Help A Northeastern Trail Runner & Backpacker Build His First Nordic Backcountry Set-Up!

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.
Young Satchel

Rank: XCD Enthusiast
XCD Enthusiast
Posts: 43
Joined: Tue Aug 08, 2017 2:52 pm

Re: Help A Northeastern Trail Runner & Backpacker Build His First Nordic Backcountry Set-Up!

Postby Young Satchel » Mon Aug 14, 2017 8:21 am

lilcliffy wrote:
Young Satchel wrote:https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=A5q1RfIIkao

This is a fun video of the S-Bound 98 I found while looking to find similar videos of the 68/78 (haven't found any great ones of the latter yet sadly) Definitely way more snow/turns than my use-case, but gets me excited for the coming season and my first forays into Nordic BC regardless!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Meant to mention this- here is a thread spawned by that video:
http://www.telemarktalk.com/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=1435


So interesting to see the more experienced among you weigh in on this as far as style, technique appropriateness, etc. I watched it and thought as follows:

"Holy shit this dude is absolutely shredding through the woods on these Skis having a blast and chasing his dogs around; this looks like so much fun!"

Essentially, its the perfect advertisement for this class of Ski to the uninitiated-but-enthusiastic newb such as myself. It makes me think that above all, these skis look easy to just get out and have a good time on in a variety of conditions. Which makes it all the more amusing that he is (was?) a regional rep for Fischer :-)


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Young Satchel

Rank: XCD Enthusiast
XCD Enthusiast
Posts: 43
Joined: Tue Aug 08, 2017 2:52 pm

Re: Help A Northeastern Trail Runner & Backpacker Build His First Nordic Backcountry Set-Up!

Postby Young Satchel » Mon Aug 14, 2017 8:23 am

lilcliffy wrote:Forgot about this one- recent discussion on the 78 vs. 88!!!:
http://www.telemarktalk.com/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=1521


Read this front-to-back already 3x prior to your post. I think I read every post here that fit the search terms "Fischer S Bound" or anything Fischer-related in the 62-98 width categories. Digging deep....


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Young Satchel

Rank: XCD Enthusiast
XCD Enthusiast
Posts: 43
Joined: Tue Aug 08, 2017 2:52 pm

Help A Northeastern Trail Runner & Backpacker Build His First Nordic Backcountry Set-Up!

Postby Young Satchel » Mon Aug 14, 2017 8:34 am

lilcliffy wrote:
The 88- to me- seems clearly targeted at fresh, soft snow- perhaps I am wrong- Woods?


This is definitely still a bit of a point of confusion for me. I actually reached out to Woods directly to ask more specifically about his feelings on the 78s in light of the fact that he mentioned that he liked them quite well at first, but once he got the 88s they began gathering dust quickly and are now relegated to "friend loaner" status. But he is also an accomplished skier who seems to get high up in elevation with some regularity. I am not, nor do I. We'll see if he gets back to me. It is still August after all

Combine this with MikeK's review of the S98 where he makes it sound ideal for stomping through crappy, broken and unbroken Northeastern trails without nearly as much of a K&G penalty on the flats as he expected, and I begin to wonder if I'm thinking too narrow! (Pun unintended, but acknowledged ;-). The idea of having a little More width underfoot NOT just for fresh snow, but also to deal with abundant trail debris, postholes, snow shoe imprints, snowmobile tracks etc seems appealing, but it is possible that in my inexperience, I'm not reading him right and the 98s would be overkill.

Even as my limit creeps a bit upwards, One thing I am certain of is that the S-Bound 98 would be he absolute top. Famous last words, I know, but anything greater than that really won't make sense for me. Of this I am fairly sure

Edit: watched waaaaay too many Fischer S98/S112 and Madshus Epoch/Annum videos on YouTube this afternoon at work. These things look too damn fun! Why are there hardly any Fischer 68-88 videos to watch???


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

User avatar
lilcliffy

Rank: XCD KNIGHT
XCD KNIGHT
Posts: 1320
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2015 7:20 pm
Location: Stanley, New Brunswick, Canada

Re: Help A Northeastern Trail Runner & Backpacker Build His First Nordic Backcountry Set-Up!

Postby lilcliffy » Wed Aug 16, 2017 7:44 am

Young Satchel wrote:This is definitely still a bit of a point of confusion for me. I actually reached out to Woods directly to ask more specifically about his feelings on the 78s in light of the fact that he mentioned that he liked them quite well at first, but once he got the 88s they began gathering dust quickly and are now relegated to "friend loaner" status. But he is also an accomplished skier who seems to get high up in elevation with some regularity. I am not, nor do I. We'll see if he gets back to me. It is still August after all

You are correct- Woods is an accomplished skier- Alpine and Nordic- mountain touring and XC touring. My intuition tells me that Woods is using a more XC-focused ski for terrain that many are using a ski like the 78...

