Asnes Ingstad vs. Fischer S-bound 98?

[Stephen]

At the risk of being overly concerned for @Ira, I would be reluctant to offer advice that is in any way related to his medical concern. I have no idea as to the severity, or extent of his condition, or of the possible outcomes if he were to take a bad fall that injured his ankle.

@Ira, I think the best advice I could offer is to, if at all possible, consult with a sports physician who understands XC skiing and the risks it poses to you, and see what they recommend.
Among other things, it’s possible that, as others have suggested, a more supportive boot and or binding system would reduce your risk to an acceptable level — or not?

Again, none of us know if you can tolerate a minor fall without injury, or if ANY fall that puts the wrong strain on your ankle would be a bad situation. And none of know what the long-term outcome of that might be. Could be permanent, could be you would recover from it ok.

Only you can make those determinations, hopefully with the help of a knowledgeable physician.

Your lack of knowledge and experience with XC makes it hard for you to process the information you get here, and it would be easy to go down the wrong path. All the thoughts offered here are offered with the intent of being helpful — I’m just concerned that we offer advice without being fully knowledgeable of you situation.
Most folks who show up here asking for advice are not dealing with the kinds of situation you are.

Again, I don’t mean to discourage you if this is something you can safely do. I’m just concerned for your wellbeing.

[Ira]

Thanks so much for the advice!

Weight: 130 lbs when I first wake up, probably around 140 dressed with boots and breakfast.

Yes, it was me who found that Madshus Epoch didn't work for me -- too much grip, no glide, felt like snowshoes (and my knees and feet have a hard time with snowshoes). And no matter how much glide wax I put on them the snow stuck to the scales (due to chemical sensitivities I could only use natural ones like Sunflower Speed Paste). I returned those, got Rossi BC 90 in 159 (I weighed 120 upon waking back then, 2015), found those too short (no glide) returned those and got Rossi BC 90 in 169 which I happily skied on for 5-6 years (despite them getting delaminated in the first season, and the delamination getting worse each year, until the delamination got so bad I'd have to continually stop and clear the snow from between the layers). The only other challenge I had with those is too much sinking in soft snow conditions, creating holes/steps on the way up in such conditions, and not enough rocker to go over those steps on the way down, and the tips becoming shovels in deep snow. Due to scratches and delamination, these will be my rock skis.

I tried plastic boots early on and found they caused pain (including in my knees, I do have some knee problems as well as foot problems). Then I got Fischer BCX 675 in 39 and loved them, been skiing them ever since but they got softer so I just bought the Alpina Alaska's in 40 at REI (they fit with 2 pairs of socks but have a bit of room in the toes -- which I can address with neoprene toe-warming sleeves, and in the heel for which I'll need to research lacing techniques). Haven't tried those yet outside of the house.

I also have tried NNNBC in the past but there's something about them that just doesn't work for me -- I think it's that the connection is at the toe vs the ball of foot. The 3-pin, with the BCX675 sole, keeps more of my boot in contact with the ski. That's a minus for kick-and-glide I realize, with this my back ski with which I'm kicking doesn't leave the snow (90% of my skiing is kick and glide or kick and shuffle on mashed potato days), but NNNBC doesn't work for me (that's why I was excited to read the Xplore reviews due to the ball-of-foot but more kick-able connection).

Thank you so much for the advice on the Asnes -- I'm going to rule those out based on this.

Given the terrain I ski (pictures below), and how plastic boots really don't work for my body, and since I currently don't actually do Tele turns or any zig-zag turns at all, I'm not going to do plastic until I get to a point of actually considering tele-turns or other zig-zag turns. Even the stiffness of the Fischer Transnordic (which I tried only indoors) is a dealbreaker for me, and trying to kick and glide (which is almost all of what I do) in plastic boots won't work so well for me.

I did however get the removeable cables as I've been reading good things about those. Would those tend to increase safety, or would they be a liability? Do they release if needed?

Given the advice shared (that less camber is safer), I'm wondering whether my current top choice, Excursion 88, would be too cambered? I'd get the 169 of course (for that one I'd be in the upper range of the suggested weight range, whereas for the 98 the 169 would put me in the middle range).

Re: falling, if I absolutely must fall, I'd try to fall to the side, though I ski gentle terrain to try to avoid falling at all. I'm unlikely to fall backwards on the uphill because the terrain I ski is not steep enough for that (and I tend to lean forward on the way up). I fall an average of once every 2 years.

In case it's helpful/reassuring, here are pictures of the terrain I ski. For me, I feel that this terrain does not call for plastic boots (I'm even wondering if cables with Alpina Alaska 75 might be overkill for these?)

Thanks!

[lilcliffy]

@Ira

Beautiful photos!

Thank you for the detailed explanation- sorry that I couldn't keep track of it all!

OK- so much to unpack here!

Sounds like plastic boots are out!

