The Åsnes Thread (News for 2018-2019!)

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.
D'hostie

Rank: XCD Enthusiast
XCD Enthusiast
Posts: 68
Joined: Fri Oct 13, 2017 12:06 pm

Re: The Åsnes Thread

Postby D'hostie » Tue Dec 26, 2017 11:27 pm

fisheater wrote: I don't know, maybe this would be a good tour for turns ski, for a guy that would love to need a Vector.


That's exactly what it is.

Although I don't see why an Objective wouldn't be on the table?

User avatar
Johnny

Rank: XCD KNIGHT
XCD KNIGHT
Posts: 1585
Joined: Wed Dec 18, 2013 6:11 pm
Location: Quebec / Vermont

Re: The Åsnes Thread

Postby Johnny » Wed Dec 27, 2017 9:46 am

lowangle al wrote:I hope you had a legal right to use that dumpster Johnny, I'd hate to think of you as criminal.

I just threw everything on the side of the road... People stopped and helped themselves for a few days... On collection day, there was only 2-3 pairs left... Mostly old Karhus... 8-)

fischeater wrote:Really Johnny, I can't believe you don't have one of these. BTW x-skin compatible.

I know... But hey, I need a wishlist to dream too...! If I had everything, life would be boring... ;)

D'hostie wrote:
fisheater wrote: I don't know, maybe this would be a good tour for turns ski, for a guy that would love to need a Vector.

That's exactly what it is. Although I don't see why an Objective wouldn't be on the table?

The Falketind is completely different from the Objective... They are both light, but that's pretty much the only thing they share... The Objective is a quite fat beast with tips at 117mm... Soft flex and big rocker... The Falketind has more sidecut, and almost no rocker, just a very subtle Nordic one... And with carbon cross reinforcements, I expect the Falketind to be quite stiff and rigid. I would never use the Objective on hard pack, but I would use the Falketinds primarily for that very purpose... The Falketind would be super nice for turning on pretty much anything, but the Voiles would make much better bottomless powder skis...

They both would make awesome xcD skis, but with different characteristics... For different kinds of turns, terrain and conditions...
/...\ Peace, Love, Telemark and Tofu /...\
"And if you like to risk your neck, we'll boom down Sutton in old Quebec..."

D'hostie

Rank: XCD Enthusiast
XCD Enthusiast
Posts: 68
Joined: Fri Oct 13, 2017 12:06 pm

Re: The Åsnes Thread

Postby D'hostie » Wed Dec 27, 2017 1:01 pm

Johnny wrote:
D'hostie wrote:
fisheater wrote: I don't know, maybe this would be a good tour for turns ski, for a guy that would love to need a Vector.

That's exactly what it is. Although I don't see why an Objective wouldn't be on the table?

The Falketind is completely different from the Objective... They are both light, but that's pretty much the only thing they share... The Objective is a quite fat beast with tips at 117mm... Soft flex and big rocker... The Falketind has more sidecut, and almost no rocker, just a very subtle Nordic one... And with carbon cross reinforcements, I expect the Falketind to be quite stiff and rigid. I would never use the Objective on hard pack, but I would use the Falketinds primarily for that very purpose... The Falketind would be super nice for turning on pretty much anything, but the Voiles would make much better bottomless powder skis...


I'm not sure I agree with that, or that either of us know much about the Falketind. You have an Objective, but unlikely you are using it the way most skiers would. If someone were to use it with T4s, then it would be a perfectly acceptable UL on-piste ski.

I actually believe the Falketind is more focused on off-piste conditions in that it has both fairly stout tip and tail rocker (I don't know what pictures you are looking at that would suggest otherwise - perhaps try looking on a monitor that isn't from the garbage?). They both have similar turning radii. The difference is that the Falketind is narrower and lighter.

My thought is that if Mr. Fish went to the Objective, he could probably pass his S112 onto his son, or retire them and sell them and the Objective would do everything they would and more. Then, instead of looking for his Unicorn which doesn't exist, focus on buying a better trail ski for beat up hiking and snow machine trails. A ski that does well for that crap will never be a good ski for skiing steeps or skiing on piste.

Also, as stated before, Voile doesn't seem to be marketing these for your intended use Johnny:

Equally at home atop The Haute Route or on a long jaunt in The Catskills, these skis are light enough to go the distance and stiff enough to hold an edge on boilerplate. They won’t exactly shine in deep powder, but many an East Coast skier will likely press them into service at their local ski resort.


And as I said, given their reputation and product testing, I doubt they'd overstate this. Sounds to me like an all-around ski that could work for touring, skiing BC steeps in variable conditions and be pressed into resort service.

teleclub

Rank: XCD Pinhead
XCD Pinhead
Posts: 100
Joined: Thu Jul 14, 2016 4:49 pm
Location: Wasatch

Re: The Åsnes Thread

Postby teleclub » Wed Dec 27, 2017 2:40 pm

fisheater wrote:...It appears to have Nordic rocker and tail rocker....


