Wildly speculative talk about Asnes 21-22 lineup: Otto/FT62

[lilcliffy]

@fisheater Thank you for the initial report on the redesigned FT62! It has further distanced itself from the Rabb 68-

I am guessing that this is in line with the design intent of the FT62 all along-

I am sure there will be a few skiers that will lament the loss of less cambered- more pure-downhill performance of the first-two-generation FT62s...

A test comparison between the new FT62 and the Ingstad would be particularly interesting...
The camber profile of the new FT62 sounds like it is in between the outgoing Ft62 and the Ingstad?

[Woodserson]

A test comparison between the new FT62 and the Ingstad would be particularly interesting...
The camber profile of the new FT62 sounds like it is in between the outgoing Ft62 and the Ingstad?

The stiffness yes, the flex no. It's significantly stiffer than the old FT but the flex is still a Round Alpine flex, and it bends into a very nice equally distributed "C" shape when flexed. Unlike the Ingstad which is firmer underfoot and resists this "C" shape, staying relatively flat underfoot.

[lilcliffy]

A test comparison between the new FT62 and the Ingstad would be particularly interesting...
The camber profile of the new FT62 sounds like it is in between the outgoing Ft62 and the Ingstad?

The stiffness yes, the flex no. It's significantly stiffer than the old FT but the flex is still a Round Alpine flex, and it bends into a very nice equally distributed "C" shape when flexed. Unlike the Ingstad which is firmer underfoot and resists this "C" shape, staying relatively flat underfoot.

Cool- makes sense.

[fisheater]

@fisheater Thank you for the initial report on the redesigned FT62! It has further distanced itself from the Rabb 68-

I am guessing that this is in line with the design intent of the FT62 all along-

I am sure there will be a few skiers that will lament the loss of less cambered- more pure-downhill performance of the first-two-generation FT62s...

A test comparison between the new FT62 and the Ingstad would be particularly interesting...
The camber profile of the new FT62 sounds like it is in between the outgoing Ft62 and the Ingstad?

The following statements are in line with being speculative. I will not be able to give a competent review for months.

I would say if the original intent is for longer approaches into steep terrain, then this design is an improvement. This is a downhill ski. There has been some design tweaks in favor of kick and glide performance that detract from downhill performance. Notably is the redesigned tail. For me, and my style of downhill skiing this is acceptable. The longitudinal stiffness is definitely a plus for me as a downhill skier. I think this is huge.

Without ever handling an Ingstad, but with the knowledge that the Ingstad is a cross country ski that turns. I will say that the camber of the FT Xplore falls between the original FT 62 and the Ingstad. My widely speculative supposition is that the Xplore may be a downhill hill ski that tours well, in the same way the Ingstad is regarded as an XC ski that turns well.

By the way, the tip on the FT Xplore is stiffer than the tip of my ancient blue and red Europa 99. In tip stiffness it is most similar to my USGI 200 cm. However the flex of the front sections of those two skis due to rocker on the FT Xplore, and just the overall difference between the two skis, but the tip flex is quite similar.

[KnoxPolk]

I currently own the new Rabb 68 and Ingstads, there’s definitely much less camber in Rabb and is much softer than Ingstad. I am sending some quick photos with comparison between those two.

[lilcliffy]

Without ever handling an Ingstad, but with the knowledge that the Ingstad is a cross country ski that turns. I will say that the camber of the FT Xplore falls between the original FT 62 and the Ingstad. My widely speculative supposition is that the Xplore may be a downhill hill ski that tours well, in the same way the Ingstad is regarded as an XC ski that turns well.

Well said! And is congruent with Woods' clarification of the flex profile of the Ingstad vs FT62.

By the way, the tip on the FT Xplore is stiffer than the tip of my ancient blue and red Europa 99. In tip stiffness it is most similar to my USGI 200 cm. However the flex of the front sections of those two skis due to rocker on the FT Xplore, and just the overall difference between the two skis, but the tip flex is quite similar.

This is cool- and it is very smart. The old-school attempt at facilitating turn inititation through a soft-supple shovel and tip can easily lead to a ski that is unstable.

