This is the World Famous TelemarkTalk / TelemarkTips / Telemark Francais Forum, by far the most dynamic telemark and backcountry skiing discussion board on the world wide web since 1998. East, West, North, South, Canada, US or Europe, Backcountry or not.
This is the World Famous TelemarkTalk / TelemarkTips / Telemark Francais Forum, by far the most dynamic telemark and backcountry skiing discussion board on the world wide web since 1998. East, West, North, South, Canada, US or Europe, Backcountry or not.
This is the World Famous TelemarkTalk / TelemarkTips Forum, by far the most dynamic telemark and backcountry skiing discussion board on the world wide web. We have fun here, come on in and be a part of it.
I do not have experience with wax. Seems like most people who are into this prefer wax over waxless?
I am inclined to stay away from wax to keep things simple...but can be convinced. I'd maybe rather have waxless +skins if needed.
Lowangle al - are you suggesting waxing an alpine ski?
You can wax alpine skis but it's not ideal if you're not already up on waxing. If you already have a pair it would be worth a shot but if you're buying new I'd go waxless. The wider waxless skis glide a lot better than more narrow no wax skis, unless you go double camber, which you sure don't want to do.
If you want to ski tight trees skinny skis won't do it, they need too much speed to plane up and turn. If your deal is to ski off trail and have fun on the down you will have more fun more of the time on heavier gear.
What's your budget?
Waxing is an art and science on top of learning to XCD. There are some great threads in the wiki about it.
I started waxing about ten, eleven years ago and last winter was the first winter I went the entire season without using WL skis at all. I also have a dozen+ waxes that made this happen. But wax skiing is far more pleasurable.
VT? Hills? More DH oriented?
I like the Ingstad idea
And
Kom.
Both.
Fischer 98 or 88 would be good too. The older Karhu 10th Mtn, Guide, Annum,Epoch and newer Madshus models would suffice also. You need at least something, don't get too paralyzed with decision making. Ski on it, think about it, adjust quiver, continue, etc. Soon you too will have the Fever
Fischer S Bound Outabound 88s, used so I wasn't exactly discerning about them. They're as much float as I need in Southern Ontario, though. OP might sometimes need a bit more in VT.
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.
I do not have experience with wax. Seems like most people who are into this prefer wax over waxless?
I am inclined to stay away from wax to keep things simple...but can be convinced. I'd maybe rather have waxless +skins if needed.
Lowangle al - are you suggesting waxing an alpine ski?
I'm unfairly biased against waxless. I came to Nordic/XCD from alpine. First trick to grip wax is colder wax first, layer warmer over that. I always wax one colder than I think is right: sometimes it's right, sometimes I put another warmer wax over. Colder doesn't work well over warmer.
I got my regular skis (Gamme) wax, and my less frequently used (Fischer S Bound Outabound 88s, used) waxless - on which scales I use liquid wide-temperature grip wax. A bit confusing...
My logic is: when I have consistent conditions I can easily wax for, I want that, because those ski are faster: (the sports sedan); when I'm not sure what I'm going to get, waxless, wider (the SUV).
Last edited by エイダン.シダル on Mon Aug 29, 2022 6:01 pm, edited 2 times in total.
Like a broken record, is I......But cruising Vermont BC has a Ritcheas ski......E99's.....They cruise up down and all around....get good on them and they make the most exquisite arcs.....get them long....minimum 200....but again a 210 to a 215 makes for incredible cruising....instead of wider go longer.....in for a penny in for a pound.....make a clean break and go for a wild ride....TM
I love the way everyone here recommends the things they love every time! Heh.
So I'm going to recommend Nansen or Ingstad skis from Åsnes.
Both come in waxless versions, both are great with short skins, both come at 195cm which is a good length for you by the official Åsnes table if 75kg is you + your pack, both are ridiculously good fun.
(Waxing for the backcountry is pretty easy, though... once you've got it right once you'll never go back.)
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.
Which is to say, get the Ingstads first (or some other moderately wide ski for the pins).
... I find the speed I Iose from the scales is made up by the energy I save from the efficient kick of the scales.
Al's right. This point is often overlooked when considering wider skis in an XCD context, especially when considering the fun factor when touring for turns in steep, tight trees.
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?
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 ???
