Crispi Idaho vs Briksdal

[Whaledriver]

Any thoughts on the two boots? I have tried in the Idaho and liked them. Was wondering if the Briksdal would be worth a look? Will be for chasing elk and muleys in CO. Thanks in advance. I am moving from the Lowa Camino. Like the boot but looking for more ankle support and lighter boot.

 

[Moserkr]

Not experienced with lowa or idahos. Put 1,000+ miles on my summit gtx before my feet flattened and ankle rolled a lot. Had to size up and get stiffer soles with more ankle support. Bought the briksdals after tons of homework. Friend bought the colorados which are just like the briksdals, and the nevadas which are more like the idahos. He hates the nevadas and loves the colorados.

Briksdals are built like tanks but still feel light. A lot more ankle support - dont think I can roll my ankle cause i literally tried. I balanced on the edge of the sole to see if it would let go and it held. Thats impressive. They are stiffer, I got the 4/5 sole, specifically for high country elk/muleys. But not so stiff they dont flex, its comfortable. The outer sole is supposed to wear even better than my old summits but we shall see.

Thoughts on the two and why I picked the briksdal. The crossbow frame is what my friend found extremely uncomfortable in his nevadas - idahos have it, briksdals do not. 10” is a taller boot than the 9” briksdal - personal choice, i have gaiters as you probably do to. The idaho will breath better with more mesh and less leather. Briksdal will take a better beating with more leather but hold more heat. The reason my feet flattened was from the summits flex 3 rating and i could feel that flex climbing steep terrain. Better for stalking close maybe, but harder on your feet over long distances with heavy packs. Idahos are flex 3, briksdals 4 or 5. The lacing seetuo is different too, briksdal is assymetrical and im not sure what that does lol.

If you can try on both and you will know right away which feels better. Good luck!

 

[DRUSS]

My Briksdahls feel more supportive than my Camino did. Both were comfortable to hike in. I've ran up to 85 lbs for both in training hikes in the hills. I like the lacing system in the Camino a little better. They were easier to put tension where I wanted it. But overall the Briksdahl was a simpler better boot. I sold the Camino and kept the Briksdahl as a primary boot. I will be getting a Insulated pair this winter.

 

[Whaledriver]

Awesome. Appreciate it guys. Sizing close to the Camino?

 

[DRUSS]

Yes, I felt the lowa was a little narrower overall. But same size for me

 

[LukiLanda]

Not experienced with lowa or idahos. Put 1,000+ miles on my summit gtx before my feet flattened and ankle rolled a lot. Had to size up and get stiffer soles with more ankle support. Bought the briksdals after tons of homework. Friend bought the colorados which are just like the briksdals, and the nevadas which are more like the idahos. He hates the nevadas and loves the colorados.

Briksdals are built like tanks but still feel light. A lot more ankle support - dont think I can roll my ankle cause i literally tried. I balanced on the edge of the sole to see if it would let go and it held. Thats impressive. They are stiffer, I got the 4/5 sole, specifically for high country elk/muleys. But not so stiff they dont flex, its comfortable. The outer sole is supposed to wear even better than my old summits but we shall see.

Thoughts on the two and why I picked the briksdal. The crossbow frame is what my friend found extremely uncomfortable in his nevadas - idahos have it, briksdals do not. 10” is a taller boot than the 9” briksdal - personal choice, i have gaiters as you probably do to. The idaho will breath better with more mesh and less leather. Briksdal will take a better beating with more leather but hold more heat. The reason my feet flattened was from the summits flex 3 rating and i could feel that flex climbing steep terrain. Better for stalking close maybe, but harder on your feet over long distances with heavy packs. Idahos are flex 3, briksdals 4 or 5. The lacing seetuo is different too, briksdal is assymetrical and im not sure what that does lol.

If you can try on both and you will know right away which feels better. Good luck!

I recently purchased the Crispi Briksdal SF [Stiff Flex] GTX Insulated Hunting Boots and I my ankle were in pain through out the day of chukar hunting in Northern Nevada. It sounds like the regular Briksdal would have been better.

 

[schmalzy]

I think the briksdal are super comfortable given the stuff sole. Rocker helps. Lacing setup allow to keep foot tight, ankle secure, but flexible and keep heel seated.

I’ve got narrow long feet without a ton of arch but for me they’re about perfect.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[JoeDirt]

I have both,

Briksdal the leather stretched a little down in their funky toe box. If they made the Briksdal with a normal toe box it would be my forever boot.

Idaho GTX 2, higher ankle makes it a little warmer in the summer months. If it was the same height, tapered cut on the ankles and stiffer sole like the Briksdal it would be my forever boot.

I have a lot more miles on the Briksdal probably on my 4th year. Few deep cuts on the leather still waterproof.

One year on the Idaho GTX 2's fingers crossed they hold up because they look a little tougher.