Crampon Crisis

Having discussed crampons at great length over the weekend in Ambleside, I took one of my boots into Snow and Rock this evening to get some advice about which type of bindings would work best. My boots (some ancient Scarpa Mantas) are not super-technical, but were designed to take walking crampons for crossing snowfields and glaciers.

Unfortunately the boots are getting on a bit (possibly 10+ years old - I can’t actually remember buying them) and they were re-soled last year after a Guatemalan volcano (Pacaya, since you asked) melted the glue binding the original soles. The distance the boots have walked and the re-soling have combined to leave them considerably more flexible than they were originally - so much so that they are now apparently beyond the limit for even walking crampons.

I’m left with a choice of buying a new pair of stiffer boots, using crampons with the existing boots and accepting that they may fall off, or just ignoring crampons completely. The second and third choice sound downright dangerous, while the first leaves me with a pair of boots that need breaking in. I’m not going to be able to walk much for the next couple of weeks, so if I go for that option then I’m going to be left with 6 weeks to break in a new pair of boots.

If I did decide to get new boots, then there’s the question of which ones. I’ve always liked the look of the new Mantas, but they’re rated B2, so are probably a bit stiffer than I need for a 2-month trek across the Pyrenees. But if I go for something more flexible then will it be up to the extended crampon-use of my trip to Nepal later in the year? It’s all getting rather complicated…