S-bound 98? Falketind62? Rab 68? Other Skis?

[jyw5]

to further confirm that S112/S98 are not right for icy slopes, I took my 169cm S112/NNNBC today. Its been a few months since I've skiied them. I am trying out a new exciting secret experiment...which I will reveal once I know it works.

It was -6F today. very cold! the storm last wk dumped as much as 2ft of cold snow and with 50mph wind gusts that left all the ridges dangerously loaded and many aspects are hard crust and breakable crust.

On the snowmachine trail on the gentle slope, the hard kibble and bits were not good up or down. On the down, the early rise of the rocker tips bounced around and I can feel myself getting tossed side to side and inconsistent drag from the scales.

slightly off trail was perfect dry shallow powder, the ride down this was so smooth, I made easy teleturns down and very fast with no drag from the scales.

off track was variable crust to deep powder. in the photo below, you will see that one ski is buried almost to my knees, the pole can sink in all the way down in this sugar snow. Higher elevation and steep slopes were off limits today as they have high avy danger today and many aspects are just a windblown sheet of ice.

The skis also didnt hold much of an edge on a moderate slope consisting of 2" powder over a solid frozen base. I skiied diagonally down this section with no problem but was unable to make any turns for fear of slipping and falling on hard frozen ice.

I think the narrower S98 may have done slightly better, but not much. The fishscales are unhelpful. wax and skins are far superior in today's conditions.

I unfortunately dont have any free days this wk to test with the Sverdrup. It would be curious to see how these would do on the crusty snow and kibble&bits.

[lilcliffy]

Not totally 100% sure if the skog is identical to nansen. but from past discussion, I seems like it. can probably email asnes to confirm.

There have been conflicting reports on this over the years- from both Asnes and Norwegian (UTE) tests...

it does have that pool cover syndrome in deep snow,

See- this suggests to me that your ski is softer than the 205 Nansen I have. Though I haven't skied my Nansen yet- it has remarkably stable flex (as stiff as the Ingstad for sure). I am not anticipating my Nansen to have the terrible poor stability in deep snow of softer flexing skis like the Eon/E109...I will find out! The flex of my Nansen is smooth, consistent and uniform over its length- I can bend into an arc, but man is it stiff, stable and resistant (waaay more than skis like Eon/E109/Epoch).

The single camber allows for tolerable k&g on flats in consolidated snow. Its still slow but not as bad as the FT62 or S112.

This is revealing as well- that you describe the Cecile Skog as "single camber". My Nansen certainly has a lower profile and less resistant camber underfoot than my Gamme/Amundsen/Sverdrup/E109- but certainly more than either of my FT62s.

It also excels on spring crust. I really enjoyed last seasons very brief crust skiing season. most skiiers here use skate skis during this time, but I found the Skog quite nice for it...it was fast and stable and easily maneuverable...I was able to ski like a pro. I was also able to continue higher and later when the snow softens and the crust skiiers are gone. I think the single camber allows the edges to dig in to the harder snow...something the FT62 and S112 really lack.

Again interesting stuff. When you say that the FT62 lacks- do you think that this is a function of its short effective edge? And when you say that the S112 lacks- is that a function of its width and lack of torsional stability?

The technology/geometry of this ski really stands out in optimal conditions. On corn, I can telehiro down the mountain. That video of Gamme on corn really illustrates how easy it is to turn in good late spring conditions.

The smooth flex makes turning easy in most conditions. I think I had the toughest time in deep snow (as expected) and then when the snow was refrozen or hard windblown or sun crust. In this instance, the ski just doesnt hold an edge ... I'm hoping the Sverdrup will do better on harder snow. I can already tell that the Skog does better than the Sverdrup on deeper snow as the tips cut through the snow better...whereas resistance is met with the Sverdrup (feels like I'm going to fall forward and faceplant).

Again- very interesting and valuable notes here. Your description of the Sverdrup in deep snow doesn't surprise me- all of that rocker, combined with the softer more flexible shovel, with that big stiff camber coming in behind...

I too will be interested on the Sverdrup vs Nansen on hardpack.

More evaluation will be needed to see how this shorter 175cm Sverdrup performs on hard snow. My initial impressions are good. I feel like a mountain goat as the edges bite into the steep hard snow. I descended a hardpacked steep slope into a creekbed last wk with no issues vs. FT62 the next day took noticeably more effort. I still think leaving xskins on or even full skins are still needed with boilerplate snow with either ski...which I havent had to do yet this season.

The Sverdrup is incredibly complex in its geometry and flex-rocker-camber profile...
A 175 Svredrup has a MUCH shorter effective edge than even a 185 Nansen...plus mounted at BP + the rocker- the weighted foot is further forward on the effective edge (vs the Nansen at BP).
..............

On another note- considering how stable the overall flex of the Ingstad is-
I wonder if the Ingstad shouldnt be just as good as the Nansen as a downhill ski-
at BP the weighted foot of the Ingstad is further forward than the Nansen-
plus, with all that rocker, the Ingstad has a shorter effective edge, therefore, for example-
a 195cm Ingstad would have a similar effective edge to much shorter Nansen (say 175-180?)-

However there are definitely conditions where the non-rockered Nansen is going to outperform the rockered Ingstad (e.g. breakable crust, climbing).

