VT woods setup?

[エイダン.シダル]

Got it, got it. Super helpful. Definitely NO wax for me right now. I have two little toddlers so no time to take care of gear.

Woods - My budget is flexible, but tend to side with more affordable. I am in the NEK, East Burke, specifically, so will mainly be tromping around Burke Mountain and the surrounding area. Likely Hor/Pisgah as well.

The "more DH" question is tricky, but ultimately yes, I think...I will likely tend to look for stuff to ski down. But in some ways, I am willing to sacrifice the down for competence on the up (understand this likely means waxless for me + skins when needed), but I don't need to be efficient. What I will prioritize on the down would be stability in variable conditions and the ability to navigate the tight trees of the area. I will certainly have these on all types of terrain - fully wooded, untracked, up and down, 4x tracks that will be partially tracked, might even throw it down a groomed slope, cut steep glades, all of it.

I think at the end of the day, as I believe you mentioned, I do not want to analyze this to death. I want to find something that generally fits what I am trying to do and give it a go.

On that note, sounds like Ingstad wl or Kom's + skins for either would be a good way to go? Any sizing recommendations for both based on what I am looking for? Sounded like 195 ingstad's? I assume 174 (max length) Kom's?

USGI skis, as mentioned by others here, and all over Telemark Talk. Can't go wrong at the price. Find surplus skins for them somewhere. Sure, they don't take short skins easily. Sure, you'll need to grip wax (which really isn't so hard). Upgrade later.

https://colemans.com/u-s-g-i-cross-coun ... kis-2-pair

https://colemans.com/u-s-g-i-cross-coun ... nhill-skis

At the price, you could try to cut a waxless pattern into them (somewhere on the forum) or maybe bond a gripper skin underfoot, like the Hoks (easier?).

[greatgt]

Fish......generally go with as light as possible.....My go to boots are a no name old light, totally flexible leather boot made by Merril....Like putting on a sock....power boots are the Asolo extreme and some left over boots from another age......North Rim if I ever go to a downhill area again.......Trees in this area.....Full on hardwood forest....tight and in places wickedly open in others......Makes an ancient person feel really good.....Not to mention the flex of a double camber ski when riding down through trees making minute adjustments to hit the next opening and ride a beautiful arc making adjustments without and conscious thought....Just total bliss....Other conditions other than powder make for serious adjustments.....Go with the flow and feel the feel....TM

[Musk Ox]

Oooh, I like this. Waxless Ingstads with pins, with the short skins. Then Mountain Race with NNN. Well, as you say, people recommend what they like themselves. I haven't actually skied either, but MRs faster than my Gamme, and Ingstads for the heavier days? Win. Could even use the MRs in tracks.

To clarify, I've not owned a pair of waxless skis after the gigantic 1990s Country Crowns I basically learned to ski on! People do seem to like those waxless Ingstads.

[lowangle al]

Who out there is skiing tight trees with fischer 88s or even 98s, nansens, ingstads or ft 62s? I know Gt does, but only where there is an opening in the tight trees.

[wrsamuels]

Thanks, Fish! Seems like a great ski. However, this ski would need wax...I'm hesitant about jumping into the wax world. I guess I could just skin with it. Also plan on driving these skis with old leather boots.

If you are looking for more DH oriented and want to kick and glide I’m a HUGE fan of the new Falketind 62 Xplore. It kicks, not in the same class as my Gamme, but every bit as foot as my 200 cm Asnes USGI skis. It also turns. I had the original FT 62, and much preferred it to my S-bound 112, but that was my preference. Quite frankly there is no comparison any more.
Now, the point I will not argue is in regards to the Voile skis. I personally believe a FT X, Alaska 75, and a Rotte ST with cable, to kick better and still be able to hang downhill. Actually I look forward to the day when Connyro or Lowangle Al will show me the error of my ways. However, I believe Asnes finally nailed the true XCD ski.
I’m just one guy. If I’m right then it will be generally accepted in about 3 years.
and… that still doesn’t mean you will not appreciate a Vector and a T-4, but for k&g and downhill FTX and Alaska is sweet!
Anyone thing I could convert @greatgt ???

[wrsamuels]

Wow, that price is insane. This does bring up the idea of using my pop's old rossi's. They are metal edge and waxable.

Again, despite knowing that once I go wax I'll never go back, I am really concerned about my lifestyle accommodating waxing...this is why waxless appeals to me - just throw them on and go. I am way more inclined to transition skins on and off - again I am coming from an AT background.

Got it, got it. Super helpful. Definitely NO wax for me right now. I have two little toddlers so no time to take care of gear.

Woods - My budget is flexible, but tend to side with more affordable. I am in the NEK, East Burke, specifically, so will mainly be tromping around Burke Mountain and the surrounding area. Likely Hor/Pisgah as well.

The "more DH" question is tricky, but ultimately yes, I think...I will likely tend to look for stuff to ski down. But in some ways, I am willing to sacrifice the down for competence on the up (understand this likely means waxless for me + skins when needed), but I don't need to be efficient. What I will prioritize on the down would be stability in variable conditions and the ability to navigate the tight trees of the area. I will certainly have these on all types of terrain - fully wooded, untracked, up and down, 4x tracks that will be partially tracked, might even throw it down a groomed slope, cut steep glades, all of it.

I think at the end of the day, as I believe you mentioned, I do not want to analyze this to death. I want to find something that generally fits what I am trying to do and give it a go.

