Madshus Panorama 78

[metamorphosis108]

My Alaska BC in a BC binding offers more control than my Alaska 75 in a 75 mm binding without employing a cable.

I don’t know what your skiing background is, could a few lessons help? Not trying to be smart, just asking.

I have taken several lessons at the various Nordic centers in NH and MA, including the recent two separate weekend Backcountry Ski workshops organized by AMC NH Ski Chapter at Cardigan Mountain. It is a work in progress for sure! Part of my struggle with downhill control could be that I come to this with only two years of BC-XC skiing experience (with no prior ski experience).

[fisheater]

It takes time. You can get a lot of practice riding a chair occasionally. I do envy your location. I really would like to do some skiing in New Hampshire. As you grow in skill you are going to want a T-4 type boot to ski your local terrain. It will also make survival turns as you learn.
Good luck, I would really enjoy a tour on Mt Cardigan, or just a ski down the Sherburne!

[lilcliffy]

Would Fischer Traverse 78 be a better choice with Bre 75 mm on icy/hard snow? I currently have Traverse 78 with NNN-BC and can switch to ST bindings (have an extra pair lying around which I got on super deep discount) if that would offer more control.

The Fischer 78 is tuned for XC skiiing- being stiff and significantly cambered.
Not that it cant be turned- and it can certainly be carved if one can easily pressure it (i.e. this would require a shortish length vs a XC-focused length).
What is your experience turning the 78 with the boot that you are currently using?

The 60mm width of the 78 is certainly more suitable for carving on hardpack with the soft Bre boot vs a 78mm ski.

What boot are you currently using with your 78?
The Bre is reportedly very soft- there are NNNBC boots with more stable and supportive soles than the Bre-
if you are happy with your current BC boot on the 78- then isn't the only reason to move to 75mm so that you can use a Telemark boot on that ski (i.e. T4)?

[metamorphosis108]

Would Fischer Traverse 78 be a better choice with Bre 75 mm on icy/hard snow? I currently have Traverse 78 with NNN-BC and can switch to ST bindings (have an extra pair lying around which I got on super deep discount) if that would offer more control.

The Fischer 78 is tuned for XC skiiing- being stiff and significantly cambered.
Not that cant be turned- and it can certainly be carved if one can easily pressure it (i.e. this would require a shortish length vs a XC-focused length).
What is your experience turning the 78 with the boot that you are currently using?

The 60mm width of the 78 is certainly more suitable for carving on hardpack with the soft Bre boot vs a 78mm ski.

What boot are you currently using with your 78?

The Bre is reportedly very soft- there are NNNBC boots with more stable and supportive soles than the Bre-
if you are happy with your current BC boot on the 78- then isn't the only reason to move to 75mm so that you can use a Telemark boot on that ski (i.e. T4)?

"What is your experience turning the 78 with the boot that you are currently using?"

Not so good on icy and hard-pack. On soft snow: no problem.

"What boot are you currently using with your 78?"

Fischer OTX Adventure BC. I had tried Alpina, but they did not fit well. Would you recommend another NNNBC?

I have no problem driving M 78 in soft snow with Bre and find the soles quite stiff. My thinking was to use Bre on both skis until I get T4.

[lilcliffy]

"What is your experience turning the 78 with the boot that you are currently using?"

Not so good on icy and hard-pack. On soft snow: no problem.

"What boot are you currently using with your 78?"

Fischer OTX Adventure BC. I had tried Alpina, but they did not fit well. Would you recommend another NNNBC?

I have no problem driving M 78 in soft snow with Bre and find the soles quite stiff. My thinking was to use Bre on both skis until I get T4.

Well the OTX BC is a very soft XC boot-
The Bre is not known for having a stiff sole, but I am not surprised that you find it stiffer and more stable than the OTX!

If you are digging the Bre (i.e. fit and performance)- then I would certainly strongly consider moving to 3pin on the 78-
rather than trying to find a more supportive NNNBC that fits.
Not that this guarantees being able to drive the 78 downhill on icy hardpack- the boot wont change the ski, but a more supportive boot will definitely give you more leverage over the ski.

What length is your 78? How much do you weigh?

[metamorphosis108]

"What is your experience turning the 78 with the boot that you are currently using?"

Not so good on icy and hard-pack. On soft snow: no problem.

"What boot are you currently using with your 78?"

Fischer OTX Adventure BC. I had tried Alpina, but they did not fit well. Would you recommend another NNNBC?

I have no problem driving M 78 in soft snow with Bre and find the soles quite stiff. My thinking was to use Bre on both skis until I get T4.

Well the OTX BC is a very soft XC boot-
The Bre is not known for having a stiff sole, but I am not surprised that you find it stiffer and more stable than the OTX!

If you are digging the Bre (i.e. fit and performance)- then I would certainly strongly consider moving to 3pin on the 78-
rather than trying to find a more supportive NNNBC that fits.
Not that this guarantees being able to drive the 78 downhill on icy hardpack- the boot wont change the ski, but a more supportive boot will definitely give you more leverage over the ski.

What length is your 78? How much do you weigh?

Fischer Traverse 78 is 176 cm & Madshus Panorama 78 is 172 cm. I weight 145lb bare (without clothes and a pack).