The most important thing for me is identifying what is already a good fit for your personal skiing context-
- Fischer BCX675
- 169 Rossi BC90
- 3pin-NN

Too bad that Fischer doesn't make an equivalent boot anymore- hopefully the Alaska 75 fits the bill-
other boot to consider:
- Svartisen 75

I would also keep your eyes open for leftover BCX75s- there usually all kinds of leftover stock in that boot..

I wonder what run your BC90s were...

If you prefer it to the Epoch, I am thinking (based on the things you didnt like about the Epoch) that the BC90 you had was stiffer and more cambered than the Epoch?

As a note I have seen a number of different runs of the "BC90" each very different in terms of geometry and flex- one of which is IDENTICAL to the Fischer 88 in terms of geometry and flex.

If the BC90 you had was stiffer and more cambered than the Epoch- the Fischer 88 will be EXACTLY the replacement ski you are looking for.

Based on Tom's recent post on the new Fischer 98- being softer and less cambered than the 88- the 98 might be too close to the Epoch for your liking...

The other ski to consider is the Fischer 78- it has the same flex pattern as the Fischer 88, but would be even easier to put on edge and snowplow-brake than the 88.

The 78 is remarkably stable and smooth- has superb traction, and decent glide. It is NOTICEABLY lighter than the 88- I much prefer the 78.

Go with the length you had- if it suits you!

The cable will give you more leverage and power-transfer when downhill skiing. It will NOT release and may well lead to higher-risk of injury if you fall (i.e. the soft boot in the 3pin bail will twist with you when you fall- the heel cable will cause the boot to stay straight, and your ankle may twist when you fall.) It doesn't sound like you need the heel cable- but it is always worth having in he backcountry.

Without flexing a current 98 I can't say how close it is to an Epoch in terms of flex and camber...

Personally, I would buy them both and compare!

If the current 98 is a bit more cambered and stiffer than the Epoch it might be your perfect ski!

But, my gut suggests that the 88 is identical to what you had- and if that is it- then the 78 is a worthy alternative.

Gareth

[Lighturn]

Hello Ira,

you should definitely check the worst case szenarios:
1. What happens to your tendons when you fall frontally, knees sideways of the ski sinking in for about 10 inches - with and without cables.
2. How do you get out of the woods when tandon snapped.

Cheers

Lighturn

[Stephen]

@Ira, based on your recent post, I am a little more reassured about about your situation.
Again, no disrespect, just concerned about your safety.

It sounds like you have been doing this for a fair number of years, without any real problem.
It also sounds like you are not a nerd about this, as many here are.
You have just gone out with what you have, without going down a rabbit hole about it, gotten some exercise, and enjoyed being outside.
That is beautiful country in your pictures!

As I see it, a little bit of the challenge here is your lack of nerdy-ness on all this stuff (applicability of cables, for example), and the large amount of information an opinions you are getting from different people.
I think @lilcliffy offers you good advice.

It looks like REI is currently out of stock on any of the skis that might work for you.
And it seems like REI is a good option for you, based on uncertainty about any particular ski.
You said earlier you’re in no hurry and could even do it next year, so you might just keep monitoring REI’s stock.
Otherwise, if you feel confident a particulate ski, like the 78 or 88, might work, you could take a chance, and order online.
One thing to keep in mind is that availability is spotty, so, if you didn’t like the online order, you could probably sell them fairly easily on Craigslist, or maybe even here, and not have it be a total loss to have taken a chance on a ski.

Just thoughts for you to consider. Hope something clicks out of all this for you.

[Ira]

Thanks - -yes, I've been checking REI stock daily (even bookmarked the relevant page there). I'm inclined to get them from REI, because, even though I'm now over 90% sure that the Excursion 88 will be the right one, I'd want to support REI so that the majority of skis I get from them I keep.

But if they have the 98 in my size before they have the 88, I'd get that one.

Yes, I haven't really started researching skis and such much until this last month (last time I did this purchase, in 2015, I wasn't living in the mountains and only recreating occasionally, and also didn't have this ankle condition -- which btw didn't start because of skiing).

If I try the cables (I already got them), I'm going to first try them on an easy-snow day.

Thanks everyone for the great advice -- I'm going to keep my eyes out for the Excursion 88!

[Ira]

@Ira

Beautiful photos!

Thank you for the detailed explanation- sorry that I couldn't keep track of it all!

OK- so much to unpack here!

Sounds like plastic boots are out!

The most important thing for me is identifying what is already a good fit for your personal skiing context-
- Fischer BCX675
- 169 Rossi BC90
- 3pin-NN

Too bad that Fischer doesn't make an equivalent boot anymore- hopefully the Alaska 75 fits the bill-
other boot to consider:
- Svartisen 75

I would also keep your eyes open for leftover BCX75s- there usually all kinds of leftover stock in that boot..

I wonder what run your BC90s were...

If you prefer it to the Epoch, I am thinking (based on the things you didnt like about the Epoch) that the BC90 you had was stiffer and more cambered than the Epoch?

As a note I have seen a number of different runs of the "BC90" each very different in terms of geometry and flex- one of which is IDENTICAL to the Fischer 88 in terms of geometry and flex.

