S-bound 98 and Nansen vs. Rabb 68

[lilcliffy]

I have a pair of outbound 68's as well and I think they turn even better on the hard stuff, as you can muscle the edge up better on the narrower ski. Something to think about if you're faced with only hardback. Maybe just go skinnier!

.......

@JB TELE Forgive me if this has already been asked-
I am wondering why you are not using your Nansen on "firm" snow...

I have a shortish Nansen BC- it is a simply wicked carving ski with a Nordic boot!!!

I have the Rabb 68- it is not tuned for firm snow- it skis very short on firm snow/hardpack- with ample rocker and taper- it is tuned for soft snow.

I would not take my Rabb for downhill-focused skiing on firm snow- I would take my 185 Nansen.

While I don't own a current S-Bound 98- and do not doubt the assertion that the Rabb is more torsionally-rigid than the S-98- I would not assume that the Rabb is a better downhill ski on firm snow...

I suppose if you got the Rabb in a significantly longer length than the S-98- the longer Rabb would have a longer, more stable effective edge...

Regardless- you will have all three to compare now that you have the Rabb-
I personally wouldn't ger rid of any of them until you have the chance to compare them for yourself.
We await your results!

[lilcliffy]

@Arobint
Great video clip BTW- thank you for sharing it!

[Nitram Tocrut]

I know this isn't the early morning spring conditions you're talking about, but I feel the s-bound 98s are so great at turning that it's worth it to struggle through the slightly less ideal conditions when its a little colder to get to this. This is BC-NNN setup with Alpina Alaskas. Apologies for my pasty white legs.

https://youtu.be/FcU3oH6Qsvg

@Arobint dear friend and colleague... you did not give me credit for this video but it's fine .

But seriously, my friend is an awesome skier and he could make any ski loog good even on the harsher conditions . He tried my Rabb once, the first generation, and he stick to his SB and maybe he could share is very short experience with both skis. The same day I shot this video I skied both my green/white FT62 and first generation Rabb. I first tried the Rabb and switched to the FT62. I must mention that the RAbb is 188 and the FT62 196. The FT felt more stable on those conditons for me but my skills are nowhere near those of Arobint even though he is a nice person and he was shouting to me that I was doing good .

Both the Rabb and FT62 are mounted with NNNBC-Alaska.

I almost forgot to mention that I tried my 205 Sverdrup as well with same boots/binding... enough to say that i barely survived the ride

[lilcliffy]

@JB TELE
Did you try out your Rabb yet?

I had my first ski on my new 179 S-Bound 98 today-
very much spring snow conditions here today-
froze hard overnight; warm sublime corn snow this afternoon.

Versus my 180 Rabb 68-
the 179 S98:
- has less rocker in the shovel;
- has an essentially flat tail with no taper;
- has a higher intial camber
- has a similar moderately-stiff round flex (the Rabb has a smoother flex)

The S98 has a significantly longer effective edge and much wider turn radius than the Rabb-
the S98 is more directionally-stable on dense snow.

[peterindc]

Versus my 180 Rabb 68-
the 179 S98:
- has less rocker in the shovel;
- has an essentially flat tail with no taper;
- has a higher intial camber
- has a similar moderately-stiff round flex (the Rabb has a smoother flex)

The S98 has a significantly longer effective edge and much wider turn radius than the Rabb-
the S98 is more directionally-stable on dense snow.

Hi lilcliffy! Been awhile since you helped me pick out gear during the pandemic, thank you very much.

Question about your S-bound 98s: For an athletic person learning to tele in deep heavy snow with a pack on, would you recommend using Alpina Alaska 75 duckbills and a Voile 3-pin Hardwire with this ski? Seems like that might offer greater leverage and control of turns on low- to mid-angle slopes on consolidated snow.

Or stick with NNN-BC, considering there’s a long approach?

Explanation is that the last week of March, pending the weather report, I hope to spend 3-4 days skiing the 31 miles around Crater Lake, Oregon, with my son, 30, who lives out there. He’s an advanced alpine and AT skier who’s tried and liked tele on borrowed equipment. These will be the first XC or tele skis of any kind that he owns. We expect lots of deep consolidated snow, i.e. Sierra cement, with a mix of kick-and-glide on the road; plenty of trail breaking on rolling XCd trails; reaching true xcD in portions where there’s a summit, a high traverse, and a day’s worth of open glades to lap. We’ll be taking our time so speed on trail is not of the essence.

