Ski recommendations for a pulk hauling heavy Finn

[V-Taper]

Hello from Finland! Just found this gem of a forum. I'm a newbie on what comes to backcountry skiing outside groomed tracks. I only have a couple of 3 - 4 day trips with old and heavy (210 cm long / 70 mm wide) waxless Karhu "army skis" under my belt. Now we are planning a 5 - 6 day backcountry trip to the fjells of northernmost Finland. It will be a hilly treeless landscape. We are expecting mostly windswept packed snow, but conditions may change quickly there. I'm going to drag a pulk weighing about 70 lbs. I'm a stocky guy at 5'10" / 240 lbs.

Could you help me to choose most optimal equipment? I'm planning to purchase Alpina Alaska BC boots, Rottafella NNN BC bindings and Åsnes Nansen 2-part poles. For the skis I have several options, with limited length choices:

1) Åsnes Gamme 54 @ 210 cm
2) Åsnes Ingstad @ 195 cm
3) Åsnes Nansen @ 195 cm
4) Åsnes Amundsen Fram Waxless @ 201 or 208 cm

My ski dealer recommended Ingstad for added flotation and better handling (shorter ski) on downhills. But what I gather from this forum is that for touring trips (especially with sled) longer and skinnier skis (i.e. Gamme or Amundsen) would be better. Right now I'm leaning towards Gammes and I guess the 210 cm length would be a good fit for me. What do you think?

[lilcliffy]

@V-Taper
Hello from Canada and Welcome!!!

Sounds like a VERY exciting trip to the fjells of Northern Finland!! WISH I could join you!

Question #1:
The ski dealer that has recommended the Ingstad- do they have intimate experience with the specific skiing conditions of your planned trip?

I ask this because when you say "fjells" I am wondering how steep it is...
If it is steep enough- perhaps they feel the trade-off in XC efficiency is worth the extra stability and ease of turning of the Ingstad over skis like the Gamme and the Amundsen?

Question #2:
Is there any way you can get your hands on a 205cm Ingstad? With you personal weight and gear, you are really going to want the 205cm Ingstad over the 195cm.

You are expecting "mostly windswept packed snow"-
These are not the conditions that the Ingstad excell in as a XC ski...
The Ingstad BC has:
- significant tip rocker- making its XC glide zone quite short on consolidated snow.
- low-profile camber underfoot- offering a very shallow "kick" and wax pocket on consolidated snow.
- has significant sidecut- which- coupled with the tip rocker- reduce tracking efficiency (while facilitating turning)

Another note- the significant tip rocker of the Ingstad perfoms poorly in breakable crust and wind-swept, but not compacted snow. In these conditions the tip rides on top of the crust/snow and you end up braking trail with the mid-section of the ski- YUCK!

The Ingstad BC is my favorite XC ski- but it is finely tuned for deep snow and steep terrain- it is not the the XC ski that I use the most.

The Gamme 54 is the XC ski I use the most in my local backcountry skiing because it performs well in all snow conditions and it is very manageale in hilly terrain.

Back to the Ingstad BC-
The Ingstad's shovel is remarkably stable-
If you KNEW you were going to be on soft snow the entire tour- the Ingstad BC would be fantastic.

But- if you are expecting a lot of "windswept, compacted snow" and hilly terrain, my intital recommendation would be the 210cm Gamme 54...

As you are going to the "fjells" I would think the Gamme 54 would be more manageable than the Amundsen...

The other ski in your list to consider would be the Nansen-
I have no experience with the Nansen, but with no tip rocker I suspect it is a more efficient XC ski than the Ingstad BC on consolidated snow...
@Roelant has taken some recent photos of the Nansen- showing its rounder flex- clearly illustrating that it is easier to turn than the Gamme 54.
If that hilly terrain is going to be real challenge- perhaps the Nansen would be a better pick than the Gamme 54...
The Nansen- by all reports- does not offer the stability and XC efficiency of skis like the Gamme 54 and the Amundesn

Hope I am helping you!
Gareth

[Musk Ox]

Hi Taper!

I have both Nansens and Gammes, and I ski in terrain not a million miles away from arctic Finland (well, literally, Finland is about 90 minutes drive away).

I'd prefer the Gammes if I were to be skiing long distances with a pulk where I suspect you will be, I think. They're noticeably more efficient. And I love my Nansens.

If those are the only choices you have, I would definitely buy the Gammes because I suspect at your weight, with a pulk, the Nansens at 195 might be a little too short. The Gammes are very nimble.

[Crayefish]

I asked a very similar question a few weeks ago (I'm also a heavy chap and have a heavy pulk).

General consensus was that the Amundsen was the most efficient for distance, but the Gamme was a better all rounder for variable conditions and terrain, and (importantly) a lot more fun!

Based on the replies of the help and knowledge chaps here, and a lot of research elsewhere, I'm definitely going for the longest model of Gammes! Job done.

Only issue is the mop of curly hair staring at you all day...

[Musk Ox]

Only issue is the mop of curly hair staring at you all day...

Ah, you'll hardly see him under all that snow.

[V-Taper]

Many thanks for your insights!

