2015 Åsnes Combat NATO

[lilcliffy]

The more you practice turning with the Alpinas, the better you will get on the E99s.

VERY true.

I try to limit my skiing purchase mania to one pair a year. This is a disease that has to be watched and controlled furiously.

Words of the wise!
How did you make out with that?

[bgregoire]

Words of the wise!
How did you make out with that?

One for me, one "for" my partner, works out swell! Its work in progress my friend! I don't think the rule applies to boots, fortunately for me this year.

[Buda]

The more I read about the Combat NATO the more I think that they or the Breidablikk Hunter would be more suited to my needs that the Ingstads.

[bem]

Hi,
I got my Asnes Combat Nato delivered some days ago.
https://www.en.asnes.com/produkt/combat-nato/
I was out on the first tour yesterday on the skis. It was about 20 km tour in about 30 cm snow with about 10-15 cm fresh snow.
First I just want to say these Combat Nato seems to be good quality, same quality as seen from outside as my Asnes Amundsen Fram WL that I have used for 2.5 seasons. Don't get missled by the all white no frills (no colorpattern) on these Combat Nato. They are after all made to be used by military and such where camouflage (all white) is important. The Combat Nato do not have the harder layer on top of the ski as other Asnes skis has, it seem just to be white paint on the wood material, but the white paint work is very nice done. If You happen to hack the ski pole into the Combat Nato surface it will probably be a dent (I got one dent yesterday), on my Asnes Nansen Fram WL the surface is more resistant to dents.
I have Rottefella BC Magnum (the wider bindings, not the less wide Rottefell BC Manual):
https://www.rottefella.com/bindings-acc ... singelpack

I thought I would try my Combat Nato as it is from the factory without any special surface preparation on underside.
I just used some ToKo "Grips and glide classic" (Liquid wax for kick and glide zones on waxless skis) on the outer glide zones, and then waxed under the kick zone with Swix blue wax for grip. I waxed for grip between the front attachmentpoint for skins to the little round hole to the rear.

The Combat Nato is the heaviest skis I have used (since I made military service in 1980 when I used the Swedish military white wood "plank" skis that was rather heavy). One Combat Nato 210 cm ski with Rottefella BC Magnum weight 1530 gram, compared to my Asnes Amundsen Fram WL 205 cm with weight 1312 gram.
The extra weight is no big deal on shorter tours but if You skii a whole day it might be a factor to take into consideration - all weight must be moved forward by the legs etc.

On my first tour on my Combat Nato I tried them briefly on a snowmobile trail where the snow was packed hard and the Combat Nato glided fine on the hard show and I was able to get little faster speed by diagonaling as a classic corss country skier although it felt little clumpsy as expected. I tried them also on some light downhill (no turning) and they really glided fast and felt stable to keep in a straight line. I also tried a small fresh show downhill and the ski float nice on the snow.
But now to more interesting things for me - back country skiing in deeper snow.
It was very good snow condition yesterday with about 30 cm total snow cover and about 10-15 cm fresh snow.
What I can compare with is my Asnes Amundsen Fram WL, width 67-57-62 mm.
https://www.en.asnes.com/produkt/amundsen-fram-bc/
Asnes Combat Nato width is 84 62 74 mm.

I was surprised that I sinked rather deep into the snow with the Combat Nato. But I noticed that the tips tried to rise and that made the skiing little harder (at least for me). My Amundsen Fram WL do not do that in deep snow.
But after some km skiing I was used to the tendency of the Combat Nato tips to try to float up on the snow. On some spots where the snow was very deep and soft the ski really sinked very deep in the snow, almost to a halt. But it was no problem to move forward despite of this.
On little harder packed snow and on thinner snow under some trees where the snow had not reached the ground so much the Combat Nato was pleasant to ski forward on. In some places under the snow it was a thin layer of frozen snow and the Combat Nato smashed that layer with the front half just fine.

My ski tour yesterday with the Combat Nato was about 10 km in one directon and then I skied back in same trails.
Then the tour was very pleasant since the ski did not sink anything in the snow. Much faster forward and it was much less work needed to glide forward. On some minor downhills where it was now trails when skiing back the speed was considerable but it still felt safe. But it is probably wise to take it easy downhill with such skis, if you fall there is no automatic release of the skii (with such bindings I use) so you will have the skis on all the time if you happen to fall, making risk greater to get injury.

I have skins to my Combat Nato but have not tried them yet. I have the Asnes X-Skin 45mm NATO Nylon
https://www.en.asnes.com/produkt/nato-s ... m-spesial/
and the Asnes X-Skin 40mm RACE
https://www.en.asnes.com/produkt/x-skin-40mm-race/
Impregnation I have for the skins:
https://www.asnes.com/produkt/eco-skinp ... regnering/

Personally I would not say that my Combat Nato (210 cm) is extremely better in deep snow then my Asnes Amundsen Fram WL (205 cm). Combat Nato is better in deep snow but it was not as big difference that I expected. If the front part and tip of the Combat Nato would have been softer I can imagine it would have been very hard to skii in the deep snow, but thanks to the stiffness of the Combat Nato this was not a major problem (only a minor, but much me not used to this slight tendency for the front of ski trying to climb out of the deep snow).

Personally I would not mind if Asnes released a waxless (WL) version of the Combat Nato. For my type of skiing WL skis works OK. I do not think Asnes Ingstad WL (that has same width as Combat Nato) is suitable for my type of skiing, at least not is deep snow mostly back country skiing where stiffer front on the skii is desirable (at least for me).

It was one funny thing when I ordered my Combat Nato: same day I got mine delivered the company I bought the skis from announced rebate on alot of skis among them Combat Nato - it is now 25% rebate on the Combat Nato at this dealer (in Sweden). No luck there for me...

I will check weather now and if it is OK I will make a tour today also with my Combat Nato.

Hope someone have use of my brief comments of Combat Nato in above lines.

/Bo

My Combat Nato:

Weight of one Combat Nato with Rottefella BC Magnum binding:

Compare weight of one Asnes Amundsen Fram WL (205 cm) with Rottefella BC Manual binding:

[lilcliffy]

Thank you for the excellent and detailed report on your Combat Nato Bem!

Seems that you are a little disappointed with the deep-snow performance of your skis...

Sounds like the tip on your ski is softer than mine- it sounds unstable like the E109 Xtralite and the Madshus Eon...

Regardless- I keep feeling like deep-snow-distance-oriented XC skis need to be 68-70mm underfoot for them to be truly effective...I still think that the Combat Nato/Ingstad BC would be better with less sidecut and 68mm...I am not convinced that all of that sidecut is an asset on these XC skis...

Waspy-waisted sidecuts require a VERY supportive tip in order for the ski to be stable in deep, soft snow.

My Ingstad BC actually has a stiffer, more stable tip than my Combat Nato, but the extreme tip-rocker makes the Ingstad BC very inefficient as a XC ski unless the snow is deep and soft...

Regardless- it certainly seems that your Combat Nato is less stable than mine...

[bem]

Hi,
I was out yesterday also with my Combat Nato. A 30 km tour. The snow was not quite so deep most of the time but on some places as deep as previous tour. When my Combat Nato did not sink so deep (in the not so deep snow) they really shine and you can move forward in a good speed. But in very deep snow it is still slow but I'm more used now how the ski behave in deep snow and to use better technique when moving forward in the deep snow. I'm more positive now with the my Combat Nato in deep snow. I perhaps had too high expectations before.
But what make these skis really shine in my opinion is once one person has made a track (me in this case) and You ski a second time in same trail the Combat Nato really float nice in the trail and one (at least I) can easily ski diagonal (as a Classic cross country skier). The speed increase is rather much then. I could feel the rear end of ski lifted from surface while diagonaling. I often ski maybe 10-15 km in one direction and then ski back in same track. So this will be very good for me with the Combat Nato, that I can ski considerably faster back home.
Despite the Combat Nato is a heavy ski I have so far not noticed that while skiing.

I have noticed it tend to be snow gathered on inside of tip on the white surface, maybe it comes snow through the small round hole in the tip? This could perhaps be a problem in some snow conditions that it could build up more snow there.
What is the purpose with the round hole in the ski tip?

