Onion River Sports closing...

[lilcliffy]

and I am interested in having fun in the downhills in addition to striding along the flats, so I have never even considered those long forest skis.

This is true of me as well!
BUT- I have always wanted a pair of those long Finnish forest skis...My backyard "wilderness" is criss-crossed with endless old trails/roads with gentle to moderate slopes (I leave the trails/roads to hit the slopes).

I would think that I could cover some crazy distance in deep snow on a 270cm ski with a 70mm waist...

If you really want to have a pair of those, I can do you a favor and ship them to you if you pay all the costs, but be warned, it is quite expensive to mail anything from Finland to abroad. PM me if you are really keen on doing this.

I will!

Regarding the OACs, I can write a review sometime later, but I don't have that much experience from different skis, so I am not that eligible to do good comparisons.

I would appreciate your perspective on these skis very much- regardless of comparisons.

I am interested in the XCD, the XCD GT, and the KAR. I have assumed that the KAR is so similar to my Hoks that I cannot justify them...

I almost bought a pair of XCDs- but now the XCD GT is an option...

[lilcliffy]

Verskis-
What model of OAC ski do you have?

[Verskis]

Verskis-
What model of OAC ski do you have?

I have the OAC Kar147.
I have not tried any other OAC skis yet, but one of my friends have the XCD 160 (not the new XCD GT), I need to go skiing with him sometime and test those. I have a feeling that one of those XCD models could have been a better choice for me, but you never know what do you want when purchasing something for the first time.

[Digger]

Sad to hear about ORS. Always liked their selection and passion.

I have also seen the middle ground slowly waning. It's either groomer XC gear or mountain tour/lift served stuff. The middle ground of meadowskipping and bushwacking has just slowly faded away.

I've even been told that I need to stay on the groomed trail at our local touring area. It's a county park with lots of woods, a golf course in it, and some fun little hills.

Sheesh.

[lilcliffy]

I have the OAC Kar147.
I have not tried any other OAC skis yet, but one of my friends have the XCD 160 (not the new XCD GT), I need to go skiing with him sometime and test those. I have a feeling that one of those XCD models could have been a better choice for me, but you never know what do you want when purchasing something for the first time.

Do you have the universal binding on the KAR?
Why do you think the XCD might have been better?
The only reviews of the KAR I have read suggest that the KAR is very similar to the 145cm Hok is width, but the KAR is stiffer and more cambered.
Would love to try it.
Was out on my Hoks all day yesterday.
If I had to choose one soft snow ski for my backyard backcountry- it might have to be the Hok- I can ski ANYWHERE on that ski.

[Verskis]

I have the OAC Kar147.
I have not tried any other OAC skis yet, but one of my friends have the XCD 160 (not the new XCD GT), I need to go skiing with him sometime and test those. I have a feeling that one of those XCD models could have been a better choice for me, but you never know what do you want when purchasing something for the first time.

Do you have the universal binding on the KAR?
Why do you think the XCD might have been better?
The only reviews of the KAR I have read suggest that the KAR is very similar to the 145cm Hok is width, but the KAR is stiffer and more cambered.
Would love to try it.
Was out on my Hoks all day yesterday.
If I had to choose one soft snow ski for my backyard backcountry- it might have to be the Hok- I can ski ANYWHERE on that ski.

First I had the universal binding on the Kar, but I was disappointed in both the xc skiability and the downhill control of those bindings. I tried mid cut hiking boots and snowboard boots as skiing boots. Neither of them worked that well, but the snowboard boots were a bit better. Then I replaced the bindings with old Rottefella Chilis and used Crispi CXT as boots. This gave much better downhill control, but is a bit cumbersome to stride. I also got some NOS Andrew Rifugio leather boots, which were not stiff enough for such wide skis when the snow is not that deep. This winter I have replaced the boots with Scott Excursions and Alico Ski Marches, because the Crispis were too big and the Andrews were too small for me (how fun it is to buy stuff online without getting to try them first ). I don't know yet which boot I prefer with the Kar, that might also be dependant on the conditions and the goal of the day ( turns or distance).
We have had so little snow for 5 years in a row now ( I still hope it is just bad luck and not the new normal) that the wide Kar seems a bit overkill most of the time, and it is quite bad tracking ski on hardpack. That is why I think I might have preferred the XCD.

[JeffXCD]

My guess on the downturn is: total failure with marketing. In fact, zero marketing. Nobody in the whole trade has put a penny into promoting it. So there ya go.

It's gotten so bad that "glide sports" aren't even considered as viable public options in many winter fest type events. They'll all have fatbikes and snowshoes, but no skis or iceskates or even sleds. ...Thankfully we do still have xc ski rentals in local parks.

