Telemark Talk / Telemark Tips Forum

Buda wrote:I'm thinking a lot about the Nansen vs the Ingstad these days. Hours of reading, translating from Norwegian, etc but 15 minutes with each is all I'd need ...

I'll use the skis in a variety of conditions but here I'm just considering resort skiing.

I've been skiing easy runs at resorts for years with 200cm long Madshus Glittertinds and it works for the most part but because the skis are so soft they become difficult when the groomed trails are too hard. Difficult but still doable and that's why I feel I just need a little more ski. Ingstad's are for sure easier to turn than the Nansen in the backcountry but I'm not convinced that they'd be easier on groomers by looking at the specs. The Ingstad has more sidecut but the Nansen has less rocker. Even though the turning radius is larger could the Nansen with it's longer effective edge provide more bite / control? Anyone tried both on groomed trails?

Between Bs, I'd suggest factoring camber into your ski comparison. Nansen is single camber. Ingstad is stiffer. I'd suggest the Nansen is a better ski for teleing on groomed resort trails. It's not soft or noodly as some have suggested, just soft (single) cambered. It's a perfect norpine ski.

I've skied the older 10th mtn ski on resorts as well. It's kind of like the Ingstad but wider underfoot. It's great but you don't really need thar wide a ski on groomed traiks.

Enjoy the snow!!!!

Thanks for all the info.

I suspect I would like the Nansens very much but since they are closer to my other skis (Glitts/E99) and since I had the opportunity to buy a pair of Ingstad's from Johnny I did just that. The other leap of faith that I'm taking is that the Ingstad's are waxless. I've never skied a waxless base so hopefully I'll like them. I may get Nansens with a waxable base later on.

Now I just need to find the right bindings for the Ingstads / Alico Teletours. It's been a long time since skied with 3pin bindings.

Nansen is single camber. Ingstad is stiffer. I'd suggest the Nansen is a better ski for teleing on groomed resort trails. It's not soft or noodly as some have suggested, just soft (single) cambered. It's a perfect norpine ski.

I beg to differ here...

The Nansen is stiffer than the Ingstad. In fact they have very similar flex and camber, but the Ingstad feels much softer because of the soft NR. Also, they are not true single camber skis, they both have "Moderate wax pocket", which means some kind of camber and a half, or high and resistant single camber with sometimes a tiny, tiny barely noticeable wax pocket.

Although they are both AMAZING skis, that makes them very poor Norpine skis... None of them are very good candidates for downhill skiing on groomers... They both need to be unweighted first in order to turn on hard pack.

EDIT: The Ingstad is way easier to turn on hard pack than the Glittertinds, but it's nowhere near a Norpine ski...

Very interesting...Well- I have never even seen a Nansen- let alone squeezed or pressured one!

Particularly interesting that you describe the Nansen as being stiffer than the Ingstad! I personally think that the current Ingstad BC is the stiffest, most supportive ski in its class (i.e. Eon/E-109/Combat Nato/BC90, etc.). If the Nansen is stiffer and has a longer effective edge it must have a significantly wider turn radius than the Ingstad...

Which one do you prefer- or rather- under what conditions would you choose the Ingstad over the Nansen?

And yes- the Ingstad (and it seems also the Nansen) is cambered and stiff underfoot for making carved linked turns on hardpack- I too have to fully-unweight this ski to fully-pressure it and turn it- though this is the technique I use with all of my distance-oriented xcd skis!

The fact that you find the Nansen stiffer actually concerns me...There have been a number of reports here of the Nansen being poor in very deep soft snow when XC skiing- prone to the dreaded "pool-cover syndrome"...

The Ingstad BC has proven itself to in almost all snow conditions- except for one- I have not tested them yet XC skiing in very deep powder snow...But if the Nansen is stiffer than the Ingstad, then surely the Ingstad will suffer from the same problems when XC skiing in powder snow?

Buda wrote: since I had the opportunity to buy a pair of Ingstad's from Johnny I did just that.

Very exciting BTW!!

The other leap of faith that I'm taking is that the Ingstad's are waxless. I've never skied a waxless base so hopefully I'll like them.

I am keen to hear all of you report on the waxless Asnes xcd skis!

Now I just need to find the right bindings for the Ingstads / Alico Teletours. It's been a long time since skied with 3pin bindings.

Awesome boot! What are you leaning towards for a binding?
What boot and binding have you been using on-piste with the Glittertind?

