Underdog wrote: If you are concerned about length- can you access a shop where you could actually stand on a few sizes? If you want a ski like this to work there should be a very slight exposed "wax pocket" when you stand on them evenly, and it should not require you to make an extremely powerful fully-weighted kick to compress it. (If it requires a very powerful kick to close the wax pocket- the ski might be fine on dense snow- but, I predict you will slip on soft snow and should consider a shorter/softer ski).
I will try this method today with the two sets of skis that I have. It would seem that I will need a "helper" to measure the "pocket." When attempting this task, should I be on a hard floor or carpet? Would a "business card" be thick enough to measure or maybe a credit card? Should the length of the measured "wax pocket" extend the full length of of the waxless scales?
There are different methods shown on youtube and they tend to vary based on the type of ski, level of fitness of the user and type of ski conditions. Note: when I was measured for the 210cm Country Crowns (20+yrs ago) I was told extend my arm to the ceiling and my wrist determined my ski length).
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mIx0qshvUVE
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JJ9qM-f4hag
One local ski/bike/skateboard shop and odds are they are going pressure me into whatever is left on the shelf and I will cave under pressure only to end up back here again.
It is important to realize and remember that performance Classic track skiing completely dominates the current knowledge base with regards to XC skis. A technician in a shop- or someone that has made a video- measuring the wax pocket on a double-cambered backcountry ski may actually be setting up a skier for a miserable slippery experience on soft backcountry snow!
Accurately measuring the wax pocket of a ski intended for use on soft off-track snow on a hard surface (e.g. floor) is not that useful IMO. Ideally one would get to actually try them out on soft snow before buying them! As this is alomost impossible I suggest the following on a hard floor:
1) stand on the skis with your toes at approx balance point (BP). If you will carry a pack- put one on your back with the weight you will typically be carrying.
2) feel if there is an effective "wax pocket". If there is an effective wax pocket you should be able to feel the camber compress to the floor when you fully weight an individual ski. The degree of weight and force you need to apply will affect how easy it is to compress that camber on soft snow.
A double-cambered ski intended for use in soft snow should not have a wax/traction pocket that is very difficult to engage.
I did find some 200 cm E109's that are waxable. Fischer says the E109 is the widest model with a "traditional mid-stiff nordic camber" for efficient glide on flat and undulating terrain. "The E109 is the wider version of the classic E99 and offers the same ability to cover long distances effectively while the slightly wider 82-60-70 mm sidecut makes the E109 more stable and easier to ski downhill. The E109 has a small amount of "Nordic Rocker Camber" to help turn initiation, and full metal edges for effective grip on ice."
What is "traditional mid stiff Nordic camber" and does it differ from "mid stiff nordic Rocker Camber" and do I want a Nordic rocker if Woodserson is saying the Nordic Rocker is the issue with the 78's lack of glide.
I would expect that "traditional" Nordic camber is referring to "double-camber" intended for Classic kick&glide XC skiing? "Nordic rocker camber" refers to a ski with Nordic rocker.
I can confirm that Nordic rocker offers essentially zero advantages when XC skiing (it certainly offers wonderous turn initiation). Nordic rocker certainly reduces the ski's glide surface on consolidated snow. AND- if the tip of a Nordic-rockered ski is very soft and unstable, a Nordic-rockered ski will be completely unstable when XC skiing in very deep soft snow. As examples of this-
1) the current E-109 & E-99 Xtralite have completely
unstable Nordic-rockered tips.
2) the current Ingstad BC and Gamme 54 BC have completely
stable Nordic-rockered tips.
The degree of sidecut plays a role in all the complex geometry of this too. For example, the E99 Xtralite is actually more stable than the E109 when XC skiing in deep soft snow because it has less sidecut.
IMO/IME- the current E109 Xtralite really sucks as a XC ski in very deep soft snow- BUT one probably wouldn't notice it in only 6inches of soft snow...
The Ingstad BC is completely stable in deep soft snow, but it has loads of tip rocker that GREATLY reduces its glide zone on consolidated snow.
The Gamme 54 BC is completely stable in deep soft snow, and only has a little tip rocker- the Gamme 54 has plenty of glide zone on consolidated snow. In fact, my E99 Xtralite Tour has more tip rocker than my Gamme 54- my Gamme 54 has a longer glide zone on consolidated snow.
I suspect you are going to want a kicker skin for that E109 Tour with its waxable base. You can buy universal kicker skins:
https://www.blackdiamondequipment.com/e ... 1_cfg.html
Not sure if this Nordic camber meets lilcliffy's recommended double camber criteria:
- considering the terrain you want to ski on I do recommend a truly double-cambered ski that is designed to ski off-track.
Both single-cambered skis (e.g. S-Bound 98/112; Storetind; Rabb 68) and double-cambered skis (e.g. E99; E109; Gamme 54 BC; Ingstad BC) can have Nordic rocker. When speaking of "double-camber" we are speaking of tension and camber underfoot only- not the entire length of the ski.