It seems that winter sports have gone totally unskilled. If skill is required it's considered a no-hoper. Yet many other popular activities are fine with instructors -- yoga, all gyms. Again: I think the 100% reason for this situation is ZERO MARKETING. The XC ski trade has never lifted a finger to defend itself much less promote.

(...The Tele vs AT battle seems different. Dueling niches.)

I think most ppl live in mellow terrain where a modest set-up like a NNN-BC w pivot cuff boot and a 70mm ski will both turn and glide.

I use traditional 58mm x 210cm waxable tour skis for wonderful glide everywhere around mid-Michigan. I can turn em in a meadow if I like. I don't travel far, tho: whenever we have snow I can ski in any public park and we have many around us. ...But I also use a lot of other skis. We clear some local ridge glades for when we get big dumps. I use old Asolo Extremes and cables on old Dynastar 190 semi-shaped skis w kickwax for my BC turns. They might be 90mm wide.

Our gang often uses midlength Fischer Spyder 62s w edges and NNN-BC's on our singletrack mtbike trails for great good times.

I bought from ORS. Sad to see em go.

I sold a pair of 240 approx forest skis on ebay last year. I thought they'd be cool for track-setting but never used em. Don't know why. It's a bad idea to sell rare skis.

I also saw a recent report that said the US was the biggest market in the XC world. Hard to believe! It says the US is growing well. Seems crazy to me. Says we move 600k items. About $16mill in a $50mill global trade. A blog reviewed -- and seriously questioned -- the report summary. https://www.dailyskier.com/2017/09/06/s ... -findings/

[lilcliffy]

First I had the universal binding on the Kar, but I was disappointed in both the xc skiability and the downhill control of those bindings.

Felt the same way with the universal binding on my Hoks.

This winter I have replaced the boots with Scott Excursions and Alico Ski Marches,

There are a number of skiers on this forum with a similar NN spread- though I have the T4 (as does Fisheater) instead of the Excursion.

because the Crispis were too big and the Andrews were too small for me (how fun it is to buy stuff online without getting to try them first ).

NOT FUN! (Can relate!)

I don't know yet which boot I prefer with the Kar, that might also be dependant on the conditions and the goal of the day ( turns or distance).

This is particularly difficult with a very wide ski isn't it? With narrow to midwidth (to 70mm waist) one can ski about anything with a soft leather boot. BUT- to get enough flotation in deep snow- one needs a very long ski at only 70mm underfoot- a "little" too long for serious downhill skiing in the woods!!

I have always found the Karhu Guide/Madshus Annum to be terrible in anything but fresh, deep, soft snow- I can XCD-ski the Guide with even my Alaskas in deep soft snow- but they are unruly even with my T4s on dense/hard snow.

Sometimes I think that the best would acually be to have two short downhill-oriented XCD skis for skiing in steep dense forests:
one soft and wide for deep soft snow (e.g. Annum/Objective/Tind/XCD GT/S-112, etc.)
one midwidth and moderately stiff (e.g. Nansen/Ingstad/E-109/XCD, etc.)

With both of these skis in a short enough length- one might get away with the same soft leather BC-XCD boot on both skis...

I have two sets of Guides: one 195cm for distance (also have a 195cm Annum with NNNBC); one 175cm for steep terrain- both are only effective in fresh, soft snow.

All of my narrow to midwidth XCD skis are in traditional XC lengths (i.e. 200cm+).

I am thinking at some point I should try a short midwidth ski in steep terrain...

The standard OAC XCD seems to fit steep terrain with a XC boot...

The wider XCD GT would need a heavy Telemark boot if the snow was difficult...

We have had so little snow for 5 years in a row now ( I still hope it is just bad luck and not the new normal) that the wide Kar seems a bit overkill most of the time, and it is quite bad tracking ski on hardpack. That is why I think I might have preferred the XCD.

Well- the Hok is the same- it is a powder ski- virtually useless otherwise.

Sounds like you have a good excuse to get another ski...

OAC XCD?

[lowangle al]

[quote=
We have had so little snow for 5 years in a row now ( I still hope it is just bad luck and not the new normal) that the wide Kar seems a bit overkill most of the time, and it is quite bad tracking ski on hardpack. That is why I think I might have preferred the XCD.[/quote]

I can't speak for the Kar specifically but I feel a fat ski is an important tool for low snow cover situations. First off they may keep your bases off the dirt, where a skinny skimay not even be skiable. Secondly, it's nice to have your tips floating above the surface of the snow so they don't catch on some hidden obstacle. Thirdly, from my experience even my fattest skis,110mm waist, only need an inch or two of soft snow to work.