The Great North American ASNES FEVER!

[bgregoire]

The cure is to drown them in skis, so many skis they lose track. Then, you become a broker of sorts and skis go in and skis go out and no one can keep track anymore

Very sane advice. Well plenty of snow and wind here to enjoy 48 pairs of skis. See ya


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Tele2$room2$broom]

48? A pair for each of the lower 48? Which one is associated with Florida?

[FourthCoast]

Maybe these for Florida?

[jyw5]

So another 120" later, it is still snowing. It was complete white out today. just to see where we were going, I had to use glacier mountaineering skills by waving my pole in front (really needed to tie some neon yarn to it). Took almost 2 hours to break 3 miles of trail...wooo! My trusty Asnes FT62s were amazing on all that soft deep snow. The drive to and from the trailhead was adventurous as well...breaking a foot of snow as no one seems to want to plow the road. Hopefully some sunny skies in the coming days as the coronavirus has forced me into unemployment ... which means I get to ski every day until the world ends.

While everyone was posting and reading covid memes, I put together my dream list of setups:


Backcountry AT:
Asnes Fjoro 92 176cm
Dynafit TLT Speed Z12 Binding
Scott Cosmos III boots 26.5

easy resort groomers / icy trails:
Asnes Gamme 54 + Voile 3 pin cable traverse 180cm

Resort/Backcountry off piste / deep powder tele:
Asnes Rabb 68 + Voile 3 pin cable traverse with risers 172cm
Alfa Greenland, 41 EU

Backcountry deep powder XCD:
Asnes NOSI 76 + manual magnum bindings 164cm

variable XC:
Asnes MR 48 + manual NNN BC, 190cm
30mm mohair Xskins


One challenge will be actually finding a place that carries these skis and willing to ship to the U.S.

Any thoughts, comments, and criticisms appreciated.

[fisheater]

Hello JYW5,
I live in SE Michigan, super deep snow isn’t something I deal with. I also am 58, I once was immune to injury. I also was always on the arc of constant improvement in my skiing ability. While I may not look or act my age, I’m not the athlete I was even 15 years ago.
I prefaced with my background to let you know a bit about my boot and binding preferences. I enjoy NNN-BC, and I can understand how Johnny can do the things he can on that gear. However I’m past the age and athletic ability to be pushing 86 mm underfoot skis with NNN-BC gear. I also am limited in my ability to buy gear, that ski and binding combination would have very limited optimal days in my terrain.
I’m 58, 5’9”, 190 lbs, former concrete contractor. I’m still actively managing building sites, but it has been years since I have done the heavier work I once did. My Asnes quiver.

Asnes Gamme 54 @ 210 cm my go to trail cruising ski. Boot is
Alaska BC. I couldn’t be more pleased with this ski. It has not been out in deep snow, because if it’s deep I am touring for turns.
This ski breaks trail nicely in 6”-8” and less, I have not taken it deeper. This ski out and out flies! It tracks better than I thought possible, I didn’t know it was possible to track so smoothly over packed out trails. I really need to see how well this ski handles snowmobile tracks. It slices tracks through fat bike tracks. This ski is not a turner in the classic sense. I do a lot of step turning, stem teleturns, and wedge turns. I am confident on this ski going down my local short and steep and twisty 100-200 foot downhill trail runs. If I couldn’t turn, speeds attained could be very serious. However, I’m not dropping a knee like I would on another ski. I would not recommend this ski for the ski area. It could be interesting to try, but wrong ski for the ski area, think about an Ingstad.

Asnes Falketind 62 @ is my normal touring for turns ski. I also prefer this ski in good conditions at the local ski hill for all runs. Good conditions to me is snow that is snow. If it’s ice underneath, not hard, but ice, or if the “snow” is really tilled ice that resembles rock salt, I wouldn’t consider these good conditions for a backcountry ski. I don’t recommend this ski for crud or crust. The boot and binding combination is 3-pin cable and Alico Ski March. I use the cable at the ski hill, and I have a few backcountry downhills that I will sometimes take a quick break for cable attachment. I am also very pleased with this ski and boot combo. For normal local snowfalls which don’t usually exceed 12”, this is my go to good conditions ski.

Late 90’s Volkl Vertigo G 21 @ 188 cm with Vice 75 mm bindings and T-4 boots. My less than good conditions resort ski. My old alpine skis. I don’t bend these skis enough Telemarking. Consequently I don’t get pop out of the turns. I also think I have become accustomed to a bit of rocker, which does not exist on this ski.

