Which Fischer ski for BCXC/XCD on firm/icy snow conditions?

[JB TELE]

Hey everyone, I'm getting into backcountry crosscountry/leather telemark this year and I'm looking to add another ski to my quiver. Currently I have the voile hypervector bc's which work ok with stiff leather boots on bottomless powder days and a pair of s-bound 98's that I haven't used yet. I think I'm also going to need a pair of skinny skis for making turns on firm snow conditions, which could be spring skiing in the morning before things warm up or it could be on wind blasted icy crust above the treeline which could occur any time during the season. My assumption is that my sbound 98s will be too wide for efficient turns in leather on that sort of snow

I get a pro-deal on fischer skis so I'm looking into them first. Out of all of fischer's skinny backcountry crosscountry skis, which one is going to have the best turning performance? Are the transnordic 66's (e99) a good option?

I live in Southwestern Colorado and while I plan on mainly cruising low angle terrain, it's easy to encounter more moderate terrain that's challenging (fun) in this type of gear, so turning performance is a bit more important than having perfect glide. Maybe I should consider going down one size?

[Stephen]

Hey everyone, I'm getting into backcountry crosscountry/leather telemark this year and I'm looking to add another ski to my quiver.
I live in Southwestern Colorado and while I plan on mainly cruising low angle terrain, it's easy to encounter more moderate terrain that's challenging (fun) in this type of gear, so turning performance is a bit more important than having perfect glide. Maybe I should consider going down one size?

I’m speaking more from theory than experience here, but one issue with the narrower skis is I think they tend to be double camber. So, on firm snow they will edge well for the traverse, but will be more challenging on the turn, because of the flex pattern. Not that it can’t be done.
For example, there is an interesting discussion along these lines here:
viewtopic.php?f=1&t=3733&p=37887&hilit= ... deo#p37883
Maybe similar to what you would like to do?
http://www.fftv.no/fjellskiskolen-ep-1- ... kk-12/0:39
(The “Share from current time” option is not working so go to 0:39 for what I meant.)

[John_XCD]

I have not had that great of experience with xcd gear on ice/hard crust. S98s feel somewhat too wide to edge effectively with leather boots on really hard surface. Narrower skis that are longer and stiffer also have turning limitations.

I wonder about going with TN66 as you suggest (or even the narrower metal edge transnordic 50-something) but really short (like 180cm for 180lbs). Not so much K&G but skinning, skating, skid turning on early morning hard crust.

That said-- you might also enjoy kick and glide on appropriately sized TN66 on some of the snowmobile routes around there (like hermosa creek/bolam pass).

[DG99]

Yes, I think you’re barking up the wrong tree.

I’ve had great luck on wide waxless skis like SBound 98 on icy snow, with plastic boots like T2s.

And abysmal luck on skinny skis and soft XCD boots like Outback 68 and BCX 675. The higher camber on the skinny skis doesn’t help, and the boots don’t give much stability or power to the edges. That combo sure works nice though, light and fast kick and glide, on a couple inches fresh snow over packed trails!

So for ice I’d say don’t buy skis, buy plastic boots. Not much new stock available though.

[JB TELE]

Hey everyone, I'm getting into backcountry crosscountry/leather telemark this year and I'm looking to add another ski to my quiver.
I live in Southwestern Colorado and while I plan on mainly cruising low angle terrain, it's easy to encounter more moderate terrain that's challenging (fun) in this type of gear, so turning performance is a bit more important than having perfect glide. Maybe I should consider going down one size?

I’m speaking more from theory than experience here, but one issue with the narrower skis is I think they tend to be double camber. So, on firm snow they will edge well for the traverse, but will be more challenging on the turn, because of the flex pattern. Not that it can’t be done.
For example, there is an interesting discussion along these lines here:
viewtopic.php?f=1&t=3733&p=37887&hilit= ... deo#p37883
Maybe similar to what you would like to do?
http://www.fftv.no/fjellskiskolen-ep-1- ... kk-12/0:39
(The “Share from current time” option is not working so go to 0:39 for what I meant.)

That's one of the issues I'm seeing. I guess what I want is an s-bound type ski with a 1.5 camber or really stiff single camper but in a very skinny package. I'm open to other brands, but since Fischer come at a reasonable price and I can get a solid pro deal it makes sense to go with that. I'm wondering if a shorter length will turn a 2 camber ski into more of a 1 or 1.5 camber ski. But I'm new skiing in general so it's possible none of that makes sense.

Yes, the conditions in that video is what I have in mind.

[Stephen]

Everyone has probably seen this sizing advice from Asnes.
I’m thinking it suggests shorter for firm snow might be the way to go.

“Generally speaking, moving through rugged terrain calls for shorter skis than the open mountain plateau. And for beginners, short skis are easier to control. If you’re mainly skiing along tracks, length isn’t the most crucial factor. For good float on deep snow, a slightly wider ski is useful. Lighter skiers might consider a shorter ski; heavier skiers a longer ski. Skiers with loads such as backpacks and sledges might consider a longer ski.”

[JB TELE]

Yes, I think you’re barking up the wrong tree.

I’ve had great luck on wide waxless skis like SBound 98 on icy snow, with plastic boots like T2s.

And abysmal luck on skinny skis and soft XCD boots like Outback 68 and BCX 675. The higher camber on the skinny skis doesn’t help, and the boots don’t give much stability or power to the edges. That combo sure works nice though, light and fast kick and glide, on a couple inches fresh snow over packed trails!

So for ice I’d say don’t buy skis, buy plastic boots. Not much new stock available though.

I don't expect good results in firm snow, and I actually hate skiing in firm conditions and would rather go hiking in the desert. But I would like to add something to my quiver so I have the option even if I have to go downhill incredibly slowly. And the spring is a great time for multi-day traverses.

I have foot issues where the rigid pressure of plastic boots causes some extreme pain on the top of my left foot. I've experimented and tried different things but I'm pretty well convinced there is no solution for me. I've tried t4's and t2's and yes they are a lot better for control.

[Krummholz]

I took my S-98’s with Ski March boots to a resort a couple of years ago on a free pass ( the only way I would go ). Every time I hit an icy spot it was like being on an ice rink with tennis shoes. Forget about getting an edge to bite. I was looking for a good deal on some “Old School Tele’s” like on Dave’s page. In case I get invited again.

http://web.archive.org/web/201510021509 ... D%20SCHOOL

[stilltryin]

Given the leather limitation, the 98's with a cable/rod binding might be as good as it gets. You could try a bit narrower ski that is still designed for XCD (I'm thinking of the old Karhu XCD/GT, Madshus Eon -- but I don't know what the comparable Fischer is -- sorry).

[JB TELE]

Given the leather limitation, the 98's with a cable/rod binding might be as good as it gets. You could try a bit narrower ski that is still designed for XCD (I'm thinking of the old Karhu XCD/GT, Madshus Eon -- but I don't know what the comparable Fischer is -- sorry).

My concern is that the 98 could be too wide for edging on firmer snow. But since I'm new to all this, I could be wrong on that.

I wouldn't be opposed to a skinny, fish scaled alpine cambered ski to compensate for the difficult conditions, but is that sort of ski even produced? I've never seen a skinny sub-60 waist width ski with a flat downhill camber.