2022 Falketind 62 Xplore 196 cm First Impressions

[Stephen]

what does this mean

The other factor I’m thinking about is surface area relative to length.
If the FTX is a powder dream ski, at 62 in the waist, how does that square with all the 90 - 100++ waisted Alpine and Touring skis?

Maybe I’m a little influenced by past comments on the earlier versions of the FT62, but, not withstanding how enamored @fisheater is with its pure touring capabilities, I have the impression that the FT62 / FTX is highly regarded as a new snow / powder sort of ski.
So, in powder snow, a skis “float is largely a function of surface area (as well as how supportive the flex pattern of the entire ski is).
If surface area corelates to float, then a ski (like the FTX) with and average width of say 75mm will have much less float than a ski, like an Alpine or AT ski, with an average width of say 100+mm.
This means the FTX is going to sink deeper into the snow, and also need more incline to get going, vs a wider ski.

So I’m just trying to understand the sizing question relative to the above.
For someone weighing ~ >185 pounds (all up) it seems like the FTX 196 would be the ski.
Maybe unless the objective was steeper and or treed slopes, where float is less important, and or turning is more important.

And also, as for general touring, if a person weighing ~ >185 pounds (all up, and maybe around 5’10” or more) is happy on the longest of some other ski, like the Amundsen, Gamme or Ingstad, might they also like the FTX 196 over the 188?

Hope that clarifies what I’m looking at.
Just general curiosity regarding the sublties of different skis and ski length analysis.
Something to pass the time until it’s white outside…

[Woodserson]

Yeah, I'd agree. The longer the ski the more the surface area. The FT62 is regarded as a soft snow ski though mostly for its design profile and rocker and relatively soft flex. The FTXp has less rocker and is stiffer throughout, improving K&G characteristics but still retains enough rocker to probably be very smooth in fresh snow and will take more weight and more power without buckling. My 1st gen FT62's are dreamy in soft snow but wander like crazy even on packed-powder trails when I'm K&G.

[fisheater]

Yeah, I'd agree. The longer the ski the more the surface area. The FT62 is regarded as a soft snow ski though mostly for its design profile and rocker and relatively soft flex. The FTXp has less rocker and is stiffer throughout, improving K&G characteristics but still retains enough rocker to probably be very smooth in fresh snow and will take more weight and more power without buckling. My 1st gen FT62's are dreamy in soft snow but wander like crazy even on packed-powder trails when I'm K&G.

Woods you kind of nailed your analysis. However my 196 cm Xplore has 10 mm more rocker than my 187 FT did (I found some notes on a 3 x 5 card I use as a bookmark). The soft flex of the old FT made it really surfy in powder. The new FTX will support my 190 plus pack weight without excess bowing. It’s great at touring, however pointing them downhill you are going downhill. You need to stay on top of the skis and turn. They turn well, but a softer flexing ski is just surfy in powder.
My biggest complaint with with the old FT was it dragged in the wax pocket and the kick was dead. I did wander but it was much better than my previous turn oriented ski. The new FT X even kicked well in oversized Whitegrass tracks. It kicks on hard base conditions, and is fully supportive in deep snow. It turns really well, however for deep and tight there are better choices.
If you have long approaches, and you have a two track width to turn I personally have not skied a better ski. I need to ski with some Vector guys. I know Allen maintains pretty good pace on his Vectors.

[Nitram Tocrut]

And also, as for general touring, if a person weighing ~ >185 pounds (all up, and maybe around 5’10” or more) is happy on the longest of some other ski, like the Amundsen, Gamme or Ingstad, might they also like the FTX 196 over the 188?

Hi Stephen, maybe i can share my experience with both the 188 and 196 white and green FT. I first got the 188 but sold them to get the 196 thinking they would be better for the touring part of my skiing. I did not notice any significant difference and ended up with a longer ski that was harder to maneuver in our densely forested hills. If I could go back in time I would have kept the 188.

As for the new FT, I remember flexing them last fall and the difference was noticeable, and that kind of convinced fisheater to buy a pair… and we all know how much he loves them Knowing from fisheater experience with the FT X I would buy them in 188 for their better ease of use in the kind of terrain I ski.

It also can help to remind you that I am a bit shorter than you (185 Cm) but way heavier at around 100 kg but with the skiing season goes on I should reach around 95

Hopes that can help you fill your free time,

[fisheater]

Well @Nitram Tocrut , I’m glad to hear you finally admit it was indeed your report that drove me to purchase a Falketind Xplore!
I owe you a beer, or three! I’m not very fond of crossing the border any more. Maybe Vermont some time?

[Stephen]

Responded with thanks to Martin’s post via email.
Martin is doing some pretty cool stuff with organic farming.
Year after year dedication that is somewhat foreign (and impressive) to someone as easily distracted as I am…

If you’re curious, check it out:
https://www.legumesbiologiques.com/en/

[Nitram Tocrut]

Well @Nitram Tocrut , I’m glad to hear you finally admit it was indeed your report that drove me to purchase a Falketind Xplore!
I owe you a beer, or three! I’m not very fond of crossing the border any more. Maybe Vermont some time?

