Quiver Killer... Qu'est-ce que c'est?

[MikeK]

re: balance point - isn't it supposed to work this way? You want you tip to rise a bit when you lift the ski?

You know, I've heard it both ways. I've heard "Mount on balance and the tips will float up" and "Mount on balance and the tips will dip down and stay in a track".

Seems like the binding and perhaps when you actually ski, a little snow on the ski may be the deciding factor. None of my skis nose dive. Most I have mounted ahead of balance so they tip up naturally (and it helps initiate the ski with more weight up front). Guess the tradeoff for that is more likely to have your tips dive in soft snow?

All I know is the farther forward I get i.e. more front knee bend while still keeping weight on my back leg, the better my skis react and the less stiff my front leg feels and I've never done a faceplant with a tele.

[lilcliffy]

Didn't mean to suggest that I, personally, think of waxless-scaled BC skis as "low performance"- as we all know, in the appropriate context, waxless scales are HIGH performance BC skis.

I think that Fischer is simply responding very carefully to its markets. Europe is a MUCH larger Nordic skiing market than NA. So- if the Scandinavians see waxless scales as "light duty"- market it that way?

The origin of Fischer's Easy-Skin was likely a shot at Asnes' market in Scandinavia- rather than a shot at the NA market.

As for the USA- if no one is buying Nordic BC skis with a waxable base- then they stop exporting them to the US (I have a STRONG belief that ski dealers are more to blame for this than actual skiers- pushing short waxless skis on new ski buyers, and treating kick wax as some form of alchemy).

Canadians are still buying enough waxable BC skis- but that- I'm sure- has as much to do with climate as anything...

All of that being said- waxless scales shine in the appropriate snow/temperature context- and there does seem to be a move to try and convince BC Nordic skiers in Scandinavia. (There is a Norwegian UTE Mag test of waxless BC skis- can't find it...)

I think that the problem lies in the high-performance track perspective. In the high-performance track XC world- waxless-scaled skis are a joke. This has had a huge influence on northern European Nordic skiers adopting waxless scales in the backcountry.

In brief- where is the largest Nordic BC market? Northern Europe. And when it comes to XCd skis- the modern trend there is long, stiff, and waxable (i.e. the "fjellski")- as opposed to short and waxless in the US.

[lilcliffy]

This is why some people HATE these type of skis. They feel like they are not good for any condition, but I feel those folks are probably mainly concerned in skiing at ski centers or dh resorts, for which a ski like this is not inclined.

I don't know about that. As you point out- mid-widthy, reasonably soft BC Nordic skis are the most popular in both NA and in Europe. I would hazard a strong bet that the Madshus Eon/Karhu XCD GT may be the best selling BC Nordic ski in NA, at least in the recent past. The Scandinavian Fjelski is not so different in flex pattern- the main difference is in the preference towards kick wax over scales- and of course, long touring lengths.

[MikeK]

The little I've seen from what you've posted here and reading some other stuff related, it seems Fischer has a big presence in Scandinavia. Asnes was in the dumps for a while, wasn't it? And I'm not sure that Karhu or Madshus are all that dominant over there (probably because the current line was designed for NA and all the wax version are pretty much defunct).

Not sure where the S Bound line was developed for, but I see they sell them in continental Europe as well as NA, but I'm not sure so much in Canada...

Definitely the US climes of the northeast are a bit more adept to waxless. Still lots of people in the Adirondacks sticking (pun intended) to wax. Generally about 10°F colder up there than the flatlands, which on an average winter day puts them well into wax territory. I'd imagine Greens and Whites would be similar.

Thing is there are a lot more flatlanders buying skis and heading to the mountains and skiing locally, and it's my observation that most people don't buy more than one pair of these type of skis. We are definitely the exception.

In most of my convos most people were not excited about paying $300+ for a pair of waxless BC XC skis. Seems though for dh, no issues. Perhaps it's the type of people XC/D attracts. Also I'd guess in NY, inconsistent snow really shy's people away from XCD. Some resorts now at least have a bit of snowmaking for tracked XC.

Also fun factor per dollar... gotta put in a lotta work for a bit of XC and even more for the D. DH is expensive but it's accessible, and far more consistent.

It's just a tough market here... Canada has a much better base of Nordic skiers for this kind of stuff.