You hit the nail on the head when you described the 78 (and other skis in this class) as "compromise skis". They are at the XC end of the hybrid "xcd" specturm.

For many, that compromise either fits their context perfectly- hence the popularity of this class of skis in North America- as opposed to more cambered BC skis like the E99 (which are more popular in Northern Europe).

For my wife- for example- I don't know if she will ever truly appreciate a fully double-cambered ski in hilly/mountainous terrain. She is first and foremost an expert Alpine skier and Nordic downhill techniques just do not compute with her intuition and muscle memory. When she is on a ski like the Eon/E109 she can use her Alpine skills downhill (as long as the boot will overpower the ski). I have insisted on her trying the E99s a few times- while she kind of sees the XC benefits- she hates them on the downhill!

For me- the 78-class of skis seems to suit my terrain and snow that I tour in the best. HOWEVER- on the daily 10-15km trail loops I do (still ungroomed fresh snow and hilly)- the E99 is truly the most efficient ski I have. If I am going by myself on these loops- I take the E99. HOWEVER- if I am going with my wife (or children) (or visiting friends)- who are on Eons- I take my E109s or Combat Natos. I am so much faster on the E99s that is no fun to ski together! So on the same loop with the Combat Natos/E109s I am able to play around and ski more aggresively on the downhill.

What I can tell you is that a ski like the 78 is reasonably XC-ish when XC skiing- but when you plant both of your feet you can easily flex and turn these skis like an Alpine ski. Skiing downhill on truly double-cambered skis iss very different.

Combine this with MikeK's review of the S98 where he makes it sound ideal for stomping through crappy, broken and unbroken Northeastern trails without nearly as much of a K&G penalty on the flats as he expected, and I begin to wonder if I'm thinking too narrow! (Pun unintended, but acknowledged ;-).

Skis like the S-98/S-112/Epoch/Annum are what I would call "hybrid" Nordic touring skis. Karhu/Madshus officially used the moniker "XCD". What I mean by "hybrid" is that they have much of the design characteristics of a downhill ski (flex, camber, sidecut), with "some" of the characteristics of a XC ski (each manufacturer does this differently- Fischer relying on stiffness for some XC performance- Karhu/Madshus relying on flex and tail profile) (Skis like the Eon/78 are at the XC exteme of these hybrid skis- skis like the Annum/S-112 are at the downhill extreme).

These "hybrid" skis are different than more traditional interpretations of the term "xcd". Because, traditionally (and currently in N.Europe), "xcd" simply means to ski downhill on XC skis/boots/bindings. Hence- for example- Asnes' "fjellskis" (literally- "mountain skis") are much more of a traditional XC ski than these "hybrid" skis.

So- "reasonable" XC performance is truly a matter of personal perspective and preference. I personally, would not describe any of the wider, single-cambered, parabolic Nordic "touring" skis as "XC" skis. And it is VERY important to remember that unless you are in truly ideal snow- or have truly exceptional skills- you are going to need some SERIOUS boots and bindings to overpower a ski like the S-98 (and bigger).

It is important to remember that skiers that are XC skiing on wide, single-cambered, parabolic skis (I do it all the time on my Annums and Hoks)- are shuffling along- most definitely more efficient than snow shoes- but, not what I would call XC kick and glide.

There are tours where I am out simply "touring for turns"- or touring in extreme terrain- where downhill control and fun are more important than XC performance. (My current ski for this is the Guide/Annum- I am upgrading this kit in the near future).

The idea of having a little More width underfoot NOT just for fresh snow, but also to deal with abundant trail debris, postholes, snow shoe imprints, snowmobile tracks etc seems appealing

Well- I must admit that I am very fortunate not to be faced with this. I have so much terrain and fresh snow to ski on that I don't even ever have to ski in my own tracks if I don't want to! If the trail conditions are that poor than maybe a wider ski would be more stable- if slower...Best to consult with other people that are faced with that kind of shit. I even avoid snowmobile tracks/trails. (And just as a note- the worst tour my wife and I ever had on the Guide and S-112, we ended up deciding to trek out of the mountains for 20kms on groomed snowmobile track- absolutely miserable)

, but it is possible that in my inexperience, I'm not reading him right and the 98s would be overkill.