On that note, sounds like Ingstad wl or Kom's + skins for either would be a good way to go? Any sizing recommendations for both based on what I am looking for? Sounded like 195 ingstad's? I assume 174 (max length) Kom's?

USGI skis, as mentioned by others here, and all over Telemark Talk. Can't go wrong at the price. Find surplus skins for them somewhere. Sure, they don't take short skins easily. Sure, you'll need to grip wax (which really isn't so hard). Upgrade later.

https://colemans.com/u-s-g-i-cross-coun ... kis-2-pair

https://colemans.com/u-s-g-i-cross-coun ... nhill-skis

At the price, you could try to cut a waxless pattern into them (somewhere on the forum) or maybe bond a gripper skin underfoot, like the Hoks (easier?).

[Woodserson]

Woods, I agree that you can't beat wax in a xc context, but with a ski like the Kom/Vector they work pretty good with scales. I find the speed I Iose from the scales is made up by the energy I save from the efficient kick of the scales.

Yes agreed, I was trying to steer the OP away from wax to start.

@wrsamuels you are skiing in sweet terrain, there are great trails cut in pisgah, etc., you will certainly find the XCD good! I like the FT62 idea as well, maybe not for the first year but definitely keep it in mind, easy easy to drive with leather boots.

But yes, Ingstad in a 195 would be a good option, but I was not a fan of the WL version, I think the Asnes WL system is a bit anemic.

SBound 98, 88 (called Excursion now, but also look for Sbound 88)
Madshus Epoch (Karhu XCD 10th Mtn) would be on point as well.
Madhsus Annum (Karhu Guide) wider but good.
Madshus Eon (Karhu GT) skinniest of the bunch, more tour less turn, but still pretty decent for travelling.

The Madshus/Karhu skis are bendier and easier to turn but less snappy for kick and glide performance compared to Fischer.

These skis are more widely available as well on the used market.

Stay away from the Colemans they turn like horseshit. Good budget ski to go the distance, nothing wrong with them, but with the territory where you are going to be you'll just have a better time on something that is more tuned to turning.

[wrsamuels]

Who out there is skiing tight trees with fischer 88s or even 98s, nansens, ingstads or ft 62s? I know Gt does, but only where there is an opening in the tight trees.

Right! This gets to my hesitation about some of these longer ski's. @Woodserson The skis you just mentioned, do you feel they fit this:

Down priorities: variable snow performance, easy to turn. They can even ski slow as that can be helpful in the tight stuff.

Up priorities: Remember I am more used to stomping around in the woods with my AT gear, so I am used to very limited K&G, so anything better is going to be perceived as an upgrade. I don't care much about speed. I would like to be somewhat efficient, but don't really care much about that, either. No wax, ideally. I am used to skin transitions.

Sounds like I am pushing myself towards Kom's or voile's! Convince me otherwise! Also, can leather boots drive Kom's?? I know they can't drive voile's. I am going to start with the old leathers.

@Woodserson you know this terrain, so I assume the skis you just mentioned fit the terrain and what I mention above? What about sizing?

[riel]

Stay away from the Colemans they turn like horseshit. Good budget ski to go the distance, nothing wrong with them, but with the territory where you are going to be you'll just have a better time on something that is more tuned to turning.

I came just here to say this. Those Asnes USGI skis sure are cheap, burly, and fast, but they are so incredibly stiff underfoot that they just won't turn, unless you are a marine with a 100lbs backpack and put all your weight on the outer ski, of course. The Asnes USGI skis are by far the stiffest skis I have, and I also have Asnes Gamme and old Fischer E89 class skis...

I would second other people's recommendations on Fischer S-Bound 98 or Excursion 88, Madshus M68 (Epoch) or M78 (Annum), or Asnes Ingstad or FT62 (with short kicker skins for traction on rolling terrain).

Out of those 6, the Ingstad and Excursion 88 will have the best kick and glide, while the S-Bound 98 and FT62 likely have the best turning. The Madshus ones aren't likely to be the best at either, but they can often be found at a substantial discount to Fischer or Asnes.

[lowangle al]

Who out there is skiing tight trees with fischer 88s or even 98s, nansens, ingstads or ft 62s? I know Gt does, but only where there is an opening in the tight trees.

Right! This gets to my hesitation about some of these longer ski's. @Woodserson The skis you just mentioned, do you feel they fit this:

Down priorities: variable snow performance, easy to turn. They can even ski slow as that can be helpful in the tight stuff.

Up priorities: Remember I am more used to stomping around in the woods with my AT gear, so I am used to very limited K&G, so anything better is going to be perceived as an upgrade. I don't care much about speed. I would like to be somewhat efficient, but don't really care much about that, either. No wax, ideally. I am used to skin transitions.

Sounds like I am pushing myself towards Kom's or voile's! Convince me otherwise! Also, can leather boots drive Kom's?? I know they can't drive voile's. I am going to start with the old leathers.

@Woodserson you know this terrain, so I assume the skis you just mentioned fit the terrain and what I mention above? What about sizing?

If your leather boots are on the heavy duty side they will work good in soft snow but can be frustrating on a hard surface. The skis won't react as fast with leather boots as they do with plastic boots but it can be a fun setup. I think you will end up with a plastic boot eventually. The lighter the better, I ski a T4.

As far as ski length, I would go with the shortest ski that fits your weight range.
I assume you want to learn tele turns. If so the wider skis will be easier because of the stability. The wider skis will also be easier to do P turns on right off the bat, and will have a much shorter learning curve.