Asnes vs Fischer Waxless

[faizanmazhar00]

Hi All, I have a couple pairs of Asnes wax skis but still find an occasional need for waxless. My current Fischer traverse 78 waxless are just not as grippy as they used to be and I find myself having to use the kicker skins for even modest climbing. There's currently a pair of Asnes Cecile waxless in 170 (I'm 5ft3 108 lbs) I've been eyeing vs another fisher pair. I already have Asnes skins as well.

What are you thoughts on Asnes waxless vs another pair of Fischer waxless? If the anser is Asnes I need to grab them soon as they don't stay available for long in the US.

Thx!

Does anyone know the performance difference between the Asnes Cecile and the Asnes Ingstad? of course. Asking as I saw the Ingstad available in a 165; the Cecile's are available in 170. I'd assume the "womens" Cecile is maybe softer or tuned for lighter skiers. Not sure if that is the case.

[riel]

Does anyone know the performance difference between the Asnes Cecile and the Asnes Ingstad? of course. Asking as I saw the Ingstad available in a 165; the Cecile's are available in 170. I'd assume the "womens" Cecile is maybe softer or tuned for lighter skiers. Not sure if that is the case.

The Nansen/Cecilie is faster on hard packed snow, while the Ingstad/Tonje is more stable and easier to turn in deep fresh snow.

When you are dealing with snow conditions of a handful of inches of fresh snow on top of old snow, it really doesn't matter much which of the two you take. The two have considerable overlap in their capabilities.

If you already have a narrower ski like the Amundsen/Liv or Gamme, the Ingstad/Tonje has less overlap with that, and gives you a few capabilities the Nansen/Cecilie does not.

If you do not have something like Amundsen/Liv or Gamme, the Nansen/Cecilie is a fantastic "90% of the time ski" that covers most of what the Ingstad/Tonje does, and also most of what the Amundsen/Liv or Gamme do.