New BCXC considering Fischer Traverse 78 / S 88 / S 98

[lilcliffy]

I'll likely heed your advice, and be sensible to opt for something for main use case, (70% singletrack / 20% woods / 10% downhill). Based on that going to eliminate S-bound 98.

The 98 will definitely offer "better" downhill turning potential with its greater sidecut-
I have not handled the current 98- I am assuming that the current 98 is less cambered and rounder flexing than the 78/88?

In regards to boots/bindings, ideally it'd be nice to have a single pair boots, leaning towards 75mm compatible ones, that would work for XC and (future) XCD skis, would you advise against this?

This entirely depends on whaty one means by "XCD"- I almost exclusively use NNBC for the BC ski touring you describe- plus distance-oriented turs in hilly/steep terrain.

A BC-XC boot that is designed for striding is not going to inherently offer better downhill performance whether it NNNBC or 3-pin. (The addition of the cable on a 3-pin binding definitely makes a downhill difference IME- even in BC-XC boots.)

One BC-XC boot will definitely cover all of the BC-XC-XCd skiing you describe doing.

But in the context you describe- the primary advantage of 75mm would not be to use one boot- it would be to switch out the boot for a stiffer, more supportive Telemark boot- if you wanted/needed it.

Personally-
1) I use NNNBC for all the skiing you describe (and then some).
2) I use 75mm Telemark boots-bindings for tours that are downhill-focused.

75mm will cover both of the above- but most skiers will want at least two different boots for each of these contexts.

So for me- I need/want two different classes of boots for my local BC touring- I am happier with the fit and performance of NNNBC in the BC-XC-XCd context. The initial move to NNNBC for me was driven by boot selection.

What boot(s) are you considering? (Forgive me if I missed this in your earlier post.)

Also from everything I’ve read on the latest models the E-88 doesn’t really turn better than the T-78.

No the 88 doesn't turn easier than the 78. Their flex and camber is near identical. 88 has a bit more sidecut- but with perhaps more tip rocker- the 88 might have the same effective edge and sidecut...

...
How much of a slog is it to opt for the larger E-88 over T-78 on XC trails? T-78 if it turns the same is probably the most attractive option. But then you dropped your Asnes recommendations lol...

Not a slog- at all.
The 88 is a remarkably decent XC ski on all snow conditions- due to its stability, stiffness and ample camber undefoot. It is certainly the best XC ski I have ever tested on consolidated snow with a waist as wide as 68mm- it tracks well and offers very good kick and glide.
The 78 is faster- narrower and lighter.
The 88 perhaps offers "better" deep snow float over the 78- for a heavier skier...(Neither ski will "float" on top of deep soft snow.)

I don't use my 88- I have other deep snow BC-XC skis that I much prefer over the 88.
The 78 is my current top pick for BC-XC-XCd skiing on consolidated, icy, cruddy, refrozen snow.
(I would prefer E99-type ski over the 78 in this context but there is nothing currently available with the grip, glide and stability of the waxless-scaled 78 (the E99 Crown is too unstable for my taste and snow conditions) (the Gamme 54 is not available with a waxless-scaled base- and I am not yet convinced that the Asnes scale design is grippy enough...)

Anyone have thoughts on Fischer T-78 vs. Asnes Nansen?

@Woodserson
Calling Woods!

Lastly, on a skinnier ski, is it easy to safely slow down on steep terrain? curious if tossing on the skins helps here, or good technique alone will keep me out of the trees way.

None of these BC-XC skis are intended to have the "wax pocket" of a Classic XC Track ski (not unless one is a light skier. A recent post here described a true wax pocket on a 180cm Nansen).

For example- I weigh 80-81kg without a pack and I completely squash the camber of even my stiffest 210cm Gamme 54 BC/E99 Xtralite.

Not sure what you weigh- but as long as you can compress the camber with the skis evenly weighted- you will have no trouble climbing hills- nor pressuring these skis into wedged snowplow to slow down.

Effectively turning skis is another matter.
Lower cambered and rounder flexing skis are definitely easier to pressure into turns than skis with stiff resistant camber.

[dave52]

Thanks for the guidance!

Perhaps I'm being fickle, but have been reading a lot about Asnes and am impressed with the reviews, seems like high quality gear.

