Asnes Ingstad vs. Fischer S-bound 98?
Re: Asnes Ingstad vs. Fischer S-bound 98?
Hi Ira!
Read this tonight. I got the Fischer Excursion 88 189cm (93kg). First used them with bc Rottefella bc Manual and Crispi Svartisen.
After that mounted 3 pin Rottefella Riva 3 and use them with 75mm Crispi Svartisen.
Really liked the later 75mm binding and boots much better(got some foot problem too 75mm Svartisen feels good for my feet) Got better control of the ski.
The ski it self work OK. Sometimes when xc on packed snowmobile tracks its a bit squirreli.
But the grip is pretty good on rolling terrain(got the extra grip aaah forgot the word "tape" used it one time)
If not to deep with snow its OK when you going downhill..
My friend got the Ingstad waxless with Rottefella bc. Little bit longer its faster but needs more wax work to do OK. But I think he is pretty happy with them. He switch and use the Epoch with 75mm volie 3pin and Svartisen 75mm then and now.
He feel it a little bit more playful ski up and down.
Just my 2 cents
Hope you doing fine with the new ski. Great pic
Read this tonight. I got the Fischer Excursion 88 189cm (93kg). First used them with bc Rottefella bc Manual and Crispi Svartisen.
After that mounted 3 pin Rottefella Riva 3 and use them with 75mm Crispi Svartisen.
Really liked the later 75mm binding and boots much better(got some foot problem too 75mm Svartisen feels good for my feet) Got better control of the ski.
The ski it self work OK. Sometimes when xc on packed snowmobile tracks its a bit squirreli.
But the grip is pretty good on rolling terrain(got the extra grip aaah forgot the word "tape" used it one time)
If not to deep with snow its OK when you going downhill..
My friend got the Ingstad waxless with Rottefella bc. Little bit longer its faster but needs more wax work to do OK. But I think he is pretty happy with them. He switch and use the Epoch with 75mm volie 3pin and Svartisen 75mm then and now.
He feel it a little bit more playful ski up and down.
Just my 2 cents
Hope you doing fine with the new ski. Great pic
Re: Asnes Ingstad vs. Fischer S-bound 98?
Hi everyone, sharing an update so far, and a question.
I did get the 98 (too short, they didn't have 169) and like it except for the length. Grip is good, and, when I ski in a campground in icy conditions, it turns ok when I need to avoid trees. But it's too short for decent glide on most days. I'm looking for those in 169.
Since the S-bound in 159 didn't have good enough glide, and I couldn't find the Fischer 78/88/98's in 169, and REI has Asnes Ingstad, I got the Ingstad, but in 165 for safety due to the feedback about Ingstads being too fast for beginners, and the waxless pattern not engaging. I tried it for for the first time, for 20 minutes today (right after the S-bound 98's in 159, to compare them). It turned to have even worse glide than the too short 98's (but I also was skiing in my previous 98's tracks). What was strange about the Asnes Ingstad WL in 165, was that they felt a little herky-jerky (and I wasn't wearing skins), meaning it would glide, then stop or seem to get caught -- as if I was wearing skins even though I wasn't, and that was in many-times-melted-and-refrozen conditions, at 3pm in the afternoon, in the same tracks and conditions that the too-short 98's had been smooth (but slow) on from 2-3pm. There were a lot of pine needles, so wondering if those somehow impact the Ingstads more than the S-bounds. Or perhaps it might be that the extra rocker gives it a shorter effective length, which accentuates the stop-and-go effect of getting them too short?
For Ingstad, the 165 is for weight up to 125 and I'm 130.
For S-bound 98, 159 is for weight up to 120. And Ingstad tends to favor glide while 98 favors grip, so I was surprised that it felt smoother on the 98's than the Ingstad (but perhaps the 98's spread out that lack-of-glide over more of the ski?)
Has anyone else experienced the Asnes Ingstad to be stop-and-go, and is that entirely due to the too-short length, or is it also less forgiving of pine needles on packed hard snow than the Fischers? I'm thinking of trying again but not in the Fischer's tracks to see if that helps.
It hasn't snowed here in weeks, so the snow is old, wondering if that made a difference.
On the positive side, I did find that the S-bound 98's seem to track well while also turning well -- I just wish they had them longer. I also had an easier time turning with the trail than I used to when I had skied (for 5 years) on Rossi BC-90's (except for the length of this specific pair, I prefer the S-bound 98's to the Rossi BC-90).
Still looking for either Fischer 98's or 88's or 78's in 169.
Thanks!
I did get the 98 (too short, they didn't have 169) and like it except for the length. Grip is good, and, when I ski in a campground in icy conditions, it turns ok when I need to avoid trees. But it's too short for decent glide on most days. I'm looking for those in 169.
Since the S-bound in 159 didn't have good enough glide, and I couldn't find the Fischer 78/88/98's in 169, and REI has Asnes Ingstad, I got the Ingstad, but in 165 for safety due to the feedback about Ingstads being too fast for beginners, and the waxless pattern not engaging. I tried it for for the first time, for 20 minutes today (right after the S-bound 98's in 159, to compare them). It turned to have even worse glide than the too short 98's (but I also was skiing in my previous 98's tracks). What was strange about the Asnes Ingstad WL in 165, was that they felt a little herky-jerky (and I wasn't wearing skins), meaning it would glide, then stop or seem to get caught -- as if I was wearing skins even though I wasn't, and that was in many-times-melted-and-refrozen conditions, at 3pm in the afternoon, in the same tracks and conditions that the too-short 98's had been smooth (but slow) on from 2-3pm. There were a lot of pine needles, so wondering if those somehow impact the Ingstads more than the S-bounds. Or perhaps it might be that the extra rocker gives it a shorter effective length, which accentuates the stop-and-go effect of getting them too short?
For Ingstad, the 165 is for weight up to 125 and I'm 130.
For S-bound 98, 159 is for weight up to 120. And Ingstad tends to favor glide while 98 favors grip, so I was surprised that it felt smoother on the 98's than the Ingstad (but perhaps the 98's spread out that lack-of-glide over more of the ski?)
Has anyone else experienced the Asnes Ingstad to be stop-and-go, and is that entirely due to the too-short length, or is it also less forgiving of pine needles on packed hard snow than the Fischers? I'm thinking of trying again but not in the Fischer's tracks to see if that helps.
It hasn't snowed here in weeks, so the snow is old, wondering if that made a difference.
On the positive side, I did find that the S-bound 98's seem to track well while also turning well -- I just wish they had them longer. I also had an easier time turning with the trail than I used to when I had skied (for 5 years) on Rossi BC-90's (except for the length of this specific pair, I prefer the S-bound 98's to the Rossi BC-90).
Still looking for either Fischer 98's or 88's or 78's in 169.
Thanks!
- Stephen
- Posts: 1485
- 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: Asnes Ingstad vs. Fischer S-bound 98?
That’s my guess.
I’m 190 skiing weight.
Ski Ingstad in 205 and they are great, but, because of the rocker, not as good on consolidated snow.
I have skied them in 195 and those were quite slow and draggy.
Not stop and start like you had, just slow.
The next size up would probably work better for you.