narrow double-cambered off-trail xcountry ski

[Teleman]

Interesting, my e109's are 78-60-70....New ones are a bit wider up by the tip?....Will be looking to ski them as a demo...have found the 178 that I have is just plain to short...At 190 thinking they would really fly....and not stop in the middle of a steep decent, which has happened....The Noodles donated by Dostie are quite stable at speed and really like speedy long arcs....Leathers and pins seem to turn them with ease....TM

[MikeK]

They do seem to market them to to a specific audience. I see them as a sort of do-all nordic BC ski which can go in groomed tracks or taken to packed snomo trails with little fuss or fiddle, but with a weight limit. Compact skis work great if you are not too heavy. I ski the BC65s in 195 length and would not want to go much shorter for my 185 lbs. My buddy has the Spider 189s and seems to really like them and he's in the 180 lbs range. The shorter length is good for when you need to turn or slow down on a hard packed icy surface or maneuver in thick brush. They also come with the 'nordic rocker camber' so that they break trail better, but I'm not sure it makes any difference. Think easy, versatile, light, and convenient. These are the skis we use when the conditions dictate when we can't do laps on our favorite slopes, but want to get out and charge some distance at speed.

I do think they work in certain situations and for certain people. It's certainly much faster than snowshoeing and I think they need to directly compete with that... although you can never beat snowshoes and crampons for climbing IMO.

Those short lengths I believe help newer skiers maneuver easier and I think they want to try to promote these as turnable skis on hills, which some are with a basic wedge turn (and someone like CIMA has shown that with technique, they can be good tele skis).

It's just another compromise for those who want to be able to ski at a center and their backyard - personally I'd go a touch longer and get a ski like an E99 or Glittertind which can do double duty as well.

[MikeK]

i had a good look at the new Xtralite E109s at the shop and even did get to try a friend's pair on the other day. Double camber or not, I agree with Teleman, they are definitely not as cambered as the E99. So much so, that I would take the E99 any day on the flats. The E109s are going to be better on the down of course.

I'm not always sure camber height is great metric to use simply because on the double camber, it's really the secondary height of the wax pocket that will affect the glide. Surely you are going to get more pop out of a higher first camber, but it will also be extra hard to turn.

Either way, I'd agree, the 109 isn't and ideal flat touring ski, simply because of the width and sidecut. I have intentions of using such a ski for more rolling terrain where a single camber ski is overkill.

Just another random note about the Fischer parabolic sidecut. I notice that while the ski is pressured it turns very nice, but when it's not it can get really squirrelly. For that reason I've noticed it's a bit easier to tele those skis than do something like a stem christie (even if the tele has some wedge in it) simply due to weighting the ski - in a snowplow those skis can get a little crazy if you don't keep your weight even. It seems exact opposite on the straighter skis - they skid nicer. I've never tele'd with carving skis but it's something I seem to recall about the inside ski alpine style.

[CIMA]

In my dreams, I see a super skinny alpine-cambered XC carving ski... ; )

How about this:
[video][/video]

For me, I don't care much for the degree of camber when it comes to turnablity.

[Johnny]

CIMA, those are indeed my dream skis. But they can't make the list because they're way too short and way too expensive...! ; )

Camber does matter downhill on the groomers...
(Hard to believe but yeah, sometimes I get bored with skiing fresh powder every day and need a hardpack fix... ; )

[lilcliffy]

i had a good look at the new Xtralite E109s at the shop and even did get to try a friend's pair on the other day. Double camber or not, I agree with Teleman, they are definitely not as cambered as the E99. So much so, that I would take the E99 any day on the flats. The E109s are going to be better on the down of course.

Also of note, I have taken the E99s everywhere, included 10 days backcoutnry backpacking trips, and this on NNN BC. Not the best control on the down, but heck, they are light and I say, you can do anything on this ski.

Teleman's E109s are an older model- that I am not familiar with.

I can say with confidence that the current E109 is a double-cambered ski- intended for backcountry-xcountry trekking/touring.

bgregoire- I think that you are also correct- the E109 is perhaps a bit less cambered than the E99- the E99 will certainly outperform the E109 on dense snow. But I believe- with some confidence- that the E109 will out perform the E99 in soft powder.

Whether the E109 is less cambered than the E99 or not- the E109 is significantly more cambered than a 1.5-cambered ski like the Madshus Eon.

As far as downhill performance; In a long XC length- neither the E99, nor the E109 are going to perform as smoothly as an Eon or an S-Bound 78/88 (at least not IME).

[lilcliffy]

I remember reading that the Rossi BCs were pretty much like alpine skis.

My understanding is that the Rossi BC xcountry lineup is real mixed bag.

The narrower Rossi BC-XCs (BC70 and narrower) are trad double-cambered backcountry-xcountry skis designed primarily for backcountry trekking/touring.

The fatter Rossi BC-XCs (BC90 and fatter) are single-cambered hybrid xcountry-telemark skis (i.e. XCD)- with a similar intent to the Fischer S-Bounds and the Madshus/Karhu XCDs. So- I do think the Rossi BC90, BC110, & BC125 are "xcountry" skis.

I have thoroughly tried the narrow double-cambered Rossi BC lineup (they are popular and widely available in my region). I have never tried the fatter single-cambered Rossi BCs. (As an aside- the Rossi BC110 does not have a 110mm shovel- it has exactly the same profile as the Madshus Annum/Karhu XCD Guide- right down to the 109mm shovel).

[MikeK]

Strangely enough I've never tried any of wider Rossi Nordic BC skis either. They are quite available in shops I've been to, and I know some people really like them (seems more the xcD skiers than the XCd skiers in my observation).

My personal interest waned after using the BC65/BC70 and realized I didn't much care for the waxless pattern. I assumed they were similar but I did have my eye out for a BC90 for a little while. I couldn't find any good deals otherwise I might have popped on a pair and tried them. Anyway they may in fact climb better due to being single cambered and wider under foot.

My thought on why they are not widely popular in my area is their lack of a do-it-all ski like the Eon. I see a lot of those on the type of stuff I ski, and I see why, they are a good compromise for XCd. The skinnier Rossi's tend to be stiff and unforgiving and the larger ones probably too heavy and slow for those types of skiers.

From the limited knowledge I have of poking around on NY ski forums, ADK forums, shops, trailheads, etc... the Annum and the BC110 are quite popular, more so among the xcD crowd. I've also noticed a lot of people ski these skis with T4s and up.

I still really love the Epoch/S-98 (I've just started to feel the uncomfortable twinge in them in heavy snow with leathers - but 99% of the time, AWESOME) so that would put me into the BC90 territory. I can't wait until next year to try the Eon/E109 on some of the stuff I like to see if I have more fun with those... we'll see. If I can get more glide and still have fun on the hills (both UP and down) - if not, I'll be back to my mid-fats (and I'll def still use them). I still see little use in my quiver for the Annum - I'm going to let my wife try them and see if she likes them with her plastic boots.

[MikeK]

Not much talk about the Alpinas - do they still make skis anymore?

I've noticed a few models here and there at shops but I never bothered to try them.

[bgregoire]

Not much talk about the Alpinas - do they still make skis anymore?

I've noticed a few models here and there at shops but I never bothered to try them.

From my understanding the NARROW ones have zero sidecut (whereas as the XCD ones have tons). I tried one pair once for 30 seconds. Great for crossing a lake. I hear they are still being sold, even though the company does not seem to advertise them online.