Falketind 62 Review

[fisheater]

The ski is a Falketind 62, 188 cm, weight at 180 cm 2040 grams,97-62-86. Mounted 3-pin cable, boot Alico Ski March. I bought this ski for two purposes, norpining (leather boot telemarking) at my vertically challenged Michigan resorts, and a rolling hill country (again lower vertical) tours for turns ski.
From first handling of this ski it is different than any skis I have handled. It has what I consider significant rocker, especially compressed, sorry I did not take a measurement for my initial impression review. I have not skied it in powder, but I will be very surprised if the tips do not come up very easily. Also this is the lightest ski I have handled, it is almost a half pound lighter per pair than the 178 cm Objective, which is regarded as a light ski. Another thing I noticed immediately is the bases easily compress base to base and they were not significantly cambered.
Getting to the ski hill one of my first concerns was, would it kick and glide? Would it slide straight or wander all over. I waxed with Swix polar over the entire ski the night previous, then waxed with Swix blue from heel to the easy skin slots in front. It kicked and glided nice and straight, my initial impression is that it will be pleasant to tour for turns with. Snow conditions were a few inches of fresh over well cared for refrozen. The blue was gone after an hour or two of downhill skiing. I think base binder and natural snow would extend this time, but I will probably need to carry wax if I plan on touring for those turns for several hours.
As for the turning part, I can offer better insight with more time on these skis. They are light and very quick edge to edge. I don't see them as hard snow carvers, but they are firm underfoot. I think they will prove to be short turn skis when it is hard, preferably finding what snow is there. As long as there is snow underneath them they are fun to let them run. I really need to put some time on a ski before I rave about it, but I think I will be pleased with this ski for the purposes for which it was purchased. I can't say for certain, but my initial impression is that if you were skiing bigger eastern mountains, or wanting to ski plastic boots you would want something more stout.
As I ski this ski more, I will be able to offer better insight into just what this ski does and doesn't do. At this point in time I am quite happy with this ski. That is a pretty good review from me at this stage.

[anemic]

Super cool skis!! The beautiful shape is fun to view from one chair behind you. It sounds a lot like the Eon 62. Surprising to hear the pocket is soft. I expected a stiffer pocket. I bet that is a fun ski. Cool setup you’ve got, fisheater.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[fisheater]

Dell, I don't really think I did a good job in my description. There is not a wax pocket, at least what I would call a wax pocket. There is no area that with half my weight does not touch the snow. It is a single cambered ski designed to turn. However Asnes describes this as a moderate wax pocket. I know on those short uphill traverses I could kick and glide faster than the alpine skaters were going. It definitely is tuned for off piste snow, but it is designed for "long trips in demanding and steep terrain" Asnes words. It most definitely was not designed for refrozen and compressed man-made. Because of the rocker it does have a pretty short effective edge, too short (I believe) to arc across the fall line. However I felt power and control when I kept the turns shorter, unweighted stronger and set the edges with a little authority. I will need some miles to get where I need to be. It is unfortunate that my operator error at this time cannot give an accurate assessment of the limit.
I really do not believe this ski to be similar to an Eon 62. They are similar in weight, I believe the FT 62 weighs about 20 grams more. I do believe they are both tuned for soft snow, but the FT 62 has a poplar and carbon fiber core. I had black dust when I drilled it. The Eon 162 has a Multi-core of laminated wood. I would think the laminations would be engineered to provide camber, I am not quite sure if that configuration would provide the torsional rigidity. I don't know, I would enjoy taking one for a ride. They sure are popular, and it is a tried and true design. I do know I felt more confident on the FT 62 then I did on the S-112. However, that too may just be feeling and not fact. I can't be sure without comparing under like conditions. I will not be doing that soon. I want to spend some time on the FT, both piste and touring for turns.

[anemic]

Cool. It would be fun to meet on the snow sometime and I’ll bring my leather boots and Eons! We can swap and ski em back2back!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[fisheater]

I have now had this ski out for another weekend, and have had the opportunity to put the ski into some different conditions. This is really different than any ski I have handled. The side cut is 97-62-86, but it really is not parabolic. The ski tapers to the pins, is relatively straight to the heel, then it tapers back towards the heel, where just in front of the twin tip (tail) it rounds back. The ski has a generous rocker when weighted.