Waiting to be reviewed, Asnes Tindan 86 @ 187 cm mounted 3-pin Hardwire. To be matched with T-4 and hopefully Ski March boots.
I am quite confident this combo will take over where the Falketind leaves off.

Waiting to be remounted for rock ski and loaner duty Fischer S-112. Will be remounted 3-pin cable, previously mounted 3-pin Hardwire.

Trail rock skis, Asnes USGI @ 200 cm mounted both 3-pin cable and NNN-BC. I really liked these skis until I bought the Gamme. The Gamme tracks so much better on hardpacked trails. I was extremely surprised at the difference. The Gamme is so much faster. I hoped the Gamme would be faster, and it has gone beyond the speed I had hoped for. I once skied this ski at the resort on blues and greens with my son as he was learning, and significantly shorter than me rather than the opposite today. I could make nice Tele turns on this ski with the Ski March boot. However the camber would trip me up quite easily in 3-D snow, much to my son’s amusement.

So I strongly recommend a Gamme to cruise miles, however if you are crushing miles in deep snow and steeper terrain you may consider the Ingstad. It will also be much better at the resort. I would suggest you read the entire review of each ski. If the Ingstad is the right ski most of the time, but you need a cheap ski for consolidated snow, find a used E-99 or purchase a Asnes USGI from Coleman’s Army Surplus. My two pair of USGI were shipped to Michigan for $75 total, shipping and skis.
I don’t prefer short skis for touring for turns, so I wouldn’t look at a Nosi. That being said, many skiers give great reviews to the Voile’ Objective, which is in the same size class. I was very happy to trade my 176 cm Tindan for a 187 cm Tindan. I am very confident that my new Tindan will tour much better than my 189 cm S-112.

JYW5, I just reread your post. How much do you weigh? You seem to prefer shorter skis. I know for turning many skiers prefer shorter skis. For a strict touring ski, such as a Gamme, too short a ski for your weight and you will never even know what kick and glide is.

Good luck in your search. I look forward to reading how things turn out for you.

[jyw5]

Thanks for sharing!

I am picking shorter skis because I'm 142lbs and 5'8".
I am going with Asnes because I have many Xskins and compatible tip attachment skins. I also think the Asnes just makes beautiful high quality skis. I don't really want yet another fat ski like the Voile Objectives which I am sure is a great ski.

I have a pair of S112s that are turning into summer corn rock skis and the default for less than ideal heavy wet cruddy snow.

That still leaves a void. I need a ski for icy moderate slopes and crusty days.

I wasn't entirely sure about the Gamme for this use especially for less than ideal days at the resort. I am looking for skis that would do relatively better/well on icy groomers and old snow/crud at the resort. I did read Johnny's review of the Cecilie Skog ...which might be a possible option. I think the Ingstad may not do well (for me) on icy groomers or packed resort groomers. They would also be too similar to my FT62s. Please correct me if I am wrong.

Reading the reviews, I thought the Rabb 68 with 3pin would be good for blues and green resort skiing in deeper snow or fresh snow.

My Nosi 76 pick is based on the fact that my FT62s are difficult for my weak legs in deep heavy Chugach powder and I thought just a bit wider and more sidecut would help me turn better. They would be a great replacement for the S112. The FT62 is amazing but my skills only allow to shine on the best powder days.

I would actually prefer NNN BC bindings for all the skis, but most resorts require leashes and I can't attach one to them...thus I must mount 3pin and the Alfa Greenland 75mm looked good and similar in fit to my NNN BC Guard and Quest Core.

I love my new Alfa Guard Advance GTX! They have finally been broken in. No blisters. Amazingly comfortable! Incredible boots. You can feel the soft snow beneath your feet on light powder days. I have more fun on them than resort skiing on a downhill setup.

Thanks again for this discussion!

Joe

[fisheater]

Joe,
From the reviews I would say the Ingstad and the Falketind 62 are completely different skis. The Ingstad is a double camber cross country ski that excels in deep snow and steep terrain. The FT is a light downhill ski that tours well enough to be a truly fun touring for turns ski. They are quite different.
Hopefully Lilcliffy, (Gareth) will comment. He has both skis, plus the Gamme as well. I believe you would get better performance out of an Ingstad in the correct length over a too short Gamme, that you will still be hop turning. At least that is my supposition.
I’m not sure as to significant difference between the Rabb and the FT as it relates to poor snow performance. Nitram Tocrut has both a Falketind and a Rabb. Might I suggest you send him a PM?
The Rabb and the Nosi are significantly different, the Nosi has some lighter core materials. Asnes mentions a comparison to a Skimo ski.
I am attaching photos of a Tindan and a S-112 side by side, and with the S-112 over the Tindan. The Tindan has significantly greater torsional rigidity that the air core S-112. The Tindan also has even more rocker than the Falketind. The Tindan is way more ski than the S-112. However, for me it is the next logical step up from the FT-62.
Again Good Luck,
Bob