We’ll carry winter camping gear in backpacks most of the way, although we can leave them in camp for the summit and laps portions. He’s 5’8” 145 lbs and fit from rock climbing. With full pack and clothing he’ll reach 180 lbs or so. Considering the steeper parts halfway around and our pack weights, I would likely take my light xcD setup of 180 cm Alpina Cross-Terrains (102-64-87) with Voile Hardwires and Merrill high leather duckbills, vs my XCd setup of 195 cm Asnes Ingstads (84-62-74) with NNN-BC and Alfa low leathers. Considering the overall distance, not thinking plastic boots or Asnes Tindans with SB2.

So — For him, what do you think about Fischer S-98 (98-69-88) in the 179 cm? Or would 169 cm be enough to float him and pack, and shorten the turn radius when he tries to apply his AT skills to tele? Or for this purpose would you recommend instead the Fischer 88 (88-68-78) which I saw you loved awhile back: https://www.telemarktalk.com/viewtopic. ... 455#p27175

And — Alpina Alaska 75 mm with Voile Hardwires? Or would Alpina Alaska BC and Magnum NNN-BC be enough to manage some tele turns in Sierra cement, while being easier to circumnavigate the 31-mile trip? Especially if we downsize him to the 88.

Thanks for reading all that and any light you can cast on this, as I’m about to order him a setup.

Peter

[wabene]

Hey @lilcliffy I'm curious why you went with the shorter length on the SB98? Interesting that you found it more stable on dense snow.

[lilcliffy]

Hello Peter,
Great to hear from you!

Question about your S-bound 98s: For an athletic person learning to tele in deep heavy snow with a pack on, would you recommend using Alpina Alaska 75 duckbills and a Voile 3-pin Hardwire with this ski? Seems like that might offer greater leverage and control of turns on low- to mid-angle slopes on consolidated snow.

Or stick with NNN-BC, considering there’s a long approach?

Well- I think that the hardwire definitely increases leverage; facilitates pressuring the ski; increases stabilty.
This will put a lot of pressure on the 3pin bill of the Alaska 75 though- you may end up with boot failure...

Personally, I think that the Alaska BC is a superb boot for the S-Bound 98- for what this ski is truly tuned for (eg "low to mid-angle slopes").

Certainly, if you want to take the S98 into more extreme terrain and snow conditions- the 75mm binding will allow you to put a modern Telemark boot on that ski.

Explanation is that the last week of March, pending the weather report, I hope to spend 3-4 days skiing the 31 miles around Crater Lake, Oregon, with my son, 30, who lives out there. He’s an advanced alpine and AT skier who’s tried and liked tele on borrowed equipment. These will be the first XC or tele skis of any kind that he owns. We expect lots of deep consolidated snow, i.e. Sierra cement, with a mix of kick-and-glide on the road; plenty of trail breaking on rolling XCd trails; reaching true xcD in portions where there’s a summit, a high traverse, and a day’s worth of open glades to lap. We’ll be taking our time so speed on trail is not of the essence.

I am reluctant to offer any advice here without personal knowledge of the conditions you will be facing...
What is the control point(s)?
At face-value your description points towards a soft BC Nordic Touring boot (eg Alaska)-
but, if the downhill skiing is very challenging- you might want/need a Telemark boot...
........
Sorry! I am probably not much help!
In my regional skiing- truly steep terrain is really only skiable when snow conditions are good (densely forested)-
when the snow is not good- I stick to trail skiing on XC skis. Therefore, I do not need Telemark boots very often.
........
If travelling at speed is not a priority than I would treat your downhill skiing as the control point.

We’ll carry winter camping gear in backpacks most of the way, although we can leave them in camp for the summit and laps portions. He’s 5’8” 145 lbs and fit from rock climbing. With full pack and clothing he’ll reach 180 lbs or so. Considering the steeper parts halfway around and our pack weights, I would likely take my light xcD setup of 180 cm Alpina Cross-Terrains (102-64-87) with Voile Hardwires and Merrill high leather duckbills, vs my XCd setup of 195 cm Asnes Ingstads (84-62-74) with NNN-BC and Alfa low leathers. Considering the overall distance, not thinking plastic boots or Asnes Tindans with SB2.

So — For him, what do you think about Fischer S-98 (98-69-88) in the 179 cm? Or would 169 cm be enough to float him and pack, and shorten the turn radius when he tries to apply his AT skills to tele? Or for this purpose would you recommend instead the Fischer 88 (88-68-78) which I saw you loved awhile back: https://www.telemarktalk.com/viewtopic. ... 455#p27175

And — Alpina Alaska 75 mm with Voile Hardwires? Or would Alpina Alaska BC and Magnum NNN-BC be enough to manage some tele turns in Sierra cement, while being easier to circumnavigate the 31-mile trip? Especially if we downsize him to the 88.