Anyhow, at the moment I'm strongly leaning towards Asnes Nansen Waxless. I'm digging into previous posts to see how capable these are on consolidated snow.

The majority of riding will be on trails on land that no one else uses, but almost all the other trails (which I'd def would want to explore) see decent use from fat bikes, snowshoes, or are groomed for on piste XC. We don't get a constant recharge of snow, it's every few days at most, and typically will dump and remain below freezing, and then become packed and crusty.

Also recently discover the Asnes USGI skis... https://colemans.com/u-s-g-i-cross-coun ... nhill-skis
I'm fairly opposed to waxed skis ATM, just to reduce the moving pieces of this new endeavour. But, for the price and their supposed quality how can you beat it? I am curious if these babies work well on the conditions described above.

I'm thinking about pulling the trigger on the Asnes USGI for this season, and then scouting for Asnes Nansens Waxless before next winter. Then I won't feel guilty beating up the GI skis in questionable terrain.

[riel]

The S-112 is not what I would choose to break trail with. While the Nordic rocker is good downhill, it is not a good trail breaking ski. The original poster will totally crush the camber on the 98, while being less wide than the 112 it probably will be more pleasant on the trail for 190 lb man. I would bet a 6-pack of micro-brew that the T-78 or E-88 would both be better trail breakers than the S-98. The S-98 would be way better making turns downhill.

You should just tell him what beer you want now. That's an easy bet

I have S-Bound 112s here that give decent float, but show "pool cover syndrome" in deep powder. When breaking trail through a ton of new snow, the tips and tails can be at the surface, while the snow is halfway up to my knees. The S-Bound 98 has an even softer flex. Should be good for turning, but useless for float...

Meanwhile, the underfoot camber on a T-78, or E-88 will likely result in those skis providing better float than an S-Bound 98, despite being narrower. The wide and relatively soft tip should result in turns still being quite alright, at least the kind of turns you make coming down logging roads, etc...

[riel]

Anyhow, at the moment I'm strongly leaning towards Asnes Nansen Waxless. I'm digging into previous posts to see how capable these are on consolidated snow.

Also recently discover the Asnes USGI skis... https://colemans.com/u-s-g-i-cross-coun ... nhill-skis
I'm fairly opposed to waxed skis ATM, just to reduce the moving pieces of this new endeavour. But, for the price and their supposed quality how can you beat it? I am curious if these babies work well on the conditions described above.

I'm thinking about pulling the trigger on the Asnes USGI for this season, and then scouting for Asnes Nansens Waxless before next winter. Then I won't feel guilty beating up the GI skis in questionable terrain.

The Asnes Nansen seems like a much more capable ski for turning than either the Fischer T-78/E-88, because they don't have a real second camber underfoot, but a smooth round flex all the way through. The Nansen also seems like it would provide more float than an S-Bound 98, because the flex isn't nearly as soft.

As for the Asnes USGI, it is a great ski for breaking trail and going straight, but if you want to turn them you pretty much have to make wedge or step turns, and there simply may not be space for that if you are skiing in a narrow snowshoe or fat bike track. I enjoy my USGI skis for some things, but they are definitely NOT a do-it-all kind of ski by today's standards.

[dave52]

I have S-Bound 112s here that give decent float, but show "pool cover syndrome" in deep powder.

What is "pool cover syndrome"? does it require medical attention, lol... I've tried searching for it's meaning but alas no luck.

Also decisions were made, perhaps impulsively but half way through winter...

I wound up grabbing the Asnes USGI skis from Coleman's, 2x in the 210cm and 2x in 200cm; I'm hoping the 200cm is usable enough for my girlfriend, 5'2" 140lbs.

Planning to expand my quiver next season, and passively searching for the Asnes Nansen's, hopefully these 2 skis will cover needs.

Need to figure out some bindings and boots now, and how to attach them. Is it worth taking the opportunity to add bindings myself, or just pay a pro?

For bindings, Rottefella Magnum BC seem to be a popular for this particular ski, might follow suit.

Anyone have suggestions for inexpensive yet decent boots? I may just go to REI since they have a great return policy if size is wrong; with my classic NNN boots I goofed up my size, and they're awfully tight.

[riel]

I have S-Bound 112s here that give decent float, but show "pool cover syndrome" in deep powder.

What is "pool cover syndrome"? does it require medical attention, lol... I've tried searching for it's meaning but alas no luck.