[lilcliffy]

easy resort groomers / icy trails:
Asnes Gamme 54 + Voile 3 pin cable traverse 180cm

I am assuming you are speaking of using the Gamme 54 at a groomed hill as a downhill ski? Interesting.
The Gamme is a very stiff and cambered ski (not as cambered as a track Classic XC ski- the Gamme is tuned for BC snow). You might need a Gamme shorter than 180cm- at your weight- if you hope to compress that camber and pressure this ski into turns...You mentioned the Cecile/Nansen in your other post- I would think that the Nansen/Cecile might be a better ski for this...Why would you not try your FT62 in this context?
You mentioned the FT62 vs Ingstad BC in your other post- they are very different skis in terms of flex and geometry. The Ingstad has camber and stiffness underfoot that is very similar to the Gamme 54 (but its over all flex and geometry is very different from the Gamme)- very different from the FT2. With its considerable tip rocker- the Ingstad BC has a much shorter effective edge than the Gamme or the Nansen (though I assume that the camber of the Nansen is easier to compress and pressure than the Ingstad/Gamme). Though I have never even seen a Nansen- the descriptions of its flex pattern remind me of the FT62- though it is more cambered than the FT62 and has no tip rocker. I don't know if you have ever read Gamme the Elder's review of the Nansen- he enjoyed the Nansen so much as a downhill ski- with XC boots- that he questions the need for modern wide downhill skis:
https://www.utemagasinet.no/test/test-av-brede-fjellski
https://www.utemagasinet.no/search?q=%C3%85snes

Resort/Backcountry off piste / deep powder tele:
Asnes Rabb 68 + Voile 3 pin cable traverse with risers 172cm
Alfa Greenland, 41 EU

A number of skiers now have the Rabb 68- don't know how stable it is in deep snow...

Backcountry deep powder XCD:
Asnes NOSI 76 + manual magnum bindings 164cm

Interesting ski- really like the dimensions and geometry! Want to try it!

variable XC:
Asnes MR 48 + manual NNN BC, 190cm
30mm mohair Xskins

Why the MR- need something that will work in a groomed track?

One challenge will be actually finding a place that carries these skis and willing to ship to the U.S.

https://www.fjellsport.no/search/?q=asnes
Pretty sure that I have confirmed that Fjellsport will ship to CAN/USA.
And of course, there is Sportalbert- that would likely be able to get whatever you want a special order from Asnes.
https://sportalbert.de/
I am also quite sure that LaCordee in QC, CAN will special order from Asnes:
https://www.lacordee.com/en/wintersport ... try-skiing
Johnny- from this site- has been making a special order the last couple of years- direct from Asnes- could PM Johnny and see if you could get in on that.
Will Neptune Mountaineering do a special order?

Any thoughts, comments, and criticisms appreciated.

Thanks for including us!
Gareth

[lilcliffy]

That still leaves a void. I need a ski for icy moderate slopes and crusty days.

Hmmm- I have recently tested the Ingstad BC (in 185/195/205cm) lengths vs the FT62 (188cm)- and although the FT62 is a magnificent ski when the snow is good- both fresh soft snow as well as consolidated corn- I find that this narrow curvy, round-flexing ski does not do well on ice and breakable crust. I think that the Ingstad is actually better on ice and crust than the FT62- despite the much wider turn radius...The tips/tails of both skis- especially the more agressively-sidecut FT62- need to be detuned for that ice and crust!!!
Shouldn't have even started there- are you looking for a ski you can ride on ice and crust with a BC-XC boot?

I wasn't entirely sure about the Gamme for this use especially for less than ideal days at the resort. I am looking for skis that would do relatively better/well on icy groomers and old snow/crud at the resort. I did read Johnny's review of the Cecilie Skog ...which might be a possible option.

Hmmm- again- I assume you are looking for ski that can be rode with a BC-XC boot...Would be an interesting test but you may be on to something here- if you get the Gamme short enough that you can squash its stiffness underfoot and pressure the ski. I would think that a short stiff ski (e.g. Gamme) is going to be more stable on ice and old snow/crud than a softer rounder ski (e.g. Nansen/Cecile)? (Again this is all within the context of a ski that is narrow enough to ride with a BC-XC boot-) But again- I would think you would need shorter than 180cm for this application- at your weight...

