New La Sportiva G Summit Boot Opinions

I’m curious if anyone has experience with this new boot or knows when it will be available this fall. Seems like fit could be difficult to get right with removing the insole to add the liner and vice versa, but the concept is interesting.

I know what I'll be climbing in this next spring!

They're available on the European site for €825 with the caveat: "Your order has to be approved by La Sportiva according to product's availability. You will be informed about timing and shipping."

https://www.lasportiva.com/en/g-summit-black-31m999100

Not available on the US site or my go to European retailers yet. Let me know if you order; I'm going to hold off.

an email I got in mid September said mid November ETA in the Boulder warehouse. 

They've shown up on the sportiva NA site - hoping they come in stock soon, they're looking interesting as a versatile option. Hoping they fit well with and without the liner.

G-Summits are imminent. Imagine a G-Tech with a thin liner and higher volume. I would hold back expectations on the use of them sans liner, however. 

Luca Raso wrote:

G-Summits are imminent. Imagine a G-Tech with a thin liner and higher volume. I would hold back expectations on the use of them sans liner, however. 

According to LS customer service last week, due for a mid-January arrival. I ended up going with G-techs for ontario ice cragging, if I need something warmer, they’ll be for sale here shortly!

Rumor has it that the La Sportiva flagship shop that just opened yesterday in downtown Boulder has the G-Summits in most sizes. Still not available online though...

My local store just got them, If I can I will check them out and report back

Isn't this the same thing as the TNF boots?

Keys Layn wrote:

Isn't this the same thing as the TNF boots?

No

Finn Lanvers wrote:

No

Have you seen and handled the TNF boots and G Summits both in person? From descriptions, they both sound like very similar concepts and intended uses. 

NateC wrote:

Have you seen and handled the TNF boots and G Summits both in person? From descriptions, they both sound like very similar concepts and intended uses. 

Yes, My understanding is that THF boots had two liners but they did not really change weight, were as it seems like the g-summit is highly weight focused in its liner options.

NateC wrote:

Have you seen and handled the TNF boots and G Summits both in person? From descriptions, they both sound like very similar concepts and intended uses. 

Similar, yes, but they aren’t the same thing. G-Summits have liner/thermal footbed swap, which gives the option to have a single or double boot, all in one package. The Torre Egger (that’s the one we are talking about right?) seems to have two liners to swap between, which makes it a double boot regardless of the setup. This distinction might matter to some people, which is why I thought I’d comment.

I purchased them on 12/30 in Ouray from Ouray Mountain Outfitters. I have worn them on 3 days. First day was at the ice park with a high temp of 28 I think.  Second day was on Dexter slab WI3 with a road walk and heinous gully scramble, temps around 28. Third day was second gully(WI3) in eureka, road approach. We (party of three) moved slowly on the three pitches and spent a lot spent a lot of time standing with feet covered in snow in temp of about 25.
I wound up sizing them the same as my old spantiks and G2 evo. I did use a medium thickness ski sock instead of a thin ski sock like before.  I also used a currex footbed (like superfeet). For all three days I used the liner. 

The fit and comfort and agility on the approach was really good. On the climbs it took some experimenting with the Velcro strap and BOA to find a happy medium of free circulation and a locked down foot. 

I have always, in every boot ever, had issues with heel lift. (Narrow heel, skinny ankle) With the G-summit, I have it as minimal as I can hope for, and wayyyyy better than either of my previous La Sportiva boots, with no modifications. This is partly because the BOA is positioned better to hold the heel down than on the G2. 

They climbed super well, stiff sole and more flexible ankle than the G2, maybe a bit stiffer than Scarpa Mont Blanc. 

The toe bail of my Blade Runner crampons will need to be modified a bit for an ideal fit, but it is already really tight. 

As for warmth, once I found the right strap position they were plenty warm, noticeably less than the G2, but not drastically less. 

The zipper is easier to operate than the G2. The gaiter closed around my leg nicely. The sole traction was superb. And I am really sold on the ease of adjustment to the forefoot that the BOA brings, allowing quick circulatory relief to the forefoot followed by fast adjustment to a snug fit. 

