NNN vs NNN-BC on 50ish waisted XC touring skis

[Woodserson]

What are thoughts on mounting NNN bindings vs NNN-BC bindings on touring skis that are around 50mm in the waist? I have NNN mounted on my Fischer Country Wax/Crowns (52mm) and my wood Holmenkollen(Asnes) Tur Langrenns (48mm). They seem pretty adequate, but that usually means flimsier boots, but I'm not exactly raging down big mountains on these type skis.

Lot of manufacturers show these class skis with BC bindings, but I think the NNN is just as good and slightly more cost competitive, and the boots would have similar uppers but more substantial soles... worth it?

Thoughts? Those with Asnes Mountain Race 48 and Mountain Tour 51's... what are you putting on those?

[lilcliffy]

To me- this is a boot question to start...Do you have a NNN boot that you like for those skis?
If so- then there are pros, and things that just aren't important.

Not important-
With skis that narrow- and gentle terrain- I doubt very much that there would be enough torque involved to worry about the NNN system breaking...I quite firmly believe that the primary reason for the wider plate and burlier construction of NNN-BC is to reduce the chances of breakage. In an alternate example, I don't believe that the "Magnum" base plate provides more leverage than the standard NNN-BC plate- but, I do think the wider plate reduces torsional stress on the binding mechanism. On wider skis- with downhill torsional forces- NNN would break.

Pros-
Lighter than NNN-BC
The "Move" system and NIS is wicked in general for touring. Being able to move the binding for extra grip or glide is wicked.

Cons-
I don't mind auto bindings on the groomed track, but my experience is that they are a menace in the backcountry...

[Cannatonic]

I put Rottefella Super Tele's (3-pin) on my 210cm MT51's....but is that useful advice? I put them on everything

It is a good experience and I'm sure you'd like the feel of your Antarctics while cruising the MT51's. You could shave some weight off the boots with NNNBC, the Super Tele weighs about the same as the NNNBC binding.

I guess it depends what boots you have and which ones you'd like to use with this ski. I actually like the convenience of the auto-NNNBC binding and that would be a good choice if I had some NNNBC boots I could wear.

[bgregoire]

Like Canna, I also enjoy skinnies with a NN (75mm) system. However, I have skinnies with both NN and NNN. I enjoy them both ways for different reasons.

Coming back to NNN though, I put a NNN binding on a 205cm Fischer Country Wax last year. Its my heaviest ski with a NNN binding and I miss the extra control I can muster out of NNN-BC boot/bindings. The setup feels so heavy (relatively to a normal track setup) that I would recommend setting a ski like that up with NNN-BC even if using it on track...

(On another note, I had I nice pair of Head med width wood skis (so relatively heavy) with the basic flimsy 3-pin binding and Alfa Vulc boots. I had a blast on them until I broke a binding in soft snow. I swapped for NNN-BC/Fischer BCX6 and found I had less control of the ski that way. When I get around to it, I am going back to 3-pins on those!)

But then again, it all comes down to personal preference. The good news is that NNN-BC and NNN share the same mounting holes, so you can swap easily if you don't like...

[Cannatonic]

so ye olde 75mm 3-pin is considered "NN" for Nordic Norm? And NNN is "new nordic norm"? I'm glad we cleared that up! never understood the nomenclature before...

[Leo Tasker]

I have Turnamic NNN bindings on my Rossignol skis which are 65-52-61 and have 3/4 steel edges, so not that dissimilar to the Mountain Race skis (albeit shorter and with fishscales). They are ok for light stuff, but the few times I've used them in the mountains (icy traverses, longer downhills) I have felt a bit undergunned due to the the boot and binding combo. The problem with NNN as opposed to NNN-BC is that to get the best lateral control, the heel needs to be against the ski so it locks into the ridges on the binding. NNN-BC on the other hand seems to rely more on the wider, thicker toe bar and stiffer boot sole to achieve the same thing. Track boots certain feel lighter and more zippy than BC boots so for flatter, faster skiing might be a better choice.

I did consider changing the bindings and getting new BC boots but in the end kept the as they are and got a set of Gammes, so now there's a bit of overlap in my quiver.

[Woodserson]

This is more of a thought exercise than anything else, I was reviewing the fleet and usually when I see these 50ish light BC skis they have a NNN-BC binding on them (really this is manufacturer pictures-- trying to upsell?), but I've been getting by for years with just NNN. I'm thinking of a trip maybe this winter or next that probably won't happen, but if it did, it would be on a light-BC class ski like my Fischer BC Country Crown or my Asnes/Holmenkollen woodies, which are all NNN. The trip would be largely track skiing with forays on connecting roads or trails, so a track specific ski wouldn't cut it. I'd want a burlier ski but would I want a burlier boot too? Probably not, I'm thinking, but I wanted to tap into the vast experience we have here.

Asnes recommends either (BC or NNN touring) on the Mountain Tour 51, and they don't give recommendations for the Mountain Race 48 for instance, so I think they assume we are smart enough to put on NNN due to waist size. The Sondre and Gamme and other 52mm+ skis are listed as BC.

