New FT62 Q/A — How true should new skis be?

This is the World Famous TelemarkTalk / TelemarkTips Forum, by far the most dynamic telemark and backcountry skiing discussion board on the world wide web. We have fun here, come on in and be a part of it.
User avatar
Stephen
Posts: 1487
Joined: Thu Aug 06, 2020 12:49 am
Location: PNW USA
Ski style: Aspirational
Favorite Skis: Armada Tracer 118 (195), Gamme (210), Ingstad (205), Objective BC (178)
Favorite boots: Alfa Guard Advance, Scarpa TX Pro
Occupation: Beyond
6’3” / 191cm — 172# / 78kg, size 47 / 30 mondo

New FT62 Q/A — How true should new skis be?

Post by Stephen » Thu Dec 24, 2020 1:14 am

See my post on page 2, of 1/21/2021 for final update.

Trying to figure out if my expectations are unrealistic or what.
Just received long-awaited, special order FT62 in 188.
Assume they are are 2020/21 model, since tail looks reasonable, rather than the higher tail of last year.
(Although, it’s interesting that the attached sticker on the base does not list 196 as an available length.)
But, that not the subject...

The pair I received are not true.
The skis have twist. In an ideal world, both skis should be flat and true.
These are not.
One ski has more twist than the other.
So, if I use these skis, I have to decide if I want the outside tip, or outside tail to bite more.
It’s “only” a cumulative 2.5mm gap (twist) at the tails. It does not take much pressure to squeeze the tails together.
Should I just suck it up and move on, or look for some sort of solution, whether that’s from Åsnes, or trying to “untwist” them over the summer?
(I will add that there is 10mm difference between the balance points of the two skis. Again, I don’t know if this is in tolerance or not. I just mounted a pair of 180cm Asnes Gammes for my wife and they had a 10mm difference in balance points, also.)
Maybe I’m too much of a perfectionist. Or, maybe the FT62s should be more true — I don’t know.
What do you think?

In the pictures, the tips have a spring clamp holding the tip bases together.
The pictures show the resulting gap at the tails.
03E96F71-8C5E-44B9-92DA-AFCCE64FA2DE.jpeg
89243AAD-1C4C-4412-A2F4-23ED66E1FB30.jpeg
2.5mm gap at the tails.
89F8260C-B480-40F5-BED7-71D10381D52B.jpeg
Last edited by Stephen on Thu Jan 21, 2021 5:56 pm, edited 9 times in total.

User avatar
CwmRaider
Posts: 610
Joined: Wed May 15, 2019 6:33 am
Location: Subarctic Scandinavian Taiga
Ski style: XC-(D) tinkerer
Favorite Skis: Åsnes FT62 XP, Børge Ousland
Occupation: Very precise measurements of very small quantities.

Re: New Ski Q/A — How true should skis be?

Post by CwmRaider » Thu Dec 24, 2020 2:03 am

Before anything else, contact Åsnes.
I don't think this is within any kind of tolerances but it isn't normal and I suspect some transport damage.



User avatar
Woodserson
Posts: 2995
Joined: Wed Feb 11, 2015 10:25 am
Location: New Hampshire
Ski style: Bumps, trees, steeps and long woodsy XC tours
Occupation: Confused Turn Farmer

Re: New FT62 Q/A — How true should skis be?

Post by Woodserson » Thu Dec 24, 2020 9:00 am

As far as BP, wood core skis and balance points might not be dead on. This is more common than dead-equal BPs in my experience, across many different brands. My FT BP's were 2+cm apart IIRC.

no opinion on the twist



User avatar
Stephen
Posts: 1487
Joined: Thu Aug 06, 2020 12:49 am
Location: PNW USA
Ski style: Aspirational
Favorite Skis: Armada Tracer 118 (195), Gamme (210), Ingstad (205), Objective BC (178)
Favorite boots: Alfa Guard Advance, Scarpa TX Pro
Occupation: Beyond
6’3” / 191cm — 172# / 78kg, size 47 / 30 mondo

Re: New FT62 Q/A — How true should skis be?

Post by Stephen » Thu Dec 24, 2020 1:08 pm

I emailed Asnes on this and will update when I get a reply.
I’m just curious if others have seen this on new skis and what effect it will have.



User avatar
Woodserson
Posts: 2995
Joined: Wed Feb 11, 2015 10:25 am
Location: New Hampshire
Ski style: Bumps, trees, steeps and long woodsy XC tours
Occupation: Confused Turn Farmer

Re: New FT62 Q/A — How true should skis be?