I would be very interested hearing a size comparison between the G-Summit and a LS Nepal or LS Spantik. It is sounding like there may be limited stock in NA so this sizing comparison from anyone would truly be appreciated to help hit the size first time round. 

Sounds like a great concept ... in theory. How warm it actually is compared with a traditional 'double boot' and how well it fits with or without the liner will be very interesting to hear about.

Ryan Eddingfield wrote:

I purchased them on 12/30 in Ouray from Ouray Mountain Outfitters. I have worn them on 3 days. First day was at the ice park with a high temp of 28 I think.  Second day was on Dexter slab WI3 with a road walk and heinous gully scramble, temps around 28. Third day was second gully(WI3) in eureka, road approach. We (party of three) moved slowly on the three pitches and spent a lot spent a lot of time standing with feet covered in snow in temp of about 25.
I wound up sizing them the same as my old spantiks and G2 evo. I did use a medium thickness ski sock instead of a thin ski sock like before.  I also used a currex footbed (like superfeet). For all three days I used the liner. 

The fit and comfort and agility on the approach was really good. On the climbs it took some experimenting with the Velcro strap and BOA to find a happy medium of free circulation and a locked down foot. 

I have always, in every boot ever, had issues with heel lift. (Narrow heel, skinny ankle) With the G-summit, I have it as minimal as I can hope for, and wayyyyy better than either of my previous La Sportiva boots, with no modifications. This is partly because the BOA is positioned better to hold the heel down than on the G2. 

They climbed super well, stiff sole and more flexible ankle than the G2, maybe a bit stiffer than Scarpa Mont Blanc. 

The toe bail of my Blade Runner crampons will need to be modified a bit for an ideal fit, but it is already really tight. 

As for warmth, once I found the right strap position they were plenty warm, noticeably less than the G2, but not drastically less. 

The zipper is easier to operate than the G2. The gaiter closed around my leg nicely. The sole traction was superb. And I am really sold on the ease of adjustment to the forefoot that the BOA brings, allowing quick circulatory relief to the forefoot followed by fast adjustment to a snug fit. 

Ryan, I haven't climbed in the G2 but I have the Spantik. You sized the same as in those boots although you mention using a thinner sock in the older boots. Does this mean for a given size the G-Summit may be a little larger and even larger still if the liner is removed?  Lastly, how would you compare them for warmth with liner as compared to the Spantik? Thanks a bunch! 

Curtis Olson wrote:

Ryan, I haven't climbed in the G2 but I have the Spantik. You sized the same as in those boots although you mention using a thinner sock in the older boots. Does this mean for a given size the G-Summit may be a little larger and even larger still if the liner is removed?  Lastly, how would you compare them for warmth with liner as compared to the Spantik? Thanks a bunch! 

I would say the length is the same between the three. The G2 felt to me like it had less volume at the forefoot and way more volume at the heel. I would say the G2 was similar to the Spantik, but the spantik had a slightly tighter heel. The G-summit seems to give a smidge more volume in the forefoot with a much snug heel in comparison. I climbed the first day with the thin sock and it was great, but the thicker ski sock on the second day was greater.
I did not climb with the liner out. However, I did try it with the liner out and the thermal sole in. I used a thorlo mountaineering sock(quite thick) and achieved a very similar fit to the liner with medium thickness ski sock. The ski socks without the liner in felt a little bit sloppy, but still useable. The warmth with the thin ski sock and liner was, with the boa loose, similar to the spantik laced snug. When the boa is snug, G-summit is definitely not as warm as the spantik for me. On a scale of 1-10, of all the ice boots boots I’ve ever worn, spantik-9, G2-8.5, G-summit-8, koflach-6, aku montgard-5, Scarpa alpha-5, Scarpa Mont Blanc -4
 But, this is based only on comparison by memory of temps from 19-31

@Luca

Except they're not double boots. There isn't a shell.and liner. The boot is in two pieces and requires one of the liners but you pick between insulation levels of either a single or double. Climbingwise they climb like a single.

Anyone out there who has picked up a pair and is able to compare them against G5 Evos?

Does anyone have any information on how do they fit compared to the Nepal/G5 lasts? Size up or down or go the same.