Falketind 62 Review

Real reviews by real skiers. What a concept! Add your own today. Reviews only please, questions can be posted as replies but new threads looking for opinions should be posted to the main Telemark Talk Forum.
HBS

Rank: XCD Enthusiast
XCD Enthusiast
Posts: 42
Joined: Sun Jan 31, 2016 8:25 pm

Re: Falketind 62 Review

Postby HBS » Mon Mar 19, 2018 12:09 pm

lilcliffy wrote:Damn the weak $CAN- that is actually a very good price for a FT68. I paid that much for my Storetinds on clearance!

Neptune's website is still a mess- I cannot find the FT68 on it.

HBS- you interested in the FT for its extra flotation over the Nansen- or, is it the downhill performance?


If you call them they can sort everything out but they just finished a huge remodel (including coffee shop...) with new owners so I think the website will there eventually. The new store is pretty amazing but doesn't seem as busy as it used to be. I'm hoping they stay open!

Float and downhill performance tbh - the Nansens are a great trail ski but get off trail in Colorado winter snow pack and you aren't going anywhere. I also have an AT setup but it feels like overkill for the terrain I'd like to be skiing. For skiing up and down mountains it's great but all winter the avalanche danger is too high for that so I'm limited to low angle skiing anyway.

User avatar
lilcliffy

Rank: XCD KNIGHT
XCD KNIGHT
Posts: 1677
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2015 7:20 pm
Location: Stanley, New Brunswick, Canada

Re: Falketind 62 Review

Postby lilcliffy » Mon Mar 19, 2018 1:54 pm

HBS wrote:Float and downhill performance tbh - the Nansens are a great trail ski but get off trail in Colorado winter snow pack and you aren't going anywhere.

I don't know how much you weigh- but my personal experience and testing is that I do not generally notice any difference in flotation between my 54mm-waisted E99s and 60-62mm-widthed skis (e.g. Eon/E109).

However- width is not the only dimension that affects flotation- flex matters as much:
-my 210cm Combat Natos (62mm) offer just as much flotation as my 195cm Annums (78mm)- due to the flex offering full-length stability in deep snow (though the rounder flex of the Annum makes them easier to turn).
-my 210cm Combat Nato (62mm) offers MUCH better flotation than the wider 195cm Epoch (68mm)- again due to flex (though the rounder flex of the Epoch makes them easier to turn).
-my 205cm Eons and E109s are absolutely useless in truly deep snow as their flex is completely unstable- they are both actually worse in truly deep snow than the narrower E99!
-my 188cm Storetind (68mm) (FT68) offers as much flotation and stability as both the 210cm Combat Nato(62mm) or the 195cm Annum (78mm) (and the ST offers MUCH better downhill performance than the Annum- sidecut, tip rocker, and torsional rigidity (the Annum is a wet noodle under pressure)).

Bob's description of the flotation of the FT62 suggests that its very stable flex supports more flotation than its meager 62mm waist would suggest...This would suggest that the FT62 could offer more float than the 56mm Nansen...

However- the Nansen is available in traditional XC lengths as well...If the Nansen has a stable flex, I doubt that a 188cm FT62 offers any more flotation than a 205cm Nansen...

How would you describe the flex of the Nansen?

Now- this has to be taken with a grain of salt as always- that grain of salt is CLIMATE.

I must be clear that I get a LOT of snowfall in my local climate- BUT, the majority of that snow is heavy and moisture-rich, and many of the heavy-snowfall storms are associated with high winds. My "deep" snow does not match the profile of true "champaign" powder snow that one gets in the western dry mountains. Even when I do get that bottomless dry powder it rarely lasts more than a couple of days, before it consolidates.

So- my point is that- due to supportive flex- my 68mm Storetind (FT68) offers even more effective flotation than my 78mm Annums- and, as such it is really the most flotation that I need in my local climate- even in 130cm of fresh snow (which is what we got last week!) I cannot speak to whether the ST/FT68 would be enough flotation for that deep dry pow you get!

I should also point out that when I do get that bottomless dry powders snow, my 210cm Combat Natos actually are more stable and supportive than the very soft round-flexing Annum...

I also have an AT setup but it feels like overkill for the terrain I'd like to be skiing. For skiing up and down mountains it's great but all winter the avalanche danger is too high for that so I'm limited to low angle skiing anyway.

