The 98 will definitely offer "better" downhill turning potential with its greater sidecut-
I have not handled the current 98- I am assuming that the current 98 is less cambered and rounder flexing than the 78/88?
This entirely depends on whaty one means by "XCD"- I almost exclusively use NNBC for the BC ski touring you describe- plus distance-oriented turs in hilly/steep terrain.In regards to boots/bindings, ideally it'd be nice to have a single pair boots, leaning towards 75mm compatible ones, that would work for XC and (future) XCD skis, would you advise against this?
A BC-XC boot that is designed for striding is not going to inherently offer better downhill performance whether it NNNBC or 3-pin. (The addition of the cable on a 3-pin binding definitely makes a downhill difference IME- even in BC-XC boots.)
One BC-XC boot will definitely cover all of the BC-XC-XCd skiing you describe doing.
But in the context you describe- the primary advantage of 75mm would not be to use one boot- it would be to switch out the boot for a stiffer, more supportive Telemark boot- if you wanted/needed it.
Personally-
1) I use NNNBC for all the skiing you describe (and then some).
2) I use 75mm Telemark boots-bindings for tours that are downhill-focused.
75mm will cover both of the above- but most skiers will want at least two different boots for each of these contexts.
So for me- I need/want two different classes of boots for my local BC touring- I am happier with the fit and performance of NNNBC in the BC-XC-XCd context. The initial move to NNNBC for me was driven by boot selection.
What boot(s) are you considering? (Forgive me if I missed this in your earlier post.)
No the 88 doesn't turn easier than the 78. Their flex and camber is near identical. 88 has a bit more sidecut- but with perhaps more tip rocker- the 88 might have the same effective edge and sidecut...
Not a slog- at all....
How much of a slog is it to opt for the larger E-88 over T-78 on XC trails? T-78 if it turns the same is probably the most attractive option. But then you dropped your Asnes recommendations lol...
The 88 is a remarkably decent XC ski on all snow conditions- due to its stability, stiffness and ample camber undefoot. It is certainly the best XC ski I have ever tested on consolidated snow with a waist as wide as 68mm- it tracks well and offers very good kick and glide.
The 78 is faster- narrower and lighter.
The 88 perhaps offers "better" deep snow float over the 78- for a heavier skier...(Neither ski will "float" on top of deep soft snow.)
I don't use my 88- I have other deep snow BC-XC skis that I much prefer over the 88.
The 78 is my current top pick for BC-XC-XCd skiing on consolidated, icy, cruddy, refrozen snow.
(I would prefer E99-type ski over the 78 in this context but there is nothing currently available with the grip, glide and stability of the waxless-scaled 78 (the E99 Crown is too unstable for my taste and snow conditions) (the Gamme 54 is not available with a waxless-scaled base- and I am not yet convinced that the Asnes scale design is grippy enough...)
@WoodsersonAnyone have thoughts on Fischer T-78 vs. Asnes Nansen?
Calling Woods!
None of these BC-XC skis are intended to have the "wax pocket" of a Classic XC Track ski (not unless one is a light skier. A recent post here described a true wax pocket on a 180cm Nansen).Lastly, on a skinnier ski, is it easy to safely slow down on steep terrain? curious if tossing on the skins helps here, or good technique alone will keep me out of the trees way.
For example- I weigh 80-81kg without a pack and I completely squash the camber of even my stiffest 210cm Gamme 54 BC/E99 Xtralite.
Not sure what you weigh- but as long as you can compress the camber with the skis evenly weighted- you will have no trouble climbing hills- nor pressuring these skis into wedged snowplow to slow down.
Effectively turning skis is another matter.
Lower cambered and rounder flexing skis are definitely easier to pressure into turns than skis with stiff resistant camber.