Asnes Ingstad vs. Fischer S-bound 98?

[Ira]

Thanks Stephen, the reason I'm hoping a 165 Asnes Ingstad might not result in the same snowshoe-like experience as a 159 Fischer S-bound is that, based on reviews I've read so far, the Asnes is more cambered, stiffer, faster ski, and with much less grip and shorter waxless pattern. I had ruled out Asnes Ingstad due to it being too fast and not grippy enough for safety, but since REI has Ingstad and no one seems to have the 169 Fischers, and Asnes has such amazing reviews (except for the ones that say the grip pattern is too short), I'm hoping the shorter length can decrease the risk of it being too gripless and fast for safety. I'm hoping choosing 165 would raise the the grip-to-glide ratio a little bit closer to the Fischer 88's that I can't find. But I'm new to this so I might be mistaken.

[Stephen]

@Ira, at this point, it seems like the next step is to log onto REI and click “Buy” on a pair of 165 and give it a try!


I know and appreciate that you don’t want to burn REI on returning them if you’re not happy with the 165, but no amount of advice is going to replace your firsthand experience.

Give it a go and let us know how it turns out — we’ll all learn something.

For perspective, I’m 190#, ready to ski, and have a pair of 205 Ingstads which I’m pretty happy with.
But, I also have a pair of 195 that fell from the sky that I’m waiting to try.
I’m hoping those work well on firm snow for XCD.
But, I also have a new pair of 196cm Traverse 78 which are kind of similar, so who knows how all that turns out.

Per the Asnes length recommendations, the 205 Ingstad is the right length for my height, and the 195 is the right length for my weight.

[Ira]

Thanks Stephen, Yes, I did do that last night (good thing because the 165's were gone today). I figured perhaps I could do a flex-test on the floor, and return them without mounting if they fail (in which case REI can sell them as new), and if they pass I'd actually mount and find out all the things one must try to know (and perhaps I'll love them!)

Everyone, I realize the paper test is good for determining if a skier is heavy enough to get traction, but is there a test one can do to determine if the skier is too heavy for any glide (before mounting)?

Thanks!

[Stephen]

I noticed the 165 was gone -- glad you got them!

Yes, there is testing that one could do, but it requires a skilled technician and I would be concerned about getting that level of service at REI. Nothing against REI.

You already know you're slightly above the recommended weight range. I think you just need to try them and not worry so much about possibly wanting to return them. REI really has no problem with that -- returns are baked into their business model.

Your intent is honorable, so just try them out.

The problem is with the people who use the gear until they have almost run out the one year return clock and then return the merchandise, having used the gear for almost a year for free. That's bad intent.

[Lighturn]

Deleted, wrong thread, sorry

[Ira]

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

[Woodserson]

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

Ira, if you find gear deals you can drop them "Gear Basket'" which gets dedicated targeted traffic for items for sale.

[lilcliffy]

Hi Ira,
Did you order the Ingstad?

and the rocker (a plus for not shoveling snow with the tips),

Just curious- what do you mean by this comment?

Also, I heard of a paper method for testing whether a skiers weight is enough for a ski, but what's the best way to test (on a hardwood floor) whether a skier's weight is too much for the ski?

There are at least two reasons to do a "paper test" on a Nordic ski-
1) to determine whether the ski has a "wax pocket", and where it is located on the ski
2) to determine appropriate ski length for a Classic track ski

#2 is not relevant for most backcountry Nordic ski touring- especially if one is going to ski on fresh untracked snow and hilly terrain.

Also, is Ingstad compatible with XPLORE? (REI doesn't have the latter at this time, but I'd love to know when they do).

Yes- Ingstad (and similar skis) are ideal for the Xplore binding (as well as 3-pin-NN and NNNBC).

Keep in touch and let us know how you make out with the Ingstad!

[Ira]

Thanks! Yes, I did order the Ingstad (in 165).

Also, I spoke with REI (the ski free virtual outfitting division) and they were very encouraging of "try it and see if you like it". They said that's what their return policy is for, and that they won't look askance at me if I end up returning the too-short 98 and an Ingstad in the same year (if the Ingstad ends up not working for me), or even trying multiple sizes of the same ski. They said they understand with XC skis, most people don't know til they try them, and that the problem is when people buy and return every year, rather than people who try several until they find the right one that they then keep (they said the latter is who their policy is designed for). So I'm ok in terms of REI ethics, because I'm eventually going to find the right ski and keep it.

BTW, for those who are looking, REI now has Falketind, Rabb, Ingstad, Nansen, and Breidablikk

I re-read some reviews and discussions on Teletalk, and one of them made me realize a potential problem going with the shortest length (rated for 10 pounds lighter than me)

Re: X-skins: “The main downside I find is on very hard and icy snow, the plastic attachment pushes the front of the ski off the snow and makes it much more squirrely.” This was regarding Nansen. But I'm wondering if that would happen with a short Ingstad.

For Asnes Ingstad, I'm guessing this problem is more likely to happen with shorter skis (165) vs. longer skis (175) for a 130-140 lb person? So by getting the shorter length to increase grip and control, and slow the ski slightly, might I have the unintended effect of causing the plastic attachment of the X-skin to hit the snow (due to crushing the camber with my weight)? My plan was to use the all-mohair X-skin 45mm, on icy or crusty days only, for both ascent and descent (low-angle Forest Service Roads, campgrounds).

Thanks!

[riel]

Re: X-skins: “The main downside I find is on very hard and icy snow, the plastic attachment pushes the front of the ski off the snow and makes it much more squirrely.” This was regarding Nansen. But I'm wondering if that would happen with a short Ingstad.

It should not happen anywhere near the same extent, because on the Nansen the point where the tip really starts bending up is right near the X-skin attachment point, while on the Ingstad the underfoot second camber (aka "wax pocket") doesn't transition into the tip region of the ski until some distance ahead of the X-skin attachment point.