If the BC90 you had was stiffer and more cambered than the Epoch- the Fischer 88 will be EXACTLY the replacement ski you are looking for.

Based on Tom's recent post on the new Fischer 98- being softer and less cambered than the 88- the 98 might be too close to the Epoch for your liking...

The other ski to consider is the Fischer 78- it has the same flex pattern as the Fischer 88, but would be even easier to put on edge and snowplow-brake than the 88.

The 78 is remarkably stable and smooth- has superb traction, and decent glide. It is NOTICEABLY lighter than the 88- I much prefer the 78.

Go with the length you had- if it suits you!

The cable will give you more leverage and power-transfer when downhill skiing. It will NOT release and may well lead to higher-risk of injury if you fall (i.e. the soft boot in the 3pin bail will twist with you when you fall- the heel cable will cause the boot to stay straight, and your ankle may twist when you fall.) It doesn't sound like you need the heel cable- but it is always worth having in he backcountry.

Without flexing a current 98 I can't say how close it is to an Epoch in terms of flex and camber...

Personally, I would buy them both and compare!

If the current 98 is a bit more cambered and stiffer than the Epoch it might be your perfect ski!

But, my gut suggests that the 88 is identical to what you had- and if that is it- then the 78 is a worthy alternative.

Gareth

Thanks so much for this information. I had previously ruled out skis in the Traverse 78 width category, but now after reading what you wrote about the 78 am reconsidering, especially if those perform better in icy conditions and still do well with Rotefella Super Tele 75mm bindings and Alpina Alaska boots. Would you say that's the case?

You mentioned "The other ski to consider is the Fischer 78- it has the same flex pattern as the Fischer 88, but would be even easier to put on edge and snowplow-brake than the 88.
The 78 is remarkably stable and smooth- has superb traction, and decent glide. It is NOTICEABLY lighter than the 88- I much prefer the 78."

I'm wondering whether this statement would equally apply to the Alpina Discovery 80 (some mentioned it was the same or almost-same ski)? I had ruled it out due to width, but now considering it (also, it's the closest thing to the 78/88 that REI has in my size). And I've been checking REI multiple times a day looking for the Excursion and S-bound 98 in my size, and every time I look they continue to elude me, while the Discovery 80 keeps staring me in the face, daring me to buy it.

One hesitation with Discovery 80, in addition to width being narrower than I'm used to, and needing lateral stability, is that the length for my weight is 186 vs 169, and I'm only 5'4". Would that impede control, and curving with the road or trail?

If the Discovery 80, like the 78, has good traction, good glide, easier to edge and snow-plow brake in icy conditions, perhaps I should consider it after all.

I'm going to measure my old 2015 Rossi BC-90's waist tomorrow (I've read on various other threads in this forum, that some versions are 60 and some 68, and if it's the former then the waist-width of the Discovery 80's/Traverse-78's shouldn't be that much of a jump, even if the tips/tails are narrower).

@Tom M -- I appreciated your wonderful Xplore video where you wore a Discovery 80 on one foot, with Explore bindings, and a Traverse 78 on the other with NNNBC -- besides the bindings being different of course, do those skis perform the same?

I also liked what was writeen about the Alpina Pioneer in another review, and the Discovery was mentioned there as equivalent (except for the binding).

Sorry everyone, I know I previously said the Discovery 80 was ruled out -- I get more info, so I might change my mind (especially if it's as good as the Traverse 78 or Excursion 88).

Has anyone skied both the Discovery 80, and the Traverse 78 / Excursion 88, and how does the Discovery compare with those?

Also, is the Alpina Discovery waxless base closer to the Fischer one, or to the Rossi Positrack? (Although I did enjoy the Rossi's, the grip wasn't the best in hard snow conditions, and heard likewise from many others).
Thanks!

[Tom M]

Has anyone skied both the Discovery 80, and the Traverse 78 / Excursion 88, and how does the Discovery compare with those?

I've skied all three of the above mentioned skis and I'd be happy skiing any of them on the Forest Service Road shown in your photo, especially if I was skiing by myself, just out for pleasure. All three of these skis are designed for simple and fun off trail pleasure skiing. I don't think you could go wrong with any one of the three.

[Montana St Alum]

At the risk of being overly concerned for @Ira, I would be reluctant to offer advice that is in any way related to his medical concern. I have no idea as to the severity, or extent of his condition, or of the possible outcomes if he were to take a bad fall that injured his ankle.

@Ira, I think the best advice I could offer is to, if at all possible, consult with a sports physician who understands XC skiing and the risks it poses to you, and see what they recommend.

Yeah, I think this is pretty good advice!

[lilcliffy]

Thanks so much for this information. I had previously ruled out skis in the Traverse 78 width category, but now after reading what you wrote about the 78 am reconsidering, especially if those perform better in icy conditions and still do well with Rotefella Super Tele 75mm bindings and Alpina Alaska boots. Would you say that's the case?

Yes- Fischer 78 + Alpina Alaska is a perfect match.