Wildly speculative talk about Asnes 21-22 lineup: Otto/FT62

[Woodserson]

I've been doing some hard brainstorming and thinking about new developments.

Otto per Crister-Asnes-Guy:

It's basically a redesigned Nansen/Cecilie, with a better wax pocket, more stiffness underfoot, and a camber more like the Børge Ousland BC and Gamme 54 BC skis. On the other hand, we wanted it to be as playful (or even more) as the Nansen/Cecilie skis, so we added more sidecut, a generous Nordic Rocker (similar as in Børge and Ingstad), as well as Taper.

The Sverdrup with even more playful than the Nansen/Cecilie, turns easier and has way better XC-performance. You may call it a downscaled Ingstad/Falketind with more camber and flex if you like. Or at least, something along those lines.

So I take this to mean that a 200cm Otto would perform probably about the same as the 205 Ingstad. The 195cm Ingstad is too short for me for any meaningful XC performance, but it turns well, while the 205cm Ingstad is much better at XC performance but starts to get a bit long if I want to turn it on a regular basis. Of course, I never approach these skis with turning in mind, but sometimes it's nice to have the attribute. I'm guessing I can get the same XC performance out of the Otto at 200cm as a 205 Ingstad and be able to whip them around a little easier as well. This is an intriguing ski, I wouldn't press into service in NH as I am mostly on forest roads and my Gammes (I WISH this came in a 205!!! I dislike the 10cm jumps in this ski) and my Nansens really have that dialed and I don't turn much. But if I was doing more mountainous XC skiing in the Alps and Jura, then this could be a nice 1-ski-to-have.


FT/Rabb

The new Falketind 62 will get a few small updates. It will be reinforced in the binding zone, a bit stiffer underfoot, and tuned to perform even better than before. It has been the No.1 ski we have tested the Xplore concept on, so we have tuned it to perform even better downhill. And, we added a bit more flex and a higher camber/wax pocket for better kick and glide. Other than that, there are no "major" changes.

We have done the same with the Rabb 68 and added a directional groove in the sole on the Rabb 68 too. Meaning, you'll get more touring capacity in that model as well. But, we also "beefed" it up a bit, so that it skis even better on edge and charges better. I have skied it quite a lot with a light AT-setup lately, and I actually skied some downhill and gates with it. It performs really well, even at higher speeds! Super lightweight, but skis like a carving ski and handles powder really well.

These are probably good changes for the FT62. The video says it gets a "double camber and moderate wax pocket" which seem counterintuitive to each other, maybe "moderate wax pocket" is in terms of length of the pocket, and is it REALLY a double camber? and what happened to that rocker? still there? I think maybe the video is pushing things a little more than they are in reality as far as the camber is concerned, I am not expecting Amundsen style camber on the FT. All in all, I think this ski could be even better than it is now and that makes me interested in another pair. The added stiffness will help it from folding up as easily as it does now, and the increased camber will make the XC skiing a bit more tolerable. I'm happy with these improvements.

Rabb wise, beefing it up is a good idea. My 180cm Rabb is notoriously chatter-happy on firm steep slopes. The tail grabs and the chatter is so bad I have to lay over and stop skiing, it becomes impossible. The ski is much fun on moderate slopes or in softer snow but anything firm and steep where I have to load it up and lean into the ski and it's game over. It's so bad. I ski these with 75mm Alaskas. I do not get this on the S-Bound 98. I wonder if it's how the tail dimension flares rapidly near the end that causes it, or the extremely light weight. Again, great in softer snow I really like it then, but bad on firm snow.

I wouldn't mind seeing the Rabb actually be a little heavier! than they are now to improve firm snow downhill skiing. Every ad has skiers in fluffy nice snow, but this is not the reality for most people most of the time, especially in the age of global warming and weirdo snowpacks. The future will be owned by those ski companies that make skis designed for crust, hardpack, slush, and pow, probably in the order. Not sexy, I know, just the reality.

I'm reposting this video because I mentioned it above, it's really great, and deserves more views.