I added some photos, to give some perspective. As you can see the ski does not have much camber, and now I have had a chance to kick around on it in some different conditions. I have kicked in hard packed skied out trails that were boot packed, not ideal for any ski. In those conditions, being a single cambered ski it did drag on the wax, and it did wander a bit under those conditions. I can say that it wandered much less than my S-112 would have under those conditions, and while I can't guarantee it was faster, it was certainly more pleasant than scales. I also think with experience one might be able to adjust wax to help glide, there is no adjusting scales. I also had the opportunity to kick on about 4" of powder over hardpack. This ski is tuned to soft snow! While the USGI would fly much faster in these conditions, even a single camber slides quite nicely in these conditions. The Falketind 62 likes to slide, even on only a modest amount of fresh. Did I mention the pair at 188 cm weigh only a hair over 4.5 lbs (2040 grams @ 180 cm)? Then the next day I had a chance to break trail in a little over a foot of fresh powder. These skis love powder! Breaking trail in these skis a this moderate depth of powder was a dream. The ski is tuned for just this, the flex is perfect. I really do not believe I would really get any more performance out of the USGI at this depth of snow. While there may be an advantage to have greater length, there is no advantage to double camber at this depth, at least for me. I can hardly wait for my next chance to take these skis out in the fresh. Most of my kicking was in a backcountry area of the area I was skiing at. I didn't have long kicks, some were just at the side of packed trails. Unfortunately I really widened the trail as there were always tracks where I broke trail the next time through. One final thing I wanted to mention, is that on the soft snow day, I had kick wax left in a "wax pocket"? I don't know what you call it on a single cambered ski, but there was still kick wax from half way between the binding and the kicker skin clip down to just in front of the heel piece after 5 hours of lift served skiing. I had waxed the entire ski with artic white, and then put blue on a wax pocket from the kicker skin mount to the heel. All wax from outside the "pocket" was gone. I am not knowledgeable to say exactly what this means. I am just reporting my observations. Yes I was able to kick around all day. Without the fresh the day before wax was pretty much gone after 3 hours on the manmade. That first day had the benefit of base binder, tip to tail. Since I lost all that wax in three hours, I just used polar white the second day, as to me it is much easier to apply.
My first impressions of the ski were not what I would have liked as I was suffering from "left footitis", I was struggling with my left foot. "Left footitis" reared it's ugly head my first couple of runs my first day of last weekend and then disappeared. While I can say this ski is not an ice ski, it can ski the groomed. The edges inspire much more confidence than my S-112. Perhaps it is just the narrow width under foot, but torsionally it seems more powerful under foot. It certainly does not make that snowboard on edge sound the S-bound makes. It is quick edge to edge, and it is certainly stable on edge even at speed. I finally was able to turn up the speed fast enough to feel a breeze through my thick wool pants. By the end of the day, I was able to say I am quite pleased with this ski as a Michigan resort ski for leather boots. The next morning there was 12" of fresh, much more than I expected. We went straight to the back country area, and I had a few runs in untouched. While the S-112 is a great ski in 12", this ski was just as good. This ski was also much more pleasant on the kick back. So much so, that I really took longer routes just to put it through it's paces. Now I had another new experience when we skied the regular lift served. The snow was totally chopped and I got my butt handed to me. It was a combination of factors, including that I found the limit to the power of the Ski March boot. I actually had the boots torqueing back and forth on my rear foot. While I think plastic boots and a beefier ski would be better in those conditions, I don't think that the rig was over it's head, it was the operator that day. I managed a few good runs that day in those conditions, when I was really on top of it. However tired legs from ripping hard the day before, just finding my left foot, and tough conditions ate me up. I finally found the limit of my leather boots, however I think I have the ability to improve. I did find a limit of where the boot can bail me out.
In closing from my perspective this is really a nice ski for touring for turns in my hill country. I guess I need to find a snow depth limit to this ski, but I can tell that it really marginalizes my uses for the S-112. The 112 may have been better in the chopped, if not just using T-4's and Hardwires. I would definitely consider an Eggi, or a Tind in the future as well as an Objective or Vector. After my brief amount of time on this ski, I would advise somebody to consider the Falketind 68 for similar use. There is a possibility the FT 68 could be more versatile. However when you buy a ski on assumption you don't know until you own it. I can say I am pleased with this ski, at this point I believe this ski will be pretty beat up before I look for a replacement.

[lilcliffy]

Bob- this is fantastic information.

Excellent photos BTW- is that your boy?- look at the rocker on those sticks!!!!

I have a number of questions and comments- will come back to this later in the day when I have more time to comb through your excellent observations on this ski.

You mounted the 3-pin cable- no riser plate?

You mounted them with pins on balance point?

Do they have a track groove?

Your comments on the kick zone preserving wax suggests to me that Asnes has designed some resistance underfoot for just this reason- perhaps that is what they mean by "moderate wax pocket" (i.e. camber-and-a-half). As an example- unlike my E99s- I can quite easily squash the camber of the E109/Combat Nato, with equal weighted-skis, but that resistance is still there underfoot and the kick zone is off the snow when I glide forwards...Brilliant design for XC skiing on backcountry snow and terrain!

You have made a number of comments/observations recently regarding experiences with grip/kick wax and base binder. Would you mind updating me in another thread or in my "grip wax" thread?
http://www.telemarktalk.com/viewtopic.p ... ilit=magic
Gareth

[Woodserson]

Do they have a track groove?