Joe- you need an Ingstad to make an ultimate "final" comparison!

[jyw5]

Hi Gareth,

there is alot to digest in your last post. I have been tempted a number of times to buy the Ingstad! The next pair of skis is a work in progress. given that i just got the Sverdrup, I need to focus this season on the 4 different pairs of Asnes that i have acquired in the last 3 seasons! lol.

I will give more feedback as I go. And will revisit your post again to provide more answers and info. I think I am finally starting to understand the pros and cons of these skis and the use cases. Alot of it too is I am becoming a better skiier so I am starting to feel the differences between ski setups over many different conditions/terrain.

Thanks for your posts. very insightful as always!

[Ira]

PSA: Hi everyone, just this morning the new Asnes Falketind 62 became available on the REI site. It's not for me, as hand disabilities and chemical sensitivities make grip-waxing not an option, and it has more sidecut than I seek, but sharing in case it's helpful:

https://www.rei.com/product/198925/asne ... s-20212022

Sharing because I know gear is hard to find this year.

[jyw5]

PSA: Hi everyone, just this morning the new Asnes Falketind 62 became available on the REI site. It's not for me, as hand disabilities and chemical sensitivities make grip-waxing not an option, and it has more sidecut than I seek, but sharing in case it's helpful:

https://www.rei.com/product/198925/asne ... s-20212022

Sharing because I know gear is hard to find this year.

wow. the price on these really went up in 2 yrs. I think I paid $425usd with shipping from sportalbert. of course these new ones are supposed to be much better after a few improvements...however my 2019/2020 version is spectacular on steep perfect spring powder and has better graphics.

[jyw5]

- 1st/2nd gen FT62- though a bit better than the Epoch/Annnum- they are still terrible on ice

And to clarify- in my experience- the limitation of the FT62 on ice is not its stability- it is a function of the very significant rocker and its very short effective edge.

" It also excels on spring crust. I really enjoyed last seasons very brief crust skiing season. most skiiers here use skate skis during this time, but I found the Skog quite nice for it...it was fast and stable and easily maneuverable...I was able to ski like a pro. I was also able to continue higher and later when the snow softens and the crust skiiers are gone. I think the single camber allows the edges to dig in to the harder snow...something the FT62 and S112 really lack."


"Again interesting stuff. When you say that the FT62 lacks- do you think that this is a function of its short effective edge? And when you say that the S112 lacks- is that a function of its width and lack of torsional stability?"

-------

Gareth,

The FT62 (2019) has a shorter effective edge. It just doesn't do well on hard snow and unusable on wind/sun crust. I can see the rocker tip slapping against the hard snow. I feel completely unstable.

The S112 wants to slide sideways in these frozen crust conditions...also equally unusable. The scales don't do anything to improve grip. So perhaps this is what you mean by width and lack of torsional stability?

I have used full skins on the FT62 in these conditions and it does mitigate some of it. I have to be very careful where and when I ski when I choose the FT62 for the day.

On the Eklutna Traverse in 2020 (multiple glacier crossings), I had S125 with full skins and a 50lb pack. There were sections of hard refrozen snow on the last day...I was falling/slipping every 50ft with full wall to wall skins. I sidehilled the steep no-fall zones by carefully digging into the snow with the edges and gliding slowly. I believe the S112 and FT62 would have similar issues.

The Skog with fullskins in these conditions are noticeably better but I wouldn't bet my life on it... I would take a good hard look at different skis/gear again if I ever had to do sections like the one on that Traverse! (the 2+ miles of no fall zones would be 500ft+ slide/fall into the creek below and some sections would be down the gorge/cliff)

[mikael.oh]

I¨m gonna repeat myself here if you¨ve read any of my threads. I read through all 6 pages now and I really think you should look at a pair of Åsnes Gamme combined with the amazingly stiff and sturdy Fischer BCX Transnordic boot.

I¨m new to BC skis and have less than 10 days on this setup having bought it late spring, early summer, but I shred the heck out of it. Only with alpine turns currently though. I need to find some time, and snow, and learn telemarking eventually. I used to ski a lot but stopped when too many of my friends died. That¨s Chamonix for you. Living and skiing in Norway now.

Since we had almost no snow so far this season I¨ve only been skiing man made snow in resorts. Hard, often icy, and steep. Up to 40 degrees. Pure smooth ice is no use, but I can still get down it safely, even when it¨s 40 degrees steep.
But if I have only a little texture to grab onto, the Gammes ski like a dream. i ski them like they were alpine skis. Slalom, giant slalom amd super g turns, and almost as fast as if I was on alpine skis. Try to limit the speed somewhat as I¨m not sure what would happen if I took a fall.

At this point in time I don¨t see any real benefits to the Xplore system, and the prices offend me. Maybe as it matures it will grow into something good but right now I wouldn¨t bother.