@lilcliffy:
Q1: I had the impression that the ski dealer didn't have very much experience on backcountry skiing. In Finland, skiing is mostly done on groomed tracks I guess. He did emphasize wider ski for flotation on snow, especially for heavier skier. But information here suggests that wider ski greatly reduces XC efficiency. And on soft snow conditions all XC skis sink, right? On our trip we will mostly stay off the summits. My more experienced friends advised to emphasize XC efficiency over downhill capabilities.

Q2: Above mentioned models and lengths are the only that are available here right now. It seems that the pandemic has greatly increased the demand for outdoor gear in Scandinavia. I did make a reservation on 210 cm Gamme. If the downhill capability was more important, do you think "too short" 195 cm Ingstad would be preferable over 210 cm Gamme? Or is matching skier weight to ski length top priority?

@Musk Ox:
Thanks for the local arctic input! We will be skiing in Kilpisjärvi area. I also do think that "correct" length Gamme is preferable over Nansen.

@Crayefish:
I just looked up and read that thread. Very helpful indeed. It took me a while to understand curly hair joke though I think I'd prefer the grim gaze of Amundsen for motivation, if that was a deciding factor

[Musk Ox]

Thanks for the local arctic input! We will be skiing in Kilpisjärvi area.

I did guess as much from your mention of 'mountains'! We've skied in around Kilpisjärvi a few times. There's a big shop in the 'town' where you can buy booze at EU prices, which makes it a popular place for people who live in Norway. But it's a really beautiful place for non-booze-related reasons.

The Gammes do make more sense the more I think about it. You'll want to use your new skis for your local terrain after your trip to the hills, and for Finland's frozen marshes, lakes and glacial flats, the Gammes may perhaps offer the greater pleasure.

[CwmRaider]

Hi neighbour from another country,
I am the same weight as you, and own the Åsnes Nansen in 205cm and a Combat Nato in 210 (and a FT62 which we wont talk about here, it is off topic for this kind of skiing).
The topography in Kilpisjärvi looks la lot like the Sylan massif which I toured several times.
Based on the assumption that you will not be doing summit tours with a loaded pulk. With a pulk, you will probably not be linking telemark turns anyway, and the most important factors are good traction and some control.

My short recommendation is in line with what the others already recommended:
Gamme 210 cm.
And remember to get some climbing skins! Mohair gives better glide. I hope experienced pulkers @bgregoire can chime in for this, but instinctively If I were to take only one, it would be Mohair 45mm for with a pulk. As a second option a full length skin when the snow gets deep. and as a third, a 30mm mohair to have the best glide.

To elaborate between the choices you were given, unfortunately the waxless pattern for the Amundsen is probably a bit on the short side for good traction, especially with a pulk. So you would be skiing with skins on to have grip, and then the waxless pattern is kind of a "useless accessory". A waxable Amundsen may have been a good alternative, perhaps a tad more efficient than the Gamme, but more tricky to steer on the way down. But as this is not a choice, the Gamme in 210cm is a better alternative.

The Ingstad and the Nansen would certainly work too. However 195cm is a a bit short for you, the 205cm would be better. Either of these choices would be better steering than the Gamme at the cost of some efficiency. These skis are quite different.
The Nansen has quite a stiff single camber which bends into an arc making it easier to turn, and its efficiency is OK for longer tours especially if the snow is not too loose. The single camber makes it easier to pressure the kick zone so it climbs easily too.
The Ingstad (which I have never tried in its current version) has a lot of rocker making the glide zone short, and it makes the ski easier to turn especially on loose snow, however on hard snow it will not track very straight.
Furthermore if you are skiing in someone else's tracks occasionally the narrower skis will help you follow the rails

Another good option may have been a Combat Nato in 210 cm. It is wider than the Gamme, with more sidecut but no rocker, and it has a weak double camber so its climbing abilities are probably between a Gamme and a Nansen. It's main downside is that it is 200g heavier per ski than the other options presented here. But it seems to me to be more directional than the Nansen.

In your place, making a decision for my first pair, with the knowledge I have of the skis, the Gamme would be the natural choice. Plus it would be awesome for any other ski trips in Finland as well.

[bgregoire]

And remember to get some climbing skins! Mohair gives better glide. I hope experienced pulkers @bgregoire can chime in for this, but instinctively If I were to take only one, it would be Mohair 45mm for with a pulk. As a second option a full length skin when the snow gets deep. and as a third, a 30mm mohair to have the best glide.

Yup, thats a very good plan. Don't know if I would go all the way to the third option though. I admit a like it when it glides so I'm not a skin type of guy. But with a pulk, its kindoff a no brainer, they are required. And the halfskin clips make it so much more enjoyable.

[lilcliffy]

My experience is that Asnes' recommendations are sound for kicker skins:
- one narrow mohair (I.e. 35mm mohair on Gamme 54/Amundsen)
- one wide nylon (45mm nylon on Gamme 54/Amundsen)

You'd be surprised how much grip a wide nylon kicker skin will offer- while still offering better glide than a full-length climbing skin.

If you have both above you would not need a full-length skin unless you had to climb something extremely steep.

That being said I would take all three for a multi-day trek in the mountains...