Is this important anymore?

[lilcliffy]

Do they have a track groove?

Is this important anymore?

I guess it depends on design intent and use. A track groove certainly helps a ski's tracking when XC skiing. The FT62 is certainly different than the FT68 (which is the redesigned Storetind)- the FT62 appears to have a track groove in the photos on the Asnes site...The Asnes site describes the FT62 as having a "moderate wax pocket"- no mention of this with the FT68...The FT62 at least appears to be a very turn-oriented XC ski. The FT68 at least appears to be a touring ski- intended for truly mountainous terrain...

Not sure if I understand your question...is there a reason why it wouldn't be important anymore?

[Woodserson]

I guess it depends on design intent and use. A track groove certainly helps a ski's tracking when XC skiing. The FT62 is certainly different than the FT68 (which is the redesigned Storetind)- the FT62 appears to have a track groove in the photos on the Asnes site...The Asnes site describes the FT62 as having a "moderate wax pocket"- no mention of this with the FT68...The FT62 at least appears to be a very turn-oriented XC ski. The FT68 at least appears to be a touring ski- intended for truly mountainous terrain...

Not sure if I understand your question...is there a reason why it wouldn't be important anymore?

Ok, that makes sense, if it's a more XC oriented ski and the groove helps tracking.

The reason I ask if because I was always under the impression that the track groove was to help funnel water out from under the base. My Kastle Slalom skis from 1977 have a track groove, it was ubiquitous actually, and now the track groove is gone from every alpine ski out there. Modern base structuring has rendered it obsolete. I see the track groove in XC skis as a remnant technology, like my appendix.

I may be very wrong here, and welcome the education.

[fisheater]

[quote="lilcliffy"]Bob- this is fantastic information.

Excellent photos BTW- is that your boy?- look at the rocker on those sticks!!!!

I have a number of questions and comments- will come back to this later in the day when I have more time to comb through your excellent observations on this ski.

You mounted the 3-pin cable- no riser plate?

You mounted them with pins on balance point?

Do they have a track groove?


Hello Gareth, that is my son Nick. He is as tall as me at fifteen. I mounted a three pin cable, without risers, pins on balance point. I reasoned that there was no need for a riser plate at 62 mm under foot. It was also my thought that at least for kick and glide a ski with a lot of sidecut and relatively narrow underfoot would feel more stable, or at least not tippy if it wandered with my boot flat on the ski. I don't really believe this ski would benefit from the riser. The effective edge is pretty reduced by the rocker. Those are my thoughts, perhaps a different skier would see things much differently.


Your comments on the kick zone preserving wax suggests to me that Asnes has designed some resistance underfoot for just this reason- perhaps that is what they mean by "moderate wax pocket" (i.e. camber-and-a-half). As an example- unlike my E99s- I can quite easily squash the camber of the E109/Combat Nato, with equal weighted-skis, but that resistance is still there underfoot and the kick zone is off the snow when I glide forwards...Brilliant design for XC skiing on backcountry snow and terrain!

On the FT 62, on hard packed trails the "wax pocket" is fully depressed onto the snow, and you feel a bit of wax drag. However, with just 4" on top of the hard pack the experience is quite different. The rockered tip rides up, and planes, the ski feels like it glides on the heel. The cool thing is that in a foot of powder, the ski arcs nicely to the surface, but the way the ski flexes it is solid and balanced under foot.

You have made a number of comments/observations recently regarding experiences with grip/kick wax and base binder. Would you mind updating me in another thread or in my "grip wax" thread?

There is not a lot to report on the grip wax, except maybe for my general application. My normal skiing is usually not in perfect snow. I apply a couple layers of base binder from heel to tip. Your reports convinced me to order polar white, which I apply tip to tail. Then I follow with wax of the day in the wax pocket, and very often moving forward as far as the shovel if I slip.
My first day waxing the FT 62 followed my normal routine, however harsh resort snow wiped the bases clean in about three hours. Although I did find place to kick around before the bases were clean. Do to my wax loss on Day 1, I got lazy on day 2 and skipped the base binder. Well the soft snow proved to be a different animal, and I was able to retain a wax pocket without the benefit of base binder. This was 5 hours of riding lifts, with skiing into areas requiring a kick back.
The one thing I think I would try, is to try to keep wax pocket wax as "cold" as possible. I think I will try to use one color colder in an attempt to get better glide on hard snow where I get some "wax drag". These skis seem to climb well, it may well work. I look forward to your review of the Storetind. I am pretty happy with the FT 62. Based on what I am seeing with the FT 62, I really see that FT 68 might be a really sweet ski. I am expecting a pretty positive review of the Storetind, but I don't ski in your boots, I will wait for the review.
http://www.telemarktalk