Ski Review: 2018-2019 Åsnes Ingstad BC

[lilcliffy]

Another question...
Right now I am skiing the Ingstad in a 195cm exclusively as a downhill ski at the local hill in frozen granular conditions. So far, so good. I would not go any longer for turns at my dimensions (6'2", 160lbs).

This is very cool man! With your Alaskas?!

However, they seem short for a distance oriented ski, and I think I would like the 205cm for this.

All of that tip rocker does make them ski very short on a consolidated/compacted surface.
The stiff completely supportive flex makes them ski long, when XC skiing on soft snow.

However, if I'm looking for a long distance ski in loose snow, unconsolidated snow, maybe I should be looking at the Combat NATO instead?

Had my 205cm Ingstad on a long (~12km-of XC skiing and LOADS of vertical) several-hour tour in very hilly/steep terrain on New Year's Day. We had about 25-30cm of beautiful fresh snow to ski on- over a very dense frozen base. (I had my Combat Nato on our on my woodlot first thing in the morning- did about 5km of trail-breaking in the same snow- but gentler terrain).
The Ingstad BC broke trail quite well, felt completely stable, climbed VERY well, and was a dream downhill- amazing actually.
BUT- the Combat Nato remains a better XC ski overall. It breaks trail more effectively, has a longer glide/running surface on consolidated snow/track, and destroys windswept consolidated and death crust.

I have had the Combat Nato out on the same steep terrain that I mentioned above- many times.
There is no question that the Ingstad outperforms the Combat Nato skiing tight lines through very steep open forest. I am able to make fully linked turns with the Ingstad that would require me to make step/jump turns with the Combat Nato. This frequently ends with us skiing down a watercourse to the Nashwaak River (some 3-5kms on a frozen brook/river)- which then requires a long XC climb and then XC ski out (some 5+kms- depending on which ridge/ravine we finish in). The advantages of the Combat Nato are clear at the end of this tour!
(As an aside, this long XC ski down to the River and then out is what would keep me from taking my Storetind...The snow was actually deep enough to use the Storetind on the flats- but, I would have been COMPLETELY incompatible with my ski partners- both downhill and XC skiing...)

As an aside- I had two ski partners with me- one on his 195cm Ingstad BC- the other on my 205cm E109 Xtralite.
I really should have traded a few times to compare the 195cm vs 205cm...Didn't think of it- I was so thrilled with the 205cm I guess!!!

The Combat Nato remains a better XC ski.

I have not had the Ingstad BC in VERY deep soft snow yet- I am concerned that all of that tip rocker may become a liability XC-skiing in very deep soft snow...

BUT- that snow I describe- about a foot of soft stuff over a dense frozen base is really the norm here. Our snow most typically becomes consolidated and frozen in between big dumps.

[Woodserson]

This is very cool man! With your Alaskas?!

Yes, NNN-BC Alaskas. Great pairing.

Thanks for the comprehensive reply

[lilcliffy]

Confirmed:

The Combat Nato remains unchanged- it is has the exact geometry and flex of the previous-gen Ingstad.

[lilcliffy]

Confirmed turn radius of Ingstad BC vs. Nansen BC:

Hi Gareth

Thanks for your email.
The turn radius on Nansen BC is 52 m (200 cm length ski).
The turn radius on Ingstad is 39,5 m (200 cm length ski).

Hope this was helpful.
Have a nice day!

Med venleg helsing / Best regards

Kathrine Gundersen

Kundeservice

[Verskis]

Confirmed turn radius of Ingstad BC vs. Nansen BC:

Hi Gareth

Thanks for your email.
The turn radius on Nansen BC is 52 m (200 cm length ski).
The turn radius on Ingstad is 39,5 m (200 cm length ski).

Hope this was helpful.
Have a nice day!

Med venleg helsing / Best regards

Kathrine Gundersen

Kundeservice

But there is no 200cm Ingstad?

[bgregoire]

But there is no 200cm Ingstad?

The previous generation, the Grey Man, did come in 200cm. The Nato Combat, same specs, still does.

[lilcliffy]

But there is no 200cm Ingstad?

The previous generation, the Grey Man, did come in 200cm. The Nato Combat, same specs, still does.

I would assume that they did the math on the geometry of both skis with the same "length" as a variable in order to make a fair comparison. They are certainly comparing the current Ingstad BC to the the Nansen BC.
The previous gen Ingstad = Combat Nato has a much wider turn radius than the current Ingstad BC.

[lilcliffy]

At this point, my perspective is that the current Ingstad BC is a specialty ski: XC skiing in very deep snow and steep terrain.

This ski has so much tip rocker that its XC glide surface is VERY short unless you are skiing in very deep soft snow. On dense, consolidated snow- or even as much as 6 inches of soft snow- this ski brutally inefficient as a XC ski.

This ski's deep-snow XC saving grace is its full-length stability and stiff tip. This ski feels remarkably stable when XC skiing in deep snow- despite all of that tip rocker. As a comparison- the rockered, soft-tipped E-109 is completely uselss as a XC ski in very deep snow- totally unstable. The slightly rockered, soft-tipped Eon isn't much better than the E109 XC skiing in deep snow.

The ooodles of tip rocker make for amazing turn initiation and early-tip-rise at downhill speeds.

The current Ingstad BC is a high-performance XC ski in the following context: truly deep soft snow and steep terrain.

This context brings me to a view that there is now considerable overlap between the Ingstad and the Asnes 68 (i.e. Storetind/Falketind 68/Rabb 68). The Asnes 68 is undoubtedly an even more capable downhill ski than the Ingstad- AND, on very deep soft snow, the 68 is really about as good a XC ski as the Ingstad...The Ingstad is certainly a bit better XC skiing on dense consolidated snow. However- I would never choose either of these skis if I knew I was going to end up XC skiing a long distance on consolidated snow...

I am starting to question whether Asnes went a little too far with the rocker on the current Ingstad BC...As it stands now- if I had to choose between the Ingstad BC and the Rabb 68?.....

As a comparison- the less dramatic tip-rocker on the Gamme 54 still offers some better turn-initiation and early-tip-rise, without ruining its XC glide (in fact my Gammes probably offer the best XC tracking and glide of all the BC-XC skis in my quiver- even better than the E99 Tour Xtralite!!)

I would suggest that less rocker on the Ingstad BC- while maintaining its supportive flex and tip- would make this ski more versatile and better performing in a wider range of BC-XCD touring conditions...

In the perfect context- I love the Ingstad BC. But, it is a "nice" to have ski in my quiver- not a MUST have.

I have skied the same snow, terrain, and distances with my 188cm Storetind- it is just as good over distance, and even better downhill. The problem is that I don't have any ski partners with similar performance to the Storetind...The Ingstad BC is better in my ski group context because everyone else is on skis and in boots of the same class (e.g. Eon/E109, etc.)

I might "need" to do what Johhny has done- mount NNNBC on the 68...

[Buda]

Interesting observations. I'm waiting for more snow before I take the Ingstads out for the 1st time.

[Cannatonic]

I"m happy as long as they keep making the "White Knights" the same way.....NATO Combat