[lilcliffy]

Fischer Traverse 78 is 176 cm & Madshus Panorama 78 is 172 cm. I weight 145lb bare (without clothes and a pack).

(For reference I am a lot heavier than you are)
The Fischer "78" is significantly stiffer and more cambered than the Madshus 78-

When you stand evenly (i.e. both skis) on the Fischer 78- on solid surface- is the camber completely squashed- or is there an open "pocket" underfoot?
(I have no doubt that the soft and single-cambered Madhus is squashed- even at your weight)

[lowangle al]

My Madshus P 68 has more camber than an alpine ski. It has a positive effect on glide but it takes more weight to turn it. It's not as forgiving as an alpine ski but it's way better than a double camber ski for turns.

[rongon]

I took my old beater Annums out for a spin at Mohawk Mountain, a small ski hill in NW Connecticut (650 ft vert). The snow was soft, the slopes aren't steep, so what the heck.

I had my old Dynastar Legend 3800 skis with me for comparison. That's a vintage 2005 downhill ski with 75mm waist, so I think it makes a good comparison. I have Switchback X2 bindings on the Legend 3800s.

Of course the Legend 3800 is a much heavier and stiffer ski, because it's a true alpine ski. The Annum is a lot lighter (maybe 2 lbs/pair lighter) and a lot softer. The Annum also has a much longer turn radius than the Legend 3800. It's not a subtle difference. The Annum feels very, very straight by today's standards. But its soft flex allows me to pounce on it and get it to turn.

I thoroughly enjoyed the challenge of skiing the soft, mushy groomers on the Annums with the red Switchbacks (not X2s) and my 3-buckle plastic boots. Yes, the Annums are harder to turn, and yes they get thrown around in the chopped up mush, but they still handled the conditions pretty well and were fun to ski. The extra challenge made the skiing more interesting, but not too interesting. The scales are bit chewed up, so I noticed a lot of drag on the flat runouts to the lift.

I fish-scaled up the uphill track once, for the exercise. I only had to switchback and kick-turn a couple of times. The fish-scales did their job well.

I think the Annum is a really good ski for soft snow. It can be taken into surprisingly steep terrain as long as the snow is not too hardpacked and fast. Even then, if you keep the edges sharp and size them a bit short, they're a surprisingly capable ski for going downhill. I think the lack of a hard camber helps in this regard.

I once tried skiing a pair of Fischer S-Bound 125, back when they still made it. I LOATHED that ski. It felt like a giant cross country ski with an almost double-camber, but something like 95mm across the waist. I skied it once and sold it off on eBay. The worst ski I've ever skied. Really.

I'm not sure how much I'd like the S-Bound 112. I demoed a pair at Whitegrass years ago and liked it well enough. But I like the Annum/M78 better for low angled turning through the trees in soft snow conditions. The Annum is great for that.

[metamorphosis108]

I took my old beater Annums out for a spin at Mohawk Mountain, a small ski hill in NW Connecticut (650 ft vert). The snow was soft, the slopes aren't steep, so what the heck.

I had my old Dynastar Legend 3800 skis with me for comparison. That's a vintage 2005 downhill ski with 75mm waist, so I think it makes a good comparison. I have Switchback X2 bindings on the Legend 3800s.

Of course the Legend 3800 is a much heavier and stiffer ski, because it's a true alpine ski. The Annum is a lot lighter (maybe 2 lbs/pair lighter) and a lot softer. The Annum also has a much longer turn radius than the Legend 3800. It's not a subtle difference. The Annum feels very, very straight by today's standards. But its soft flex allows me to pounce on it and get it to turn.

I thoroughly enjoyed the challenge of skiing the soft, mushy groomers on the Annums with the red Switchbacks (not X2s) and my 3-buckle plastic boots. Yes, the Annums are harder to turn, and yes they get thrown around in the chopped up mush, but they still handled the conditions pretty well and were fun to ski. The extra challenge made the skiing more interesting, but not too interesting. The scales are bit chewed up, so I noticed a lot of drag on the flat runouts to the lift.

I fish-scaled up the uphill track once, for the exercise. I only had to switchback and kick-turn a couple of times. The fish-scales did their job well.

I think the Annum is a really good ski for soft snow. It can be taken into surprisingly steep terrain as long as the snow is not too hardpacked and fast. Even then, if you keep the edges sharp and size them a bit short, they're a surprisingly capable ski for going downhill. I think the lack of a hard camber helps in this regard.

I once tried skiing a pair of Fischer S-Bound 125, back when they still made it. I LOATHED that ski. It felt like a giant cross country ski with an almost double-camber, but something like 95mm across the waist. I skied it once and sold it off on eBay. The worst ski I've ever skied. Really.

I'm not sure how much I'd like the S-Bound 112. I demoed a pair at Whitegrass years ago and liked it well enough. But I like the Annum/M78 better for low angled turning through the trees in soft snow conditions. The Annum is great for that.

Thank you for this write-up! Good to know that the Annums are capable skis on soft snow and moderate terrains. I have mounted mine with Rottefella ST w/cable on Voile risers and am pairing it with T-4. Were you mostly making tele turns or p-turns and/or the combination of the two? The ski hill where I plan to use this set up is very similar to what you describe.