Another new guy saying hi!

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: 80
Joined: Tue Aug 08, 2017 2:52 pm

Re: Another new guy saying hi!

Postby Young Satchel » Mon Jan 08, 2018 9:55 am

Lars wrote:My perspective is from someone getting into XCD. There are many experienced individuals who can offer you far more expert opinions on this choice than I can.

It's a little overwhelming as far as choices go. I also believe that min-maxing is great for discussion and theory crafting, but at some point, you just have to get out there. I'm sure I could have chosen differently and been fine. I am not an Olympic athlete looking to shave off thousandths of a second in my races. I have no interest in anything resembling competition. I just want to get out there any enjoy myself with gear that will help me do so.

We have a lot of fields/light hills in my area with mixed woods/rolling terrain in the region between Lake Champlain and the Green mountains. We also have some killer resort areas.

I tried to define what I wanted to do.

- Mostly flats, some hills, occasional groomed resort XC trails (although my recent experiences indicate I'd be better off having a standard classic or skate kit for those. I did not expect amazing groomed performance, but what did surprise me was how pronounced the gear/conditions dynamic was and how much I had to learn about technique).

Definitely an example of the difference between thinking you know something and experiencing it). Room to grow to attempt harder terrain as my skill level improves.

For me researching stuff like this is one of my passions. I almost have a let down when I actually buy something! I probably read that thread over 20 times and many others, searching through these (and the web) for any mention of the Eon, Epoch, 78, and 88.

Fischer skis were very attractive to me based on quality, the waxless pattern, and the easy skin system. For the 88s specifically, I liked that they are wider than the 78s, have more nordic rocker, and sound like they handle the XC climb and glide very well. My girlfriend has Fischer 68s and loves them.

All of that being said, I had some gift cards from Christmas to Outdoor Gear Exchange (plug for great local store) that greatly reduced the sale price of my package and they don't stock the 78 :) If I'm honest, that may have been one of the biggest factors.

So to summarize: XC performance with some D capabilities, price (unique with GCs), availability, quality, stability, grip/climb ability, easy skins.


Thank you! That was a big help.

And yeah, I’ve had every sage-hand on deck here offer advice. I was actually interested in your take specifically because you’re also a Newbie like me! Sounds like we are in a very similar places as far as our needs and desired and even the factors motivating our purchase. I have the 88s + NNNBC manuals in my cart on outdoor gear exchange as we speak lol. BUT. They are significantly more expensive than the 78s I saw at my local for 30% off.

I feel like ultimately the deciding factor may be along the lines of what Woods said to me via PM: “Just get a deal and get out there” lol. If Rock & Snow has the bindings in stock and is willing to drill and mount em for me on the 78s, that’s prolly what I’ll do. Otherwise I’ll likely go with the 88s from GearX or some close-out 2015 Madshus at The Mountaineer.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Lars

Rank: XCD Enthusiast
XCD Enthusiast
Posts: 26
Joined: Thu Dec 28, 2017 10:08 am

Re: Another new guy saying hi!

Postby Lars » Mon Jan 08, 2018 10:31 am

Sounds great whichever path you go down.

Keep in mind, I got a rather large discount off with my combined gift cards and 10% off for the whole package deal.

If I had a situation with 30% off on T78s instead, I probably would have gone that direction.

If you can be patient, that's sure to work in your favor. I wanted skis for an upcoming vacation in lake placid, so I was going to pull the trigger last week one way or another.

User avatar
Woodserson

Rank: XCD Guide
XCD Guide
Posts: 706
Joined: Wed Feb 11, 2015 11:25 am
Location: New Hampshire

Re: Another new guy saying hi!

Postby Woodserson » Mon Jan 08, 2018 10:33 am

I will say that I do love the 88's for traveling over uneven terrain in mostly straight lines, and I do like them more than the old SBound 78's but if the Traverse 78 has changed from the SBound 78 in terms of flex that may be out the window. One thing that has changed in my opinion is what length to get. After much experimentation I would stick with the recommended weights with a little variation on either side if you're looking for more gliding or more turning. I once pooh-poohed the Fischer weight scale and have come to regret doing so. I weigh 160 and I'm still on my 189 88's since I use them for distance travel, but I realized I have strong honed technique in grip+glide to get them going up hills. I actually ended up sizing down in my 98's because they were too long and thus too stiff and I was having problems handling them down hills.