Based on your initial description- I think it would be...And- if you end up looking seriously considering the 98- I strongly recommend considering the Epoch as well- personally I much prefer the flex of the Epoch for soft, fresh snow than the 98...

Even as my limit creeps a bit upwards, One thing I am certain of is that the S-Bound 98 would be he absolute top. Famous last words, I know, but anything greater than that really won't make sense for me. Of this I am fairly sure

I would seriously consder a 75mm binding a plastic touring boot (T4/Excursion) if you are going to go to a ski like the 98 or bigger...
The pursuit of XCD balance: cross-country AND down-hill skiing in the backcountry

User avatar
lilcliffy

Rank: XCD KNIGHT
XCD KNIGHT
Posts: 1320
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2015 7:20 pm
Location: Stanley, New Brunswick, Canada

Re: Help A Northeastern Trail Runner & Backpacker Build His First Nordic Backcountry Set-Up!

Postby lilcliffy » Wed Aug 16, 2017 7:49 am

Though I hate to add yet another ski to your decisions.

I present the OAC XCD. Man do I ever want to try these babies!
https://www.skinbased.com/product-page/xcd-160-uc

viewtopic.php?t=961

Read the description on the OAC website!

They sound like the distance-oriented BC Nordic dream in hilly-forested terrain!

And look at the sidecut- they are 72MM underfoot!!!

OAC is truly doing something absolutely different here...
The pursuit of XCD balance: cross-country AND down-hill skiing in the backcountry

Young Satchel

Rank: XCD Enthusiast
XCD Enthusiast
Posts: 43
Joined: Tue Aug 08, 2017 2:52 pm

Help A Northeastern Trail Runner & Backpacker Build His First Nordic Backcountry Set-Up!

Postby Young Satchel » Wed Aug 16, 2017 9:10 am

lilcliffy wrote:Though I hate to add yet another ski to your decisions.

I present the OAC XCD. Man do I ever want to try these babies!
https://www.skinbased.com/product-page/xcd-160-uc

http://www.telemarktalk.com/viewtopic.php?t=961

Read the description on the OAC website!

They sound like the distance-oriented BC Nordic dream in hilly-forested terrain!

And look at the sidecut- they are 72MM underfoot!!!

OAC is truly doing something absolutely different here...


Agreed on all counts; Including wanting to try them!

BUT. No way is this the correct "my first BC Nordic ski" purchase for me. This is either a later quiver addition, OR a single-ski-quiver approach Ski for an ice climber or someone like that. In which case the shorter "Ski-shoe-like" 147 they offer would probably make more sense anyways.

This is actually a really curious Ski though. Is anyone here on a pair? Would love to hear some user-reviews....

Edit: found some nice manufacturers video shorts of the 160 in-use. Wish everyone else made these instead of showing me some Austrian dude under lights in front of a sheet of white seamless TALKING about the skis! (ahem * cough cough* Fischer ;-)




Edit II: oh man, these have what I almost see as a "snowboard type" binding system too?! Very interesting. I still maintain I'd like to start wii something closer to a true BC Nordic/XC-little "d" -setup with NNN-BC, but damn if that ain't pretty cool

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Last edited by Young Satchel on Wed Aug 16, 2017 9:10 am, edited 2 times in total.

Young Satchel

Rank: XCD Enthusiast
XCD Enthusiast
Posts: 43
Joined: Tue Aug 08, 2017 2:52 pm

Re: Help A Northeastern Trail Runner & Backpacker Build His First Nordic Backcountry Set-Up!

Postby Young Satchel » Wed Aug 16, 2017 9:39 am

lilcliffy wrote:
Young Satchel wrote:This is definitely still a bit of a point of confusion for me. I actually reached out to Woods directly to ask more specifically about his feelings on the 78s in light of the fact that he mentioned that he liked them quite well at first, but once he got the 88s they began gathering dust quickly and are now relegated to "friend loaner" status. But he is also an accomplished skier who seems to get high up in elevation with some regularity. I am not, nor do I. We'll see if he gets back to me. It is still August after all

You are correct- Woods is an accomplished skier- Alpine and Nordic- mountain touring and XC touring. My intuition tells me that Woods is using a more XC-focused ski for terrain that many are using a ski like the 78...

You hit the nail on the head when you described the 78 (and other skis in this class) as "compromise skis". They are at the XC end of the hybrid "xcd" specturm.

For many, that compromise either fits their context perfectly- hence the popularity of this class of skis in North America- as opposed to more cambered BC skis like the E99 (which are more popular in Northern Europe).