What is "Nordic rocker"? I understand what people mean when they say tip rocker/early rise, but what does the "Nordic" mean in this case?

fisheater wrote:...what is the purpose of tail rocker?.......


Not a fan myself of tail rocker but it allows you to smear turns in soft snow and ride switch in variable snow or land jumps switch (backward).

fisheater wrote:...The (Falketind 62 touring ski) sidecut is 97-62-86....


Cool--that's the same sidecut dimensions of my 200cm Atomic TM26 BetaCarve skis from 1999 or so. These TM26 also have lots of camber, 3" at least when held together at the base (like all Beta era Atomics had), and are fairly light for an alpine/Tele ski. Makes me think I should try them out for touring.

User avatar
lilcliffy

Rank: XCD KNIGHT
XCD KNIGHT
Posts: 1658
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2015 7:20 pm
Location: Stanley, New Brunswick, Canada

Re: The Åsnes Thread

Postby lilcliffy » Wed Dec 27, 2017 7:04 pm

The pursuit of XCD balance: cross-country AND down-hill skiing in the backcountry

User avatar
fisheater

Rank: XCD Pinhead
XCD Pinhead
Posts: 350
Joined: Fri Feb 19, 2016 9:06 pm
Location: Oakland County, MI

Re: The Åsnes Thread

Postby fisheater » Wed Dec 27, 2017 10:04 pm

D'hostie wrote:
fisheater wrote:


That's exactly what it is.

Although I don't see why an Objective wouldn't be on the table?


Mike, the reason why I am not looking at Objectives is because I have an S-112. The s-112 may not be as torsionally as rigid as the Objective, but they are in the same class. I certainly do not have the terrain that Phoenix or Connyro have. Even for the northern lower peninsula of Michigan a ski that can carry speed makes the touring for turns better. Actually you talk about the steep short ups and downs in your area. Picture something similar to that with finding some 200 to 300 foot down hills if you pick the right area. In my neck of the woods it might be 150 feet or so. A ski needs some speed in the rolls to be fun. That being said, we get 2 feet on occasion. The s-112 is fun to ski downhill in powder, and while not fast it is capable as a powder trail ski.
I might be dreaming of the impossible, but I really could use something between the USGI and the s-112.

User avatar
lilcliffy

Rank: XCD KNIGHT
XCD KNIGHT
Posts: 1658
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2015 7:20 pm
Location: Stanley, New Brunswick, Canada

Re: The Åsnes Thread

Postby lilcliffy » Thu Dec 28, 2017 8:08 am

fisheater wrote:I might be dreaming of the impossible, but I really could use something between the USGI and the s-112.


I don't think you are dreaming at all. Your most recent descriptions of the USGI's camber and flex resonate with mine- it is a stiff, double-cambered touring ski- whose strength is covering distance. The USGI is in the same group a the E-99- despite being much heavier- the USGI being more effective in very deep snow.

The S-112 clearly- like the Guide/Annum- gives up MUCH XC performance for the ability downhill ski on soft BC snow.

The skis in between this you are looking at- they are midwidth BC-XCD skis with significant sidecut and camber-and-a-half in profile. Obvious choices in this group- from my perspective:
1) Eon- very soft and roundish flex- too soft for my XC taste.
2) E-109- fabulous XCD performance- wanting in deep snow, and crust.
3) Traverse 78- can't speak to the current model- haven't even flexed them- but the S-Bound 78 was fabulous.
4) Combat Nato- although it MAY be more on the XC side of things- if you like the USGI downhill- you would LOVE this ski.
5) Ingstad- Johhny's and Waitin-4-snow's reports are pretty impressive!

Unkown's- from my perspective:
1) Nansen- all of the reports suggest it should offer the balance you are looking for- but we don't have much info (REVIEW PLEASE).
2) Falketind- no idea- the 62 at least appears a bit more XC than the 68- but they both look like downhill skis to me...

Here is my angle- I think that you want a BC-XC ski that is fun skiing downhill- am I right?

To me- a ski like the Falketind appears to be dreamed up to satisfy the downhill skier that wants to shred in XC shoes- not to satisfy the skier that wants to shred miles in the backcountry hills.

I didn't mention the Excursion 88 above because every time I flex it in the shop I feel single camber...It seems narrowly focused on fresh snow- I don't know if it has enough camber and XC flex to offer the XC performance you are looking for on variable snow and trails...Though Woods has stated that he is using it on trails...Perhaps it is fine on a hardpacked trail...doesn't feel that way to me...

Too bad you cannot test the Traverse 78...

though I think you want a waxable base- yes?
The pursuit of XCD balance: cross-country AND down-hill skiing in the backcountry

User avatar
Johnny

Rank: XCD KNIGHT
XCD KNIGHT
Posts: 1585
Joined: Wed Dec 18, 2013 6:11 pm
Location: Quebec / Vermont

Re: The Åsnes Thread

Postby Johnny » Thu Dec 28, 2017 8:59 am

D'hostie wrote:Also, as stated before, Voile doesn't seem to be marketing these for your intended use Johnny:

Equally at home atop The Haute Route or on a long jaunt in The Catskills, these skis are light enough to go the distance and stiff enough to hold an edge on boilerplate. They won’t exactly shine in deep powder, but many an East Coast skier will likely press them into service at their local ski resort.