[MikeK]

This is why some people HATE these type of skis. They feel like they are not good for any condition, but I feel those folks are probably mainly concerned in skiing at ski centers or dh resorts, for which a ski like this is not inclined.

I don't know about that. As you point out- mid-widthy, reasonably soft BC Nordic skis are the most popular in both NA and in Europe. I would hazard a strong bet that the Madshus Eon/Karhu XCD GT may be the best selling BC Nordic ski in NA, at least in the recent past. The Scandinavian Fjelski is not so different in flex pattern- the main difference is in the preference towards kick wax over scales- and of course, long touring lengths.

I meant among the general public and people on ski forums, other than this one. Seems a lot just don't even mess with this type of ski. They buy skate skis, a pair of Vectors and some other NTN tele stuff.

Majority of the general public it's OT skis (because that's what they sell here at EMS), track skis or DH skis, be it tele or Alpine.

[lilcliffy]

re: balance point - isn't it supposed to work this way? You want you tip to rise a bit when you lift the ski?

You know, I've heard it both ways. I've heard "Mount on balance and the tips will float up" and "Mount on balance and the tips will dip down and stay in a track".

Mounting pins/toe bar on center is the starting point for "classic" kick and glide skiing. Mounted on BP the ski should feel perfectly balanced during the glide phase of kick and glide- with even weight fore and aft of the mounting point. In other words- the ski shouldn't feel weighted towards either tip or tail. In a K&G context, moving the mounting point forward of BP increases grip- by putting more pressure on the tips; moving the mounting point aft of BP increases glide- by putting more pressure on the tails (your heel is flat on the tail of the ski during the glide phase of K&G).

From a XC perspective- a forward mounting point should work against tip rise- in the absence of tip rocker...

The toe bar on NNNBC is slightly further back than on NNN- shifting a bit of weight forward- giving a bit better grip and turn initiation than NNN at BP- makes sense to me. (It's important to remember that track NNN ain't the same as NNNBC- a track NNN setup on BP should produce a near perfectly balanced ski.) Rottefella's NIS system is intended to offer a XC skier the option of modifying mounting position without having multiple pairs of skis.

(Freestyle skate skiers play with mounting position a lot as well. By definition- they MUST pick up their skis as they stride forwards- they compensate for an unbalanced ski by using a very stiff flexor (this also reduces heel lift).)

If a 3pin mounted at BP feels "tail-heavy"- compared to a NNNBC setup- then it should offer a bit better grip and turn initiation than NNNBC. This might actually explain a lot...

(As an aside- my old friend- that used to work in a Nordic ski shop as a tech- has an old NN metal mounting jig with a different mounting point for "race" and "touring". The "Touring" position is slightly forward of center...)

I put NNNBC on my XC-oriented XCD skis. Therefore, I prefer them mounted on BP. On the downhill, I have to pick up my long XCD skis a lot anyway- therefore having aggressive turn initiation on my XCd skis doesn't help me much- and it would also reduce K&G performance.

Most I have mounted ahead of balance so they tip up naturally.

This doesn't make sense to me- your heel is flat on the tail of the ski during the glide phase...A forward mounting position will put more weight on the tips...

Historically, skiers moved mounting positions aft to increase performance in deep snow- and encourage tip rise.

Rocker has allowed for a forward mounting position- without losing tip rise...

[MikeK]

Again, I was referring only to when you lift the ski with your foot, not anything to do with weighting the skis or actually skiing

So I'm not really sure it means much of anything. I agree with your assessment of ski dynamics, as that is how I understand them.

[Cannatonic]

interesting, I know for nordic racing they often advise mounting 1cm or 1 inch behind BP. My 90's Kazama XC skis have the mounting line 1cm behind BP. Maybe for track skiing or nordic race they do like the tip to stay down in the track or on the surface more. Makes sense, variable BC conditions make you want to lift the tip more.

[lilcliffy]

Mounting aft of BP should offer better glide- but less grip.

[Woodserson]

Back to the original topic...

I can't pick just one. I have a ginormous quiver for a reason. They are all great. They all have a reason to live and be skied on! They all mean something.

SB 98s are pretty nice and polyvalente.
The Vectors, used once in pow, are pretty phenomenal.
My woodie Madshus Tourings are mindblowing for low-country flat tours..

BUT if I had to pull just one: My Rossignol Big Bangs are the quintessential resort ski. If I could get these with scales, I think I'd be set. I just love this ski. Woooeee