Coming back to NNN though, I put a NNN binding on a 205cm Fischer Country Wax last year. Its my heaviest ski with a NNN binding and I miss the extra control I can muster out of NNN-BC boot/bindings. The setup feels so heavy (relatively to a normal track setup) that I would recommend setting a ski like that up with NNN-BC even if using it on track...

This is interesting, I'm on a 205 Fischer Country Crown (and wax but use them less) and I run the NNN on them and they are lightest ever- to me- that being said I've never owned a dedicated set of track skis, all my track skis have been in this lighter BC category and I use them as track skis and then go ballsing off onto a snowmobile track with them. So I guess it's what you know and don't know.

I have Turnamic NNN bindings on my Rossignol skis which are 65-52-61 and have 3/4 steel edges, so not that dissimilar to the Mountain Race skis (albeit shorter and with fishscales). They are ok for light stuff, but the few times I've used them in the mountains (icy traverses, longer downhills) I have felt a bit undergunned due to the the boot and binding combo. The problem with NNN as opposed to NNN-BC is that to get the best lateral control, the heel needs to be against the ski so it locks into the ridges on the binding. ... Track boots certain feel lighter and more zippy than BC boots so for flatter, faster skiing might be a better choice.

Yes, this is has been my experience as well. I guess I don't want to lose the "zippy" feeling of my lighter boots and just charging along. The Alaska is too much for a ski like this, and if I went and put BC on everything then I'll want a lower cuffed BC boot, like the Outlander and then I'm drowning in boots again. It's a good point about the heel needing to be locked in the pad with NNN, the BC doesn't require this nor does the heel pad come with lock-grooves.

Not important-
With skis that narrow- and gentle terrain- I doubt very much that there would be enough torque involved to worry about the NNN system breaking...I quite firmly believe that the primary reason for the wider plate and burlier construction of NNN-BC is to reduce the chances of breakage. In an alternate example, I don't believe that the "Magnum" base plate provides more leverage than the standard NNN-BC plate- but, I do think the wider plate reduces torsional stress on the binding mechanism. On wider skis- with downhill torsional forces- NNN would break.

Pros-
Lighter than NNN-BC
The "Move" system and NIS is wicked in general for touring. Being able to move the binding for extra grip or glide is wicked.

Cons-
I don't mind auto bindings on the groomed track, but my experience is that they are a menace in the backcountry...

I have yet to break my NNN bindings bombing down snowmobile hills with the required wrecks, but I don't know if I've been lucky or the stuff is more resilient than we think. I wouldn't be taking a NNN setup on a long mileage backcountry tour, my skiing is more oriented towards track skiing and then shorter periods of hiking trails or snowmobile trails back to track skiing.

Interesting thoughts in the Move System, another out of sight out of mind thing. I should look at these more, they might be just the ticket on a wax ski like the Country Wax.

[NordicWilly]

Greetings all. First post here after lurking for the last 2 years. Reviving this thread from last year rather than starting a new one.

I have been thinking the same about mounting NNN-BC on 50-ish waist for A mix of track and off-track, but have question. Does the wider NNN-BC binding binding and boot sole drag on the edges of the tracks? Maybe its a more a question of whether the tracks are machine made (i.e., wider) or set by another skier (narrower)?

Also, what is the maximum shovel width for tracks, especially on curved areas? I had read 62, but can’t find the thread.

[Woodserson]

Greetings all. First post here after lurking for the last 2 years. Reviving this thread from last year rather than starting a new one.

I have been thinking the same about mounting NNN-BC on 50-ish waist for A mix of track and off-track, but have question. Does the wider NNN-BC binding binding and boot sole drag on the edges of the tracks? Maybe its a more a question of whether the tracks are machine made (i.e., wider) or set by another skier (narrower)?

Also, what is the maximum shovel width for tracks, especially on curved areas? I had read 62, but can’t find the thread.

Hey! Welcome

In my experience, no, there is no extra drag, they are skinnier than your footprint is, so if anything is dragging it's your foot, which will drag regardless of binding. I ski in tracks with NNN-BC routinely, no problems.

SKI WISE: I have found that 66mm is the largest acceptable shovel width that usually works, sometimes doesn't. Keep in mind local track variations due to equipment, snow type, frequency of skier passes, etc. 60mm is no problem what-so-ever.

AS FAR AS THIS THREAD IS CONCERNED
I am now thinking: NNN only for a ski that I would be at least 60/40 (track/BC.) If going BC for the day pair with a NNN combi boot for ankle stiffness. Thanks to altabackcountry for this tip, this is what they run on their Mountain Race 48's. Light but with a bit more support.

[NordicWilly]

Many thanks for the follow up. That is good tip on the combi boots. It makes sense that the increased ankle support would provide more control. My skate boots crush my classic ones for lateral control.

For that same 60/40 split on-track / off-track split, how would combi boot/NNN stack up against NNN-BC with higher quality boot like Alfa Guard?