[fisheater]

Hello Woods, I couldn’t agree more with you in terms of the FT. A little more of a wax pocket, and a little stiffer all sound great.
As far as Otto, I’m not sold it would be a ski for me. Even at 190 lbs. I can’t bend my Gamme 210 into a turn. I am not saying I should be able to bend it. I can utilize that Gamme rocker, and when the snow isn’t too deep, I really have utilized quite a bit of rotation into my Gamme Tele skiing. I wouldn’t be looking for a second ski that I really can’t bend.
However, I have a feeling I might be able to bend a Nansen. Not that you ever want to be over 190 lbs, but if you had all that lard, do you think you could bend a Nansen into a turn?

[Woodserson]

Hello Woods, I couldn’t agree more with you in terms of the FT. A little more of a wax pocket, and a little stiffer all sound great.
As far as Otto, I’m not sold it would be a ski for me. Even at 190 lbs. I can’t bend my Gamme 210 into a turn. I am not saying I should be able to bend it. I can utilize that Gamme rocker, and when the snow isn’t too deep, I really have utilized quite a bit of rotation into my Gamme Tele skiing. I wouldn’t be looking for a second ski that I really can’t bend.
However, I have a feeling I might be able to bend a Nansen. Not that you ever want to be over 190 lbs, but if you had all that lard, do you think you could bend a Nansen into a turn?

Oh yeah definitely, easily.

But if you're going for turns you should really think about the Ingstads. With a bit more "tension" underneath and the rocker it'll turn easier, and be about the same speed as the Nansens in loose/fresh snow. The Nansen is only faster on more compact snow. I also found the Ingstads to be more stable turning in fresh snow than the Nansens.

[Stephen]

So, since you posted that video again, I have to comment.

Top-of-mind for me was the impression that the skiers seemed to be heavy on the back ski and light on the front ski in the DH segments of the video.
The ski weighting was interesting to me.
Many of you have way more time on skis than I do.
As I was working on my DH skills last winter, It seemed there were times when “more weight on rear ski” really seemed to work. It allowed me to more easily use the lead ski as sort of a front rudder in the turn.
Once the turn was initiated, I could more evenly weight both skis.

In the video, it really seemed like the skier stayed weight back during the turn.
It seems like a conservative stance, since it allows some reserve balance, in case of unexpected deceleration.
Maybe I’m just making stuff up...

The other thing I noticed was the instability of the skier on the right at 2:20 to 2:30.
The skier on the left seemed more fluid and stable.

Anyone have any thoughts on the ski weighting in that snow in that video?

Also, to echo Woods, I really enjoyed the Ingstad in loose/fresh DH conditions.

[Woodserson]

Looks like there is some wind buff as a top layer in that video. That’s going to complicate things on skis that weigh 1000grams and are 62 in the waist.

[lilcliffy]

So I take this to mean that a 200cm Otto would perform probably about the same as the 205 Ingstad.

To be equally wildly speculative-

I doubt very much that the Sverdrup will be stable in deep snow-

I am expecting the Sverdrup ski to have a relatively soft and flexible shovel and tail...
Reasoning-
If it is going to be as "playful"/"turnable" as a Nansen- yet have the camber and resistance underfoot of a Gamme/Amundsen-

then I don't see how it can be as longitudinally stiff/stable as the Ingstad-
therefore, I don't think that the Sverdrup will be as stable in deep snow as the Ingstad.

So- my wild speculation is that the Sverdrup will actually be- if a design success- a precision instrument just like the Ingstad-

A distance-oriented BC-XC ski for hilly-steep terrain-
- one for deep soft snow → Ingstad
- one for consolidated snow → Sverdrup

Unlike the Nansen- that kinda spreads its utility around a bit more- my prediction is that the Sverdrup and Ingstad will have little overlap in terms of performance...

