Extreme range two ski quiver.

[Olaf]

I am thinking about making an extreme range two ski quiver to simplify travels. The skis I have chosen are the Åsnes Mountain Race 48 and the Falketind 62. I have the boots already, some Rossignol X5 boots for NNN and the leather Merrell Telemark boots with Velcro laces and plastic Scarpa T3 for three pin 75mm NN. I would like to not have to buy a pair of NNN BC boots.

I would like to ski the Mountain Race 48 skis on groomed tracks and untracked trails covered with fresh snow. I would ski the Falketind 62 skis on climbs up steeper logging roads to ski back down on the road or off through clear cuts and treed slopes. I would like to ski occasionally at lift serviced areas to practice my Telemark turns.

Is there too big of gap in the middle of this quiver?

[CwmRaider]

It seems you are aware of what these skis are good for, so as long as you're not going to regularly Traverse 25 km off track in the wilderness it would be OK. Even so, either of these skis may manage that just fine depending on snow conditions.
Do you have track xc skis in addition?

If you only have an axe and a scalpel, if you need to cut a slice of salami, either will work. But a Swiss army knife would be the best alternative.
Swiss army knife skis are Gamme, Nansen, Combat Nato, E99 etc. Such a ski is a must have for me and if I were to have to chose just one pair for the full spectrum of skiing I do it would probably be one of these. I also cannot imagine doing altogether without one regardless of the number of skis I would own.

As I also own track skis i don't believe I would have a use for an MR48 with NNN. But perhaps I underestimate it's capabilities... this is probably one of those YMMV things.

[Olaf]

I do not have a track ski and plan to ski mostly off track on ungroomed trail but would like to ski on groomed tracks when they are available. I think the Gamme and Ousland are overkill for the short trips day that I plan so I am going with the lighter and narrower Mountain Race 48. If I was planing overnight trips with a pack or pulk the Gamme and Ousland would be ideal.

[Olaf]

I my current track ski is the Rossignol LST BC with Rossi X5 NNN boots. I would like a wax ski with edges to ski mostly off track on ungroomed trail but would like to ski on groomed tracks when they are available. I think the Gamme and Ousland are overkill for the short trips day that I plan so I am going with the lighter and narrower Mountain Race 48. If I was planing overnight trips with a pack or pulk the Gamme and Ousland would be ideal.

[Musk Ox]

Having owned and loved the MR48, and now very vaguely considering something more downhilly at some point, I think it's not a bad plan, to be honest (maybe I'd have kept my MR48s if they were 200cm and we hadn't basically abandoned groomed trails altogether...)

While the MR48 is no fjellski, it is emphatically backcountry-adjacent, at 210cm they're used on polar expeditions and they're really OK in deeper snow (well, it's not for hunting ptarmigans out of season, put it that way, they definitely like their deeper snow on the heavier side and I wouldn't exactly go into the wilderness on them, but they're genuinely enjoyable). The MR48 is hilariously fun on broken trail, they absolutely fly on the hard stuff. They're so much fun.

MR48 has limits in that it's extremely useless climbing up anything other than the firmest snow, not much fun on difficult crust, and it's almost as unforgiving as a track ski when you're coming downhill on anything other than perfect conditions (I exaggerate, but you really have to be on your toes/ not afraid of death). Which is where the FT62 comes in!

The caveat is that the 'extremes' are kind of theoretical... it's just different uses... if you use those skis for the purposes you intend, and absolutely no other, then those are good extremes to cover. Is the 'gap' you're talking about a straight-tracking, efficient, cross country ski for Crushing Miles™ where no man or woman has set mohair? If that's something you might want to do, I'd refer you to Roelant's post... the few (short) times I've been out on groomed trail on my Swiss army knife Gammes have been very pleasurable, I have to say.

[wabene]

Olaf
I have the Madshus M50 with the integrated skin which is right between the MR48 and the MT51. I do have thinner waxable touring skis, but I have found myself grabbing the M50's when I hit the tracks because of the ease of the integrated skins and how well they handle any condition (plus newer ski fever). I have been checking out many new trail systems and having a stoutly built wood core ski with metal edges makes coming across icey, steep, rutted sections more fun with the confidence I have in these skis. These are fast and fun skis. For the binding the skis came with NIS plates so manual NNN's it is. This is good with the skins because I have seven positions for the binding fore and aft which is what makes the integrated skin work in any condition as I dial in the grip/glide. BC bindings would be great so I could ski these in my Crispi Norland Hook leathers, but only if they made this binding slide fore and aft or a NNN boot in leather with the torsional rigidity in the sole of my Crispi's, of course if the little NNN bar could handle it. When you hit untracked trails this works well too. Very versatile.
Your downhill setup sounds good as well since it sounds like you won't be touring miles to get to your hills.

[bwm8142]

If you only have an axe and a scalpel, if you need to cut a slice of salami, either will work. But a Swiss army knife would be the best alternative.
Swiss army knife skis are Gamme, Nansen, Combat Nato, E99 etc. Such a ski is a must have for me and if I were to have to chose just one pair for the full spectrum of skiing I do it would probably be one of these.

I like this analogy for this situation - really illustrates the functions of the different tools we use to access the backcountry. If I were in your situation I would try and find a happy medium rather than the two extremes. I usually come across many areas during a tour that I am happy to have some XC efficiency, as well as the ability to get down a hill without having to survival ski.
All arounder skis are a blast and you don't have to scratch your head on what to take out with you depending on terrain, you simply load up and go ski. Your area may be more extreme than mine though, and the more downhill oriented ski may be necessary than what I require to navigate.

[Olaf]

Considering the feedback so far I have reconsidered my selection of my fjellski from the Falketind to the Åsnes Ingstad BC. It is good for untracked deep snow and is good turning on descents. It should have good glide on the flat stretches or my tours. Most of my steep and deep powder skiing will be done in the side country of lift serviced resorts with regular downhill boot and my Rossignol Soul 7 downhill skis.

[Stephen]

For what you’re suggesting, I have been very happy with Ingstad 205cm for me at 6’3” and 190# with a pack.

[Olaf]

I am 5’ 7”(170 cm) tall and weigh 210 lbs(95 kg). The Åsnes sizing cart for the Ingstad suggests a 185cm for my height and a 205cm for my weight. Following Gary Neptune’s advice in “Nordic Ski Touring” I am picking the next size shorter the size recommended for my weight, a 195cm long ski to reduce clumsiness of the ski.

Åsnes also agreed:

“ Thanks for your email. Very often we do not fit completely into those tables. 195 cm skis are better to handle considering your height and use.”

I only ski with a light day pack and I hope to loose 5kg with a lot of skiing next year and the would get me into the recommended range for the 195cm long ski.