S-bound 98 and Nansen vs. Rabb 68

[JB TELE]

I have a pair of S-bound 98s and Nansens. The 98s are great for most consolidated powder conditions but not great on firm snow. I bought the Nansens in an intentionally shorter length as an XCD ski for spring conditions.

I have too many skis. Some how I now have 6 skis. I am definitely not dropping money on new skis this season, but I'm thinking about next season.

Does the Rabb have enough torsional rigidity and stiffness for skiing on firm spring snow? If so, it could potentially replace both my S-bound 98s and Nansens. I'm aware that none of these skis are great on firm, just need something that can get down morning corn before it warms up. And then I could have one wider ski deep powder days. What do you all think?

I'm aware that the Rabb is more downhill oriented than my current options. I wouldn't mind that and I have a TN66 for laying down miles on really mellow terrain.

[fisheater]

@lilcliffy states the Rabb and the Falketind Xplore are pretty comparable both for kick and glide and going downhill.
If that is the case, and I believe it to be true, the Rabb is a better XC ski than the S-98. I know the Falketind is a better XC ski than the S-98. Better downhill too! They just don’t come with scales.

[JohnSKepler]

I have a pair of S-bound 98s and Nansens. The 98s are great for most consolidated powder conditions but not great on firm snow. I bought the Nansens in an intentionally shorter length as an XCD ski for spring conditions.

I have too many skis. Some how I now have 6 skis. I am definitely not dropping money on new skis this season, but I'm thinking about next season.

Does the Rabb have enough torsional rigidity and stiffness for skiing on firm spring snow? If so, it could potentially replace both my S-bound 98s and Nansens. I'm aware that none of these skis are great on firm, just need something that can get down morning corn before it warms up. And then I could have one wider ski deep powder days. What do you all think?

I'm aware that the Rabb is more downhill oriented than my current options. I wouldn't mind that and I have a TN66 for laying down miles on really mellow terrain.

What kind of binding and boots will you be using? I've skied the FT62 with Xplore+Alaska/AlfaFree and with 3-pin+T4. The 3-pin + T4 is a MUCH better downhill weapon than the Xplore, and I have to think this would be doubly so if there was any ice in the equation. At the same time, surprisingly for me, the T4 doesn't tour a whole lot worse than the Xplore. In fact, in deeper softer snow, the T4 tours better.

I'm thinking that a scaled FT62 with T4 is about as close to a one-ski quiver as you're going to get. I know that makes me the Devil, but Hell hasn't frozen over in a long, long time and wax has a low melting point so, I'm sure he uses scales, too.

[lilcliffy]

@JB TELE
Have you tested the Nansen in "firm spring snow conditions"?

I'm not sure if I understand what you mean by "firm" snow- annd by "firm" and "spring" snow, do you mean firm, but not frozen and icy?

What boot have you been using and what boot would you be using with the Rabb 68?

The Rabb 68 skis short on firm snow- it is rockered and tapered- it has a short effective edge. Depending on context, you might find it unstable at speed on "firm" snow...
The Rabb 68 is definitely more torsionally-rigid than the S-Bound 98, if that is helpful.

[lilcliffy]

@lilcliffy states the Rabb and the Falketind Xplore are pretty comparable both for kick and glide and going downhill.
If that is the case, and I believe it to be true, the Rabb is a better XC ski than the S-98. I know the Falketind is a better XC ski than the S-98. Better downhill too! They just don’t come with scales.

My mind-jury is still out on whether the K&G performance is comparable between the Rabb 68 vs Falketind 62X...
I think it is clear in my mind that the FTX 's flex pattern is designed to offer more efficient XC performance than the Rabb- BUT, there are a number variables that can render that moot (eg deep snow; skier weight; ski length).
Also- as a result- don't know that the Rabb 68 is a better XC ski than the S-98...
BUT- yes- the Rabb 68 is a more stable, more capable downhill ski than the S-98- definitely.

[JB TELE]

Typical spring conditions for the mountains in the western united states. Refrozen corn in the morning, warming up to a nice soft corn mid-day, mash potatoes in the afternoon. We typically don't get super icey snow. My s-bound 98s are kind of noodley on refrozen corn.

Skiing on leathers.

I bought my nansens last year but I ended up whitewater boating in the spring instead of skiing. I haven't used them on anything firm yet. Someone on here said they are better than most for firm snow.

My assumption is that the rab has a less pronounced nordic camber and more torsional rigidity. With most backcountry nordic skis, it seems like the springiness that gives them their XC qualities makes them wet noodles on firm snow.

[satanas]

Leather boots + firm or icy snow = fail. There's not enough lateral or torsional stiffness to edge the ski, and even on something like an E99 one gets sore feet fast. With an SB98 there's no hope due to the width, and SB98s IME aren't torsionally stiff enough in very firm conditions even if one uses say a T4.

The major problem here is the boot not the ski IMHO. On ice one needs a stiff boot plus a stiff ski with sharp edges, especially if it's at all steep. If it's not steep and you don't mind going sideways softer boots may be tolerable; YMMV.

[JB TELE]

I never said ice. And everyone seems to have a different idea of what icey snow is. I'm talking about the kind of snow you find in the spring time before the sun has warmed everything up. Similar to what you find at a resort when it hasn't snowed recently. Most people pull out skinnies for spring tours when you don't need much float.

I can edge my k2 shes piste (107/70) in leather boots on groomed or hard packed resort runs and I'm not a great skier. Width is not the only factor. My k2 skis has great torsional rigidity and dampening. In contrast, my s-bound 98s with a similar waist width and skinner tip are wet noodles on firmer snow. The dogma that leather boots must be skied on super skinny skis on packed snow only applies to nordic skis or really old low tech skis.

If the Rabbs have ok torsional rigidity and ok performance on firmer snow then maybe they could eliminate the need to have a skinny (50-60mm) waist with XCD ski in my already too big quiver.

[JB TELE]

I'm not sure if I understand what you mean by "firm" snow- annd by "firm" and "spring" snow, do you mean firm, but not frozen and icy?

I'm talking about multi day trips in the mountainous western united states around late march through early may, when the snowpack has gone isothermal and the top layer has turned into corn. When temps drop below freezing at night and the day time highs are relatively warm with afternoon temps turning snow into breakable slop. Backcountry nordic or low angle backcountry downhill skiing. Would the Rabb be good for that?

[mca80]

So... ice? Seems doubtful.