Asnes MT65 (USGI) Combat Skis

[MikeK]

Got the skis today. hmmm... I have a few opinions on them.

First off they have a lot of initial tension. We knew that. They are going to have some spring on the trail.

Second mine do not have plastic sides. They are like cliffy's.

Third, I get maybe a 2-3" partial wax pocket with the 200s I have right in front of my foot. It's not much, but a notecard can slide out, won't pinch it fully. Both sets I have are pretty close.

I'm glad I got 200s. These things are beasts. 210 in a ski this wide and thick is a lot of ski for me.

The flex... here's where I differ immensely. It's pretty bad. Because the tips and tails are so stiff, it's almost impossible to reverse camber them. They remind me a lot of the Asnes/Merrell branded skis that Johnny has. Just wider. Similar construction, really heavy initial camber... maybe a slight second camber? It's really hard to tell because they flex so hard. The center of the ski stays pretty flat though. They flex just like those Merrells did.

No matter. They'll be good for flatland cruising and learning wax.

[lilcliffy]

The flex... here's where I differ immensely. It's pretty bad. Because the tips and tails are so stiff, it's almost impossible to reverse camber them.

Why do you say it is "bad"? The flex pattern is intended for XC K&G...I think you might be surprised by how "good" you might find them. Why do you want to "reverse camber" them?

They are nothing like the S-Bounds, nor the Madshus/Karhu XCDs- but you might be surprised at how much more efficient they are in XC-focused backcountry skiing.

I have been testing mine against a 205cm waxable Eon- and they are much more efficient than the Eon as a xcountry ski.

[MikeK]

Why do you say it is "bad"? The flex pattern is intended for XC K&G...I think you might be surprised by how "good" you might find them. Why do you want to "reverse camber" them?

They are nothing like the S-Bounds, nor the Madshus/Karhu XCDs- but you might be surprised at how much more efficient they are in XC-focused backcountry skiing.

I have been testing mine against a 205cm waxable Eon- and they are much more efficient than the Eon as a xcountry ski.

Well by flex I mean how the ski would go to a reverse camber for turning performance. I look at all skis from this perspective.

I think they have a great initial camber for k+g, much like my e89s have. Gives the skis a lot of pop of every stride.

They are actually harder to reverse camber than the e89 is though, and that's a pretty poor performing ski on hills.

Honestly I wish they had a big 'ole wax pocket, but even the 210s most likely wouldn't have provided me that and another reason I chose to keep a size I was more comfortable with (and I wanted my wife to ski a pair).

I can't complain for $30 a pair shipped. If it turns out I really don't like them when I ski them, it won't bother me in the least.

NNN-BC would have been my binding of preference but I cheaped out and bought pins for both sets (yes, because they were cheaper).

[Woodserson]

Hmmmmm, man sounds like a groovy great flatland touring ski. You want that stiffness underfoot, that's a good thing. I wonder... at 160lbs and lanky and not a lot of muscle, I wonder if the 200cm or the 210cm... would do it...

[MikeK]

Yeah I'd definitely say it's an offtrack cruiser. Wide, straight, springy, heavy (damp I assume?).

200 ought to do ya. I'd guess 20 less lbs per ski and they'd have a healthy wax pocket, maybe not a full length traditional though.

I don't know if I have 80lbs of lead lying around... if I do I'll measure them for you. I think I only have 50 lbs though.

When I put them base to base I can squeeze them together with both hands (it's a fair deal of force), but there remains about a 2mm gap that I can't get by hand. Becomes very non-linear there. So it makes me think they have a slight second camber.

I wish I had a better floor to measure on too... when it's this close you really need a very flat surface.

[lilcliffy]

Well by flex I mean how the ski would go to a reverse camber for turning performance. I look at all skis from this perspective.

I'm curious- why would you look at all skis from the attribute of whether you can reverse-camber them?

Fist of all- I was under the impression that you are primarily XCd skiing- a flex pattern that is soft-flexing enough to reverse camber, cannot be stiff enough to get an efficient Nordic "kick"...

Secondly- doesn't the ability to reverse-camber a ski only apply to steering through turns in deep, soft snow? If you are downhill skiing on a dense base- you want a strong, torsionally rigid single camber- in order to effectively engage the edge. If the ski is soft-flexing enough to reverse-camber it- it will go all "noodily" when you put it on edge- precisely why the S-98, S-112, and Vector hold an edge on a dense base- and the Epoch and Annum do not...

I have been downhill skiing with these on moderately steep slopes- I can compress the camber of this skis enough, on a dense base- to engage the edge. They have a huge turning radius due to the lack of parabolic sidecut- but if I stride into turn initiations, I can complete some tight turns. If these skis had a parabolic sidecut- you could burn through some tight, carved alpine turns...

The tips and tails are relatively stiff- but I think you will be happily surprised by how much that supports an effective "kick" and glide- much more than your Eons or the S-78.

The moderate width gives pretty decent flotation over the "typical" fresh snow in the northeast- dense fresh snow over a dense, stable base. Despite the lack of a rockered tip- I am finding that these skis break trail better than my Eons as well in up to 16 inches or so of fresh snow- over a dense base. And on old, dense, consolidated snow- this ski "kicks" a softer-flexing ski's ass.

[MikeK]

Well every skis turning ability relies on it's ability to reverse camber. Sidecut makes the ski reverse camber when rolled on edge on dense snows.

I've talked to a few people that work in the ski industry. First thing they do with a dh ski is flex it and sight it. The shape profile, rocker and the torsional stiffness will come into play as well, but if it can't reverse, it can't carve a turn arc.

I just look at every metal edged ski like Gamme does on his chart. It doesn't matter if it's good or bad, I just take note of where it is on the map.

I expect the attribute that make skis a good straight line performer to be in direct conflict with what would make it a good turner. It's often the case.

Being a GI ski I would have actually expected more dh aspect. Being an Asnes ski of this vintage, I am not surprised though. Like I say, it was just like the other ones I handled.

[lilcliffy]

OK- I understand what you are saying...I think you and I have a different definition of what "reverse-camber" means. And the degree to which a ski can flatten or completely reverse its camber (i.e. a full rockered ski) determines its turning performance- depending on snow conditions. For example, true downhill powder skis are fully-rockered and come "reverse-cambered" right out of the box- this flex pattern produces terrible downhill performance on dense snow- and zero Nordic "kick"

What I can tell you is if you are heavy enough (like me) you will be able to "reverse-camber" that ski and engage the edge.

But is is too straight to give a short-radius carved turn. I have to physically pick them up in a telemark stride to complete a tight turn.

[MikeK]

OH yeah... I figure I'd be able to weight the heck out of them and get them to skid loose on the right snow. I'm not very good at that truth be told - A technique like Gamme was using in his vids would be most appropriate for these skis I think.

I'd rather just use them for what they are good for - I'll test them on hills to see how it feels, but likely I'll grab my S Bounds for stuff like that.

The longer I ski, the better I get at skiing any ski, but also the more I appreciate certain attributes of others - it's just like beers actually - I can drink most, but I really appreciate some. I really do love having a long, cambered ski with a lot of pop and glide for flat, stiff snow. I can ski it with any ski, but I enjoy it much more with a ski like that... hence my thoughts on getting a Gamme 210 for next season.

[connyro]

Did you find an aluminum plate in the binding zone when you mounted the bindings? I was actually pleasantly surprised by that- I expected them to just be solid wood beneath.

Yes, mine have the plate under the front 3 screws for the Magnum NNNBC bindings. The rear 2 screws mount directly into wood.