hope the ski season has been kind to you! So I think I went too long on my Skogs. I got the 185cm (Im 5ft8in and 135lbs). They are awesome on wide open moderate variable terrain, but impossible on steep hardpack ...maybe a shorter ski would have been more manueverable. But they are really amazing on many long gentle approaches. I can also descend fairly steep powder and make wide turns too and not faceplant too often.
So instead of getting another shorter pair, I am now considering the Ingstad WL for next season.
I would like to replace my S112 next yr which are now rock skis. I need a ski that can handle steep corn and mash (30-35 degrees max), icy refrozen late spring/summer rotten snow on moderate terrain (short sections of 25 degrees max) and windblown and suncrusted hard snow. The S112 is just ok because the higher elevations would have better snow and it would perform well especially in corn/mash but the middle elevations are often frozen nail biting descents.
Is the Ingstad up to the task? Would a short length like a 165cm do the job? I know this ski does well in deep powder because of the rocker tip but I dont need them for deep powder. I want a ski that can turn well on icy terrain....the 185cm m51 does that well on moderate terrain except I get knocked around alot on kibbles and bits because they are so light...and they are too fast!! I can easily carve and jump turn on the mt51 on a slope that rises approx 1000ft in 1.8 miles (300m in 3km) . The 185cm Skog also does well on similar terrain with more stability. I'm looking for a ski that can do the same task in 1000ft in 1 mile or less (300m in 1.5km).
I have been reading most of the comments on the Ingstad and havent been able to form any good conclusions other than that they are a well rounded ski that has better downhill performance and in powder than the Gamme 54. How do they differ from the Nansen/Skog as far as downhill and hardpack/icy conditions?
Its been a strange season here in AK, late season snow just dumping on us. great but creates a very short window to actually ski any powder as avy dangers are very high. ...looks like it will be a great corn/mash summer season...my trusty S112s will get some use (and abuse) for yet another year.
- Posts: 2897
- Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2015 7:20 pm
- Location: Stanley, New Brunswick, Canada
- Ski style: Nordic backcountry touring
- Favorite Skis: Asnes Ingstad BC; Asnes Gamme 54 BC; Asnes Storetind Carbon; Madshus Annum; Asnes Comabt Nato
- Favorite boots: Alfa Guard Advance BC; Alpina Alaska BC; Crispi Svartisen BC; Scarpa T4
- Occupation: Forestry Professional
Instructor at Maritime College of Forest Technology
Husband, father, farmer and logger
I think you need a report and perspective from someone that has rigourously downhill-skied both the Nansen/Cecile and the Ingstad.
@Woodserson Woods might be your man.
We have had some reports on this site- as well as UTE Magazine's test- that would suggest to me that the donwhill performance of the WL and BC Ingstad is quite different (with the BC being better downhill in terms of turn completion and release- especially on hardpack)...
I hope you get some good information here as I too would like to know about the Nansen vs Ingstad in terms of downhill performance. (I have never even seen a Nansen/Cecile BTW.)
You could also post this question in the Asnes Thread- over in the main forum- and you might get a helpful response from Crister, the Asnes Pro.
Unashamed to be a "cross-country type" and love skiing down-hill.
- Site Admin
- Posts: 2062
- Joined: Wed Dec 18, 2013 6:11 pm
- Location: Quebec / Vermont
- Ski style: Dancing with God
- Favorite Skis: Redsters, Radicals, Objectives and all Asnes skis.
- Favorite boots: ALFA Guard Advance, Scarpa TX Comp
- Occupation: Full-time ski bum
On the downhill, especially on harder snow, the main difference between the Nansen and the Ingstad is that you will have to fight a bit with the camber on the Nansen every time you initiate a turn. No big deal, it's part of the whole XCD thing, but it's easier to handle on the Ingstad, thanks to the NR...
- Never trust a guy who recommends T4s and pins
"And if you like to risk your neck, we'll boom down Sutton in old Quebec..."
- Posts: 2175
- Joined: Wed Feb 11, 2015 11:25 am
- Location: New Hampshire
- Ski style: Bumps, trees, steeps and long woodsy XC tours
- Favorite Skis: DH: Voile V6, Altai KOMs, XCD: Asnes FT62, XC: Nansen, E99, Bonna 1800
- Favorite boots: T2Eco, T4, Rossignol BCX10
- Occupation: Retro Rager-grouch. Flailmeister. E99 Nerd
Nah, not me. I only skied these things downhill inbounds at the ski area, otherwise rolling K&G on forest roads without enough downhill to truly turn them. Also, I only skied the Ingstads 1 day, the rest of the time I was on my Nansen's or Gammes.
I am tempted to get a pair of Ingstads either WL or wax really short...like 165cm to try them out for the very specific conditions... icy moderate/steep descents and summer corn. I am also thinking about skiing Mauna Kea next yr, but my buddy told me its steep and boiler plate at the top... may need plastic boots/AT setup for that. ...I have a while to figure that one out.
The Skog 185cm is amazing for low angle terrain especially with a light dusting of snow. But I think they are too difficult to turn on steep downhill terrain. FT62 has been a blast in deep light powder...dont ever need plastic boots in those conditions...have been blazing up and down faster than most ppl on AT setups.
Woods, how did you do at the resort with the Ingstads and Nansen? what conditions were u skiing? blues,black? groomers? moguls?