Spantiks or G2evos?

If you have used both of these boots I would like to hear which pair you prefer, and why. I have tried on the g2’s and I like the fit, but I can’t find the Spantiks locally so I’m wondering how they compare. 

For what purpose? I'm honestly surprised to hear the Spantiks are still available. They're like 2 generations of double boots old.

alpinejason wrote:

For what purpose? I'm honestly surprised to hear the Spantiks are still available. They're like 2 generations of double boots old.

Exactly.  I think I tried on Spantiks like 20 years ago and passed.    Would not try them on today. 

Spantiks are still good boots.  Warmer than most modern 6000 meter boots, particularly if you have the Baruntse liners in them.  

That said, I'd rather have one of the modern integrated boots like the G2 for most purposes.  

abandon moderation wrote:

But heavy. Generally over a full pound heavier per pair. I can't say that I've used both, but I'd be surprised if the Spantik is warmer than the G2. But it is warmer than the something like the Phantom 6000s as I recall.

No matter if you're trudging or technical climbing, you're gonna feel that extra weight on your feet.

I'd bet durability is the only metric that the Spantiks win at, but that's a guess. But when I'm gasping for air at 6000m I know I'd happily trade durability for weight.

Spantiks are for sure warmer than my Scarpa Phantom 6000s.  As you said, they are also heavier.  My Spantiks (with Baruntse liners) are 6 pounds, 2 ounces.  My Phantom 6000s are 5 pounds, 2 ounces.  About 1 pound heavier per pair.  

Spantiks with the stock liners are slightly lighter, but much less comfortable.  Spantiks with the Baruntse liner are very comfortable, and the Baruntse liners are more robust than those in the Phantom 6000s.  Baruntse liners make great camp slippers.  Phantom 6000s not so much.    

I've not used the G2, and don't know how much it weighs in a comparable size or how warm it is.  

The Spantik is a good boot for cold conditions.  I've been in some really cold temps with the Spantiks and never had cold feet.  They provide excellent support for long frontpointing sessions, but have enough articulation to allow for good footwork with crampons and comfortable walking.  The supportive nature of the boot, combined with a no-heel lift fit from the thermoformed liners makes them less tiring for long pitches on steep ground.  I've used them for winter alpine and ice in cold temps and have been happy.      

Lots of really hard, cold climbs got climbed in the Spantiks.  Are there better boots available now?  Yes.  But I do believe that the Spantiks are, in general, warmer than many of the modern 6000 meter boots, so if warmth is a serious concern, the Spantiks could still be contenders.  They bridge the gap between 6000 meter boots and full-on Himalayan 8000 meter boots.  There's a reason that Sportiva is still selling them and people are still buying them.  

All that said, I don't use my Spantiks all that much any more.  My Mammut Nordwand 6000s are lighter, more comfortable, and almost as warm.  I've grown soft enough that if it's too cold for my Nordwand 6000s, I'm probably just staying home.  

alpinejason wrote:

For what purpose? I'm honestly surprised to hear the Spantiks are still available. They're like 2 generations of double boots old.

I’m looking at them for cold weather technical climbing, and multi day winter ice climbing trips. I know the Spantiks are old and heavier but they have a pretty good reputation for what they are made for, and currently they cost less than half the price of the g2’s. I will probably go with the g2’s since I have been able to try them on and get a good fit, but I wonder if the Spantiks would be more durable. I’ve also heard of people using them as snowboard boots, and I have a few objectives which would make them ideal for that. 

I've been climbing in spantiks on cold days and thought they're great. Never climbed in more modern doubles to compare though. Comfy enough for long approaches and as aforementioned, can front point for days in them. Occasionally the 'not waterproof above the ankle' thing is silly, but usually it's too cold to find liquid puddles if you're wearing them. If you never climb in G2s you'll probably think the spantiks are great. I climb in the original liners and never noticed an issue as well. 

Christopher I wrote:

I’m looking at them for cold weather technical climbing, and multi day winter ice climbing trips. I know the Spantiks are old and heavier but they have a pretty good reputation for what they are made for, and currently they cost less than half the price of the g2’s. I will probably go with the g2’s since I have been able to try them on and get a good fit, but I wonder if the Spantiks would be more durable. I’ve also heard of people using them as snowboard boots, and I have a few objectives which would make them ideal for that. 

I've owned both. The weight difference between my G2SM (and now my G2 Evos which weigh the same as the SM) and my Spantik wasn't actually all that much if I recall correctly (I think it was 100-150g per boot more for the Spantik). The Spantik is warmer, that's about all you can say for the Spantik in this discussion though. 

The G2 Evo climbs better, is less bulky, is easier to put on, is easier to dry the liner, is just as ugly, and seems to fit crampons a little better. 

Between the two, G2 Evo all the way. 

Some good input in these posts, thanks for the insight. I think I will be going with the g2’s, based on the fact that I have been able to try them on and get a good fit. I’ll find some Spantiks somewhere down the road and try them on, see what I think.

FWIW, I've owned 2 pairs of spantiks, the G2SMs and for the last few years the Scarpa 6000s. Several dozen Alaska Range trips between these setups. Spantiks climb and walk fantastically, but aren't durable. G2s are soft, boxy and I didn't like them. Scarpa 6000s win easily. 

Clint Helander wrote:

FWIW, I've owned 2 pairs of spantiks, the G2SMs and for the last few years the Scarpa 6000s. Several dozen Alaska Range trips between these setups. Spantiks climb and walk fantastically, but aren't durable. G2s are soft, boxy and I didn't like them. Scarpa 6000s win easily. 

Clint, have you had a chance to try out the new Scarpa 6k? Interested to hear your thoughts on it 

I have not, John. I did see them in person and I am very intrigued. THey didn't have my size. I would suspect that as long as they fit my feet, I would like them. Sportiva also has a major boot upgrade in the works that will render the G2SM back to plastic double boot status.

I got G2 Evo for a planned trip to Peru. I started wearing them during the last ice season and did all my climbing in them. They climb well, your feet is always dry and warm and I do not over heat when it is mild. They rock. The Spantik just seem like an outdated boot, but I have not tried it.