Give 'em a call. I asked a few weeks ago if they would get Kongsvold in before next season and the woman said she checked the list for their next order and no Kongsvold. So they have an order, evidently.rickjamesbrown wrote: ↑Mon Feb 07, 2022 6:49 pmI suppose it's a bit of a moot point right now anyway as both are out of stock in the sizes I would want. Does Neptune generally restock mid-season? Or do I need to wait till end of season/next season?
Advice: Breidablikk vs Finnmark
-
mca80
- Posts: 994
- Joined: Sun Jan 02, 2022 5:24 pm
- Location: Da UP eh
- Ski style: Over the river and through the woods
- Favorite Skis: Nansen, Finnmark, Kongsvold, Combat NATO, Fischer Superlite, RCS
- Favorite boots: Crispi Bre, Hook, Alpina 1600, Alico Ski March, Crispi Mountain
Re: Advice: Breidablikk vs Finnmark
Re: Advice: Breidablikk vs Finnmark
I have Finnmark WL 210 and Kongsvold 200, and we have in our family a Breidablikk 180 and Combat Nato 190 so have some experience in that ski too. I ski them with 1-2 two arctic sled dogs pulling me. In spring when it gets icy I find it safer to have metal edges, and yes, sometimes in open wind packed hills too. But, edge or no edge, and although our dogs know to beware of me coming behind, and I use a long leash, I must ALWAYS stay on guard and be prepared to perform any necessary stunts to avoid collision when something happens.
If I had to get one dog ski it would be Breidablikk 210, no question (I am 5'10", 190lbs). But my case is different because I do skijoring. My speeds are high, so I would benefit from turnability of Breidablikk (Kongsvold even more), and softer camber makes it much easier to get K&G grip(especially in higher speeds). But that is only for soft snow. When it gets firmer Finnmark has more reliable edging and adequate grip (I would not buy Åsnes WL again, at least for something as cambered as Finnmark - I can make it grip only with grip wax, so would be better off with a waxable base).
One thing to consider is if you really can take your dog to deep snow - I know that in our conditions, even our big arctic dogs can not go outside trail/track of some kind like 90% of time. Yes, they can usually somehow survive 5km if it can not be avoided, but it is a torture and they are more exhausted just swimming behind my ski tails than pulling me 30km in an old consolidated track with 8 inch fresh on top. In that case I myself would be happier with Breidablikk over Finnmark, but would truly prefer Finnish forest skis for proper float. If I do not want to torture my dogs, Finnmark has adequate float. So, if I would get a ski for skiing with a dog who is not pulling me, I would be happy with either Finnmark or Breidablikk. Yes, Breidablikk has it's advantages especially in soft snow, but when they are clearly better I might want to leave the dog at home anyway. And, I would say that where Finnmark excels in what comes to turning, is from 4 to maybe 8 inch of soft snow on top of firm (not icy!), then I have sometimes witnessed the rocker come alive and give me good times in the hills.
My bottomline for your case would be: both are a good step up in soft snow XC performance from Madshus 62, especially so if you choose a longer length. Finnmark will be more different from the 62 if that is what you want and often more efficient, but Breidablikk excels in a bit deeper conditions.
Edit: Gamme + Breidablikk, everything most people would ever need for XCd... apart from forest skis and other such local specialities.
If I had to get one dog ski it would be Breidablikk 210, no question (I am 5'10", 190lbs). But my case is different because I do skijoring. My speeds are high, so I would benefit from turnability of Breidablikk (Kongsvold even more), and softer camber makes it much easier to get K&G grip(especially in higher speeds). But that is only for soft snow. When it gets firmer Finnmark has more reliable edging and adequate grip (I would not buy Åsnes WL again, at least for something as cambered as Finnmark - I can make it grip only with grip wax, so would be better off with a waxable base).
One thing to consider is if you really can take your dog to deep snow - I know that in our conditions, even our big arctic dogs can not go outside trail/track of some kind like 90% of time. Yes, they can usually somehow survive 5km if it can not be avoided, but it is a torture and they are more exhausted just swimming behind my ski tails than pulling me 30km in an old consolidated track with 8 inch fresh on top. In that case I myself would be happier with Breidablikk over Finnmark, but would truly prefer Finnish forest skis for proper float. If I do not want to torture my dogs, Finnmark has adequate float. So, if I would get a ski for skiing with a dog who is not pulling me, I would be happy with either Finnmark or Breidablikk. Yes, Breidablikk has it's advantages especially in soft snow, but when they are clearly better I might want to leave the dog at home anyway. And, I would say that where Finnmark excels in what comes to turning, is from 4 to maybe 8 inch of soft snow on top of firm (not icy!), then I have sometimes witnessed the rocker come alive and give me good times in the hills.
My bottomline for your case would be: both are a good step up in soft snow XC performance from Madshus 62, especially so if you choose a longer length. Finnmark will be more different from the 62 if that is what you want and often more efficient, but Breidablikk excels in a bit deeper conditions.
Edit: Gamme + Breidablikk, everything most people would ever need for XCd... apart from forest skis and other such local specialities.
-
rickjamesbrown
- Posts: 20
- Joined: Fri Feb 19, 2021 1:26 pm
Re: Advice: Breidablikk vs Finnmark
@havuja , thanks! That's great info.
That's a good point about the snow being too deep for the dog - perhaps if it's a depth that the dog could come with, the Finnmark would suffice and offer better efficiency. Can always get a Gamme in addition for icy/spring skiing without the dog.
Maybe it's good everything is out of stock right now... I keep changing my mind.
Thanks again.
That's a good point about the snow being too deep for the dog - perhaps if it's a depth that the dog could come with, the Finnmark would suffice and offer better efficiency. Can always get a Gamme in addition for icy/spring skiing without the dog.
Maybe it's good everything is out of stock right now... I keep changing my mind.
Thanks again.
-
rickjamesbrown
- Posts: 20
- Joined: Fri Feb 19, 2021 1:26 pm
Re: Advice: Breidablikk vs Finnmark
Does anyone know if the Breidablikk is still available as 210 cm? I notice on Asnes' site, that 200 cm is the max listed length, but on some european retailer sites, I see 210 cm.
varuste.net has "B-grade" Breidablikks available right now for $211, but only 190 cm and 200 cm. It's tempting, but I'm ~185-190 lbs, and would like as long as I could get for that ski, so if 210 cm is available for that ski, I would maybe wait. My partner is also interested in them, but she only weighs ~125 lbs - too light for the 190 cm I would imagine?
varuste.net has "B-grade" Breidablikks available right now for $211, but only 190 cm and 200 cm. It's tempting, but I'm ~185-190 lbs, and would like as long as I could get for that ski, so if 210 cm is available for that ski, I would maybe wait. My partner is also interested in them, but she only weighs ~125 lbs - too light for the 190 cm I would imagine?