Åsnes Nansen Waxless

[lilcliffy]

Some more notes-
Wax retention is noticeably better with a sintered base than the extruded base-

However- got a number of rock hits-scratches today that I was able to easily buff out- could easily have taken chunks right out of a sintered base...

[Johnny]

A few observations after 5 years of skiing on different Nansen lengths... (190, 195 and 205)

First, I really wish the balance point was moved back a few centimeters... it would be even more fun... And obviously, the waxless pattern is NOT long enough on the Nansens...

[riel]

A few observations after 5 years of skiing on different Nansen lengths... (190, 195 and 205)

First, I really wish the balance point was moved back a few centimeters... it would be even more fun... And obviously, the waxless pattern is NOT long enough on the Nansens...

The waxless pattern seems to be too far backward. Some of the deep fishscale pattern is behind the heel of even a size 44 boot. The fishscale pattern should probably transition from deep to shallow around where a size 40 or 42 shoe ends.

On the front side, the deep fishscales could go forward (almost) all the way to the X-skin attachment point, and then there could be 5-10cm of shallow fishscales ahead of the X-skin attachment point.

That should work for both Nansen and as well for a more stiffly cambered ski like the Ingstad. If anything, the shortcomings of the fishscale pattern placement are more obvious on the Ingstad than on the Nansen.

[lilcliffy]

A few observations after 5 years of skiing on different Nansen lengths... (190, 195 and 205)

First, I really wish the balance point was moved back a few centimeters... it would be even more fun... And obviously, the waxless pattern is NOT long enough on the Nansens...

Hey Johnny,
I am wondering if this is a typo-

The BP of the Nansen is already further back than any other similar fjellski-

Do you actually mean that you wish BP was further back on the Nansen?
And- if so- why?
Gareth

[Leanmeangreen13]

When alternating between slight uphill and downhill several times over shorter distances (IE when skiing up along the edge of a flatter river valley), I find that removing and putting on the skins is not so much fun as it kills my pace.
Yes I could wax with softer wax and maybe have success. But then this rules out using skins at all unless I scrape the base to remove the wax completely.

Roelant, I had two notes based on this thread.

I use a Asnes waxable ski and predominantly only use skins. I also read on the Asnes site not to apply the skins over wax. On days where I climb bigger hills then remove the skins to descend I wondered how I could maintain grip on the flats. I emailed Asnes about the best practice for mixing grip wax vs skins. According to Asnes, using the skins over dry grip wax is ok, they only don't recommend using skins on gel grip wax like Klister.

I have not personally tried using my skins over grip wax, but this does make sense.

Also, If you haven't tried it yet the Asnes race skins are awesome. Might be a wax replacement for me. I've using both the race skins and nylon skins on everything from deep powder to ice and they both grip. The race skin glides significantly better than nylon.

Cheers.

[CwmRaider]

@@Leanmeangreen13 I have made my peace with the system. Past season I was happy with grip wax Swix Polar plus Swix Green or Blue extra, OR mohair skins when above working temperature for the Blue Extra.

I did get a tube of universal klister but have not been tempted to use it yet.

I still somewhat dislike the skins on very hard (ice like) snow but, perhaps klister will work well in those conditions. On near zero or just below zero soft snow I find the skins ok.

[Inspiredcapers]

Wonder if this is the ski that would be more beneficial for my singletrack insanity that I do on occasion. Some grip for going up (frequent yoyoing), a little softer for when I attempt hairpins (often involving a wipeout) and other tight turns. The Gammes started this and are great on straight stretches, the Ingstads have been fun when its fresh powder on the track, still looking for the right ski for variable conditions (semi-packed, occasional ice, snowshoers to slide-tackle, etc.).

[fisheater]

I skied with a guy on a Nansen, the ski bends nicely in a turn. I would have asked to try it, but I was much heavier, I would need a 205 Nansen.
If I didn’t have a Falketind Xplore, I would have a Nansen. I can handle my trails on Gamme. Gamme is faster, but my downhills would be so much prettier on Nansen.
I own a MT 51 waxless, scaled model. I don’t think I have ever had success with those scales without some wax in those scales. I wouldn’t buy an Asnes waxless ski. I got my MT 51 used, it was a good deal, and it does what I need it to do. I much prefer Gamme, except it tracks

[CwmRaider]

@Inspiredcapers As much as I am convinced of the excellence of the Nansen as an allround ski, if you NEED waxless I would look elsewhere.
Im happy with waxable skis now but if I needed a waxless ski I would get a Fischer. Transnordic 66 crown, Traverse 78 or Excursion 88 (if you can get last year's models) or an S-Bound 98, depending on how much you prioritize vertical as opposed to distance touring, or anything in between.
FWIW I now run Åsnes Falketind Xplore and Børge Ousland as a duo, and Im quite impressed by both. Neither would cover all my desires in terms of properties, a Nansen or Otto Sverdrup is a better one ski quiver.

[lilcliffy]

Wonder if this is the ski that would be more beneficial for my singletrack insanity that I do on occasion. Some grip for going up (frequent yoyoing), a little softer for when I attempt hairpins (often involving a wipeout) and other tight turns. The Gammes started this and are great on straight stretches, the Ingstads have been fun when its fresh powder on the track, still looking for the right ski for variable conditions (semi-packed, occasional ice, snowshoers to slide-tackle, etc.).

Your excellent description of the "variable conditions" resonates!
Yes, the Gamme can be a lot to handle on steep-tight trails (same as the Amundsen)-
I can do it- but, there are lot of step/striding/jump turns going on.

The Nansen is much easier to bend into a turn than the Gamme- MUCH.

The Sverdrup has a much shorter turn radius than the Nansen- but it has much more resitance underfoot. The Sverdup's rocker does facilitate planing, as well as going up and over crud/rubble (ie same as your Ingstad)- but, the rocker- along with its flexible shovel and tail- makes the Sverdrup terrible in crust and truly deep snow. If the conditions don't comprimise it- the Sverdrup is a fantastic ski. It is VERY similar to the Fischer E99/TN66; E109/TN82- though the Sverdrup offers an even tighter and variable turn radii and technique, due to the geometry and flex of its tail.

You can go much shorter on the Nansen (vs the Sverdrup ) and still have a similar-length effective edge/glide zone on your "variable conditions". I have 185 Nansen that is just wicked downhill on hardpack/boilerplate/ice.

However- if what you are looking for includes "some grip for going up"- the Nansen WL is nowhere near as grippy as Fischer's Offtrack Crown. I use the Nansen WL with a system- scales, hard grip wax and kicker skins. HOWEVER- I have the Nansen WL in a long Nordic touring length (205)- I would likely get a bit more grip with a shorter length...Not certain that it would be enough to climb on scales alone though.

In XC mode- when the snow is ideal for scales- the Nansen WL scales alone offer a great balance of grip and glide.