Differences Between the Saskatchewan and TA Pac Boots
This question was asked previously and most of the answers were either incorrect, or just didn’t sound quite right. Both are obviously warm, and both should also be waterproof.
1. Trans-Alaska (TA) boot lists having Dry-Plus and Radiantex. It also specifically lists having a reflective, lightweight waterproof shell. The word shell sounds more like the waterproof membrane is farther to the outside of the boot, rather than Gore-Tex which is usually a bootie found closer to the inside. The fact that it is heat reflective also is ideal in cold weather. Previous answers state that this boot may be worse than the Saskatchewan (SK) since it’s not waterproof – based on the description that is incorrect. Furthermore, having a waterproof membrane closer to the outside would actually be better since it would help to keep more of the insulation dry.
2. The SK boot lists having Gore-tex with Scent-lok. However, it does not list having any sort of reflective material other than the 13mm Texel that both boots have.
I don’t want to beat a dead horse, though I am trying to figure out which one should perform better in various situations. It seems as though the TA boot may actually be better for survival in harsh cold (my primary concern) due to Dry-Plus (which I think is pretty much the same thing as Gore-Tex. It’s also what a lot of Irish Setter boots use and those are great boots) and the reflective Radiantex material. Conversely, it seems like the SK boot may be better for hunting due to the Gore-tex with Scent-Lok and cammo.
Thoughts or corrections, anyone?
Country: United States
asked 2 years, 10 months ago
on Cabela's Trans-Alaska™ III Pac Boot
Answer this question
0out of 0found this question helpful.
I agree with most of your post The dry plus is a coating which, as per one sale rep, has a 10 life and then has to be treated again.
Gortex also has to be treated after a number of years too. This is simply a spray material applied to the boot.
However I looked at the reviews of both boots and the TA III had better overall reviews. I just received and used my TA III boots ice fishing and so far I am very happy with the warmth of the boot.
At first glance they appear large and heavy but they definitely are light weight and easy to maneuver in on the ice. I am only 5'9" and had no issue walking or hole hopping.
Also my niece is a musher in AK and just told me most to the mushers in AK have this boot. I gave them a 5 after the first outing.
Country: United States
answered 6 months ago
0out of 0found this answer helpful.
I has both boots, not so different performance when pure adrenaline-pumping adventure. Both boots pushes every performance parameter to the limit. There goal are perfection, and there spare no effort to insure your boots is ideal for your chosen pursuit, be it hunting or pure adrenaline-pumping adventure. Good Luck.
answered 1 year, 6 months ago
0out of 1found this answer helpful.