Page 1 of 7

Does Fischer Transnordic 66 + 82 make sense?

Posted: Tue Oct 12, 2021 10:30 am
by johnnycanuck
I'm trying to sort out my quiver for this year and I think I've finally settled on what I am going to get:

Alpina Alaska boots
Fischer Transnordic 66 Easy Skin in 195cm
Fischer Transnordic 82 Easy Skin in 196cm

Height: 178cm
Weight: 72kb

For context, I'm in south-eastern Ontario. I primarily ski right outside my backdoor, we're surrounded by farm fields, open meadows, and some forested areas. We've also got a provincial park not far from here that has sand dunes that provide some tiny hills to go up and down. As well, we've got family in Quebec City so looking for something that can tackle hills when they come up. Last year I had really mixed conditions: 12" of fresh snow, snowmobile trails, packed trails.

I'm thinking my most used ski will be the Transnordic 66 and for days with a lot of fresh snow (not that often) and I'm looking to break trail, the 82 will be nice. The 82 would also provide me something a bit better to use in the Quebec City area.

Some other skis that I've considered:

- Asnes Otto (possible all-in-one, but newer ski with no reviews)
- Fischer Traverse 78 (potential all-in-one, review mentions them as boring in comparison to the 82/E109)

Any advice here is appreciated, sizing and models... I've done a lot of research here and have gone in circles trying to decide.

Re: Does Fischer Transnordic 66 + 82 make sense?

Posted: Tue Oct 12, 2021 10:34 am
by Montana St Alum
Do whatever costs the most!

Would the 82 be for days when you skin up? Are there days when that's needed where you ski?
I confess, I really don't know much about these types of skis, I'm just wondering since it appears one is scaled and one is not, but set up for "easy skins".

Re: Does Fischer Transnordic 66 + 82 make sense?

Posted: Tue Oct 12, 2021 10:36 am
by johnnycanuck
Montana St Alum wrote:
Tue Oct 12, 2021 10:34 am
Do whatever costs the most!
LOL that is what it feels like - though getting the Asnes skis in would be more pricier than this setup... hmmm

Re: Does Fischer Transnordic 66 + 82 make sense?

Posted: Tue Oct 12, 2021 10:39 am
by Montana St Alum
Asnes + another ski would be really pricey! :D

Re: Does Fischer Transnordic 66 + 82 make sense?

Posted: Tue Oct 12, 2021 10:56 am
by fisheater
I think a S-98 would make for a much more versatile quiver

Re: Does Fischer Transnordic 66 + 82 make sense?

Posted: Tue Oct 12, 2021 11:07 am
by johnnycanuck
fisheater wrote:
Tue Oct 12, 2021 10:56 am
I think a S-98 would make for a much more versatile quiver
Interesting, my only concerns with the S-98 would be its kick and glide performance, would it perform more poorly there compared to the Transnordic 82?

Where as the E109 (which if I am correct in my understanding the Transnordic 82 is based on) is well reviewed for a wider ski when it comes to kick and glide performance: https://www.telemarktalk.com/viewtopic.php?f=19&t=2709

One other thought I've had is to skip the larger ski altogether and go the Transnordic 66 only and decide later on what I need. Though last year would have been amazing having something that I could float in the fresh snow with.

Re: Does Fischer Transnordic 66 + 82 make sense?

Posted: Tue Oct 12, 2021 12:25 pm
by fisheater
I had an S-112 rather than an S-98. The S-112 did not kick and glide to my liking, and I doubt the S-98 would either. However sometimes if you are breaking trail and making powder turns downhill it isn’t about the kick and glide.
I myself prefer waxable skis, but that doesn’t change my opinion that a faster touring ski and a more turn oriented ski make a more fun quiver of two

Re: Does Fischer Transnordic 66 + 82 make sense?

Posted: Tue Oct 12, 2021 1:39 pm
by johnnycanuck
Montana St Alum wrote:
Tue Oct 12, 2021 10:34 am
Would the 82 be for days when you skin up? Are there days when that's needed where you ski?
I confess, I really don't know much about these types of skis, I'm just wondering since it appears one is scaled and one is not, but set up for "easy skins".
My thinking is that the 82 would be for trekking across the farm land/meadow/swamp after a fresh snow. Last year we had ~12"+ of deep snow bury the open fields out here. But once the snow mobiles get to it, I don't think the 82 makes sense. At that point I'd switch down to the TN66. My fear with only having the TN66 is that it will be super sluggish in the fresh snow.

The Otto is still something I'm considering as an all-around-ski, but I'm worried that at its steep price (only 50 euro less than both Fischers I'm looking at) I'll end up with something that is OK for both conditions, not great at either.

Re: Does Fischer Transnordic 66 + 82 make sense?

Posted: Tue Oct 12, 2021 2:03 pm
by Montana St Alum
Makes sense.

Re: Does Fischer Transnordic 66 + 82 make sense?

Posted: Tue Oct 12, 2021 3:41 pm
by CoreyLayton
johnnycanuck wrote:
Tue Oct 12, 2021 1:39 pm
But once the snow mobiles get to it,
why is it,
that when you break your own trail through an open field,
when you return to it another day,
looking forward to a fast kick and glide adventure,
the snowmobiles have obliterated your tracks? :|

I always tend to stay just inside the tree line at the edges of open fields,
for this reason, if I can help it.