Post by Woodserson » Thu Dec 24, 2020 2:40 pm

If you put them on the correct feet, it will make them more schmeary. Which is the point of this ski with all its rocker.

Basically, Elan AMPHIBIO technology!!!



User avatar
Stephen
Posts: 1487
Joined: Thu Aug 06, 2020 12:49 am
Location: PNW USA
Ski style: Aspirational
Favorite Skis: Armada Tracer 118 (195), Gamme (210), Ingstad (205), Objective BC (178)
Favorite boots: Alfa Guard Advance, Scarpa TX Pro
Occupation: Beyond
6’3” / 191cm — 172# / 78kg, size 47 / 30 mondo

Re: New FT62 Q/A — How true should skis be?

Post by Stephen » Thu Dec 24, 2020 3:51 pm

Woodserson wrote:
Thu Dec 24, 2020 2:40 pm
If you put them on the correct feet, it will make them more schmeary. Which is the point of this ski with all its rocker.
I thought of that — more schmeary on the back end BUT more railed on the tips.
Plus, the way it works out, the graphics end up right to left, rather than left to right (“backwards”).
Sometimes being a perfectionist sucks — can I have a helping of “Ignorance is bliss” please?



User avatar
Woodserson
Posts: 2995
Joined: Wed Feb 11, 2015 10:25 am
Location: New Hampshire
Ski style: Bumps, trees, steeps and long woodsy XC tours
Occupation: Confused Turn Farmer

Re: New FT62 Q/A — How true should skis be?

Post by Woodserson » Thu Dec 24, 2020 4:46 pm

Seriously, Elan Amphibio tech.

Also, the shovels are straight, right? The slight twist in the tails of such a tiny amount, on such a floppy ski, with a shovel that is heavily rockered, is not going to "rail" the front end of the ski. The twist in the back is not going to make it to the front. It's just not. I mean the ski is like a banana. If it does, it means you are on a fully-cambered multi-titanal layered GS World Cup ski that is not available to the public and you are Bode Miller and you're pissed about losing 0.01. The FT62 ain't that.

I mount my skis backwards graphic wise all the time just to screw with people on the chairlift.

EDIT I'm not saying it's right or you should accept it, that's your own decision.



User avatar
fisheater
Posts: 2622
Joined: Fri Feb 19, 2016 8:06 pm
Location: Oakland County, MI
Ski style: All my own, and age doesn't help
Favorite Skis: Gamme 54, Falketind 62, I hope to add a third soon
Favorite boots: Alpina Alaska, Alico Ski March
Occupation: Construction Manager

Re: New FT62 Q/A — How true should skis be?

Post by fisheater » Thu Dec 24, 2020 5:05 pm

Stephen, try putting a gallon of milk on the pin line. If the ski sits flat that is approximately 7 pounds. If the ski sits flat with 7 lbs. of weight, I would think the difference is not significant. As that is less than 10% of half your weight.
I am only offering a perspective. Those skis aren’t cheap. If they were mine, I would need to sell myself on the idea the twist was insignificant.



User avatar
Woodserson
Posts: 2995
Joined: Wed Feb 11, 2015 10:25 am
Location: New Hampshire
Ski style: Bumps, trees, steeps and long woodsy XC tours
Occupation: Confused Turn Farmer

Re: New FT62 Q/A — How true should skis be?

Post by Woodserson » Thu Dec 24, 2020 6:30 pm

fisheater wrote:
Thu Dec 24, 2020 5:05 pm
As that is less than 10% of half your weight.
So 5% of his weight?

Great recommendation!



User avatar
Stephen
Posts: 1487
Joined: Thu Aug 06, 2020 12:49 am
Location: PNW USA
Ski style: Aspirational
Favorite Skis: Armada Tracer 118 (195), Gamme (210), Ingstad (205), Objective BC (178)
Favorite boots: Alfa Guard Advance, Scarpa TX Pro
Occupation: Beyond
6’3” / 191cm — 172# / 78kg, size 47 / 30 mondo

Re: New FT62 Q/A — How true should new skis be?

Post by Stephen » Sat Dec 26, 2020 12:44 am

I’m surprised there isn’t more input on this one.
Would you buy skis off the rack with this amount of twist?
I remember that was one of the several things I would check when buying wood skis.
Unfortunately, these were special order, and sight unseen.
Unless Asnes is willing to do something about it, I’m stuck with them.
I’m with Bob — I’m having a hard time selling myself on this.



Post Reply