. It is also a coldish boot. And it also is one of the most painful boots that I've ever removed as far as the cuff usually separates and then ends up clamping directly on top of your Achilles tendon. These are all things I'm willing to live with.

Now where it is class leading five stars is downhill performance, weight and very friction-free ROM. This is the first four buckle boot that made me forget that I was skinning in a 4 buckle and made me feel like I was skinning in a one kilo boot of yesteryear. Except for the fact that I could drive skis aggressively through chop in these.

There are a couple of things that separate this boot from every other boot I've tried. A) It probably has the most aggressive forward lean settings that I'm aware of. B) It is extremely low volume, It honestly feels like a climbing shoe. And it is very low to the ground. These are not bad things but they definitely feel very different than any other boot than I've used. Surprisingly, despite being very low volume, they accommodate my fat foot quite well and with the exception of where the carbon reinforcement runs It punches extremely easily. The built-in booster strap is excellent and the buckles are less faffy than the zero g's version of wire buckles. I think too often that people pick boots based off of stats that don't actually fit them well obviously im guilty of this to some extent as well, however, after trying essentially every beef boot in the category, I will say that if this fits you, it is the best option even with its shortcomings. And by fit I also mean your forward stance. Some people are suited by a more upright stance boot and even if this boot accommodated your foot, it would not work for you if you fit that category. However, if you have a medium to widish foot that is low volume vertically, and want a very aggressive forward lean and a slipper like fit that is quite stiff then there's nothing better than I'm aware of.

If I was to create my perfect boot, it would essentially be this boot except with a full rubber vibram sole, a tad more rocker in the forefoot and a less protruding toe welt. Everything else is extremely refined.

On paper I wanted nothing to do with this boot and I thought it would not work for me and probably be too narrow and that it wouldn't walk well but I was wrong on all accounts. It certainly isn't necessarily a narrow boot, but it absolutely is low volume. I'm very glad that I tried this boot because it is considerably higher performance for me than others. Again with the caveat that it fits me well. I thought that I had a good fit in other boots until I tried this one.

I do feel like the heel cup could better, however, when it's all buckled up, the hold is perfect. It's only noticeable in uphill if you're running buckles on a slightly looser setting however, it doesn't feel quite as loose in the heel as the zero g, at least for my particular heel.

How does this compare to the Tecnica Zero G Pro Tour?

Trying to decide between these 2.
Nice stiff downhill oriented boot light enough for those bigger missions.

Currently on the Salomon shift pro 130 which is great but too heavy and limited rom.

Thanks!

Hi,

How will these be to punch out? Need to get them about 10 mm wider. Have been difficult to do with the Scarpa how have carbon integrated in the Grillamid, as the Alian RS.