Scarpa Zodiac Tech GTX boots on Hood?

I'm looking at getting my first pair of (semi-auto) crampon compatible mountaineering boots. I'd like something light and agile for summer/shoulder season ascents up various Cascade climbs (mostly in OR, to start). I believe the Zodiac Tech boots align with my goals, as I'm drawn to technical rock and light glacier travel. 

However, I don't want to under-gear myself for future objectives. Of which would certainly be Mt. Hood, and the like. So my question is this: is the Scarpa Zodiac Tech GTX enough boot for summits such as Mt. Hood? I'm mainly concerned about insulation for colder summits, and stiffness/climbability for some potentially more technical ice/snow work. If the consensus is yes, how far could one push the limits of this boot? Thanks in advance. 

Can you be a bit more detailed about what "climbing mount Hood" means in this context?  Are you talking about going up the Pearly Gates in May?  Reid Headwall in February?

I have those boots and I LOVE them.  However, they really are a hybrid between an approach high top and a 3-season boot.  They would likely be fine for Pearly Gates in late spring or summer on a warm day.  They are fine on steep snow and can do a bit of easy front pointing, but I would not want to wear them for extended front-pointing or on a cold day.  They are a perfect boot for Middle or North Sister, Forbidden Peak, Shuksan, etc. in the summer.  I would not recommend them for winter on Mt. Hood, or for any routes requiring ice or steep mixed travel.

Thanks for the reply, Kyle. Given my lack of experience, I'd likely approach Hood in the Spring on an easier route. It sounds like these boots would be up for it! I usually take a minimalist stance on footwear in general (hard hiking in trail runners and pushing the limits if my approach shoes), and typically avoid insulation due to running warm. 

The peaks you'd mentioned are exactly what I have in mind, but I'd hate to have to run out and get different boots if the opportunity for Hood came sooner than expected. 

Taking the opposite stance, how would boots you'd recommend for long days front pointing, or colder weather, fare on the peaks you listed? I am concerned about the bulk and stiffness of such a boot when it's not needed. 

P C wrote:

Taking the opposite stance, how would boots you'd recommend for long days front pointing, or colder weather, fare on the peaks you listed? I am concerned about the bulk and stiffness of such a boot when it's not needed. 

It is tough to beat the value proposition of Nepal-ish boots, like the Nepal, Mont Blanc, and Alpine Expert.  They are durable, relatively affordable, warm enough, and climb well.

However, they are way overkill for just about everything else on your list, in our region, in summer season.  I would be quite sad if I had to wear them on any of the summer scrambles you mentioned.

That was my thought as well (overkill). My Sportiva TX4s are probably enough boot for most summer climbs, though I've never strapped crampons on them. 

I'd like to get out on some shoulder seasons, and think the TX4s may be a little out of their element on something like a snowy North Sister climb with their lack of waterproofing. I'm wondering if a combination of TX4s and say, the Mont Blancs, would have me covered comfortably, or if there's a need for a middle ground. 

To paint the picture more completely, I'd like to tag some local peaks (ie, your list) this coming early season/summer, and move into bigger objectives in the late season/early the next year, while not buying the whole gear store. I keep going rounds between the Zodiacs and Mont Blancs, with the occasional Manta to really confuse me (I've got wide feet). What do you think? 

It's really hard to say specifically what will and won't work.  What do "bigger objectives" look like to you?  There's a lifetime's worth of summer alpine climbing in the PNW that Zodiacs would be totally sufficient for; there are also a variety of climbs that you'd want more boot.  Without talking about specific routes in specific seasons it's difficult to give specific boot recommendations.

I haven't used the Manta, but per the specs it looks like it would fall in between the full winter ice boots (Nepal, Mont Blanc) and the lighter 3-season boots (Trango, Charmoz).  That could be a good fit, or it could have the same issues as the Nepal or Mont Blanc, depending on how and when you're using it.

TX4s will take a strap-on aluminum crampon fine and work for approaching rock routes and scrambles cross snowfields and easy glaciers.  I won't want to wear them on consequential snowy/icy slopes somewhere like North Sister.  I have used TX3s for similar rock approaches in the North Cascades and they work well for that (Forbidden, Dragontail, Stuart, etc.).

That's a good question. On the Bigger Objectives list are certainly larger, snowier mountains, such as Hood, Adams, and Rainier. Also on the list is plenty of alpine rock. At this point, routes/seasons are likely to align with the most accessible conditions. 

It seems to me that the Zodiacs might not gain me much in the world of alpine rock over my TX4s, and would also come up short in the colder/steeper environs. I'm sure it excels at what it was made for, but I believe I've got 'good-enough' coverage for now. I'll wait a bit and shoot for a more dedicated snow/ice boot. 

Thanks for the insight, Kyle. If we ever cross paths, I'd like to buy you a beer. 

For what it's worth, I have TX3 and Zodiacs, and I think that they have quite different applications (although there are certainly similarities).  The Zodiac is built more like a boot and is much stiffer, so the main difference is when using crampons.  Approach shoes with crampons are good for mostly mellow snow; the Zodiacs are much more comfortable on steep firm snow and in more consequential terrain, and can even do a bit of easy front pointing.  I was very glad to have mine for the approach to the NW Face of Forbidden, for example, which requires some steep snow and easy ice to access the rock climbing.  They were also clutch on the steep snow traverse on the Torment-Forbidden Traverse.  My partner wore TX3s for both of these and was kinda scared (I led these bits and gave him a belay, since I had better security, and he led the rock crux because the TX3s were better there).  Not saying you should run out and buy them, just wanted to try to shed some light on the applications for each.  The TX3/4 works great when it's more hiking, scrambling, and crossing easy snow slopes (for example, Washington Pass or the Complete N. Ridge of Stuart).

The Zodiac would be plenty of boot for Adams (via the South Spur), people regularly use trail runners on that.  However, it would likely not be enough for Rainier for most folks.

Sadly, a one-boot quiver is pretty tough to accomplish while also having reasonably comfy feet and legs.

Kyle has given some good thoughts. Given what you describe I would suggest a boot like the Trango Tech which a more of in-between boot:

https://www.sportiva.com/trango-tech-gtx.html