fjellski for wisconsin

[radiomir]

Awesome community here. Probably spent 10 hours reading before this post.

I'm looking for advice on my first off-track / light BC ski for south central Wisconsin. I only started xc skiing last year, with some basic classic skis (Rossi XC 55 r-skin), but caught the bug. I always sought the trees or (if I could) open quieter areas back when I was able to alpine ski more in western US and alps (still not a lot, maybe 1 or 2 trips a year), and so now want a ski I can explore a bit with.

In reality, I am in my late 30s with 2 young kids, so I will mostly only have time for local golf course and state park skiing of 1-3 hours at a time, with mostly flat and moderately-hilled terrain (maybe some very short steeps). I would also like to try skiing across the many windswept lakes nearby, on some single-track trails where I mtb, and up and down some of the more hilly areas (hilly for Wisconsin) within driving distance, but I don't think those will be my primary use-cases. Snow is often fairly dry around here and it can stay below freezing for weeks at a time, but when it does warm up, it can get a little icy. We only get about 50" of snowfall a year on average (but it usually sticks around), often in 1-4" cold snow increments, with occasional 5-8" dry or wet snow mini-dumps. So, there may be several layers of icy or dry crust sandwiched between a couple of inches. Last season was unusually good for the area, with 120 ski-able days.

I've spoken with people at Neptune in Boulder, as well as at New Moon Ski shop in northern Wisconsin, and so far am considering a range of skis including fischer transnordic 66, Rossi BC 80, and from Asnes, the gamme, nansen (waxable or waxless), amundsen, and even ingstad. Also saw recent discussions about the Otto. I've never waxed, but willing to try, especially given the relatively consistent conditions I ski in.

I'm fairly thin - 148 lbs (67 kg) at 5'10.5" (179 cm) tall. My K&G technique is probably not fantastic given my newbie status, but I've managed to get decent kick out of my 185 cm Rossi's even though I'm light for that size according to their chart. They aren't very fast or stiff, though, so I imagine this is not much of an accomplishment!

I know I'll need to move quickly for availability. My guess is I'll try to add one pair of skis each year

Anyway, sorry for yet another "what ski for me?" post. I just couldn't find much advice for my local conditions!

[Woodserson]

I write this in unfortunate haste but damn, with a good consistent snowpack like that I'd definitely lean towards wax and double cambered (or more cambered) so you can run a skin or klister easily when in warms up.

200cm Gamme without hesitation. Or 200 Transnordic 66 Wax/EZ Skin... (Not the crown) if you can find it (it exists).

Edit: ... Maybe 190 Gamme if you consider XC skiing to be more shuffling rather than dynamic. If you are the more "give me fuel, give me fire" kind of guy, 200. I'm on the 200 at 155/160lbs without backpack and for lake skiing I wouldn't want to go shorter. And I can turn it pretty good down hills.

[lilcliffy]

Hello and welcome, welcome Radiomir!

I simply cannot think of a better touring ski then the Gamme 54 for the skiing you describe-

You will simply fly acrosss the lakes, fields and through the woods, up the hills-
and then drop a gear on the descents as the slightly rockered tip encourages those lightening bolts to plane in soft snow!!!

Lightening tur man! Gamme is the man.

Stay in touch and let us know what you decide and how your ski season goes!
Gareth

[connyro]

I'm in the UP with sort of similar conditions/seasons. considering you are a self-described newbie, you may consider waxless for simplicity and versatility. the Fischer Traverse 78 may be a good option. I'm the rare skier that does not like to fiddlefart with gear so I prefer waxless vs wax.

[Musk Ox]

I have 200 cm Gammes and they're great, and wouldn't want them shorter.

I'm some 10kg + heavier than you, though – so I'd probably quickly check in with the hive mind here that you won't find it a wee bit frustrating squishing 200 cm Gammes when you're climbing. You're certainly light enough for the 190s.

It doesn't sound like you're going to be doing much climbing, though, in which case I can heartily echo the recommendations.

Don't forget some skins! The 30 mm mohair skins are just brilliant for wet conditions, de facto grip wax substitutes in some conditions. Albeit waxing those skis is better than sex. I mean, it is better. With no qualifications whatsoever.*





*There are some qualifications.

[radiomir]

Thanks everyone for the replies. I'm a bit intimidated by waxing, but I'm sure I could figure it out, and on days when I don't have much time, I can always hit the tracks with skin classics. Thinking of gamme length, I definitely started last year with a lunge, and then a shuffle, but eventually started shifting my weight more dynamically with one ski coming off the ground/ out of the track. I do like the feeling of a faster glide, but at 67 kg, I am still tempted to go with the 190 to avoid frustration. 190 is already one size bigger than the Asnes chart, and I guess I am not as confident of my stride uphill and balance off-track? I could probably be convinced otherwise.

