Karhu 10th Mountain Tour; the "Catamount Class" design profile; and the quest for a mile-crushing deep snow ski

[lilcliffy]

I have been on the hunt for this ski for many years- Karhu Canada’s premier deep soft snow XC ski:

The Karhu 10th Mountain Tour:
o 84-68-74mm
o Wood core
o Sintered waxable base
o “Double” camber: moderately stiff, full-length smooth supportive flex
o Lengths to 200+cm
I describe them as “double” camber because they really aren’t- not in a technical sense. They are highly cambered like a XC ski, and they are moderately stiff. But- they do not have that very stiff hard to close second camber that I personally associate with truly double-cambered skis. They really have a uniform full-length, relatively stiff, high single camber- at least from my perspective. You know the camber-flex profile is almost identical to my Asnes USGI Combat skis- which I describe as “double”-cambered, but they are really more a stiff high single camber…
My friend has a set of these 10th Mountain Tours in a 208cm (I think?) Many years ago, I tried them a number of times. I loved them- they left quite an impression on me actually. They are light, snappy, responsive, floaty and fast in deep soft snow. Though they are not turny- they are light enough that they lend themselves well to tight step/jump turns.

With much thanks to my friend Ben I tracked down a pair of 180cm 10th Mountain Tours in Quebec. They are immaculate- have never been mounted, and still have the bar code sticker on them!
Though I do wish they were longer- they will fit perfectly into my family quiver! I am personally looking forward to testing them!

As I was cleaning them up and starting to think of mounting them I began to realize that they were reminding me of other skis I have known and one that I currently own:

Karhu Orion: 85-70-80mm
o Foam core
o Extruded waxless-scaled base (Omnitrack)
o Camber?

Karhu Catamount: 85-70-80mm
o Foam core
o Extruded waxless-scaled base (Omnitrack)
o Camber?

Trak Bushwacker: 85-70-75mm
o Foam core
o Extruded waxless-scaled base (Omnitrack)
o Camber?

Karhu Combat Skis: 85-70-75mm
o Foam core
o Extruded waxable base- no track groove
o “Single” camber: moderately stiff
o Thick, full-wrap steel edge
o Noticeably heavier than the 10th mountain tour

I own a couple pair of Karhu Combat surplus combat skis (photo above)- they were made in the same factory in Quebec as all of these skis. They are well made, burly, moderately stiff, “single” cambered, have a full-wrap steel edge, and are fairly heavy. I have used them a few times at my local hill- I am not crazy about them as a frontside downhill ski…
https://www.ebay.com/p/Telemark-Snow-Sk ... 2383587837

These Karhu Combat skis have almost the exact same sidecut profile and camber/flex as the 10th Mountain Tour!
It got me thinking about Dave Pinnah’s “Catamount Class skis” and made me realize that all of these skis are essentially identical in terms of sidecut and camber/flex.
http://web.archive.org/web/201510021509 ... #SNOWSHOES
I hadn’t thought about it before…
Most of the skis in this class have never interested me much- thought they offer decent flotation- they don’t turn well and most of them are two short to be fast enough for me as XC skis…

The fact that the 10th Mountain Tour was longer, much lighter, wood-cored and had a sintered waxable base, made me think that they were a completely different class of ski- one that doesn’t exist anymore…And I guess these differences do make the 10th Mountain Tour different than the shorter, stubbier “Catamount Class” skis. But it is interesting to me that they are still based on the same sidecut/camber/flex profile…

(Interesting that the 68mm 10th Mountain Tour is not listed in Pinnah’s overview of Nordic touring skis…)

So- I am still on the hunt for a 200+cm 84-68-74mm 10th Mountain Tour…For purely distance-oriented XC skiing in deep soft snow…

But- it always leads me back to this:
If one wants to cover distance on deep snow- and turns not important- why stop at 210cm?
Maybe what I have really always wanted is a Finnish forest touring ski? Say 270cm and 70mm underfoot?
http://www.peltonenski.fi/outdoor_touring/
I have spoken directly with retailers in Finland. They will sell me a 270cm ski- they are actually not very expensive. But they cannot use a conventional method to ship a ski that long….