For my wife- for example- I don't know if she will ever truly appreciate a fully double-cambered ski in hilly/mountainous terrain. She is first and foremost an expert Alpine skier and Nordic downhill techniques just do not compute with her intuition and muscle memory. When she is on a ski like the Eon/E109 she can use her Alpine skills downhill (as long as the boot will overpower the ski). I have insisted on her trying the E99s a few times- while she kind of sees the XC benefits- she hates them on the downhill!

For me- the 78-class of skis seems to suit my terrain and snow that I tour in the best. HOWEVER- on the daily 10-15km trail loops I do (still ungroomed fresh snow and hilly)- the E99 is truly the most efficient ski I have. If I am going by myself on these loops- I take the E99. HOWEVER- if I am going with my wife (or children) (or visiting friends)- who are on Eons- I take my E109s or Combat Natos. I am so much faster on the E99s that is no fun to ski together! So on the same loop with the Combat Natos/E109s I am able to play around and ski more aggresively on the downhill.

What I can tell you is that a ski like the 78 is reasonably XC-ish when XC skiing- but when you plant both of your feet you can easily flex and turn these skis like an Alpine ski. Skiing downhill on truly double-cambered skis iss very different.

Combine this with MikeK's review of the S98 where he makes it sound ideal for stomping through crappy, broken and unbroken Northeastern trails without nearly as much of a K&G penalty on the flats as he expected, and I begin to wonder if I'm thinking too narrow! (Pun unintended, but acknowledged ;-).

Skis like the S-98/S-112/Epoch/Annum are what I would call "hybrid" Nordic touring skis. Karhu/Madshus officially used the moniker "XCD". What I mean by "hybrid" is that they have much of the design characteristics of a downhill ski (flex, camber, sidecut), with "some" of the characteristics of a XC ski (each manufacturer does this differently- Fischer relying on stiffness for some XC performance- Karhu/Madshus relying on flex and tail profile) (Skis like the Eon/78 are at the XC exteme of these hybrid skis- skis like the Annum/S-112 are at the downhill extreme).

These "hybrid" skis are different than more traditional interpretations of the term "xcd". Because, traditionally (and currently in N.Europe), "xcd" simply means to ski downhill on XC skis/boots/bindings. Hence- for example- Asnes' "fjellskis" (literally- "mountain skis") are much more of a traditional XC ski than these "hybrid" skis.

So- "reasonable" XC performance is truly a matter of personal perspective and preference. I personally, would not describe any of the wider, single-cambered, parabolic Nordic "touring" skis as "XC" skis. And it is VERY important to remember that unless you are in truly ideal snow- or have truly exceptional skills- you are going to need some SERIOUS boots and bindings to overpower a ski like the S-98 (and bigger).

It is important to remember that skiers that are XC skiing on wide, single-cambered, parabolic skis (I do it all the time on my Annums and Hoks)- are shuffling along- most definitely more efficient than snow shoes- but, not what I would call XC kick and glide.

There are tours where I am out simply "touring for turns"- or touring in extreme terrain- where downhill control and fun are more important than XC performance. (My current ski for this is the Guide/Annum- I am upgrading this kit in the near future).

The idea of having a little More width underfoot NOT just for fresh snow, but also to deal with abundant trail debris, postholes, snow shoe imprints, snowmobile tracks etc seems appealing

Well- I must admit that I am very fortunate not to be faced with this. I have so much terrain and fresh snow to ski on that I don't even ever have to ski in my own tracks if I don't want to! If the trail conditions are that poor than maybe a wider ski would be more stable- if slower...Best to consult with other people that are faced with that kind of shit. I even avoid snowmobile tracks/trails. (And just as a note- the worst tour my wife and I ever had on the Guide and S-112, we ended up deciding to trek out of the mountains for 20kms on groomed snowmobile track- absolutely miserable)

, but it is possible that in my inexperience, I'm not reading him right and the 98s would be overkill.

Based on your initial description- I think it would be...And- if you end up looking seriously considering the 98- I strongly recommend considering the Epoch as well- personally I much prefer the flex of the Epoch for soft, fresh snow than the 98...

Even as my limit creeps a bit upwards, One thing I am certain of is that the S-Bound 98 would be he absolute top. Famous last words, I know, but anything greater than that really won't make sense for me. Of this I am fairly sure

I would seriously consder a 75mm binding a plastic touring boot (T4/Excursion) if you are going to go to a ski like the 98 or bigger...


