UKH

Now in its seventh version, the Manta remains a benchmark mountain boot in the B2 category, and should equally appeal to mountaineers and winter hillwalkers. This is a robust and unashamedly chunky boot, says Dan Bailey, and while you'll find lighter models, and others that may cost a little less, the Manta Tech sets a high bar for build quality, all-day comfort, and all-round performance.

Great photos Dan! What's the mountain in the background in the one with your hood up and crampons on? Beinn Alligin maybe? That's a guess if I'm miles out!

I see Scarpa on their own .co.uk website give the Manta 5 out of 5 for "Winter Mountaineering" and I've definitely seen people recommend (presumably past iterations) for climbing up to say grade IV, but I wonder what Scarpa think "winter mountaineering" is. It's interesting that you seem to suggest they might be B1.5 or maybe even B1.75? - rather than full on B2s. I know the whole B/C thing is just a rough guide, and you discuss at some length that your long feet make most boots more flexible for you than they seem to be for others, but do you think the boot -even in smaller sizes- would be too soft for any pitched winter climbing? 

You're spot on Toby, that's Alligin from Beinn Dearg.

5 out of 5 for winter mountaineering is probably fair but as you say that will depend on your definition of mountaineering. Note they don't get rated at all for summer alpine climbing (a bit unfairly?), mixed or ice falls, all of which are categories for the Mont Blanc Pro on the Scarpa website.

I did some short lived front pointing on moderate angled snow on BD, and there is enough flex in my size 47 that you know about it, though it seems fine for grade I sort of angles. I'd guess the brief nippy bits of the BD traverse rate about II but that's rocky scrambling ground which means you're never on front points for long. On the strength of how they feel on me I doubt I'd pick them over a B3 for a sustained grade II like an icy gully. No chance I'd do anything as steep as your average IV in them. But that's not to say I won't at some stage find myself getting the rope out while wearing them, they are definitely on that borderline.

Small-foots I've climbed with over the years have sometimes seemed to get by with boots that I'd find too flexible, and anecdotally that's not unusual. So doubtless some folk would be happy in Mantas on stuff that I wouldn't be. In any boot there's a lot of added leverage from the extra length in the upper sizes, and the sole construction will be the same whatever size. If you have big feet then you'll probably also be heavier (I can speak personally here) which may also come into it.

Yep those of us with dainty size 41.5s (well actually my feet are sort of square an ugly, but short anyway! ) are probably less likely to have the reach - doesn't foot size normally roughly equate to height? - but our boots seem to be a lot less flexi than your boats/boots!

Nah, inversely proportional to intelligence in’it?

These boots have a good pedigree. I still have my Manta Mark 1s and have used them extensively for many years. Those boots are quite stiff. I've climbed up to III in them and they are almost as stiff as my Scarpa Mont Blancs. Maybe they have softened them up a bit. 

My friend has lead tech 5 ice in them (with me belaying), he weighs about 13 stone and size 46. I'm pretty sure most people wouldn't be able to tell the difference on tech 4 certainly if they are lighter / smaller feet. That was the version from about 15 years ago which maybe were stiffer?

Quite a lot of modern B3 boots now flex especially in the larger sizes and seem more like B2.5 really.