Åsnes NOSI 76 Ski Review

[stenu]

@lilcliffy I have always thought things like for example in this drawing (by J Skis) below. With modern rockered skis the effective edge can be somewhat longer than their running length. Or in some cases a lot longer if you think fully rockered skis. When the ski is leaned to curve, ski’s contact length with the snow gets longer. Theoretically when the ski is at a 90 deg angle to the slope rocker has no effect to the contact length. That is why rockered skis are more stable when they are skied in a curve than when skied bases flat on the snow.



Nosi has slightly less sidecut than Rabb. 180 cm Nosi’s turn radius is 20 m. 172 cm Nosi has about the same radius than 180 cm Rabb.

About Storetind, I have no complains about its skiability but when descending it is difficult to turn in consolidated deep snow (would need more powerful boots) and it is difficult to control on windblown, uneven hard snow (the tails and tips tend to grab to the obstacles on the snow). In good conditions it is a predicable ski but not very fun in my opinion. Because of its camber and stiffness it needs a lot of speed to get it arched on turns. It does not really want to ”stay on the rail” and therefore I like more 172 cm Nosi even on groomed slopes. I had originally the bindings on bp but I moved them about 1,5 cm forward.

[CwmRaider]

@lilcliffy
Looks like low camber and rocker to me. 180 cm Nosi Xplore. I like the shorter length for this sli, the ski didn't wander excessively.
Crusty snow so poor testing conditions but it was nice to get out and catch some sun. I skied with 58mm mohair x-skins. Grip was plenty, but glide on hardpack was lacking.

[fisheater]

Every time I see photos of those mountains, that fjord. I’m pleased too see an area that I may never visit, but the photo brings me there.

[CwmRaider]

Thanks, it's basically my back yard, I love it, and if it were a longer distance from home I wouldn't be able to go as often (and I go skiing less often than I would like with two small kids)

[lilcliffy]

@stenu
Thank you for posting that excellent diagram from J Skis.

That is a more sophisticated diagram than the ones I posted from Voile-
the J Skis diagram illustrates the ski in a pressured-flexed shape- indicating the effective edge extending beyond the section of the ski with positive camber- VERY interesting.
In the J Ski diagram, the effective edge of the ski is longer than the section of the ski with positive camber.
I wonder if this diagram is for a specific ski design, or intended as a general overview-
I also wonder whether that flexed effective edge is indicated for all snow conditions, or just deep 3-dimensional snow...

Thanks again- and let us know how you make out with your longer Nosi!
Gareth

[lilcliffy]

@CwmRaider
Thank you for those excellent photos!

It certainly looks like the new Nosi 76 Xplore has less shovel-rocker than the outgoing Nosi 76-
the rocker profile looks like the current Rabb 68 and Falketind 62 Xplore.

I am sold- got a get a pair!!!!!

I still lean towards the 180 length-
I have the 180 Rabb 68 (was on it today in INCRERDIBLE conditions)- I have never thought I would want it shorter...

[lilcliffy]

@CwmRaider
Did you N76X ski have a boot-center mark on them?

Where did you mount the XP binding? Balance point?

[CwmRaider]

@lilcliffy the shop mounted them so embarrassingly I cannot be sure. Usually here it is pin line on balance point.

[stenu]

@stenu
Thank you for posting that excellent diagram from J Skis.

That is a more sophisticated diagram than the ones I posted from Voile-
the J Skis diagram illustrates the ski in a pressured-flexed shape- indicating the effective edge extending beyond the section of the ski with positive camber- VERY interesting.
In the J Ski diagram, the effective edge of the ski is longer than the section of the ski with positive camber.
I wonder if this diagram is for a specific ski design, or intended as a general overview-
I also wonder whether that flexed effective edge is indicated for all snow conditions, or just deep 3-dimensional snow...

Thanks again- and let us know how you make out with your longer Nosi!
Gareth

The diagram is for a spesific ski but most of the modern off piste skis look more or less like that and so does Nosi. The sidecut profile and the length of the effectice egde has more effect on the hard surfaces and not that much in soft snow.

I have now skied 5 days with a total of about 5k vertical meters at different snow conditions plus one ski lift assisted bad visibility day with 1700 verticals with the 180 cm Nosi. I also was back on the 172 Nosi for one day. For now I would say it is unnecessary stiff for soft boots and for my skills.

It is a nice ski on lower angle slopes but on steeper (20-25 degree) slopes it does not turn fast enough to be able to stay in fall line and link turns properly with the speeds I can tolerate. The denser the snow is the bigger is the difference. Also in breakable crust the longer one is harder to get turned even with parallel turns.

The length is not the problem, I like it. I have two photos from where the difference can be seen, I think. While the 180 cm Nosi stays quite straight in a turn, 172 cm Nosi bends to nice arc. I even have a feeling that the shorter one floats better because of its softer flex/shovels but it may be a false feeling.

180 cm: https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/543 ... 3710_k.jpg
172 cm: https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/543 ... b919_k.jpg

So for now and in my opinion Åsnes’s recommendation for a 5-10 cm shorter ski than the skier (for AT use) is spot on also for xcD use. If you want a ski that is better for XCd I believe a Falketind or Rabb in longer length may perform better overall. If Nosi’s construction has been changed for the XP version it may change the situation.

I dont know if a more forward moint point would make it to turn easier also in softer snow but with those stiffer shovels I am not sure if it would be useful to mount more forward. I think I will keep the binding there where they are and anyway I am definatelly going to keep both skis. There will be times and places for the longer on too and maby skills will allow to pressure it more in the future.

Hope this helps to choose the best length for your use. I like them both but for different reasons. 172 cm Nosi makes me a better skier, 180 cm gives more challenge

[tkarhu]

Would love to try both lengths- but, will probably get 180 if I buy a Nosi...

Well…I love Nosi skiing so much that I ordered they in 180 cm length too (non-xplore version). Then I will know

I believe that our AT setups will see less and less use in the future.

We have atleast Europe’s - if not world’s - cheapest Crispi Svartisens here in Helsinki in a store called Bear & Water. I went yesterday there to test them. I have a wide foot and the fit was better than with Alaskas. Alaska is a little bit too long boot for my shoe and with Svartisen I could go one size down. When attached to the binding and to the ski, it felt that much stiffer than Alaskas that I decided to by them. The difference was not huge but it definatelly was there. It will be interesting to see how much better downhill performance they have.

We have a bad winter here in Southern Finland but they have promised some new snow for the weekend so it may be possible that I can test the boots during the upcoming weekend at some of the small ski centers we have here.

Next possibility to ski bigger hills will be not untill the beginning of March at Pallas fells.

@stenu Thanks for all the info here. Were the new skiing experiences now on Svartisens?

Would be nice to hear more AT vs Xplore experiences. Maybe in another thread, or even face-to-face as we are both in Helsinki. EDIT: You seem to be on 75 mm, wss it Rottefella Super Telemark and Alaskas. Should be quite similar to Xplore and stiff boots I think.