The "pool cover syndrome" is when the ski flexes like a pool cover, with the ends sticking up and the middle way down. Instead of gliding over the snow, you'll be over your ankles deep in the snow, while your ski's tip and tail are laughing at you. Not good for glide, as you can imagine.

I wound up grabbing the Asnes USGI skis from Coleman's, 2x in the 210cm and 2x in 200cm; I'm hoping the 200cm is usable enough for my girlfriend, 5'2" 140lbs.

Planning to expand my quiver next season, and passively searching for the Asnes Nansen's, hopefully these 2 skis will cover needs.

Need to figure out some bindings and boots now, and how to attach them. Is it worth taking the opportunity to add bindings myself, or just pay a pro?

For bindings, Rottefella Magnum BC seem to be a popular for this particular ski, might follow suit.

Anyone have suggestions for inexpensive yet decent boots? I may just go to REI since they have a great return policy if size is wrong; with my classic NNN boots I goofed up my size, and they're awfully tight.

You can attach the bindings yourself quite easily. Just get a 3.5mm (9/64") drill bit, and put some tape on it 9mm in, so your holes are only as deep as they need to be for the screws.

Balance the ski on the edge of a table, or even on your finger, to find the balance point. You will want the NNN-BC bar at the balance point. Place the binding there, and figure out where the front screw needs to be. With the front screw in place, work backwards from there.

The skis come with existing holes for some weird military bindings. You can easily water seal those with some pieces of wood skewer and wood glue. You can use the same wood glue to water seal your own screw holes.

The USGI skis are rather heavy, but they're pretty good trail skis.

[dave52]

What boot(s) are you considering? (Forgive me if I missed this in your earlier post.)

Boots gave me some sticker shock, lol. Since I'm a novice to all this maybe budgeting and getting a feel for this is better than blowing $ out of the box.

I'm considering the Alico ski march boots. via suggestions in this USGI ski boots binding thread... viewtopic.php?f=1&t=2884&p=29919&hilit=alico#p29919

If I went with the Alicos, are 75mm bindings specifically with the added cables even worth the bother?

However, Alice is taking me further down the rabbit hole, boots are the area I'm least informed about so still keeping options open.

In your (Lilcliffy) Asnes USGI review thread, you seemed keen with Rottefella Magnum BCs, still considering these and will investigate matching boot ideas too.

[fisheater]

Here’s the deal with the Ski March. It is a heavy duty leather Telemark turning boot. One step down from the plastic T-4/Excursion boots. The Ski March is in the same weight class, with a little less power, but more flex being a leather boot.
I have one and love it. It isn’t a great match for a Nansen, only because the sole is a little stiff to maximize kick and glide. The Ski March can only be used with a 75 mm binding. You cannot use it with Rottefella magnum NNN-BC binding.
Another downside of the Ski March is that shipping costs more than the boot. If it doesn’t fit, sell it and try again. It’s kind of like buying $100 raffle ticket.
If you’re on a budget, and believe this is a sport you will continue to enjoy for a few years, buy a good boot. The Alpina Alaska BC is a great boot. In a year, when inventories are low, you’re not getting a deal. It’s about $250 now. I did a quick search and I did see some boots for $180, I have my doubts they’re a better value. You could also check the Tele Turn around section, there are new and used once and didn’t fit boots for sale.
You kind of figured out your skis. You really need to figure out boots. You’re better off with a good boot, and an EBay ski.

[Smitty]

You kind of figured out your skis. You really need to figure out boots. You’re better off with a good boot, and an EBay ski.

Couldn't agree more. Every ski will have its strengths and limitations. The only way to find out what those are, and what's right for you, is to make sure you have a boot that you can stand to wear for more than 10 minutes at a time. Functional, well fitting boot is the place to focus your budget.

[Krummholz]

My 2 cents on the Ski March. If the Ski March were my first xcd boots I would have given up.
Hard to break in, heal blisters after 1/2 mile. I am on my second season with them and they are stiff for K&G but starting to break in and I do like them for downhill. I own the Alpina 1675 and it is an ok beginning boot, not expensive, easy break in. Fine for K&G, broke one of the power straps after a few times taking them downhill. For a comfortable boot good at K&G I really like my Alpina Alaska 75. I can go miles in them with no foot problems. Maybe when my downhill technique gets better I’ll like them for that too.