Just food for thought. If serious turning is more in your future that overland travel, consider the Madshus Epochs or Eons as they are slightly softer and take a bend a little easier for the neophyte.


FISCHER SBOUND SKI LENGTH

<150 lbs. -169 cm

145 - 190 lbs. -179 cm

185+ lbs. -189 cm

All that being said, I love the EZ Skin and wish stuff like that was more integrated into other ski brands, like VOILE ARE YOU LISTENING.

Young Satchel

Rank: XCD Enthusiast
XCD Enthusiast
Posts: 80
Joined: Tue Aug 08, 2017 2:52 pm

Re: Another new guy saying hi!

Postby Young Satchel » Mon Jan 08, 2018 10:41 am

Woodserson wrote:I will say that I do love the 88's for traveling over uneven terrain in mostly straight lines, and I do like them more than the old SBound 78's but if the Traverse 78 has changed from the SBound 78 in terms of flex that may be out the window. One thing that has changed in my opinion is what length to get. After much experimentation I would stick with the recommended weights with a little variation on either side if you're looking for more gliding or more turning. I once pooh-poohed the Fischer weight scale and have come to regret doing so. I weigh 160 and I'm still on my 189 88's since I use them for distance travel, but I realized I have strong honed technique in grip+glide to get them going up hills. I actually ended up sizing down in my 98's because they were too long and thus too stiff and I was having problems handling them down hills.

Just food for thought. If serious turning is more in your future that overland travel, consider the Madshus Epochs or Eons as they are slightly softer and take a bend a little easier for the neophyte.


FISCHER SBOUND SKI LENGTH

<150 lbs. -169 cm

145 - 190 lbs. -179 cm

185+ lbs. -189 cm

All that being said, I love the EZ Skin and wish stuff like that was more integrated into other ski brands, like VOILE ARE YOU LISTENING.


I’m glad you mentioned this man! I was actually gonna shoot you a PM about this but now I don’t have to bother you! :) I assumed that because I’m 6’3” I’d want their 189 in either the 78s or 88s. But I’m about 160-165 sans pack. Does that seem Ill-advised? The 179s looked crazy short for me when I saw them at the shop, but with your mention of “Pooh-pooing the weight scale” I’m given a bit of pause on this.

Thoughts?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

User avatar
Woodserson

Rank: XCD Guide
XCD Guide
Posts: 706
Joined: Wed Feb 11, 2015 11:25 am
Location: New Hampshire

Re: Another new guy saying hi!

Postby Woodserson » Mon Jan 08, 2018 10:47 am

Young Satchel wrote:
Woodserson wrote:
I’m glad you mentioned this man! I was actually gonna shoot you a PM about this but now I don’t have to bother you! :) I assumed that because I’m 6’3” I’d want their 189 in either the 78s or 88s. But I’m about 160-165 sans pack. Does that seem Ill-advised? The 179s looked crazy short for me when I saw them at the shop, but with your mention of “Pooh-pooing the weight scale” I’m given a bit of pause on this.

Thoughts?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


No, I think the 189's would work well with you because you're so tall AND you come up to the bottom of the weight scale, especially with a pack. You'll get good glide, but you'll have to work on the grip a bit in certain conditions. Now, if you said, I plan on going straight up the Catskills and skiing sweet sweet turns and that's my one and only objective- I would say to go shorter, but if I remember correctly you are doing a bunch of overland travel- and the length will over speed and flotation. PM me any time, brother. I will reply usually as quick as possible.

Young Satchel

Rank: XCD Enthusiast
XCD Enthusiast
Posts: 80
Joined: Tue Aug 08, 2017 2:52 pm

Re: Another new guy saying hi!

Postby Young Satchel » Mon Jan 08, 2018 10:55 am

Woodserson wrote:
Young Satchel wrote:
Woodserson wrote:
I’m glad you mentioned this man! I was actually gonna shoot you a PM about this but now I don’t have to bother you! :) I assumed that because I’m 6’3” I’d want their 189 in either the 78s or 88s. But I’m about 160-165 sans pack. Does that seem Ill-advised? The 179s looked crazy short for me when I saw them at the shop, but with your mention of “Pooh-pooing the weight scale” I’m given a bit of pause on this.

