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: 1763
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: 1763
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

User avatar
Johnny

Rank: XCD KNIGHT
XCD KNIGHT
Posts: 1682
Joined: Wed Dec 18, 2013 6:11 pm
Location: Quebec / Vermont

Re: Falketind 62 Review

Postby Johnny » Wed Sep 05, 2018 9:37 am

Image

I've been looking at this picture all summer... I just can't figure it out...
How can a flat, single camber like this be a moderate wax pocket? While other Asnes MWP skis (Ingstad, Nansen etc) have a lot more camber than this, with higher profiles...? :?

I am getting more and more confused... And I can't afford to buy them all...
/...\ Peace, Love, Telemark and Tofu /...\
"And if you like to risk your neck, we'll boom down Sutton in old Quebec..."

User avatar
lilcliffy

Rank: XCD KNIGHT
XCD KNIGHT
Posts: 1763
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2015 7:20 pm
Location: Stanley, New Brunswick, Canada

Re: Falketind 62 Review

Postby lilcliffy » Wed Sep 05, 2018 12:44 pm

Yeah- I know- which is why I initially described the Storetind as "single camber"- and it certainly has the unpressured profile of a single-cambered ski...But when I try and close that gap there is every bit as much resistance as the Ingstad and the Combat Nato...BUT- certainly no effective "wax pocket".

Is this "camber-and-a-half" or just a stiff-flexing single cambered ski? Regardless- I do NOT find the camber hard to manage when downhill skiing- but I DO feel that snap when XC skiing, but ONLY on soft snow- the ST feels dead when XC skiing on hard, dense snow. I have not tried the ST downhill skiing on a hard groomed surface yet- I am planning on trying that this winter coming!
The pursuit of XCD balance: cross-country AND down-hill skiing in the backcountry

User avatar
Johnny

Rank: XCD KNIGHT
XCD KNIGHT
Posts: 1682
Joined: Wed Dec 18, 2013 6:11 pm
Location: Quebec / Vermont

Re: Falketind 62 Review

Postby Johnny » Sun Sep 09, 2018 8:14 am

I am beginning to think that every single model is carefully tuned for its intended purpose. Flex, camber, resistance, sidecut, all crafted differently for each ski, in a way that no combination of words can describe.

Or maybe it's just very good marketing... It is working, as I will have to buy both FTs...! 8-)

I find the resistance on the Ingstad quite hard to manage on hard pack for pure downhill skiing... Not it's intended purpose, I know... ;)
/...\ Peace, Love, Telemark and Tofu /...\
"And if you like to risk your neck, we'll boom down Sutton in old Quebec..."

User avatar
fisheater

Rank: XCD Pinhead
XCD Pinhead
Posts: 384
Joined: Fri Feb 19, 2016 9:06 pm
Location: Oakland County, MI

Re: Falketind 62 Review

Postby fisheater » Thu Oct 04, 2018 8:30 pm

If "marked chamber" means that after a day of skiing downhill on soft snow, with some kick and glide traverses. Riding a lift up, skiing a bit on hardpack resort snow, to the "non-maintained" area of soft snow, soft snow traverse, repeat. At the end of the day still have enough kick wax to have grip, then the ski has "marked chamber".
That being said, you can't measure in the traditional manner. A sixteen year old girl living a pampered life, could easily squeeze my FT 62's together. Put them on a hard pack trail and you can feel the wax draggggg. Put them on as little as 4" of soft snow and the come to life! Kick down and grip, feel the the tip plane up and glide on your heel.
Now this hypothesis might be nothing but malarkey, but to me these are the work of a second generation master ski designer. Someone who loves skiing and ski design. Somebody that grew up learning the intricacies of what made a ski perform in the subalpine mountains. When they became of age they designed something dramatically different. The chamber only works when the Ski is reverse chambered in soft snow, and the "marked chamber" also needs the dynamics of rocker, and the wide tip and tail to perform the function of a second chamber.
The real magic isn't that you have a second chamber that cannot be measured in a traditional sense. The wax pocket stays preserved for a reasonable amount of time (on soft snow) that is all that really matters. The real magic is dancing with these light skis going downhill. Now with all that being said, I wouldn't recommend the FT 62 over the Storetind. It is very possible that the 68 hits the sweet spot better than the 62.
Maybe you should get both ;) !

User avatar
lilcliffy

Rank: XCD KNIGHT
XCD KNIGHT
Posts: 1763
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2015 7:20 pm
Location: Stanley, New Brunswick, Canada

Re: Falketind 62 Review

Postby lilcliffy » Fri Oct 05, 2018 6:49 am

That was a wonderful description of that ski Bob!
Gareth
The pursuit of XCD balance: cross-country AND down-hill skiing in the backcountry

User avatar
Johnny

Rank: XCD KNIGHT
XCD KNIGHT
Posts: 1682
Joined: Wed Dec 18, 2013 6:11 pm
Location: Quebec / Vermont

Re: Falketind 62 Review

Postby Johnny » Sun Oct 07, 2018 8:21 am

fisheater wrote:Now this hypothesis might be nothing but malarkey, but to me these are the work of a second generation master ski designer. Someone who loves skiing and ski design. Somebody that grew up learning the intricacies of what made a ski perform in the subalpine mountains. When they became of age they designed something dramatically different. The chamber only works when the Ski is reverse chambered in soft snow, and the "marked chamber" also needs the dynamics of rocker, and the wide tip and tail to perform the function of a second chamber.
The real magic isn't that you have a second chamber that cannot be measured in a traditional sense. The wax pocket stays preserved for a reasonable amount of time (on soft snow) that is all that really matters. The real magic is dancing with these light skis going downhill. Now with all that being said, I wouldn't recommend the FT 62 over the Storetind. It is very possible that the 68 hits the sweet spot better than the 62.
Maybe you should get both ;) !


Beautiful. Very moving. Sometimes words fail to describe the essence of a great ski.

That sounds not only like a wonderful description of the Falktindees, but also a wonderful description of what Asnes is all about... Master ski designers.
/...\ Peace, Love, Telemark and Tofu /...\
"And if you like to risk your neck, we'll boom down Sutton in old Quebec..."


Return to “Community Ski Reviews”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest