2015 Åsnes Combat NATO

[bem]

Hi,
I have used my Combat Nato little more now, during this weekend about 40 km skiing. It has been snowing rather much during previous week so I tested deep snow skiing more with my Combat Nato.
It really depend on the snow characteristics if one sink through the snow or not. On many places I sank maybe 30 cm into the snow with my Combat Nato (210 cm, my weight is 80 kg), on other places where the snow was more packed I sinked just down through latest snowfall (about 10 cm). I really do not know what skis to be used to not sink through softer deep snow, but they must be rather wide I'm sure. Maybe there are some hunter type of skis out there that is suitable for such conditions.
I do not recomnmed anyone skiing alone longer distances in softer deep snow with Combat Nato if You will sink deep into the snow. It is rather demanding on the body since You basically have to step forward. It just do not work to try to get the ski to penetrate the snow down under the snow cover if you sink deep. You then have to more or less crush the snow from upside-down-forware step by step. If You are a group of skiers with Combat Nato skis the following skiiers behind the first "tracker" will get a comfortabe tour. For example I made a ski tour about 10 km in the deep snow and had to plough throuh the snow but back in same track it was a nice ride.

I like my Combat Nato more and more. Now I know their limitations in deep softer snow. When planning longer tours one has to take that in consideration because if you need to ski trough deep soft snow and You sink trough it several decimeters the speed forward will be slow, it will be even slower then normal walking speed.
Although I have not tried to ski in a track made by Combat Nato ski with skis not not so wide as Combat Nato I would guess I could ski without problem with my Asnes Amundsen Fram WL in same track without sinking trough the track, in a fresh track that has not hardened by cold. It is a slight risk when one skier use wider skis and the following skiers use narrower skis that they can sink trough the snow more then the person in front of You with the wider skis.

I suppose the conlusion is as with any ski to now it's limitations or weaker sides and how they behave in various snow conditions. There is simply no universal ski that can perform good in all thinkable snow conditions. But I would be surprised if there are any significant better skis out there then Combat Nato that covers such broad spektrum of snow conditions as it seems they are capable of. At least they are so far good enough for my type of skiing, but keeping the deep snow performance in mind. My skiing is Back Country, mostly Cross Country type skiing, with limited steep up- and downhill skiing. Much sking in forest, over lakes near land, over bogs, fields, moderate up- and downhills. No mountain terrain.

I have still not tried the Asnes X-Skin 45mm NATO Nylon and Asnes X-Skin 40mm RACE that I have. It is so few tours for me that involves very deep climbing but I have one trail that I somtimes ski that has long deep uphill climb. It would be interesting to test the skins there, and also the flat terrain skiing on at least the X-Skin 40mm RACE to see if I notice any speed decrease.

/Bo

[lilcliffy]

Took my 210cm Combat Nato out on a wicked stream-valley tour on Sunday on very deep but highly-variable snow-

Started out at about 300m-
Skied down some 150m vertical to a stream-valley floor and then skied out the floor to the Nashwaak River-

Started out on deep soft snow at about -10C = Swix Blue Heaven.
Skied through both cold soft snow and a lot of soft refrozen icy top (from above freezing temps the previous afternoon).
Finished on deep actively melting and becoming sticky snow at +5C.
........
The trail-breaking was brutal on this tour and this ski- the Combat Nato- was a champion-
It is the best trail-breaking XC ski I have ever tested-
The non-rockered, broad, elongated tip is the finest trail-breaking BC-XC tip I have ever experienced...............
..........
Additional notes-
It is a more efficient XC ski than the Ingstad BC.
It is a more efficient XC ski than the Gamme 54 BC in deep snow- but, the Gamme 54 BC is just as stable as the Combat Nato in deep snow and is a more efficient XC ski otherwise.
The Ingstad BC is more fun than the Combat Nato downhill (early-rise tip) and just as stable (if not more stable) as the Combat Nato in deep snow (just doesn't break trail as effectively as the Combat Nato).

[Petetheswede]

Lil Cliffy, this might have been covered already but anyway. For multiday trips in variable terrain could the Combat NATO be the ultimate compromise? I love the Gammes when they float but sometimes they dont. The new Ingstads are killers going down in powder but feel squirrely on the hardpack.

Since my Gammes are stolen by my better half I might need replacement for longer trips and I appreciate the possibility to lead the way through unbroken fluff but still not die on the snowmobile tracks. I unfortunately bought the Ingstad in 195cm...

Cheers
Pete

[bgregoire]

Lil Cliffy, this might have been covered already but anyway. For multiday trips in variable terrain could the Combat NATO be the ultimate compromise? I love the Gammes when they float but sometimes they dont. The new Ingstads are killers going down in powder but feel squirrely on the hardpack.

Since my Gammes are stolen by my better half I might need replacement for longer trips and I appreciate the possibility to lead the way through unbroken fluff but still not die on the snowmobile tracks. I unfortunately bought the Ingstad in 195cm...

Cheers
Pete

Perhaps, but consider the Nansen as well while you are at it.

[Petetheswede]

The Nansen in 195 was actually my first ski and I remember going Gamme in 200cm as a huge improvement. I think the Nansen flexes to soft in deep snow. This might be remedied by going longer but I'm doubtful if I want to invest in another.

[bgregoire]

The Nansen in 195 was actually my first ski and I remember going Gamme in 200cm as a huge improvement. I think the Nansen flexes to soft in deep snow. This might be remedied by going longer but I'm doubtful if I want to invest in another.

Ok sure. By the way, the 200 cm combats (older Ingstads pre-NR) I own feel very squirrely on harder surfaces, at least to me. My guess is a long Nansen will feel less squirrely, but still a lot more than a Gamme/E99.

At some point, maybe you have reached that point, it really comes down to personal experience and/or preference.

[Petetheswede]

You are right about preference being a major factor. I have read a lot of people being very happy with the Nansens. I just feel its no better in powder than the Gammes. I have decided to be happy with Ingstads for everything playful and get a pair of 210cm double cambers for distance. Probably Gamme or the new Borge Ousland perhaps.

[lilcliffy]

Lil Cliffy, this might have been covered already but anyway. For multiday trips in variable terrain could the Combat NATO be the ultimate compromise? I love the Gammes when they float but sometimes they dont. The new Ingstads are killers going down in powder but feel squirrely on the hardpack.

Since my Gammes are stolen by my better half I might need replacement for longer trips and I appreciate the possibility to lead the way through unbroken fluff but still not die on the snowmobile tracks. I unfortunately bought the Ingstad in 195cm...

Cheers
Pete

Hi Pete-
Sorry I did not get back to you sooner-
I have gone back and forth on this at least a couple of times- mostly compromised by my local abundance of deep soft snow during my ski season.

Though I do feel strongly that the Combat Nato has a more versatile XC geometry than the redesigned Ingstad BC-
IMHO- The Gamme 54 BC is a much more versatile BC-XC ski than the Combat Nato-
The Gamme 54 BC vs Combat Nato:
- is just as stable and supportive in deep snow
- is faster and more efficient on consolidated snow
- has a similar turn radius due to the Gamme 54 BC's slightly rockered- but supportive- tip

The only dimension of the Combat Nato that is better in a XC context is its non-rockered broad raised tip. As a XC ski the Combat Nato breaks trail- through any deep or difficult icy snow- better than any ski I have ever tested.

Though I greatly acknowledge and ENJOY the downhill advantage of a rockered tip on a XC ski-
I have yet to see evidence that tip rocker does anything to improve the XC performance of a ski- there is just no way to glide fast enough at XC speeds for a ski to offer early tip rise when XC skiing.
AND- unless the rockered tip is stiff and supportive- it will be totally unstable when XC skiing in deep snow and/or crust.
...............
And on that note- I would love to test the Borge Ousland BC...I must confess that I don't understand the amount of tip rocker it has...If its tip is as stable as the Gamme 54 BC- it will be fine in deep snow- but it will be terrible in crust and have a much shorter glide zone on consolidated snow than the Gamme 54 BC.
...............
I must admit that my Gamme 54 BC has largely made my Combat Nato obsolete.

[lilcliffy]

You are right about preference being a major factor. I have read a lot of people being very happy with the Nansens. I just feel its no better in powder than the Gammes. I have decided to be happy with Ingstads for everything playful and get a pair of 210cm double cambers for distance. Probably Gamme or the new Borge Ousland perhaps.

Though I have never even seen a Nansen ski-
I cannot see how it could better than the Gamme 54 in deep snow...I don't see how 4mm underfoot (2mm/foot) of extra width would make any noticeable/measurable difference in flotation- and if the flex of the Nansen is rounder and softer than the Gamme 54 BC- as skiers report- it must be less stable than the Gamme 54 BC when XC skiing in deep snow?

[Petetheswede]

So a full length Gamme then for float and speed. What I was contemplating was whether this new Ousland might have easier turn initiation due to more rocker and thus ease the transition to 210cm skis at my 75kgs.