Wildly speculative talk about Asnes 21-22 lineup: Otto/FT62

[lilcliffy]

Antoher note on the Sverdrup-

I also just bought a 205cm Nansen WL.
(In some ways I am more surprised by the Nansen than the Sverdrup- more on that later and somewhere else...)

Flex comparison of the Sverdrup vs Nansen:
- Sverdrup MUCH stiffer and more cambered underfoot
- Sverdrup has more flexible shovel
- Sverdrup has more flexible tail

(I am almost shocked by how stiff the Nansen is...Not that it is rail-stiff like the Gamme- but, the Nansen has a much more supportive flex than I was expecting...I was out on my E109 Crown today (haven't mounted the Nansen yet)- the Nansen may well be my dream spring ski for my local touring...)

[fisheater]

Antoher note on the Sverdrup-

I also just bought a 205cm Nansen WL.
(In some ways I am more surprised by the Nansen than the Sverdrup- more on that later and somewhere else...)

Flex comparison of the Sverdrup vs Nansen:
- Sverdrup MUCH stiffer and more cambered underfoot
- Sverdrup has more flexible shovel
- Sverdrup has more fliexible tail

(I am almost shocked by how stiff the Nansen is...Not that it is rail-stiff like the Gamme- but, the Nansen has a much more supportive flex than I was expecting...I was out on my E109 Crown today (haven't mounted the Nansen yet)- the Nansen may well be my dream spring ski for my local touring...)

Gareth I bugged the heck out of Woods, before I got it through my thick head that the Nansen at cross country length is a stiff ski. I checked in with jyw5 afterwards, because just as the Grinch’s heart is three sizes too small, my head is three degrees too thick!

[Woodserson]

I told you guys it was kinda stiff! I love it. And lighter than the PRE-Xtralite to boot!

[jyw5]

Yes! my 185cm Skog is great on flat terrain with consolidated snow. and does pretty well breaking trail in 4-6inch of fresh powder. Its a more capable ski than the MT51 in deeper powder and steeper terrain. It is also more stable when the trail is kibbles and bits...whereas I get knocked around on my MT51 in those icy cruddy conditions.

@fisheater ...I think you would do fine with a 200cm Nansen. if you regularly carry any packs greater than 10lbs, the 205cm would be better. The length at 185cm for me feels right for XC but feels long for XCD. MT51 in 185cm feels short for XC (i could have gone up to 190cm for better K&G)...probably the rocker tip shortens the effective length (I dont use MT51 for XCD...it was too fast and scary).

My 175cm Sverdrup with mounted manual NNN BC left Europe yesterday. Hope to be skiing next weekend! so excited. The avy danger has been considerable to high with layers of snow stacked from different storms and not bonding together as its been very cold...as low as -19F last wk (I was fortunately gone to California for Thanksgiving). with warmer temps on the way hopefully I will be able to test them out properly. otherwise will have to polar wax the skis maybe use skins and bundle up and pretend I'm skiing the Arctic.

It was a very tough choice between Gamme, Ingstad, and Sverdrup.... settled on the sverdrup as my impression from all the analysis by you all led me to conclude that the Gamme is like a stable wider MT51. The Ingstad works well in deeper snow. After my experience with the Skog, I wanted something slightly stiffer like the MT51 but not so stiff that I would have a hard time turning on steep terrain. The slightly shorter length 175cm Sverdrup will hopefully live up to the hype and fit nicely between the (2019) FT62 and the Skog.

[Jalla]

I must have read all the different threads on this forum regarding choosing between the Nansen, Ingstad, Gamme and now the Sverdrup. During my search all of these skies seemed perfect at one point

I have very little experiance with BC skies, but i do a lot of groomed track skiing.

I am looking for a ski that can do it all, but i know that probably not possible. My plan with the skies is to do some xc skiing about 20 km a day for 2-3 day trips, and do some hilly terrain with my AT friends. I know they will be much faster on the decents, but they are all new to AT, so i can probably joine them on the easy decents (i dont want AT equipment) I will probably also do some hunting in some forrest areas, not with a dog. I have signed up for a telemark skiing course to properly learn how to turn.

My latest conclution is the Ingstad 195(im 85kg) with a 75mm and stiff boot, but the sverdrup is tempting for the days all about xc. How big is the difference between these skies in reality? Can i go wrong with either?

[Musk Ox]

My latest conclution is the Ingstad 195(im 85kg) with a 75mm and stiff boot, but the sverdrup is tempting for the days all about xc. How big is the difference between these skies in reality? Can i go wrong with either?

This seems like a sensible conclusion to me. 195s will be better for days out with your AT friends, but 85 kg of person on the 195s might be less than perfect for days with a load. The calculations, the calculations...

I'm also really interested in hearing about the difference between the Ottos and the Ingstads for distance, largely because one of those is probably going to be my next buy, and I'm looking to step up my access to mild peril.

It seems kinda reasonable to assume the Ottos are more comparable to the Nansens than the Ingstads when it comes to going downhill. If you're intending to go out with your AT friends I think I'd prefer a pair of Ingstads for that, of course... chop chop Otto owners, get reviewing!

[riel]

My latest conclution is the Ingstad 195(im 85kg) with a 75mm and stiff boot, but the sverdrup is tempting for the days all about xc. How big is the difference between these skies in reality? Can i go wrong with either?

I'm also really interested in hearing about the difference between the Ottos and the Ingstads for distance, largely because one of those is probably going to be my next buy, and I'm looking to step up my access to mild peril.

I have Ingstads, and am still planning to buy a pair of Sverdrup skis for next season.

Why next season? Because I have a pair of Gamme skis on order already, and I feel I should get at least 100 miles on each pair of new skis I get each season. Also, I have no idea yet what length Sverdrup I should be getting in order to get something in my quiver that is different from what my Ingstad, Sondre, Tur-Langrenn, Storetind, and Gamme skis provide

[Jalla]

I have Ingstads, and am still planning to buy a pair of Sverdrup skis for next season.

Which skie would you choose if you could have only one?

[riel]

I have Ingstads, and am still planning to buy a pair of Sverdrup skis for next season.

Which skie would you choose if you could have only one?

Every ski has something that I like. I like how the Sondre flexes relatively easily, and how it is fast and tracks well due to being narrow. I like how the Ingstad has good float and stability, and turns easily due to its tip rocker, but it is a little slower because it is wider. I like how the stiffness, camber, and narrowness of the Gamme make it go fast, while the tip rocker helps it turn relatively well.

The Sverdrup appears to combine some of the best qualities of different skis: a relatively narrow, stiff base for fast kick and glide, and decent flotation, with a rockered tip and soft tail for easy turning.

From the descriptions I have heard so far, it sounds like the Sverdrup combines the go-fast stiffness and camber of the Gamme with the easy turning tip and sidecut of the Ingstand, and has a totally new tail design that should help release from turns on consolidated snow. We'll know how well those great-sounding ideas actually work once the people who have Sverdrup skis get enough snow to actually start using them

However, even with a ski like that I am sure I will encounter conditions where another ski would be more fun

[CwmRaider]

The snow was a bit tricky, about 20cm of semi crusty powder without a base. I hit some rocks on the first descents so I was very careful afterwards, and it was just a short tour with some steep narrow climbs. I waxed for the climbs (heel to 15cm in front of snakebite), this caused some more drag than I would like on the flats but was very grippy.
I'm happy so far but given today's conditions i cannot provide any real objective info apart from that they are very nice and nimble to use.
Anyone else had a go?