You’re welcome! Always up for a beer! As for road trip, I would sure like to spend some time in Tom M paradise and Stephen just told me he would spend the winter in Idaho and I have been talking with LilCliffy for a while about skiing in his own Boreal forest paradise in NB and I talked with Woods a couple years ago about doing the Canadian Ski Marathon that take place in my region and not to mention that I always wonder where greatgt actually ski, etc. Reading post on TTalk makes me dream about skiing all over the continent knowing that I will most likely not visit most of them but still, there is hope and having hope goes a long way in being happy

[John_XCD]

Yikes these are fun skis! First outing this afternoon

Set up with NNNBC magnum + alfa guard. Waxed a la lilcliffy with tip to tail polar and extra blue heel forward.

Conditions were 8 inches of dry powder on top on a fairly supportive base with temp around 25F. Skiing where I previously would have used S98. Striding was downright pleasant with wonderful grip and glide (from an ex-xc racer) compared to S98 which was probably more due to wax with optimal conditions vs scales. I climbed a skin track in the shade using just wax that I previously needed full skins because the EZ-skin is not enough grip. I'm shocked. Skis are incredibly light and you can dance kickturns through the trees. Glide faster than S98 with glide wax on tip/tail.

Turning feels much more single camber and is much more forgiving than S98. 188cm felt great for my 180lbs/6ft at least in open or widely spaced trees. The turning radius is much narrower than S98 of same length.

Return on this zone is down a skin-highway of a trail that is not that steep but narrow, hard packed, and accumulates moguls and swoopy turns. S98s through here (with leather boots) ski in control mostly but not really fun at all, just a commute to the car. FTX I was able to hold an edge and carve on hardpack, having a blast, hitting little jumps. I didn't know such a thing could be done on leather boots.

Best $300 I've spent in a long time (thanks Varuste!)

I was still noticeably skiing on the firmer base under the powder, so jury is still out on flotation in deeper snow. Maybe I'll need a Rabb too?!

[Stephen]

Yikes these are fun skis! First outing this afternoon
…
188cm felt great for my 180lbs/6ft at least in open or widely spaced trees.

Winter is a month away for me — stuck in the lowlands for now.
Encouraging report.
I really agonized on length for the FTX.
6’3+” / 172 buff / 190-195 all geared up
(My height is just above the break point between 188cm and 196cm.)

I placed an order that was held up for 10 days waiting for one item.
I ordered the 196 FTX — couple days later requested change to 188 — and couple days later change back to 196 (feeling pretty embarrassed).
Is that enough agonizing?

Too many ways to analyze the length choice.
Sort of came down to wanting it to be an all a rounder, and knowing the 205 Ingstad seemed to work great for me in downhill mode, so thinking 9cm shorted on the FTX should still be good for turns.
But, the tip of the FTX is stiffer and less rockered than the Ingstad, so that’s going to push back on the turns.
But, the FTX has a rounder, more even flex — not as stiff under foot as the Ingstad.
The 23.2m turn radius on the 196 FTX seems geared toward bigger turns?

It should be fun, no matter what…

[lilcliffy]

I climbed a skin track in the shade using just wax that I previously needed full skins because the EZ-skin is not enough grip. I'm shocked. Skis are incredibly light and you can dance kickturns through the trees. Glide faster than S98 with glide wax on tip/tail.

This resonates.
I regulary climb up to 30% grades in very deep snow and on challenging forest floor microtopography- on just grip wax alone.

And not only do I also find the glide "better" (possibly because I would rarely otherwise have the perfect glide wax on)-
I find I can "feel" the snow better on grip wax- I feel like I can actually feel the entire interface between the ski and the snow.
Might sound stupid- but I know my downhill skiing (with BC-XC equipment) is better on grip wax than glide.

I grip wax my scaled touring skis as well.

Turning feels much more single camber and is much more forgiving than S98. 188cm felt great for my 180lbs/6ft at least in open or widely spaced trees. The turning radius is much narrower than S98 of same length.

This is very helpful information! Especially being able to compare with the S98!

Return on this zone is down a skin-highway of a trail that is not that steep but narrow, hard packed, and accumulates moguls and swoopy turns. S98s through here (with leather boots) ski in control mostly but not really fun at all, just a commute to the car. FTX I was able to hold an edge and carve on hardpack, having a blast, hitting little jumps. I didn't know such a thing could be done on leather boots.

Again- wow!

I was still noticeably skiing on the firmer base under the powder, so jury is still out on flotation in deeper snow. Maybe I'll need a Rabb too?!

Do you need to ask? HA!
At the very least do it for me so I can figure out if I "need" the FTX!