And as I said, given their reputation and product testing, I doubt they'd overstate this. Sounds to me like an all-around ski that could work for touring, skiing BC steeps in variable conditions and be pressed into resort service.


One has to keep in mind that the world is spinning backwards. 50% of all skiers are using Soul 7's as their primary skis for hard pack and groomers. One has to understand how marketing is working.
/...\ Peace, Love, Telemark and Tofu /...\
"And if you like to risk your neck, we'll boom down Sutton in old Quebec..."

D'hostie

Rank: XCD Enthusiast
XCD Enthusiast
Posts: 68
Joined: Fri Oct 13, 2017 12:06 pm

Re: The Åsnes Thread

Postby D'hostie » Thu Dec 28, 2017 9:27 pm

fisheater wrote:Mike, the reason why I am not looking at Objectives is because I have an S-112. The s-112 may not be as torsionally as rigid as the Objective, but they are in the same class. I certainly do not have the terrain that Phoenix or Connyro have. Even for the northern lower peninsula of Michigan a ski that can carry speed makes the touring for turns better. Actually you talk about the steep short ups and downs in your area. Picture something similar to that with finding some 200 to 300 foot down hills if you pick the right area. In my neck of the woods it might be 150 feet or so. A ski needs some speed in the rolls to be fun. That being said, we get 2 feet on occasion. The s-112 is fun to ski downhill in powder, and while not fast it is capable as a powder trail ski.
I might be dreaming of the impossible, but I really could use something between the USGI and the s-112.


I don't pretend to know your business, but I can read, and from what I've read, it seems like the S112 isn't cutting the mustard for what you want. Trust me, I have its little brother, and love it, but I certainly don't ski it on piste and I know it's not the fastest ski in my quiver; it's particularly slow feeling on packed down trails.

I could go find the quotes but it seems you think it's a tad slow and not really at its full potential on hardpack. I get that. Pretty sure I said the same things long ago about my S98s. It's a wicked fun ski when we get big dump, but you know what else would fill that void? Yup. It would also do better than the 112 at the resort, I bet.

Thing is, I think you actually need two skis. There's no one that's going to do all that stuff you asked. Sorry. It just doesn't exist. Couple routes you could take, but I would prioritize here. What do you enjoy skiing the most? What do you wind up skiing the most? Seen as how I live in a similar environment as you but on the other side of Lake Erie, I bet I know the answer.

The options, as I see it, are such:

- Spend a lot of money on a trail ski which you'll likely use a lot, but won't fulfill all the requirements and won't be as much fun when you get a big dump. Keep skiing your S112 in big dumps and at the resorts, and live with the compromise.

- Buy a decent, used ski for the resort and stick with what you have. There are TONS of older shaped skis out there that will work great with your T4s. Look in the direction woods has gone.

- Spend a lot of money on a really sweet steep and deep ski that will still rip at the resort and get rid of your S112. Look around for a used or beater trail ski - old Karhus, S Bounds, whatever... don't be too picky. Anything in the mid-widths will be good and most anything from the last 10 years will be easier to handle dh than those USGI skis. Those things are bears. They are stiff though, I give them that.

Seen as how I'm in a similar environment as you, I'm trying to give you some reasonable feedback. The ski I grab 9/10 around my house to ski beat up hiking trails is my S78. It's tough, stable, reliable, and I bought it fairly cheap. Anything like that will work though. They are downhillable, but not a dh ski. They are decently fast. And you don't care that much about so you'll ski it over rocks and sticks and shit when the cover is thin.

Now when we get a big dump, I grab my S98s. But I also have a separate resort ski (2 actually). If I wanted one ski to cover both those bases, it'd not be any of the skis I have. The old Tua Heliums I have would be the closest, but they still aren't as good as a modern ski in terms of shape and geometry, and they are pretty stiff torsionally, but no where near what a carbon reinforced ski will be.

D'hostie

Rank: XCD Enthusiast
XCD Enthusiast
Posts: 68
Joined: Fri Oct 13, 2017 12:06 pm

Re: The Åsnes Thread

Postby D'hostie » Thu Dec 28, 2017 9:36 pm

Johnny wrote:One has to keep in mind that the world is spinning backwards. 50% of all skiers are using Soul 7's as their primary skis for hard pack and groomers. One has to understand how marketing is working.


So you think they designed the Objective so you could mount NNN-BC on it and ski it with Alpina Alaskas?

Seems you might be an outlier here.

And Johnny, you owe me for a some Glitts, bindings and kids skis - see if you can't find something decent for Bob to slide around on the trails. I know you have or can find something.


Return to “Telemark Talk Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest