Asnes Mountain Race 48 SKIN

[lilcliffy]

Just perhaps to try and clarify-

All of Rottefella's current Nordic touring bindings (NN, NNN, NNNBC, Xplore) have the same width mounting pattern and can be mounted on any Nordic ski-

NNN and NNNBC have the exact same drill/screw pattern for screwing a binding directly into the ski core (i.e. not like NIS).

As such, all of the NNNBC bindings have exactly the same mounting/drilling/screw pattern (i.e. Automatic, Manual and Magnum).

Therefore- you could put any of the three NNNBC bindings on any ski- including the MR48.

The NNNBC "Automatic" and "Manual" share the same binding plate (57.9mm).

The NNNBC "Magnum"- while having the same mounting/drilling/screw pattern- have a wider binding plate (68mm) than the "Automatic"/"Manual" .

Any of the three NNNBC bindings (as well as any of the other Rotte Nordic Touring bindings) can be mounted on the MR48.

I- personally- would put NNNBC on the MR48 (if I had one), because I would want to use one of my BC boots on it.
(I have NNNBC on my track touring skis for the same reason.)

I would- personally- choose either the "Manual" or the "Automatic"- over the "Magnum"- because of not wanting the binding to rub the sides of a groomed track (i.e. the widest point of the MR48- the tip- is only 60mm- tracks are groomed to ~70mm- therefore, the Magnum binding is going to rub on the track (I know this for a fact because I had the Magnum binding on my E99 Tour (66mm tip) before I switched it out for the Manual).

I- personally- currently have no interest in the MR48- but if I did, I would want it to work in a Classic groomed track (and if I had a lot of Classic track to ski in- that would be the only reason for me to consider the MR48).
Therefore- from my perspective- the "need" for a binding that "works" in a Classic groomed track- hence the narrower binding plate.

If you are not going to use the MR48 in a groomed Classic track- then there is no real reason not to mount the wider Magnum binding.

Lars has been pushing the backcountry advantages of automatic bindings- which until his most recent post I really could not understand...

Lars is using an NIS plate on the MR 48-Skin- therefore he can easily adjust the mounting point of the binding to either increase grip or glide. I get it. This would truly be a big advantage on a touring ski with a permanent integrated skin. If I was considering the MR48-Skin, I would strongly consider putting an NIS binding on it.

[lilcliffy]

Correction- Lars is not using the MR48-Skin- he using the E99/TN66 with a skin:
http://www.telemarktalk.com/viewtopic.p ... =50#p45080

Regadless, the advantage of being able to adjust the mounting point are the same.

[Stephen]

@lilcliffy, yes, that is way more clear than my cryptic post!

[beeeweee]

First time poster but long time reader here.

A little background before my question. I’ve been skiing on AT gear for many years and decided to go all in on XC this past season and put in 300+km this winter, all of it has been on XC race skin skis and I’m really enjoying the free heal and lightweight setup. So as far as kick and glide goes, my favourite setup for in-track skiing is the Madshus Race Pro in 181cm (50-60kg) which seem to have a perfect combination of kick and glide for me.

In trying to expand my touring a bit without going to AT, I’ve been looking into some light touring skis that would allow me to still use a NNN binding which doesn’t leave too many options except for the MR48 and Fjelltechs.

My weight is around 58-59kg with clothes, boots, backpack, etc… and ~160cm tall so I’m often in between size for skis. I’ve recently tried a pair of Fjelltech M50 at 177cm and found them on the soft side. To get some glide, I had to shift he bindings back about 3cm but haven’t had a chance to try the M50 at 187cm or longer.

After reading all the glowing reviews about the MR48 Skin, I’m now leaning towards getting the MR48 Skin and using it with the Rottefella RMP NIS plate so I can mount a pair of Rottefella MOVE bindings that I use on my XC setup.

With the above, I’m struggling to decide whether I should go for the 180cm or 190cm. I would appreciate input from anyone who has experience with these. I think @Musk Ox mentioned that his wife uses the 190cm so I’d be curious how much Mrs. Musk Ox weighs which puts her in an ideal range for the 190cm MR48 skin.

[beeeweee]

In case a bit more background is needed to refine my question about whether 180cm or 190cm would be more suitable.