The Fischer boot is stiffer than anything else available and combined with the Gamme you can have a lot of fun on hard snow. I did ski some powder my second day on them late last spring and that was super fun as well. Did telemark turns then even though I didn¨t really know how to.

[jyw5]

I¨m gonna repeat myself here if you¨ve read any of my threads. I read through all 6 pages now and I really think you should look at a pair of Åsnes Gamme combined with the amazingly stiff and sturdy Fischer BCX Transnordic boot.

I¨m new to BC skis and have less than 10 days on this setup having bought it late spring, early summer, but I shred the heck out of it. Only with alpine turns currently though. I need to find some time, and snow, and learn telemarking eventually. I used to ski a lot but stopped when too many of my friends died. That¨s Chamonix for you. Living and skiing in Norway now.

Since we had almost no snow so far this season I¨ve only been skiing man made snow in resorts. Hard, often icy, and steep. Up to 40 degrees. Pure smooth ice is no use, but I can still get down it safely, even when it¨s 40 degrees steep.
But if I have only a little texture to grab onto, the Gammes ski like a dream. i ski them like they were alpine skis. Slalom, giant slalom amd super g turns, and almost as fast as if I was on alpine skis. Try to limit the speed somewhat as I¨m not sure what would happen if I took a fall.

At this point in time I don¨t see any real benefits to the Xplore system, and the prices offend me. Maybe as it matures it will grow into something good but right now I wouldn¨t bother.

The Fischer boot is stiffer than anything else available and combined with the Gamme you can have a lot of fun on hard snow. I did ski some powder my second day on them late last spring and that was super fun as well. Did telemark turns then even though I didn¨t really know how to.

Thanks for your posts. I have read them and the conclusion I draw is that you are great downhill skiier. Most skiiers cannot do what you are describing on **any** setup. and 2nd, the boots matter. A stiff supportive boot is needed for icy descents...the stiffest possible.

I don't have the Gamme, and was thinking about it, but ultimately passed on it because the Sverdrup looked like a ski that is overall easier to turn and would have a slight advantage on downhill vs the Gamme which is undoubtedly one of the best XC skis (if not the best) for variable condition. I also passed on the setup as I am reluctant to buy yet another pair of boots and also reluctant to spend so much more $$$ on this new, largely untested, Xplore system. In a few seasons, if the boots and bindings hold up after many have skiied them, I will switch. For our OP, its hard to say if he wants to take a chance on a new (but possibly better) system or stick with NNNBC.

I personally think if you had my Sverdrup setup, you would be zipping downhill just fine. Like I said a while back, I have seen nordic skate skiiers go up and down steep bowls on NNN skate gear. For the rest of us humans, we need some technology to compensate for our lack of skill.

I think you greatly underestimate the thousands of days you have skiied in the past.

Having only skiied maybe 500 days in my lifetime, with half of those days being from the past 4 yrs, I have noticed that I am able to use the FT62 on a wider variety of terrain now vs. the month when I bought them in late 2019.

[mikael.oh]

While I agree with most of what you write I still think most people here underestimate what a potent and powerful downhill combo the Gamme and BCX Transnordic is.
Probably because A: they ski the Gamme in 210 and B: they don¨t have hands on experience with the Fischer boot. This combo is MAGIC and most people would probably come to that conclusion if they tried it. The boots are that good, and the Gamme that solid on hardpack. It still astounds me every time I give it some gas and they fill me with confidence.

I ski the Gamme in 190 and that¨s also the correct length according to my weight, even though I¨m only 3cm shorter than the ski. They do like a little bit of speed before they get really turny but in return you can push them SO HARD!

Also about the boots, even though they feel like alpine boots when fully laced up, they have a completely different, much more nimble and flexy feel if you only secure the foot and don¨t use the upper 2 lacing points. I¨m planning some trips this winter with long flats as well as lots of up and down and I don¨t see these boots giving me any trouble. Sure, they won¨t be the lightest and most nimble alternative, but they actually weigh less than the Alaskas, for instance.

Also, not to forget, this setup, even with the BC Magnum, fits in ski tracks, and I¨m gonna use them as classic skis as well and try to use an active technique. With the same setup I do super G turns down black slopes with. This as a concept gives me so much joy!

To quote the late, great Doug Coombs: "I just love skiing. I like the gravitational pull."

[Stephen]

I think you greatly underestimate the thousands of days you have skiied in the past.

I have to agree with @jyw5.
I have read that it takes 10,000 hours to become a master at something — skiing for example.

So much of skiing is based on confidence — confidence that what I want to happen will happen.
And that confidence only comes with time.

@mikael.oh, I can TOTALLY visualize what you talk about in your skiing.
I have had little tastes of it.
I can vicariously feel it when I see someone else being a TRULY expert skier (not a very good skier — a master skier).

I have the Gamme (in 210 — ha ha) and I would trust it the most, of the skis I have, in a do-or-die situation. It just holds.

What you talk about with the Gamme is something I can aspire to…
I admire you philosophy of voluntary simplicity — very Zen.