/Bo

[bem]

Hi,
I searched through this thread and found out what the round hole in the ski tips are for. It is for mounting a Helper Sledge (first aid and auxillary sledge):
http://www.hjelpekjelken.com/mile.jsp
"The Helper Sledge is standard equipment in all NATOs snowoperative units."
…"delivered to the Norwegian, Swedish, Dutch and British military forces."


/Bo

[Cannatonic]

I used to have a K2 snowboard with a hole in the tip, it adds some versatility. Thanks for the review, it's really useful. I have 200's and I find myself wanting a pair of 210's! The 200's are a telemark ski for me, to be used for climbing for turns. 210's would be great for floating in deep snow for nordic skiing too.

I didn't mean to diss the USGI combat's by saying they're "just XC skis"...they're good backcountry XC skis! I meant people buying them to use as a telemark ski will have a rude awakening as it sounds like they're stiff and highly cambered without much sidecut. The 200's Combat NATO's are super easy to initiate turns, even with my primitive skills and soft leather boots. The USGI sound like they're better for XC logging miles through deep snow....10cm sidecut vs. 22mm.

[lilcliffy]

I have put some extended kms on three different skis over the last week or more:
210cm Gamme 54 BC
210cm Combat Nato
205cm Ingstad BC
188cm Storetind

There has been well over a foot of soft, very cold snow over top of at least 1.5 metres of frozen, consolidated base.

Been thinking about Bem's report on the Combat Nato and his surprise and at the lack of significant extra flotation over his Amundsen...

None of these Nordic touring skis offer enough width to truly float on top of powder snow. And anything that is wide enough that does, is not designed to travel long distances at speed.

I too, do not notice any significant difference in effective flotation between my 60-ish-waited skis and my mid-50-ish-waisted skis.

As an acute example of this- my E99 Tour Xtralite is actually better in deep soft snow than the wider E109 and Eon...

I do however significant differences in the powder-snow stability between these different skis though.

I cannot speak for the Amundsen, but the Gamme 54 BC does offer similar flotation to my Combat Nato in deep powder snow. But I do find the Combat Nato better in deep powder- not because of float- but because of stability. My Gamme 54 is more stable in deep powder than my E99 Tour- but the slightly wider Combat Nato is more stable in deep snow than the Gamme 54. This difference in stability is particularly noticeable on steep terrain.

As another example- I briefly took my 195cm Annum out the other day- just as a quick test against the 210cm Combat Nato. The Annum- at 78mm underfoot- does, in fact, float higher in the snow column than the 62mm Combat Nato. BUT- the Combat Nato is more stable when XC skiing in deep soft snow than the Annum- therefore, despite not floating as high- I find the Combat Nato a more efficient deep snow XC ski than the Annum. (In deep soft snow the Ingstad BC is a more stable XC ski than the Annum as well.) (The Annum has a soft, round, single-cambered flex.)

The Amundsen- at 57mm underfoot- with a full-length stable flex- represents an interesting overlap with the Combat Nato and Ingstad BC...Offering as much float and stability in deep, soft, snow on gentle terrain...And- the Amundsen clearly offers better overall XC performance then the Combat Nato/Ingstad...BUT- does the Amundsen offer the steep terrain stability and turning performance of the Combat Nato and Ingstad BC? I think not.

[lilcliffy]

(Oh- and the Storetind is more stable and a better downhill ski than the Annum).

And as another example- the Storetind floats higher in the snow column than the Combat Nato/Ingstad BC/ Gamme 54.

But- the more trad XC skis- Combat Nato/Ingstad BC/Gamme 54- have longer glide surfaces, more camber and they track straighter- making them more efficient over distance in deep snow- making them more efficient deep snow XC skis than the Storetind.

To summarize all of this endless musing...The reason to pick a Combat Nato or Ingstad BC over an Amundsen/Gamme 54/E99 should be driven by the terrain you want to XC ski on- not an expectation of greater flotation.

And with that- Rebecca being home from a trip to town- it is time to get out on that white stuff!!!