Thanks for reading all that and any light you can cast on this, as I’m about to order him a setup.

The S98 is a fairly cambered ski...Certainly much more cambered than an AT/downhill ski...
While the extra length (179) will greatly improve XC performance- the camber on the longer ski might be a bit of a handful for a non-Nordic skier...What is Fischer's weight recommendation?
The Fischer 88 is even more cambered than the S98...
If dowhill skiing is your control point- I would favor the 98 over the 88...

The hardwire will definitely offer greater stability over NNNBC- especially for an Alpine skier- just not sure if the boot will stand-up...

I don't think that the Alaska boot (75 or BC) is rigid enough to really drive a ski that wide in very difficult snow...
Soft fresh snow/corn- yes-
not personally familiar with Sierra cement...

Hope I am being helpful!

Regardless- you want to both be on equivalent setups- that way you will travel at similar efficiency and tackle terrain together.

Let us know how you make out!

Best,
Gareth

[lilcliffy]

Hey @lilcliffy I'm curious why you went with the shorter length on the SB98? Interesting that you found it more stable on dense snow.

I certainly debated over the 179 vs 189-
but once I was able to confirm the camber and long effective edge of the current model-
I am happy I chose the 179.
This will be a purely indulgent touring-for-turns with Nordic boots spring snow ski.

At an equivalent length- the current S98 has a significantly longer effective edge than the Rabb 68.
It doesn't offer the surfy, smeary, slarvy performance of the Rabb on soft snow-
but, it has a longer effective edge on consolidated snow.
(And the S98 definitely tracks better and is more directionally stable in XC mode than the Rabb.)
The alternative on consolidated snow would be a long Rabb-
I would have to take some measurements though...I don't know that even a 188 Rabb would have as long an effective edge as a 179 S98...Might need a 196 Rabb to get an equivalent edge...

[lilcliffy]

And BTW- my short Nansen is still a better carving ski than either.

The scaled S98 is however simply sublime to tour-for-turns on spring snow and on low-vertical terrain with constant transitions. The grip is excellent- I didn't need skins at all on Saturday (though I would carry them and need them on very icy snow- that we often have here overnight/early morning here in the spring). I definitely don't need a wider ski in theses conditions- and if I chose a wider ski (eg Kom), I would need a proper Telemark boot to drive it- the S98 fits the bill!

[peterindc]

This will put a lot of pressure on the 3pin bill of the Alaska 75 though- you may end up with boot failure...

Personally, I think that the Alaska BC is a superb boot for the S-Bound 98- for what this ski is truly tuned for (eg "low to mid-angle slopes")…

Great advice, thank you Gareth. It makes me want to put him on the Fischer S98 with NNNBC in the 179 cm and take my Asnes Ingstads with NNNBC in the 195 cm. That way we’ll both be doing low-angle hills on the same system and experience greater freedom on the flats.

Plus I checked with him and he said for anything steep in the future, he would probably still take his AT skis, so this is my chance to introduce him to more of a Nordic style anyway.

The Fischer 88 is even more cambered than the S98...
If dowhill skiing is your control point- I would favor the 98 over the 88...

Regardless- you want to both be on equivalent setups- that way you will travel at the similar efficiency and tackle terrain together.

How do you think the S98 would stack up against my Ingstads for such rolling BC tours with turns? I saw what you wrote a few years ago about the Ingstad being much better for downhills than the 88s, but what about the S98s, are they a more even match?

I don't think that the Alaska boot (75 or BC) is rigid enough to really drive a ski that wide in very difficult snow...
Soft fresh snow/corn- yes? Not personally farmiliar with Sierra cement...

“Sierra cement” is deep, consolidated snow with a relatively high moisture content. It falls in warm storms that hit the Sierras and Pacific Northwest, so it doesn’t even start out dry and fluffy. It bakes eventually to corn but meanwhile is just a heavy moist snow that can be skied but makes you work. Short of mashed potatoes but definitely not powder, even when relatively fresh. You can get stuck in it and straight-line when you mean to be turning (sort of like breakable crust in that way, although this is homogenous snow). We may also get rain.

So another question somewhat related: I see four count ‘em four Fischer skins I could buy for the S98s:
50 mm width Easy Skins (650 mm long)
65 mm width Easy Skins (650 mm long)
Long 45 mm width Easy Skins (930 mm long)
Full skins which they call Super Skins

Uses I’d guess would include ice or rainy slop, as well as climbing those mid-angle slopes in slippery skin tracks. Did you get any skins for your S98s, and what are your thoughts about which skins to invest in?

Peter