Thoughts?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


No, I think the 189's would work well with you because you're so tall AND you come up to the bottom of the weight scale, especially with a pack. You'll get good glide, but you'll have to work on the grip a bit in certain conditions. Now, if you said, I plan on going straight up the Catskills and skiing sweet sweet turns and that's my one and only objective- I would say to go shorter, but if I remember correctly you are doing a bunch of overland travel- and the length will over speed and flotation. PM me any time, brother. I will reply usually as quick as possible.


Rad.

And yeah, you definitely remember correctly lol. while I dearly wish I was planning to abandon my family and go ski Turns in the Catskills all winter, the reality will be far less glamorous and more pedestrian

189s it is.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Cannatonic

Rank: XCD Pinhead
XCD Pinhead
Posts: 497
Joined: Thu Nov 27, 2014 10:07 pm

Re: Another new guy saying hi!

Postby Cannatonic » Mon Jan 08, 2018 2:02 pm

I have the Sbound 78's but two things have changed since I bought them - the new ones have more camber and shorter length, mine are 199cm. I like my Sbound 78's a lot, but today I'd probably take 88's. They have less camber and a wider, turnier ski is what I want at 189. The Sbound 78's won't glide as well for me at 189.

Young Satchel

Rank: XCD Enthusiast
XCD Enthusiast
Posts: 80
Joined: Tue Aug 08, 2017 2:52 pm

Re: Another new guy saying hi!

Postby Young Satchel » Mon Jan 08, 2018 2:24 pm

Cannatonic wrote:I have the Sbound 78's but two things have changed since I bought them - the new ones have more camber and shorter length, mine are 199cm. I like my Sbound 78's a lot, but today I'd probably take 88's. They have less camber and a wider, turnier ski is what I want at 189. The Sbound 78's won't glide as well for me at 189.


Grabbed the 78s ending months of indecision about the purchase including whether I’d make it at all. The 88s totally could be the “right” one just as easily, but a good deal from a shop I enjoy supporting found me, so that’s that for now :-)


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Cannatonic

Rank: XCD Pinhead
XCD Pinhead
Posts: 497
Joined: Thu Nov 27, 2014 10:07 pm

Re: Another new guy saying hi!

Postby Cannatonic » Mon Jan 08, 2018 2:30 pm

you won't be disappointed - great all-around ski that also gives you a fishscale ski for warmer temps.

Desmo

Rank: XCD Enthusiast
XCD Enthusiast
Posts: 23
Joined: Tue Jan 02, 2018 1:37 pm

Re: Another new guy saying hi!

Postby Desmo » Mon Jan 08, 2018 7:45 pm

Woodserson wrote:I will say that I do love the 88's for traveling over uneven terrain in mostly straight lines, and I do like them more than the old SBound 78's but if the Traverse 78 has changed from the SBound 78 in terms of flex that may be out the window. One thing that has changed in my opinion is what length to get. After much experimentation I would stick with the recommended weights with a little variation on either side if you're looking for more gliding or more turning. I once pooh-poohed the Fischer weight scale and have come to regret doing so. I weigh 160 and I'm still on my 189 88's since I use them for distance travel, but I realized I have strong honed technique in grip+glide to get them going up hills. I actually ended up sizing down in my 98's because they were too long and thus too stiff and I was having problems handling them down hills.

Just food for thought. If serious turning is more in your future that overland travel, consider the Madshus Epochs or Eons as they are slightly softer and take a bend a little easier for the neophyte.


FISCHER SBOUND SKI LENGTH

<150 lbs. -169 cm

145 - 190 lbs. -179 cm

185+ lbs. -189 cm

All that being said, I love the EZ Skin and wish stuff like that was more integrated into other ski brands, like VOILE ARE YOU LISTENING.



Thanks for the input...much appreciated!

I'm 185 without any gear on, so I'd likely pick up 189's in either ski.


Return to “Telemark Talk Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google Adsense [Bot] and 11 guests