Telemark Talk / Telemark Tips Forum

Seems that Rossignol has actually updated their backcountry skis for 2019-2020:
https://www.rossignol.com/int-en/rossig ... -skis.html

There are some additonal pictures in the Aventure Nordique website, for example BC 100:
https://en.aventurenordique.com/rossign ... track.html

To me it looks like they have at least a new shape compared to old Rossignol BC skis, added skin slots in the tip, but the Positrack pattern seems unchanged.
I wonder how much rocker (or "nordic rocker") these new skis have?

There is also one smooth base ski with pretty comparable dimensions as Voile Objective or Åsnes Tindan 86.

Verskis wrote: ↑

Fri Aug 02, 2019 2:07 am

There is also one smooth base ski with pretty comparable dimensions as Voile Objective or Åsnes Tindan 86.

https://www.rossignol.com/int-en/rhiqr01-000.html
120-86-108

Seems pretty similar/repackaged to the current Seek 7, which is 122-86-108, this one has the little skin notch in the tip. I've seen the Seek7 in person, it's light, moderately stiff, not enough rocker up front for me, Objective still has more rocker and more even flex underfoot.

Woodserson wrote: ↑

Fri Aug 02, 2019 8:55 am

I've seen the Seek7 in person, it's light, moderately stiff, not enough rocker up front for me, Objective still has more rocker and more even flex underfoot.

Same thing here... Pretty sure it's just a similar copy of the 3yo Seek7 packaged with a different cosmetic for people who only buy stuff under the "Nordic" label... I played with The Seek7 when it first came out too... It was not a bad ski, it was very nice in fact for a chinese ski... but nowhere near the Objective or the Tindan. Plus, the Tindan 86 has even more rocker than the Objective.

And seriously, who in the world would spend their hard-earned money on a company that doesn't even bother to publish the weight of their "LIGHTWEIGHT" skis? That the least a ski maker can do...

But hey, thanks for the info..!

The new BC 100 looks interesting. Like the dimensions for Nordic touring: 100-80-90mm (Rossi is still posting the wrong sidecut measurements on their website- they have been screwing that up for years!).

Both the BC100 and the BC80 need to come in longer lengths to accommodate heavier skiers if they are serious about these skis being Nordic touring skis.

I'm incredibly tempted by the BC 100 for a warm snow xcD ski.

Currently I do have only waxable skis and some kicker skins, but neither waxing nor skins feel like a good solution for warm snow (soft waxes are minor pain in the ass and not that effective, kicker skins are slow as hell and prone to icing).
I want a ski that would be a better compromise between grip and glide near 0°C temperatures, so fishscales it is.
My skiing is mostly rolling terrain touring with some yo-yoing on the smallish hills I encounter. Terrain is usually tight woods, so turning ability of the skis is appreciated.

I know nobody has any experience with the BC100 yet, but is there any reason why it wouldn't work for my purposes? The other ski I'm interested in is the Fischer S-Bound 98.

Fischer has more sidecut, maybe turning a bit easier? But if the Rossi would habve more rocker, it might not be the case?
Rossignol has more waist width, which could be an advantage in heavy snow (not sinking too deep --> easier turning?).
Rossignol seems to have more upturned and tapered tail, probably making it easier to turn on heavy snow (less hang-up)?
Fischer fischscales might have better grip, as I have understood?
Some past Rossi BC skis have been overly stiff, I've heard. Fischer seems more proven design.

So many arguments to choose one over another, aarghh!

Verskis doesn't Asnes have a ski that would work for you. I would go with a ski that everyone is raving about, either Asnes or Voiles. Rossi recommends there skis for the near expert skier. Maybe that's because you need to be a near expert to get them to work?? We talk about good skis being "easy to turn" and if they were easy to turn they should be just as good for beginners. I'd get the ones that turn easiest. Life is too short to ski second rate skis.

The problem is, Åsnes doesn't make fishscale skis in widths above the Ingstad, and Voile skis are somewhat rare and pricy in Europe. Åsnes is not cheap, either.

This being my "crappy conditions" ski, I would not like to spend too much, but let's see. Voile Objective BC's would be really nice...

lowangle al wrote: ↑

Thu Aug 22, 2019 6:00 pm

Life is too short to ski second rate skis.

^^^^^^ THIS!

Verskis wrote: ↑

Thu Aug 22, 2019 6:29 am

The other ski I'm interested in is the Fischer S-Bound 98.

Probably the best WL BC ski on the market, after Voile's Objective. And without a doubt the easiest to turn after the Rabb. Quite similar to your Rabb actually, but with better edge hold. The Rabb performs better on powder days, while the S98 offers more performance on harder snow or uncertain conditions.

Verskis wrote: ↑

Fri Aug 23, 2019 4:33 am

The problem is, Åsnes doesn't make fishscale skis in widths above the Ingstad

Yep, that is their main North American marketing problem. And that is why they won't be big here until they start doing so. Most people using narrow XC skis do not want scales, they want waxable skis. The waxless market here is for wide skis, not skinnies.

Hey Verskis-

How much flotation do you need with this ski?

lilcliffy wrote: ↑

Sat Aug 24, 2019 6:28 pm

Hey Verskis-

How much flotation do you need with this ski?

Well, when the conditions are warm, the snow tends to be more dense and more supportive, so in that sense I do not need that much floatation. But, when the snow is dense, I tend to have more trouble turning the skis, because the tails seem to be prone to hang up on the heavy snow. Therefore, I think the skis could be easier to turn in the heavy snow, if they wouldn't sink too deep.
So, the proper answer is "it depends". I think that if the tails are rockered and tapered, they would be less prone to hang up, and I would not need that much floatation. But if the tails are prone to hanging up, I need more floatation.