Telemark Talk / Telemark Tips Forum

Hey, back to ask for advice... Again.

I snapped my well-used vintage-2008 Fischer S-Bound Rebound Crown ski. Overdid a pretty dumb maneuver and cracked one right in half. Oh well. I did get 16 years of steady use out of them, so I can't really complain.

Now I'm left looking for something that would fill that same niche in my XCD quiver. What I liked about the old Rebound was that when coupled with stiff boots like Asolo Extreme (or possibly Alpina Alaska) it kicked and glided well on mellow-angled hiking trails with packed snow, but also turned pretty well in mellow-trees with soft snow. I got decent grip even with the negative scale pattern, and they were fast enough on the flats that they didn't bother me. I think the negative pattern helped wit that. For me, the Rebound was a good Nordic backcountry jack-of-all-trades. So... What's made now that can replace it?

The old Rebound had a 88-60-78 profile with a nearly double camber. It was fairly stiff, but not overly so. More cross country ski than XCD, but not as much of a downhill-oriented ski as a Madshus M62/Eon, which is softer and has noticeably less camber to it.

The Asnes ski that seems closest is the Ingstad BC Waxless. But that's very expensive.
The Asnes Rab 68 looks much more downhill-oriented. I'm also thinking I want a fish-scale based ski for the ease of use and freedom to just grab and go, without thinking much about waxing.

Does anyone know if Fischer is still making a version of the old Outtabounds? That was 88-68-78 with a fair amount of camber and fish-scale base. I thought there was an OTX Adventure 88, but it's not on Fischer's site. Has that been dropped?

Is the Fischer E109 still made? Is that the Fischer Transnordic 82?

Please feel free to share your opinions. I'm all ears!

You should at least consider an Asnes ski with an X-skin as a substitute for a ski with a waxless base. You can modify the grip with different lengths/widths of X-skin, and take it off altogether for downhills. Doesn't solve the cost issue that you mention, though.

I forgot to mention where I ski, which has a lot to do with what kind of ski would work best for me.

I'm in NY State, and I often ski on old woods roads and hiking trails in the Catskills, Adirondacks and Berkshires. The trails are often narrow and twisty, the woods roads tend to be logging roads that are not maintained for the benefit of skiers, and the terrain is always hilly. Snow conditions vary all over the place, from wet and heavy to hard-frozen to dust on crust to the odd powder day. I've bushwhacked through the woods on rolling terrain on the Rebounds and I don't mind using them as glorified snowshoes. I like that they're light yet wide enough to float pretty well on deep, soft snow. But at the same time, they're stiff enough to get a decent edge on hard snow (which I find is where the Madshus XCD skis are weaker).

So, since the Asnes skis rely on two different climbing skins designs for enhanced grip beyond kick wax, wouldn't that mean buying (and carrying) a lot of stuff for this kind of Northeast USA woods wandering? I mean, snazzy tech is great, but fish scales aren't *that* onerous... They sure are convenient for an easy to use, go anywhere kind of ski.

On the other hand, I hear nothing but raves about Asnes skis, so maybe I'm being stubborn and keeping myself in the dark...

I broke mine in half a few years back, and replaced them with rossinols, also fish scaled, steel edged and similar width. They have been great for backwoods yoyo in Vermont and the ADKs.

rongon wrote: ↑

Tue Feb 20, 2024 4:42 pm

I forgot to mention where I ski, which has a lot to do with what kind of ski would work best for me.

[…]

So, since the Asnes skis rely on two different climbing skins designs for enhanced grip beyond kick wax, wouldn't that mean buying (and carrying) a lot of stuff for this kind of Northeast USA woods wandering? I mean, snazzy tech is great, but fish scales aren't *that* onerous... They sure are convenient for an easy to use, go anywhere kind of ski.

On the other hand, I hear nothing but raves about Asnes skis, so maybe I'm being stubborn and keeping myself in the dark...

I have both waxless and wax skiis.

When conditions are in the “sweet spot” for wax? I use wax.
which means I never mess with Klister or other soft goopy waxes. and use a skin only if Ive commited to a trek on wax, and find that i just cant get the wax dialed-in well enough. Asnes makes great wax skiis.
and outside of those conditions, I use waxless.
fischer makes a wonderful “crown” base.

having the flexibility of both is a very nice luxury.

Hello @rongon !

I have skied the old Rebound many times in years past.

I would suggest the closest ski in the current Fischer lineup is the last-gen E-109 Xtralite Crown (82-60-70)→ now the Transnordic 82. However, not currently available in the scaled "Crown" version. Similar to the old Rebound- the E109-XL/TN82 is double-cambered and poppy underfoot- coupled with moderate sidecut; a soft shovel; and a stiff flat tail. The E109-XL-/TN82 also has a rockered shovel.

Yes- the old Outtabounds is now the Excursion 88 (formally the S-Bound 88).
The Traverse 78 (formally S-Bound 78; Snowbound)- though not as close as the E109-XL/TN82- is closer to your Rebound than the 88- methinks.

The closest ski design in the Asnes line to the Rebound is the Sverdrup- though not currently available with a scaled base.
Of the other two Asnes offerings with scales in this width range-
the Ingstad WL has a lower-profile camber than the Fischer, and not as "poppy"- but still quite resistant underfoot.
the Nansen WL has less resistance underfoot than the Ingstad- it has a smoother rounder flex.

If you are content with Fischer's old negative scaled pattern- you should be content with Asnes'.

Peter P wrote: ↑

Tue Feb 20, 2024 4:26 pm

You should at least consider an Asnes ski with an X-skin as a substitute for a ski with a waxless base. You can modify the grip with different lengths/widths of X-skin, and take it off altogether for downhills. Doesn't solve the cost issue that you mention, though.

Kicker skins glide well enough, but the issue is going downhill. Getting speed and making turns on kickers is asking for a face plant.

There's a pair of Rebound Crown's up on the turnaround page, recent.

Most of us have broken our Rebounds. Still have a set but they are beat. Use 109's wax with decent camber. They are 78-60-70 and the newer 82-60-70. They are fast, turn well and slice powder beautifully. Like the older model but both are decent. Rebounds are a good ski in most conditions. Bit slower as most patterned bottoms are. My go to ski right now is the older 109 model but have destroyed the lamination and do a glue job every year. The rocker on the newer 109, fore and aft is ok with the tip but the rocker on the tail is a bust. Still not a bad ski. Like skis that get up to speed quickly so i can give them some input. TM

If I'm going to spend real money on this kind of ski, I'll probably wait until next year and get an OTX 88 or Excursion 88 if Fischer offers them. I'll look into the Transnordic 82 as well (latest version of E109).

I have a pair of Transnordic 66 (E99) which I need to mount up. Maybe I'll enjoy those enough to just take them everywhere. But at 200 cm length, I have a feeling they'll get caught in the twigs and shrubbery a lot when I go off-trail, especially with the lack of snow lately. (Northeast USA)