XC(D?) skis for a big man

[Areyoutele]

Hi guys.

This is my first post, but I’m simply having a hard time condensing all the great information from here into the choice I need to make. So I registered, and this is what followed.

Last year, I used alot of the extensive research from this here forum to find some new 75mm boots, and landed on the Alpina Alaska. Best buy I’ve done in a long time. This time around, I’m looking for some XC(D?) skis. After reading through unlimited posts, discussions and reviews, I ended up feeling even more indecisive and confused.

As of now, I’ve had the Gamme (dark green version) 205cm with Voile 3p for 6-7 years and FT20/21 (white and green one) 190cm with Rottefella ST cable for 2 years. No need to get into the characteristics of these two, they are both superb in their own way and I love them both, but the Gamme is far and away from how and what I want to ski and the FT is basically useless without that 20cm powder on hardpack for me.

As per the title, I’m a heavy skier, 187cm height and 100kg w/o gear weight. Not a great teleskier by any measure, but I’m obsessed with making turns, which is basically why I fjellski. Sadly, I do not manage to prioritise skiing often enough. I rarely do long outings, and mainly go from the car to a the cabin, and (try to) tour for turns with max 5-10km trips from the aforementioned base. With a 1,5yo now on slep, the pulk has become a vital part of the experience.

I need a ski to handle my height, weight, be easy to turn but stable in extremely(!) varying snow conditions (spring skiing in South Western Norway is not powder heaven where I go), and can handle snowmobile tracking and some groomed tracks. Say 40/40/20 downhill, trailbreaking and rolling, ungroomed, terrain with a lot of snowmobile tracks, respectively. For setup, I’ve got another pair of Rottefella ST cable, my Alpina Alaskas and a pair of T4s for XCD (if that is within?). Now I’m missing the, eh, missing link.

My struggle has cooked down to deciding between the Nansen and the Otto Sverdrup. From what I think I’ve learned, the Nansen is great for turns, is forgiving and can handle a lot of different conditions. Enter O Sverdrup with its same measures as the Nansen, with the increased XC part on top. But mostly on optimal conditions. Almost like a mix of the two I already possess? Suddenly, I learn that both the Ingstad and Combat Nato is the choice. But wait, theres more! A Fischer and a Madshus just found their way into the discussion. Not to mention the FTX, Rabb or even Nosi. Whelp, overwhelmed and no closer to my true path. And I haven’t even started on what length. Longer for the weight of the skier and stability or shorter for easier turns? I think between 185-200, but, yeah.

So there it is dear fellow community members. I hope this post can draw some dugnad feelings to get me on the right track. My hopes and dreams are just to hopefully get some more insight, better clarity and maybe even concrete input.

If you got through all this, I must thank you for taking the time. I wish you a great day onward.

Kind Regards

TLDR:
187cm / 6,14ft, 100kg / 220,5lbs skier looking for the stable ski to turn and tour varying snow, also with some pulk. Alpina Alaska (and T4 for XCD) with Rottefella ST cable setup. Is it just Nansen vs. Otto Sverdrup, and what length?

[Jurassien]

Have you thought of renting? There are lots of private owners in Norway who rent out their skis when not in use, for example on hygglo.no. This link is for Oslo region, but I think you can change the settings to your local region: https://www.hygglo.no/category/9286-fjellski/oslo

All of the models which you mentioned above, especially Nansen and Ingstad, are well-known in Norway, as are all three mentioned manufacturers, so it shouldn’t be too difficult to find examples with 75mm to rent.

200 kr/dag is a very modest outlay compared to the price of a new ski-set, and actually trying out the skis you are interested in on snow would be a very good way to overcome your indecision.

[Stephen]

“Dugnard.”
Wonderful concept, and sadly lacking in the US.

@Jurassien’s advice seems wise, but with your limited outings, could take some time to solve the equation you are working on.
You didn’t make it clear if you have a preference for wax or no-wax skis?
For fresh snow, you are happy with the FT you have, so a ski that does well on firmer snow might be the way to go?
And maybe wider and shorter than the FT, to still provide support (width), but turn more easily (shorter length)?
And, you want good turning characteristics, but still need a ski stiff enough to support your weight?

There are several outcomes and only you will know if the final outcome matches your hopes.
Hopefully others will chime in with ideas that help you narrow it down.

Good luck on your search!

[Charlynor]

Hei,
Åsnes Nosi with T4 would be a great combo or a 188 Rabb maybe.

https://www.finn.no/339250044

[Areyoutele]

Hei,
Åsnes Nosi with T4 would be a great combo or a 188 Rabb maybe.

https://www.finn.no/339250044

My main boot is the Alpina Alaska, but a ski with 65mm+ width is not a bad suggestion. The Rabb 188 is something I’ve considered, but I’m a bit skeptical because of my inaptness with FT20/21 in anything except ideal conditions (10-15cm styresnø). It just feels to light and extremely unstable, and I can’t catch an edge with it.

Next year I’m definitly after a shorter XCD ski with more width to be used mainly with the T4s

[Areyoutele]

Have you thought of renting? There are lots of private owners in Norway who rent out their skis when not in use, for example on hygglo.no. This link is for Oslo region, but I think you can change the settings to your local region: https://www.hygglo.no/category/9286-fjellski/oslo

All of the models which you mentioned above, especially Nansen and Ingstad, are well-known in Norway, as are all three mentioned manufacturers, so it shouldn’t be too difficult to find examples with 75mm to rent.