Johnny wrote:

Nansen is single camber. Ingstad is stiffer. I'd suggest the Nansen is a better ski for teleing on groomed resort trails. It's not soft or noodly as some have suggested, just soft (single) cambered. It's a perfect norpine ski.

I beg to differ here...

The Nansen is stiffer than the Ingstad. In fact they have very similar flex and camber, but the Ingstad feels much softer because of the soft NR. Also, they are not true single camber skis, they both have "Moderate wax pocket", which means some kind of camber and a half, or high and resistant single camber with sometimes a tiny, tiny barely noticeable wax pocket.

Although they are both AMAZING skis, that makes them very poor Norpine skis... None of them are very good candidates for downhill skiing on groomers... They both need to be unweighted first in order to turn on hard pack.

EDIT: The Ingstad is way easier to turn on hard pack than the Glittertinds, but it's nowhere near a Norpine ski...

You're right J, I might have pushed it with it being single camber. It's surely a lot less camber than what you would expect from an e99 style ski. And ok, it might not be a norpine ski by your definition, but it sure is finé ski to take on the groomers!

At least we agree on the Nansen being a relatively stiff ski.

As for the dreaded pool cover syndrome. I've found the overall stiffness of the Nansen prevents that to a large degree. It's a lot more of a problem with the Xtralite e109.

I would describe the Nansen as a classic nordic bc touring ski that you can use and depend on to go far and that actually turns very well too. It's not the number one ski I would pick for yoyoing. It's a deepenable workhouse for travellling and enjoying the down as you go. My number one choice for the traversée de Charlevoix for example.

bgregoire wrote: As for the dreaded pool cover syndrome. I've found the overall stiffness of the Nansen prevents that to a large degree. It's a lot more of a problem with the Xtralite e109.

Well damn- now I kinda want a Nansen as well!

I would describe the Nansen as a classic nordic bc touring ski that you can use and depend on to go far and that actually turns very well too. It's not the number one ski I would pick for yoyoing. It's a deepenable workhouse for travellling and enjoying the down as you go. My number one choice for the traversée de Charlevoix for example.

Wicked (on my todo tour lists BTW- my wife and I had this trip planned before a certain child joined our life! )

Why would you choose the Nansen over the Ingstad for this trip? Nansen better on variable snow like an E99? Ingstad best on deep soft snow?

lilcliffy wrote:
Why would you choose the Nansen over the Ingstad for this trip? Nansen better on variable snow like an E99? Ingstad best on deep soft snow?

Hi LC, happy holidays. One reason I would choose the Nansen over the ingstad is that I actually own a pair

The Nansen is better ski than the e99 for that route given the extra downhill control it offers. There are a lot of tough steep sections to be handle with a full pack.

As the trail is travelled by groups most every day, its either packed or will be by your own group, so soft snow floatation is not critical here. Besides, the wider the tip of your ski, the more snow you actually carry and push around as you ski.

Keep in mind I would take an e99, e109, gamme, nansen or ingstade on this trail any day. They would all work quite well. If I had to choose though, number one would be nansen and I'd be split between Ingstad or a gamme or e99.

lilcliffy wrote: Very exciting BTW!!

Indeed!

What are you leaning towards for a binding?

Don't know. I haven't used 3pin bindings since I was a kid. I want to keep it simple. "Voile 3-pin cable telemark", "Voile 3-pin cable traverse telemark". Suggestions welcome.

What boot and binding have you been using on-piste with the Glittertind?

Salomon X-Adv raid manual bindings and X-Adv 7 boots. I was very happy with that and would stay with that system had it not been discontinued.

bgregoire wrote: a classic nordic bc touring ski that you can use and depend on to go far and that actually turns very well too.

That's my dream ski right there!

lilcliffy wrote:Which one do you prefer- or rather- under what conditions would you choose the Ingstad over the Nansen?

You know that I like both...
http://www.telemarktalk.com/viewtopic.p ... 072#p24037

lilcliffy wrote:The fact that you find the Nansen stiffer actually concerns me...There have been a number of reports here of the Nansen being poor in very deep soft snow when XC skiing- prone to the dreaded "pool-cover syndrome"...

After squeezing both of them again this afternoon, I would actually be very tempted to say they are the same, except for the NR on the Ingstad, which makes it feel smoother over the Nansen.

bgregoire wrote: And ok, it might not be a norpine ski by your definition, but it sure is finé ski to take on the groomers!

You are absolutely right: every single ski can (and should!) be brought on the groomers at least once... Fun is guaranteed everytime...! (So are faceplants too...) But true Norpine skis must have single, alpine camber to maximum the fun factor...