I mainly intend to use these skis on skier tracked, ungroomed trails since I have skinny skies for groomed trackset trails. I do want something that can fit in approaches that may be partially trackset so I can take advantage of it. I find the 60mm shovel is nice for lateral stability on skier tracked trails and don’t feel like I need more width and compromise on speed in the tracks.

Terrain wise, I intend to ski more mellow terrain so its more XC touring rather than XCD. My NNN boots have a carbon sole and heal cup so torsional rigidity is not an issue, even when skiing steeper hard/icy slopes with the M50. I think if I were go wider and need something more for XCD, I’d probably end up on my AT setup.

Lastly, as far as ski lengths go, I’ve skied XC skis up to 197cm. To me, 197 is on the long side, especially if I need to herringbone up a slope but 187-190 is fine and I don’t think I’d want to go shorter than 180.

[Musk Ox]

I think @Musk Ox mentioned that his wife uses the 190cm so I’d be curious how much Mrs. Musk Ox weighs which puts her in an ideal range for the 190cm MR48 skin.

Oh my God, I can't ask her that.

She's around the 70kg mark, I'm going to say. I'll try and subtly get a more accurate metric (wish me luck.)

[CwmRaider]

I think @Musk Ox mentioned that his wife uses the 190cm so I’d be curious how much Mrs. Musk Ox weighs which puts her in an ideal range for the 190cm MR48 skin.

Oh my God, I can't ask her that.

She's around the 70kg mark, I'm going to say. I'll try and subtly get a more accurate metric (wish me luck.)

It will be muskox sausage for dinner this easter. Start rubbing on the juniper berries.
https://www.lokalmat.no/no/produsenter/ ... -einerbaer

[beeeweee]

I think @Musk Ox mentioned that his wife uses the 190cm so I’d be curious how much Mrs. Musk Ox weighs which puts her in an ideal range for the 190cm MR48 skin.

Oh my God, I can't ask her that.

She's around the 70kg mark, I'm going to say. I'll try and subtly get a more accurate metric (wish me luck.)

Oh my, I didn’t intend to put you in danger! I think around 70kg is a good data point. I’m somewhat leaning towards the 180cm since I’m about 10kg lighter. But if you are able to get a more accurate number, that would be much appreciated.

I wish Asnes would give a more sensible recommendation table that provide a lower recommended weight range for the 180cm MR48 Skin rather that’s just say anyone under 70kg. For example, if they said 60-70kg instead, that would imply the stiffness is relatively proportional to other ski lengths.

[fisheater]

Do these jeans make my butt look big?

There is no correct answer, trust me!

[Musk Ox]

I think @Musk Ox mentioned that his wife uses the 190cm so I’d be curious how much Mrs. Musk Ox weighs which puts her in an ideal range for the 190cm MR48 skin.

Oh my God, I can't ask her that.

She's around the 70kg mark, I'm going to say. I'll try and subtly get a more accurate metric (wish me luck.)

My estimate was pretty much bang on. The 190s are good for her. I think, looking at your weight, the 180s would be a reasonable choice... but the 190s would be faster. The issue for me was that I squashed them too much, I think.

Just to reiterate, if you're on the cusp of these skis in weight without gear, I'd recommend getting the longer ones (probably not an issue for you @beeeweee, but I do understand ski-chosing anxiety better than anyone, oh my god). This was my experience, anyway. I really loved my 190s! But I would have been better off with the 200s for my skill and use, especially with skins on the waxable bases. These skis are made for cruising and fun 'shortcuts' (heh) home off the trails rather than, say, climbing high in deeper snow. So I'd maximize the whizz by choosing the longer ones. Whizz is their raison d'être. They're a LOT of fun coming down in good conditions, maybe a little hair-raising if the conditions aren't perfect or you ski 'comme les danois', but so nimble, tapdancing shoes. They can smash miles and miles in the right conditions. They really work as fjellski on surprisingly deep snow. I mean, maybe there are better choices for the wilds, but it's worth bearing in mind that MR48s/ Holmenkollen have been to the North and South Pole, so they're the real deal. For a combination of trails, shortcuts, a bit of 'can I get up there?' with skins, tracks back to the car, these are so great. You can smash miles with these.