Anyone interested in joining my quest?
The quest for a mile-crushing deep snow ski?

[lilcliffy]

Oh- and perhaps I have the name of my new ski incorrect:

10th Mountain Tour?
Or- Tour 10th Mountain?

[bgregoire]

Oh- and perhaps I have the name of my new ski incorrect:

10th Mountain Tour?
Or- Tour 10th Mountain?

You're welcome Gareth! I think my 10th mtn 189cm skis turn very well both on the groomers and in soft snow. They float great and tour very well. They tour straight, which I love. I wish they would make a lighter version though, air core or a light wood core?

I don't have anything against the Catamounts class other than they were rarely made in a waxable version. The more shapely and sexy modern Era xcd skis have improved turnability but IMO it's all at the cost of tourability. There really is something about touring with a ski that stays ON track.

[greatgt]

Boy if those are the skis I think they are.....good luck.....Have some 10th M Kahru skis that went with me to Idaho....Fair to poor on the ski areas and the same in the bush....These are like before the newer 10th M Kahru's so it might not be the same....Will check the shed and find out....TM

[Woodserson]

Last year I found myself on my favorite forest road through a high mountain pass in 24"+ of snow and I badly wanted a long straight ski. My 210 Madshus Touring skis at 67mm in the shovel were not enough. (one thing to keep in mind is that these skis, from what I've read, have very soft tips and the softness starts way back the ski... who knows if it's "double cambered.")

The FInnish Forest Ski was needed in a brutal fashion.

You and I have bandied back and forth the different manufacturers of Finnish forest skis, both the plastic and wood

https://www.vilminkosukset.fi/7
http://suksitehdasylonen.fi/index.html


BUT I think we're going to have to make our own. Long straight grained birch, an axe, a plane, some fire & steam. We should probably do this all outside, living in a yurt, drinking Ale, chant to the stars that wheel above. This is the way.

[lilcliffy]

I think my 10th mtn 189cm skis turn very well both on the groomers and in soft snow.

Well this is good info- and I am kinda surprised actually- just based on their sidecut, camber and flex.

They float great and tour very well. They tour straight, which I love.

This what I remember about this ski- it is embedded in my memory. I have never tested better- at least in my mind- XC skiing in deep soft snow...In all fairness, my Combat Nato probably is equally good...Would need a comparable-length 10th Mtn Tour for a fair contest.

I wish they would make a lighter version though, air core or a light wood core?

Are yours wood-cored? They are quite a burly ski and are certainly heavier than my Combat Nato. But- they are significantly lighter than the foam-cored Karhu Combat ski that I have. They feel quite light with repsect to their burly dimensions- like the Karhu Combat skis- they are quite a thick ski.

I don't have anything against the Catamounts class other than they were rarely made in a waxable version.

This is true- and I agree. I was never interested in the "Catamount Class" of ski because they were heavy, too short and no waxable base. The 10th Mtn Tour is a different class of ski despite the identical profile and flex.

The more shapely and sexy modern Era xcd skis have improved turnability but IMO it's all at the cost of tourability. There really is something about touring with a ski that stays ON track.

This is SOO true. I think that hourglass sidecut ski design has become dogmatic in the BC-XC ski design world- just like it did in Alpine ski design. The use of tip rocker, early-tapered tips and customized flex has revolutionized Alpine ski design. I am hoping that some of this experience will continue to cross over into Nordic touring design....For example- the current Ingstad BC and E-109 do not need to be that narrow underfoot to be turny. All of that tip-rocker on the Ingstad shortens the effective edge, "moves" the binding point forwards and produces early-tip rise. The shape, flex and rocker of a tip can produce turning performance without having to have a waspy waist. Take the Voile V6 vs Vector for example: the V6 has a wider waist, and less sidecut, but still has a shorter turning radius than the Vector...
I would like to test a ski with the exact flex and camber of the Ingstad BC but with a waist pushing 70mm- it would float way better, have more grip and stability, and still be dreamy to turn on soft snow. (This would actually be somewhere in between the Storetind and Ingstad BC...though I see it more as an Ingstad with a wider waist, everything about ti remaining the same...)