I think the Ingstad may not do well (for me) on icy groomers or packed resort groomers.

Similar underfoot to the Gamme- waaaay more tip rocker than the Gamme- MUCH shorter effective edge than the Gamme. But- again- due to its stiff camber underfoot- you would want a short Ingstad BC for icy hardpack.

They would also be too similar to my FT62s. Please correct me if I am wrong.

Very different. Think of the Ingstad like a wider Gamme underfoot with waaay more tip rocker.
The FT62 has a completely different flex pattern and geometry.

Reading the reviews, I thought the Rabb 68 with 3pin would be good for blues and green resort skiing in deeper snow or fresh snow.

This is my impression as well- and in that context would be good with 3-pin or NNNBC.

My Nosi 76 pick is based on the fact that my FT62s are difficult for my weak legs in deep heavy Chugach powder and I thought just a bit wider and more sidecut would help me turn better. They would be a great replacement for the S112. The FT62 is amazing but my skills only allow to shine on the best powder days.

I don't think it is simply skill- the FT62 has its limits.
Don't know anything about the Nosi 76- but does the Nosi have more sidecut than the FT62? Depends on the amount of tip rocker/effective sidecut- based on the photos on the Asnes site the Nosi appears to have much less tip rocker:
Nosi- 108-76-98mm: xx-32+22mm
FT62- 97-62-86mm: xx-35+24mm
At the very least- I am thinking that the FT62 has a shorter effective edge- and therefore a shorter turn radius than the Nosi76?
Just checked the site:
Nosi76: 18.2m radius, 172cm ski
FT62: 16.7m radius, 172cm ski

And- if you are thinking heavy soft snow- I don't think you want sidecut- you want little to no camber, stable flex and tip and tail rocker...You want (I WANT) a ~70mm ski with the profile and geometry of the Voile V6!!!

The Nosi doesn't strike me as powder ski- looks more like a go-up fast then come-down fast on consolidated snow?

I would actually prefer NNN BC bindings for all the skis, but most resorts require leashes and I can't attach one to them...thus I must mount 3pin and the Alfa Greenland 75mm looked good and similar in fit to my NNN BC Guard and Quest Core.

I love my new Alfa Guard Advance GTX! They have finally been broken in. No blisters. Amazingly comfortable! Incredible boots. You can feel the soft snow beneath your feet on light powder days. I have more fun on them than resort skiing on a downhill setup.

You need to use the Guard man- make it work at the resort!!!

(I too LOVE the Alfa Guard!!!)
Gareth

[lilcliffy]

Joe,
From the reviews I would say the Ingstad and the Falketind 62 are completely different skis. The Ingstad is a double camber cross country ski that excels in deep snow and steep terrain. The FT is a light downhill ski that tours well enough to be a truly fun touring for turns ski. They are quite different.
Hopefully Lilcliffy, (Gareth) will comment. He has both skis, plus the Gamme as well. I believe you would get better performance out of an Ingstad in the correct length over a too short Gamme, that you will still be hop turning. At least that is my supposition.

My current perspective and experience are that the difference between the Gamme and the Ingstad is geometry. The camber and stiffness underfoot is actually quite close between the two skis (MUCH more than the FT62)- the Ingstad has more sidecut and A LOT more tip rocker than the Gamme- more sidecut and a shorter effective edge.

I’m not sure as to significant difference between the Rabb and the FT as it relates to poor snow performance. Nitram Tocrut has both a Falketind and a Rabb. Might I suggest you send him a PM?

I am hoping that both Nitram and Woods chime in on this- based on my conversations with them- the Rabb 68 is nothing like the stiff Storetind of old. The Rabb seems a purely downhill ski- tuned for moderate terrain and good snow. The FT62 is clearly more downhill focused than the XC Ingstad, but it offers better XC performance than the Rabb- especially the redesigned FT62 (BTW- I have both FT62 models now).

I am attaching photos of a Tindan and a S-112 side by side, and with the S-112 over the Tindan. The Tindan has significantly greater torsional rigidity that the air core S-112. The Tindan also has even more rocker than the Falketind. The Tindan is way more ski than the S-112. However, for me it is the next logical step up from the FT-62.
Again Good Luck,
Bob

Still eagerly awaiting your reports on the Tindan Bob! BTW- cool you managed to trade up the Tindan to a longer length.
Gareth