I "toured" on an AT setup alot in the late 90s- for up and down it cannot be beaten- but I freakin hate it :evil: for any touring that involves significant horizontal distance- I need ye-old Nordic metatarsal flex!!!!
The pursuit of XCD balance: cross-country AND down-hill skiing in the backcountry

HBS

Rank: XCD Enthusiast
XCD Enthusiast
Posts: 42
Joined: Sun Jan 31, 2016 8:25 pm

Re: Falketind 62 Review

Postby HBS » Mon Mar 19, 2018 11:20 pm

lilcliffy wrote:I don't know how much you weigh- but my personal experience and testing is that I do not generally notice any difference in flotation between my 54mm-waisted E99s and 60-62mm-widthed skis (e.g. Eon/E109).




To me it seems like the 105 tip vs the 76 on the nansen would made a big difference, also about 30mm wider on the tails - I can often feel the tails on the nansen sink in.


lilcliffy wrote:However- width is not the only dimension that affects flotation- flex matters as much:
-my 210cm Combat Natos (62mm) offer just as much flotation as my 195cm Annums (78mm)- due to the flex offering full-length stability in deep snow (though the rounder flex of the Annum makes them easier to turn).
-my 210cm Combat Nato (62mm) offers MUCH better flotation than the wider 195cm Epoch (68mm)- again due to flex (though the rounder flex of the Epoch makes them easier to turn).
-my 205cm Eons and E109s are absolutely useless in truly deep snow as their flex is completely unstable- they are both actually worse in truly deep snow than the narrower E99!
-my 188cm Storetind (68mm) (FT68) offers as much flotation and stability as both the 210cm Combat Nato(62mm) or the 195cm Annum (78mm) (and the ST offers MUCH better downhill performance than the Annum- sidecut, tip rocker, and torsional rigidity (the Annum is a wet noodle under pressure)).

Bob's description of the flotation of the FT62 suggests that its very stable flex supports more flotation than its meager 62mm waist would suggest...This would suggest that the FT62 could offer more float than the 56mm Nansen...

However- the Nansen is available in traditional XC lengths as well...If the Nansen has a stable flex, I doubt that a 188cm FT62 offers any more flotation than a 205cm Nansen...
How would you describe the flex of the Nansen?


Seems soft at first but firms up pretty quickly but I'm not sure what a round flex would feel like. Compared to my fischer RCS track skis it's definitely stiffer.

lilcliffy wrote:Now- this has to be taken with a grain of salt as always- that grain of salt is CLIMATE.

I must be clear that I get a LOT of snowfall in my local climate- BUT, the majority of that snow is heavy and moisture-rich, and many of the heavy-snowfall storms are associated with high winds. My "deep" snow does not match the profile of true "champaign" powder snow that one gets in the western dry mountains. Even when I do get that bottomless dry powder it rarely lasts more than a couple of days, before it consolidates.

So- my point is that- due to supportive flex- my 68mm Storetind (FT68) offers even more effective flotation than my 78mm Annums- and, as such it is really the most flotation that I need in my local climate- even in 130cm of fresh snow (which is what we got last week!) I cannot speak to whether the ST/FT68 would be enough flotation for that deep dry pow you get!

I should also point out that when I do get that bottomless dry powders snow, my 210cm Combat Natos actually are more stable and supportive than the very soft round-flexing Annum...


Yeah if you step off the track without a ski or snowshoe on your foot you'll wind up thigh deep. Often you can't rely on solid pole plants because your pole (with powder basket) will just sink in as far as you can reach. There are layers so your skis do tend to stop on the last layer of snow (6-12" down typically). Near treeline we get a lot of wind crust because the snow is so fine and that stuff can range from styrafoam to bulletproof ice. In the spring it tends to soften up nicely but not so much in winter.

Nothing really "floats" until you get into AT ski territory but I think an extra 30mm would go a long way. Maybe I'll get lucky and they will go on 40% off and I can report back next winter. Spring here is definitely AT ski time though...

lilcliffy wrote:I "toured" on an AT setup alot in the late 90s- for up and down it cannot be beaten- but I freakin hate it :evil: for any touring that involves significant horizontal distance- I need ye-old Nordic metatarsal flex!!!!


I hear that - some guy tried telling me skimo setups are just as fast and I just shook my head. Also I will take a comfy soft boot over a rigid box any day.

User avatar
lilcliffy

Rank: XCD KNIGHT
XCD KNIGHT
Posts: 1677
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2015 7:20 pm
Location: Stanley, New Brunswick, Canada

Re: Falketind 62 Review

Postby lilcliffy » Mon Aug 13, 2018 5:06 pm

Hey Bob,
When you get a chance give those sweet FT62s a good squeeze for me.
I am wondering how resistant they are underfoot...
The pursuit of XCD balance: cross-country AND down-hill skiing in the backcountry


Return to “Community Ski Reviews”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests