Test report
For the sake of completeness, the well-known advantages of a hard boot should be briefly mentioned again here:
Improved lateral support when ascending in demanding ski touring terrain.
Low inertia when walking.
Efficient step-packing when bootpacking.
Compatible with fully automatic crampons
Read more about this topic here.
Characteristics on the descent
In terms of downhill performance, I was particularly impressed by the direct power transfer to the board. The flex towards the front is soft but progressive and almost identical to that of a softboard. This gives you a more direct power transfer and a much better impression of the board underfoot. Although this is not its main purpose, it is also surprisingly brilliant for carving on the piste. What is an advantage on the ascent - the lack of lateral flex - is of course a disadvantage on the descent. However, the Phantom binding can make up for this. The binding is tilted 5° towards the inside of the foot (canted) and is also designed to allow lateral flex - i.e. towards the nose and tail - with the boot.
The Spark Dyno also flexes quite comfortably; the canted pucks, on the other hand, only have a 3° tilt. Overall, you have a little less lateral flex than with a soft boot. Nevertheless, the bindings do a lot of the work and I don't feel restricted in my range of movement during the descent.
Characteristics on the ascent, bootpacking and scrambling
The range of movement in walk mode offers more than enough freedom of movement when skinning. Even normal running and climbing stairs are comfortable and cannot be compared with a classic ski boot. The upper part is ergonomically shaped so that there is no uncomfortable feeling in the calf area, known as calf bite.
Smaller climbing passages between snow and ice can be mastered well, but require an adjustment if you are used to soft boots. These always cushion a little, which can be quite pleasant in easy terrain with rock. With the Key Equipment boots, you immediately feel a direct connection to the rock or stone. This is still quite unusual for me. I would like to see a more solid rubber sole here. But you can tackle smaller rock structures such as ledges or cracks with them - in contrast to the usually clunky soft boots. A real gain!
Together with fully automatic crampons and the Auftriib Verts (Saucer,Test here), the whole setup becomes a real dream team. In terms of weight and volume, fully-automatic tools such as the Petzl Irvis are no comparison to the Grivel irons (Grivel 1050g, Irvis 570g), which I have to use for the softboots. You can almost always pack the Irvis in your touring rucksack, whereas with the Grivel I always think twice about whether I really need them on tour.
In comparison to the Phantom Slipper, which is no longer in production, the shoe has a screwed tongue that cannot be removed. With the Slipper, some users remove the tongue during the ascent to gain more comfort. Compared to the Key Equipment Boot, the upper part of the boot is supposed to be slightly harder. This is not possible with the Disruptive and, in my opinion, not necessary.
In spring conditions with wet snow, I have not noticed any problems, even after prolonged use. The shoe keeps out the wet well. The Velcro fasteners still work reliably even after several years. Even when you have to trudge through waist-high powder, there are no problems with the Velcro fasteners due to contact with snow - a clear plus point for the Disruptive.
