Asnes Cecilie Wax or Waxless?

[SnickBreck]

Hi, I need some feedback to make a purchase decision within the next couple of days. Neptune just restocked some of the Asnes skis I've had my eye on for awhile. I didn't pull the trigger last time and they sold out of my size.

I have two pairs of Nordic BC skis both waxless; Fischer Traverse-78 169, and Fischer Sbound-98 169. Both mounted with Rottefella BC NNN Manual bindings. I use Fischer EZ skins for both when terrain gets steep enough. I love the Sbounds for steep & deep where I need more stability downhill. My Traverse 78s are a little too heavily cambered for my body weight (113 lbs, 5ft3) so I slip a bit on most climbs and they are a little chattery on hard pack/refrozen chunder.

I'm trying to decide if the Asnes Cecilie would be the next ski to add to my quiver. A possible replacement for the Traverse-78 as well. I'd keep that for my daughter who weighs 130. I know the wax version will be faster downhill and possibly grip better uphill but part of me knows I'm going to be kinda lazy about waxing so I'm debating between the Cecilie wax 175 vs waxless 170. My weight is suited to the 170 but Ive been told the Cecilie is a softer ski so a 175 should work as well.I like to just grab the skis and go vs thinking about what wax I might need for the day and throw on a coat of F4 or maxiglide en route if needed.

I live/ski Colorado, variable snow, rolling terrain + terrain w/sustained long climbs and descents, most routes some amount of narrow trees. I ski every day winter through spring- Nordic BC, Touring, skate. Of all the types of skiing I do Nordic BC is by far my favorite and what I do 75% of the time.

Based on my details/thoughts, would you recommend the wax or waxless version?

Thanks for any feedback!

[Rodbelan]

The wax version will make you happy... the waxeless will make you merry.

[SnickBreck]

Is it better to be happy or merry?

I'm going to try some climbing wax on my Fischer Traverses and see if that takes care of the slippage issue. If it does, I'd go the wax route for new purchase since I'd already have the same size waxless for spring conditions.

I'm also looking at the Asnes Liv wax ski as well. This would be for more moderate vs hilly terrain. Honestly, I can see having both the Liv and Cecilie for different terrain. But I can only pick one right now.

Ability wise I'd say I'm an advanced (not expert as there's always more to learn!) Nordic BC skier; fast climber and fast on descents.

In lieu of more feedback and lack of demos I might head over to Neptune tomorrow and check them out in person.

[Smitty]

I don't have much experience with waxless skis myself, but there's some good comparisons on here of Asnes vs Fischer waxless patterns. Since you have perspective with the Fischer waxless, this might give you a good frame of reference. If you run a search, it's definitely been discussed in a few more places too.

http://www.telemarktalk.com/viewtopic.p ... ec4#p30949

Note Asnes Nansen and Cecilia are identical in construction, so above may be particularly comparable.

[SnickBreck]

Thanks Smitty. The link was very helpful!

Looks like that area of Norway has warmer snow than Colorado snow (barring spring conditions). Maybe I should just used to waxing . I'm not that much slower on my waxless than my heavier friends on wax skis so its a tough decision! What are the main reasons most skiers on this forum use wax vs waxless? I could go either way. On the fence!

[fisheater]

I put a baseball card in my spokes, rode my bike four houses to the corner and took It out. That was over 50 years ago, I still don’t like that feeling. Scales feel the same way to me. Wax grips, glides, and never gives you that baseball card in the spokes feel. In a double camber ski it’s nothing but smooth glide.
However sometimes my fingers get sticky. If you’re skiing in snow at or above freezing waxless could be easier. Waxing at the mid-twenty degrees F and below is really pretty easy. However if you’re in spring corn, go waxless. Personally I prefer a wax ski in what could be considered as difficult wax conditions, however it really isn’t difficult.
Now if you find putting a layer or three of the right wax for the day on, each day, go waxless. I don’t think waxing is easier, just generally better. If you really like your Traverse 78 and the scales stay with it. From what I’ve read here the Fischer scales have better grip that the Åsnes scales which I have read are geared more to glide. I do know, that utilizing the right wax or klister, I can getter better grip, than I could get with Fischer scales. You may not like that.
So if you like Fischer scales, want a better turning ski, and are not turning in deeper mid-winter snow, have you considered a Fischer E-109? I’ve been told it is the Fisher equivalent to Nansen.
I like my Åsnes skis, but I like to wax. If I wanted scales, I may not be as sure. I guess it really depends on how much you like integral kicker skins.
It’s all about what makes you happy. I guess all I wrote just make what @Rodbelan wrote all the wiser and more concise. At least you know why I like wax, and something to think about the different waxless offerings.
I really wish you success and happiness with your next ski choice. Because if you’re happy, you’ll have peace and pass it on.

[SnickBreck]

Thanks fisheater. I like your baseball card analogy. I'm going to branch out and try the Asnes Cecilie wax ski; maybe the Liv wax later on for flatter terrain. I'll keep the waxless Sbound 98s and Traverse 78s for spring. Better grip and faster descents are too appealing to pass up simply due to not wanting to wax. If there's a day when I don't feel like it, I'll just grab a pair of my existing waxless. No sense in adding a 3rd waxless ski to the quiver.

[CwmRaider]

@SnickBreck
The Nansens / Cecilie are excellent skis.

I use waxless Nansens because in this part of Norway the climate is a bit less stable than inland, and because days are very short at 63.5 degrees north in the winter when it is more stable. So longer trips are usually in March/April/May when daylight lasts longer, and when the day temperatures can be warmer.

And yes the Waxless Nansen/Cecilie have a shorter patterned zone than than the Fischer offtrack Crown pattern, so they glide a bit better, and are more quiet, but have less grip. So while this may be an OK compromise in some situations, from your description you are looking for better grip. So I don't think it will help you.

With grip wax you have silent skis, and you can get better grip and glide, than with even the best waxless pattern, if the conditions are suitable. You can also extend the waxing all the way to the tip and have better grip, than short skins if required.

I would have settled on waxable Nansens if conditions would have been more consistent. For trips when good snow conditions are predicted, and if the topography justifies it, I also have now wider waxable skis (FT62).

Cheers

[lowangle al]

Good choice, everyone needs at least one pair of waxable skis. They are faster on descents but the beauty of a well waxed ski is the glide you get after every kick.

[Rodbelan]

I was being a bit playful... But you seem to know the implications (from the explanations you gave us); again, I would say, you can't go wrong.

Me? I would buy the wax version; like Al and Fish are saying, its much better (it's *kind* of subjective)... Better glide and very good grip. It's magic. But it also depends on your environnement (climate), like Roelant suggest...