Either way, any recommendations on bindings with the gamme? NNN-BC Magnum? Auto? Manual? I don't think I need 75 mm for my purposes, but I'm thinking of also eventually getting some altai hok's with a 75 mm binding to occasionally explore with a non-skiing friend (and plod along next to my young kids). I suppose I could save on boots if I did 75 mm on both, if I could find some that fit.

On that note, any boot recs? I have narrow ankles, but fairly wide forefeet. I have yet to find a fischer or rossi boot to fit (all too narrow). Solomon's touring lasts are wide enough. Haven't tried any alpinas, but the Alaska seems pretty standard on this forum and not overly narrow.

Anyway, thanks again! Can't wait for snow. 5" is a possibility this weekend, which would be just enough.

[Woodserson]

Thanks everyone for the replies. I'm a bit intimidated by waxing, but I'm sure I could figure it out, and on days when I don't have much time, I can always hit the tracks with skin classics. Thinking of gamme length, I definitely started last year with a lunge, and then a shuffle, but eventually started shifting my weight more dynamically with one ski coming off the ground/ out of the track. I do like the feeling of a faster glide, but at 67 kg, I am still tempted to go with the 190 to avoid frustration. 190 is already one size bigger than the Asnes chart, and I guess I am not as confident of my stride uphill and balance off-track? I could probably be convinced otherwise.

Either way, any recommendations on bindings with the gamme? NNN-BC Magnum? Auto? Manual? I don't think I need 75 mm for my purposes, but I'm thinking of also eventually getting some altai hok's with a 75 mm binding to occasionally explore with a non-skiing friend (and plod along next to my young kids). I suppose I could save on boots if I did 75 mm on both, if I could find some that fit.

On that note, any boot recs? I have narrow ankles, but fairly wide forefeet. I have yet to find a fischer or rossi boot to fit (all too narrow). Solomon's touring lasts are wide enough. Haven't tried any alpinas, but the Alaska seems pretty standard on this forum and not overly narrow.

Anyway, thanks again! Can't wait for snow. 5" is a possibility this weekend, which would be just enough.

Magnums or Manuals, whatever you can get. Why not put NNNBC on the Hoks too? There is a thread about the binding differences probably a few posts down. https://www.telemarktalk.com/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=4413

Alaska.

[Musk Ox]

190 is already one size bigger than the Asnes chart, and I guess I am not as confident of my stride uphill and balance off-track?

Ah, you will be absolutely fine with the 190s, without a shadow of a doubt, up hill and down dale. If I weighed a mere 67 kg I'd probably want to have a word with the resident long-ski experts and owners before I bought a pair of 200 cm Gammes though, if I had lots of hills in mind.

You don't need Magnums on the Gammes, but you don't, um, not need them either. I mean, I've got standard NNN-BCs, they're fine.

On that note, any boot recs? I have narrow ankles, but fairly wide forefeet.

I, too, have flippers, and I heartily recommend these.

https://www.lundhags.com/en/footwear/me ... 8731669582

Every time I see a pair of Alaskas in the shop my resistance weakens. I don't need them because I love my boots, but I suspect that if I had a pair I could do jumpy linked telemark springs like Gamme's handsome brother does in the vids

[radiomir]

Magnums or Manuals, whatever you can get. Why not put NNNBC on the Hoks too? There is a thread about the binding differences probably a few posts down. https://www.telemarktalk.com/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=4413

The no-binding hoks were unavailable and I thought there might be some 75mm binding hoks available. Also thought 75 might be easier to turn when necessary. Both are sold out now, so I would need to get the universal boot binding option anyway. Can always swap later.

I, too, have flippers, and I heartily recommend these.

https://www.lundhags.com/en/footwear/me ... 8731669582

Every time I see a pair of Alaskas in the shop my resistance weakens. I don't need them because I love my boots, but I suspect that if I had a pair I could do jumpy linked telemark springs like Gamme's handsome brother does in the vids

Nice boots! They seem to be unavailable in the US (maybe I can import from a place in Finland if I were more confident about sizing), but I'll keep a lookout!

I have read that the Alaskas are not very wide, but are they also low volume? I could get away with a narrower boot if the volume is enough for me to put in raised arch insoles. This is what I typically do with ice skates rather than sizing up to the point they are too long. It's not always comfortable though.

I also couldn't find any width/volume discussion on the FISCHER BCX TRANSNORDIC. Are they narrow like Fischer's NNN boots?

The Alaskas and BCX Transnordics are readily available to me, but anything Alfa or Lundhag is hard to find.

Finally, any more thoughts on an x-skin? Is 30 better than recommended 45? Mohair? I'm planning to order the gamme's today!

[Stephen]

@radiomir, I have used the 30 mohair x-skin on Gamme and liked it.
The nylon was very slow — almost no glide, if I remember correctly.
The mohair had a surprising amount of glide and good grip.
If climbing is more important, the 45 might / would be better.
The 30 will climb, 45 better.

Remember to wax or proof the mohair skins if you will be skiing anywhere near the freezing point.