beeeweee wrote: ↑Sat Nov 26, 2022 2:03 pm
“Skiing long” on the MR48 Skin is all relative to what you’re comparing against.
The MR48 Skin is basically a wider touring style traditional XC ski with a 3/4 metal edge. It tracks like a touring ski so it’s not what I would use for turns but it works well in the tracks and can handle icy conditions. If you compare it against other traditional XC skis, then it skis ‘normal’ for its length. If you compare it to a rockered ski like the FT62, then it will of course feel long.
I have NNN MOVE bindings mounted on my MR48 Skin and it is nice to be able to move it forward and backwards to dial in the grip for your load, terrain, and conditions. It works fine for most easy terrain on NNN binding and stiff carbon soled classic boots but if you’re going to traverse across a lot of icy off camber terrain, NNN bindings will be the weak point here as there’s a bit too much flex from the binding plate. That said, the MR48 is still more torsionally stiffer than the M50 with the same NNN binding setup.
Personally, I see the MR48 as a beefy all condition track ski rather than a light BC/XCD touring ski but if you need to do long approaches in set tracks, it’s probably the best option. If you are not going to do long approaches in set tracks and you want non-adjustable Xplore bindings, I would consider the waxable version of the Gamme or the MR 48 so you can dial in your grip, either with kick wax or trimming the X-Skin to your liking.
Great remarks! Feel free to jump down to my actual question, I just felt like pondering my choices a bit more in depth, now that you mentioned it.
Maybe I should have specified, that it seems the MR48S, to me, seems it is a bit long in the front. I have no track skiing experience from past years, so I am mostly comparing to other "light/narrow" nordic touring skis, such as Amundsen, Ousland, Glittertind, Panorama M55 etc in similar lengths, though a step shorter in each. With the FT62X I am taking a leap of faith into downhill, it having been characterised as borderline touring capable felt like a reasonable place to start from my background.
Why I got the MR48S is that I wanted a better tracking, truly track compatible (well, not in curves probably) ski for very long, 1000km+ ski tours in Scandinavia. Planning to do Norge på Langs in the coming years, basically ski Norway south to north. Having done similar, though not as long, trips with "true" tourers it always bugged me I cannot take advantage of the generous track options along the way, especially if weather up the mountains was tough some days. So, more efficient lower alternates, more efficient approaches to resupply towns, more efficient skiing on ski trails and snowmobile tracks. In springtime I can imagine the skin to be a true hero on frozen snowmobile tracks over wax. But then of course good skiing on windpacked snow off track. I have felt a bit limited by the "regular" nordic touring skis not fitting it tracks and being a bit heavy, hence I am getting lighter poles, bindings, boots and skis - yet maintaining a good balance for backcountry travel with a good binding/boot control over track boots and bindings. I just hope the Alpina Pioneer Pro ships soon, seems there are some delays. I have the Alaska XP to play around with until that day comes.
I would imagine I would be fine 70% of the ascents with just the integrated skins, where the rest may require me to slap on additional X-skins. Why I wanted to try the skin version, is I am a lazy boy. Conditions also vary so much during the days at different altitudes and such, that I do not want to constantly be adjusting my grip wax for the conditions, or be slowed down by the x-skins when I do not have to be. I generally only stop for an effective break twice a day, lunch and camp, unless nature calls.
I hope the skis fulfill this purpose. Another option would have been the new Madshus Panorama T50, an updated model of the earlier M50 (Panorama, not Fjelltech). Very light, even lighter than MR48, but these would also be wax skis and the skin attachment is not as easy as on Åsnes skis. Huge difference in weight, but sadly no reformed skin attachment. The recessed front piece is truly amazing to ski compared to Åsnes plastic brake, especially on hard snow and skis with NR. As the ability to use kicker skins is a must on a long backcountry tour, hence really only had these two (well, three with the wax MR48) options in this weight/width category. But I recognize I would have a higher tolerance of suffering before getting myself to connect the skins on Madshus' system. Also have not received replies to my questions about the build of this new version compared to past ones from Madshus.
I do agree, that with grip wax I really would not need to be worrying about the placement of my bindings that much. I am not really using the ski to make turns, rather survive the downhills as part of touring. With true nordic touring skis I can make turns with NNNBC, so I would imagine the Xplore helps me a bit in this regard with the skinnies. I am just wondering how horrendous the MR48S is going to be to turn, especially as I got the longest of it. 1 or 2 cm ahead of BP might allow for a wider range of ascents, and a bit easier turning downhill. But what I wonder is, if the skin will then start braking me down too much. I do have the longer skis to possibly accommodate this, though. Would love to hear opinions.
I will probably get Gammes at some point too to test them out - I got my Ouslands 10cm too short, so might replace them with Gamme in the same class, although a noticeably heavier ski. To me, Ousland skis a bit short due to the nordic rocker, and so regardless of weight, not as efficient for touring in ideal conditions. I mean, Ousland has its own ideal conditions. Gammes have been hyped up as the one ski does it all. Thing is, I mainly use this class of skis for pulling a pulk, day tours, and skiing on spring snow on occasional multi-day tours. Basically what a MR48 might be able to handle.
I have never liked spring snow for downhill, ever, not even alpine skiing.
Maybe it would have been wiser to go with Ingstad over the FTX for more turns, but to also accommodate multi-day touring in windpacked winter snow where the choice between a narrower touring ski vs a forest ski almost always leans more towards the longer planks for certainty. But to me somehow it felt a bit unnecessary at this point, to consider a non-ideal trailbreaking ski when I have absolute monsters for that, hence I ended up favoring the downhill capabilities but as a bonus still wish these can handle a tour here and there. And not ideal skis for spring/crust, so that does not bother me.
Well, this became a long wall of text. I guess I may just need to wait until I get to ski these skis and then report back, how horribly wrong or correct my choices were
What is your experience with the ability to move your bindings? Where do you usually find yourself, in what kind of conditions? How noticeable is the difference, really?
there is still some time left before I can ski these, snow is late for this season in my location