I hear you on all of this. I think between your posts today and my last one I've "talked myself back from the edge" a bit in regards to the wider, single-camber lot (S98, Annum, etc) for the time being.

I've also decided that 68 and below is not the right choice either. If I'm headed down that-a-way I'd do better to follow the advice of yourself and others and just go E99.

So essentially I've narrowed it down to the Fischer Traverse 78 or the Excursion 88. ORS has a decent package deal on the latter that would save several bucks and keep me in my $5-700 range.

Image

Considering many of the reviews I've read on ORS, and elsewhere, it seems like either of these would be an excellent choice for me; the 78 being a bit more K&G biased while the 88 offers a bit more float when needed.

Decisions; decisions!

I'm still biding my time.......


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Cannatonic

Rank: XCD Pinhead
XCD Pinhead
Posts: 455
Joined: Thu Nov 27, 2014 10:07 pm

Re: Help A Northeastern Trail Runner & Backpacker Build His First Nordic Backcountry Set-Up!

Postby Cannatonic » Wed Aug 16, 2017 1:46 pm

You can't go wrong with either one IMO, they will be lots of fun. Lot of good information from LC on these skis.

You will have to find out what kind of BC skier you are. When I did lots of resort skiing & snowboarding I still liked the occasional day in the BC doing XC skiing, usually at local state parks in variable conditions. So I like having a couple pairs of 210cm XC-focused skis for the woods around here. Other people who haven't logged much classic XC time don't like 210cm skis at all! And I hate track XC skiing so my XC skis tend to be thicker & beefier.

And then there's boots and bindings, NNNBC vs. 3-pin, leather vs. plastic, you will be experimenting & finding out what works best for you. The Fischer 78's and 88's are useful in almost every situation.

Young Satchel

Rank: XCD Enthusiast
XCD Enthusiast
Posts: 43
Joined: Tue Aug 08, 2017 2:52 pm

Re: Help A Northeastern Trail Runner & Backpacker Build His First Nordic Backcountry Set-Up!

Postby Young Satchel » Wed Aug 16, 2017 7:49 pm

Cannatonic wrote:You can't go wrong with either one IMO, they will be lots of fun. Lot of good information from LC on these skis.

You will have to find out what kind of BC skier you are. When I did lots of resort skiing & snowboarding I still liked the occasional day in the BC doing XC skiing, usually at local state parks in variable conditions. So I like having a couple pairs of 210cm XC-focused skis for the woods around here. Other people who haven't logged much classic XC time don't like 210cm skis at all! And I hate track XC skiing so my XC skis tend to be thicker & beefier.

And then there's boots and bindings, NNNBC vs. 3-pin, leather vs. plastic, you will be experimenting & finding out what works best for you. The Fischer 78's and 88's are useful in almost every situation.


Thanks for weighing in once again. It's awesome how ready the small crew here has been to help a new guy out. I'm very appreciative.

I totally agree that I won't really know what I need until I get out there and figure out what I like and what works in practice for my purposes. I'm looking forward to that.

Hoping to put my kit together over the next couple of months and be ready when the snow hits. That is if we get any this year out east!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

User avatar
lilcliffy

Rank: XCD KNIGHT
XCD KNIGHT
Posts: 1320
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2015 7:20 pm
Location: Stanley, New Brunswick, Canada

Re: Help A Northeastern Trail Runner & Backpacker Build His First Nordic Backcountry Set-Up!

Postby lilcliffy » Thu Aug 17, 2017 7:29 am

Thanks for posting those videos on the OAC XCD- I have not seen them.

The XCD 160 clearly has a flex for soft, fresh snow, and it also has a single camber. The XC performance is certainly compromised for superb downhill performance!!!!

I keep thinking that I want a ski even bigger/wider for my steep-and-deep, touring for turns, Annum replacement...

Watching that video of the skier beautifully skiing downhill through open conifer forest (I have endless steep ravines that look like just like that!)- and with only his winter pac boots on!!!

I am glad I have not made a purchase on a Vector or a Kom yet...

And BTW- maybe you already know this- you can put a real binding and ski boot on the XCD 160.
...............
Looked at your ORS shopping cart- my family has a couple pairs of the Offtrack 5 BC boot- it is super comfortable and warm- BUT- it is VERY soft and not very supportive. Certinainly softer than a boot like the Alpina 1550 you were looking at. The Offtrack 5 is not much more supportive than my Rossi X5 XC track-touring boot- though it is warmer and more comfortable.
The pursuit of XCD balance: cross-country AND down-hill skiing in the backcountry


Return to “Telemark Talk Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 15 guests