As far as staying on track- I agree, it is a big deal for a Nordic touring ski.

[lilcliffy]

BUT I think we're going to have to make our own. Long straight grained birch, an axe, a plane, some fire & steam. We should probably do this all outside, living in a yurt, drinking Ale, chant to the stars that wheel above. This is the way.

This is it.
Both the crafting and the workspace.
I look forward to a time in my life when I do just this.
And I would certainly love to share that experience with you my friend!
.....

In the meantime-
I memory serves- our Finnish friend Verskis said he might be able to look after getting a set of Finnish backcountry touring skis shipped to NA...
Sounded like it might be pricey...
In the meantime- until I can create the space and time to build a pair- perhaps I should start saving for a shipment of these skis from Finland...

Those wooden skis are magnificent.

[Woodserson]

I think that hourglass sidecut ski design has become dogmatic in the BC-XC ski design world- just like it did in Alpine ski design. The use of tip rocker, early-tapered tips and customized flex has revolutionized Alpine ski design. I am hoping that some of this experience will continue to cross over into Nordic touring design....For example- the current Ingstad BC and E-109 do not need to be that narrow underfoot to be turny. All of that tip-rocker on the Ingstad shortens the effective edge, "moves" the binding point forwards and produces early-tip rise. The shape, flex and rocker of a tip can produce turning performance without having to have a waspy waist. Take the Voile V6 vs Vector for example: the V6 has a wider waist, and less sidecut, but still has a shorter turning radius than the Vector...
I would like to test a ski with the exact flex and camber of the Ingstad BC but with a waist pushing 70mm- it would float way better, have more grip and stability, and still be dreamy to turn on soft snow. (This would actually be somewhere in between the Storetind and Ingstad BC...though I see it more as an Ingstad with a wider waist, everything about ti remaining the same...)

As far as staying on track- I agree, it is a big deal for a Nordic touring ski.

Yes, I strongly agree here. We can get turnability with tourability and float and little compromise in speed now, the manufacturers just need to break through the last little bit of hesitation. An Ingstad with a 70 waist and basically the same turniness is a total possibility. That being said, I'm pretty happy with the Ingstad for going down things as far as a XC ski is concerned. I just need snow and then I can begin to put The Grey Man through the paces!

[lilcliffy]

The Fischer 88 is also a profile that could be taken much further than it has been.
I would already own one if I could get one longer than 189cm and even better with a waxable base!
Fischer 88 in a 205cm length- with Nordic-rockered tip, stable supportive flex- in both waxable and Off-Track Crown bases- and both with the Easy-Skin attachment. PLEASE.
.......................
It is very strange to me that Pinnah classifies the 88/Outtabound as a "Classic AT" ski- when it is clearly a XC ski and fits best in his "Catamount Class" as far as his classification goes.
.........................
I have never tested the current 88 with its rockered tip. Is the flex of this ski stable- or does it have a soft tip?
........................
I too am thrilled with the current Ingstad BC. I will throw it out there that it offers the best downhill performance of any XC ski.

I have yet to test the Ingstad BC when XC skiing in truly deep soft snow though...
Its stiff supportive tip has pleased me in breakable crust and wind-swept snow. It is not as good as the Combat Nato in these two contexts- but the Ingstad's tip is stable enough that it doesn't rise up on top of the crust/snow and flip and flap all over the place like the E109/Eon.

My final test for the Ingstad BC will be XC-skiing in deep powder. My prediction is that the tip and overall flex of the Ingstad BC should compensate for its narrow waist- it should be ok- I'm hoping. If the Ingstad BC is unstable when XC skiing in deep powder- I suggest the only solution is a wider waist...

[lilcliffy]

(one thing to keep in mind is that these skis, from what I've read, have very soft tips and the softness starts way back the ski... who knows if it's "double cambered.")

Yes- I can't imagine long Finnish touring skis are double-cambered! I can't imagine how heavy one would have to be to engage the wax pocket on a truly double-cambered 270cm ski!!!
True double camber and truly deep soft snow do not go together!