What they are attempting with the Sverdrup is very difficult to pull off.
What Asnes does with the flex is what will interest me.
The rockered shovel of the Sverdrup could still be stable- like the Ingstad- but what have they done with the tail flex to make the stiff-cambered Sverdrup "playful" and easy to turn? Surely the Sverdrup tail is flexible...

If they get it right- I could use the Sverdrup ski quite a bit actually.
There are many hilly-steep tur days- on more consolidated snow- where I either have to choose to-
a) put up with the low camber and short glide zone of Ingstad on the flats- or
b) deal with the rail-stiff Gamme on the slopes.

I'm guessing I can get the same XC performance out of the Otto at 200cm as a 205 Ingstad and be able to whip them around a little easier as well.

My prediction is- yes on consolidated snow- the 200cm Otto could be an even better XC ski on consolidated snow- depending on the over all camber and flex- even a 195cm Otto might be a more efficient XC ski than a 205 Ingstad on consolidated snow...

FT/Rabb
These are probably good changes for the FT62. The video says it gets a "double camber and moderate wax pocket" which seem counterintuitive to each other, maybe "moderate wax pocket" is in terms of length of the pocket, and is it REALLY a double camber? and what happened to that rocker? still there? I think maybe the video is pushing things a little more than they are in reality as far as the camber is concerned, I am not expecting Amundsen style camber on the FT. All in all, I think this ski could be even better than it is now and that makes me interested in another pair. The added stiffness will help it from folding up as easily as it does now, and the increased camber will make the XC skiing a bit more tolerable. I'm happy with these improvements.

These skis are truly a passion project!
It is amazing how Asnes continously keeps working at the design of these two skis!
This is at least the third time they have been redesigned in almost as many years!

As far as the FT62- inreasing its stability would definitely be an improvement. Improved XC performance- I suppose...(I know that a few on this site seem happy with the "XC" performance of the FT62- I am not). It certainly would make sense to me for the FT62 to have improved XC performance- otherwise, why choose it over the Rabb 68?

To date- for my part- there is almost no conditions where I wouldn't choose either my Ingstad/E109 or Storetind over the FT62...And my FT62(s) (I have both early-gen models) cannot replace either of these skis because it is too unstable.

..........
I am very interested in the redesigned Rabb 68- probably more than the FT62.

I really can't see how much more efficient they can make the FT62- yet still preserve its mini-downhill-ski performance...

And if the new Rabb tracks more efficiently when XC skiing and is more stable when charging downhill- why would I want an FT62?

UNFORTUNATELY- the only way to know is to try them both...

[Johnny]

The video says it gets a "double camber and moderate wax pocket"

Personally, I think it's a very bad idea. Because if they change the camber, they will become like a lot of other similar skis on the market. Just like any other ordinary ski. The reason why the Falkees are so unique is because of their single magic camber. Change them and they won't be unique anymore. There's plenty of skis like that on the market to choose from. But only the Falkees have that low single camber. Which is the reason I personally love them so much. (And the reason why I will not buy the new models...)

There is already SO MUCH confusion about Asnes camber profiles, the old "Marked chamber" and the upcoming "Prominent camber" and "Prominent wax-pocket"... Changing a single camber ski into a higher, double camber one is only going to bring more confusion and deception to future buyers who are expecting something they heard for years... I am not saying it's a bad thing in itself... But major updates on a product are sometimes worth a different model name... Just saying...

[bgregoire]

Oh man. They hit me through the core with this ad. Man I'm stoked. Bring it on.

I agree with ya'll. Not interested in a double camber Falketind. The tuned Rabb 68 sound great. If I get it, I might manage to free myself of several other lesser skis.

[Woodserson]

I think the double camber talk on the video is all about marketing.

I'm going with Crister's take. We know Crister he seems to shoot straight. We don't know the marketing guy that made the video.

The new Falketind 62 will get a few small updates. It will be reinforced in the binding zone, a bit stiffer underfoot, and tuned to perform even better than before.

I'm good with his description. I feel it.

[Johnny]

tuned to perform even better than before.

That doesn't mean anything... My own definition of marketing...