Roelant wrote: ↑Wed Nov 20, 2019 2:32 am
I did give the Ingstad a bit of thought.
1) For me, most BC ski kilometers are in the spring (longer daylight hours) when there is a layer of fresh snow on harder snow, and combine long distance trips with ups and downs in the middle. I suppose that if there was less distance involved the Ingstad would have been a better option. Whether it has better XC performance, this may be your experience, but, other Ingstad and Nansen users on fjellforum.no have different experience. Is there a big difference in the present day Ingstad vs the Ingstad from 2 years ago? Perhaps my info was outdated.
There is a big difference between the current Ingstad BC and the Combat Nato/Ingstad(old) (not sure which version you are speaking of).
Given those snow conditions- you are correct- the current Ingstad BC is a pretty poor XC ski on dense, consolidated snow- especially due to its short glide zone on consolidated snow- due to all of that tip rocker. A number of my favourite local hill tours end with with a significant (several kms- at least) ski out on snowmobile track. The Ingstad BC is so poor on that snowmobile track that I often end up wishing I had brought my Gamme 54/E99- despite how AWESOME the Ingstad was all day in deep, soft snow!! (My friend and I- who also is on the Ingstad BC- joke that we need a "transformer ski", where we can- at the push of a button- tighten down all of that tip rocker and raise and tighten the camber underfoot for the ski out!)
The Combat Nato/Ingstad (old) is actually a much better XC ski on consolidated snow than the Ingstad BC- though not as good as a Gamme 54.
It would appear that my impression of the Nansen's XC performance is totally wrong (at least on a dense consolidated base). It sounds like the Nansen offer reasonable XC performance on dense snow- but is less cambered and stiff than the Gamme 54- making it more manageable on hills. Does this sound right? If so- that would make it a somewhat narrowly focused late winter/early spring BC-XC ski for hill terrain- on a dense consolidated base? Which makes the Gamme 54 a more versatile BC-XC ski as it is both more efficient and more stable in a wider range of snow conditons- though as a trade-off is more of a handful on slopes?
If I am on the right track here:
- Ingstad BC: distance-oriented ski in deep soft snow- hilly/mountainous terrain.
- Nansen BC: distance-oriented ski on consolidated snow- hilly/mountainous terrain.
- Gamme 54 BC: distance-oriented ski on all snow and terrain (stiff and cambered on hills).
- Combat Nato: distance-oriented ski on deep snow and all terrain.
- Amundsen BC: distance-oriented ski on all snow- gentle terrain.
If I am on the right track here- I would be keen to try the Nansen for my local hill tours on a consolidated base...
Combined with having the Ingstad BC for deep soft snow conditions- perhaps it is the Gamme 54 that becomes obsolete in my quiver!!!? Meaning- if I had both an Ingstad BC and a Nansen BC- I wouldn't need the Gamme 54!?
So- if I am to be of any help to Woods at all-
Sorry if I missed this in your OP-
What kind of snow will this BC-XC ski be gliding on?
...............................................................
2) I wouldn't mind a pair of FT62's when I am in it for just the ups and downs
perhaps at a later date. Is it reasonable to run FT62s with NNNBC (and Crispi Stetind boots)?
I cannot speak for the Stetind- but I am absolutely loving the FT62 as a downhill-focused ski with all of my NNNBC boots (Alaska/Svartisen/Guard Advance). I have no problem setting this ski on edge with even the softest of my BC boots!
)