If the FT62 has a rockered shovel, it does not need a soft shovel- what it needs is a supportive flex.

The Ingstad has a stiff supportive shovel and a stiff tip as well.
The older "Ingstad" design- Combat Nato- has a stable shovel, but the end of the shovel and the tip are soft and supple to facilitate turn initiation.
The current stiff, stable Ingstad is easier to turn and has a shorter radius than the Combat Nato- due to the significantly-rockered shovel.

What you are describing in the new FT62 all sounds good to me!

[lilcliffy]

@KnoxPolk
Great photos! Thank you!
Looking forward to your reports on these two skis!
Gareth

[Johnny]

I am sure there will be a few skiers that will lament the loss of less cambered- more pure-downhill performance of the first-two-generation FT62s...

The only reason why the FT62 was so special, was exactly because of this. It WAS a unique ski, the only one on the market in that class which such a camber profile.

Now without the low single camber, without the shmear factor, without the surfy feel and with a stiffer flex, I don't see why the new FT62 would be different than Fischer's S-Bounds, Madshus' Panoramas, Alpina's Discoveries and Rossignol's BCs... They are almost the same. Just yet-another-ski in that class... With an added touch of XP emotional communication of course.

I mean, the new FT62 seems to be exactly what its immediate ancestors the old Asnes Storetind and the VetleTind were 10 years ago. Some would use the word retrograde here. The ancestors had all the same characteristics of the new! I know it's not always easy for "progress" to renew itself...

I'm sure it's a GREAT ski, but it sure doesn't have the DNA of the previous Falketinds incarnations I loved so much. And it's sure not unique anymore. I think they should have split this into two different models... I would have bought both instead of none!

[Woodserson]

I don't see why the new FT62 would be different than Fischer's S-Bounds, Madshus' Panoramas, Alpina's Discoveries and Rossignol's BCs... Just yet-another-ski in that class... With an added touch of XP emotional communication of course.

I mean, the new FT62 seems to be exactly what its immediate ancestors the old Asnes Storetind and the VetleTind were 10 years ago. Some would use the word retrograde here. The ancestors had all the same characteristics of the new!

I'm sure it's a GREAT ski, but it sure doesn't have the DNA of the previous Falketinds incarnations I loved so much. And it's sure not unique anymore. I think they should have split this into two different models... I would have bought both!

-I picked up a super cheap pair of 195 Panorama 62's (EON) and the new FT Xplore is stiffer.

-@Reil has the older grey Storetind, the Storetind is stiffer with less of a round flex. Similar, but the Storetind is stiffer and flatter underfoot when flexed.

-Agreed on two different models, but I bet the Rabb is staying as the softer ski.

I do bemoan the loss of splay/rocker in the tail. The schmearability is important. I find that the Ingstad, FT, and Rabb could all lose some tail WIDTH and have better turn release, more schmear, and less chatter on firm snow with narrower tail dimensions. The Rabb is the worst offender of the three.

It's interesting/headscratching because they NAILED this with the Tindan86 and Fjoro92... the tails are quite narrow and tapered and don't flare out at the end, and have zero rocker/splay in the tail, yet provide a really sweet telemark turn with varied radius release. Why not carry this thinking to the lighter skis?

I do bet the new FT Xplore skis better in manky cut up snow, however, especially with the extra torsional rigidity.

[riel]

The only reason why the FT62 was so special, was exactly because of this. It WAS a unique ski, the only one on the market in that class which such a camber profile.

Now without the low single camber, without the shmear factor, without the surfy feel and with a stiffer flex, I don't see why the new FT62 would be different than Fischer's S-Bounds, Madshus' Panoramas, Alpina's Discoveries and Rossignol's BCs... They are almost the same. Just yet-another-ski in that class... With an added touch of XP emotional communication of course.

There still are major differences. The Fischer S-Bound and Alpina Discovery skis have nordic rocker, but soft tips, which makes them chatter to the point of feeling unstable when going at speed on hard snow. The Madshus skis don't seem to have rocker at all, but rely entirely on soft tips for turning, which creates its own set of issues.

Simply getting the details right could be a large differentiator in this category.

Lets hope they improve the tail along the way Woods suggested