200 kr/dag is a very modest outlay compared to the price of a new ski-set, and actually trying out the skis you are interested in on snow would be a very good way to overcome your indecision.

Hi, thank you for your reply. As @Stephen points out, the low frequency of my outings (basically 1-2 trips + one week of Easter break) sets the bar of rent to test a little bit to high for me. I’m also (per my SO) very stubborn, so if I manage to decide on a pair, I would aggressively force myself to enjoy them. I know this sounds a bit weird, but I think would be very content with any significant upgrade. I’m mainly trying to make sure my eventual choice will be the most optimal pick i could’ve chosen. I suffer a lot from GAS and buyers remorse, and I invest a lot of time and energy in pre-buying research

[Areyoutele]

“Dugnard.”
Wonderful concept, and sadly lacking in the US.

You didn’t make it clear if you have a preference for wax or no-wax skis?
For fresh snow, you are happy with the FT you have, so a ski that does well on firmer snow might be the way to go?
And maybe wider and shorter than the FT, to still provide support (width), but turn more easily (shorter length)?
And, you want good turning characteristics, but still need a ski stiff enough to support your weight?

Good luck on your search!

No preference, but I mainly use skins (I have many Åsnes skins), and love the grip and it helps slow down my speed in steep descents. It honestly does not matter, as I dont think either will impact my preferred usage.

I’m happy with the FTs for «styresnø» of 10-15 fresh snow og slushy spring snow where Im not so reliant on putting it on edge. Though I mainly keep them out of affection (first birthday gift from my SO), as the aforementioned conditions are pretty rare where I ski.

The Gamme is great; stable with a good edge with which I always maintain control but I only manage a teleturn on 1/100.

Lengthy enough for stability for my weight and height but still short enough for tighter turns with more width than Gamme. Both the Nansen and OSverdrup reads like a perfect fit, but the description of OSverdrup being reliant on better conditions and the Nansen being to soft, gets me confused

Thank you!

[Nitram Tocrut]

@Areyoutele It feels like this is the kind of question I asked myself a couple of years ago and I kind of gave up on chasing that elusive skis. Sorry if I kind of burst your bubble I am just about the same height and weight as you and I have many Asnes skis so I think i can be of some help... I have both the old versions of the FT and the Raab and I would not pursue the way of the Raab or the Nosi if you want a ski that will be used on snowmobile track or any hardened snow. Those skis are not made for that... I could live with that if the trails lead to a perfect spot for those skis... but if you follow a snowmobile trail to a soft spot for those skis chances are good the snowmobile made a mess of the powder

I have the Ingstad in both 195 and 205 and I still love those skis although i don't use them as much since I bought the Sverdrup. We don't get as much snow as I would like where I live so I use the Sverdrup most of the time as I find them more efficient for K&G then the Ingstad and they are a joy to turn with in the proper conditions. They are supposed to be even more easier to turn then the Nansen and sure are easier then the Ingstad. But same story for the snow conditions... I don't push the Sverdrup for downhill if there is not a good layer of soft snow on a good base.

Through the years I also tried different skis like the Voile Objective that would be great if they were available in around 184 cm like the Voile HyperVector that i also have. I sold the Objective as they felt too short for a guy my size and weight and the HyperVector are really fun ... when the snow is good and I can use them in steeper hill then the Raab or FT but that happens 1-2 times a season. But those are fat and slow skis... Finally, I got my hand on an old pair of Karhu XCD Guide for a really good price and I am glad I did not pay too much because, once again, they need really good conditions to perform well dh. But the fact that they have scales make them a good addition to my quiver for those days when it's warm and I don't want to use skins on my Asnes skis or when I need a "rock" skis.

Sorry for not being really helpful in your quest of the elusive ski, but if I can suggest something, I would say you should aim for a ski that offers good performance in deeper snow. The Sverdrup are not the best and I don't know the Nansen. When the snow is deeper I use my Ingstad but if I had to do it again I would get the Combat as all reports from TTalk skiers are unanimous about its quality in deep snow for trail breaking and they must excel at pulling a pulk.

That was a pretty extensive reply... I hope you get something good out of it

[RabbitEars]

I'm a big guy myself. The skis that have become my go to:
Asnes Rabb 68 for powder conditions. I find it a little hard to control on consolidated snow or icy conditions.
Asnes Ingstad was a ski that I grew to like. At first I found it hard to control because I was too heavy for it even at the longest length. I tried unsuccessfully to sale it fortunately because after finding the conditions where it worked for me it's probably my favorite ski and the first ski that I was able to link up my tele turns. I find it works best when there is some soft snow on top of a more consolidated base. To much powder and unconsolidated snow it tends to bow under me.
My absolute favorite is the Asnes Kongsvold. For me it's great for kicking and gliding and pretty easy to turn. Under the right conditions or technique it's possible to do parallel turns. With no metal edge probably wouldn't be great when it gets icy.

Lucky for you being in Norway you can probably easily find any of these.

Best of luck

[Nitram Tocrut]

My absolute favorite is the Asnes Kongsvold. For me it's great for kicking and gliding and pretty easy to turn. Under the right conditions or technique it's possible to do parallel turns. With no metal edge probably wouldn't be great when it gets icy.

@RabbitEars Interesting take on the Kongsvold that I have been lurking for a while... I suspect you have the 200 cm? How do they compare for K&G with the Ingstad? Are they more directional then the Rabb on consolidated snow? Are they stiffer then the Ingstad so that they are less prone to bend in deeper snow?

I almost wish you come up with answers that will not tempt me into buying a pair of Kongsvold