Uphill track ski

[Woodserson]

I'll keep an eye out for the Fischer Power with metal edges in case that makes it the the US. A little turning ability for the downhill would be nice though. What is the EF thing?

Efficient Forward is this thing that makes us suck less. But I can actually feel it in the ski. It's the way it takes a shitty kick and makes it into a better, less-shitty kick. It sounds like baloney marketing and it is, but damn if my skis don't kick easier and I can go further on the EF. It's not total baloney, there's actually something to it. The ski is smoother and it works. Tough to explain.

Here's a most terrible video about it complete with awful triumphant music and themes that mirror our on-demand society:

[fisheater]

Hello Woods, it may kick better, but does it kick like a Gamme or an E-99? Is it in a track ski class that just blows away the previously mentioned skis?

[Woodserson]

Hello Woods, it may kick better, but does it kick like a Gamme or an E-99? Is it in a track ski class that just blows away the previously mentioned skis?

Yeah man, it's just a track ski and tuned as such, 1 dimensional ski. It does not kick like a G or E, or I should say the inverse, the G and E don't kick like this track ski.

Apples to oranges kind of thing. Of course, it turns like a wet noodle being pushed by a bulldozer. No turning but step turning.

In my opinion, Asnes could take a page out of the graphics in that video-- and tailor the waxless pattern to suit, to amateur, longer, less forceful kicks, the kind of kicks we are giving out on soft snow along forest roads, etc. The waxless pattern now is suited to perfect kick technique. Unrealistic.

[riel]

In my opinion, Asnes could take a page out of the graphics in that video-- and tailor the waxless pattern to suit, to amateur, longer, less forceful kicks, the kind of kicks we are giving out on soft snow along forest roads, etc. The waxless pattern now is suited to perfect kick technique. Unrealistic.

I suspect the Asnes waxless pattern works great on the ski it was originally developed on: the Nansen/Cecilie.

It just has not been fine tuned when it was moved onto double cambered skis. It's alright on the Ingstad, though it takes a LOT more focus than the kick on Fisher or Alpina skis, and nearly useless on the Mountain Tour 51 even with the same kick technique that works great on the waxless Ingstad. No idea how the waxless Finnmark performs.

I totally agree the waxless pattern needs to be made more beginner friendly.

If they want it to also glide well, they can move the deep part of the waxless pattern further forward, and have the shallow pattern start at maybe 25cm back from the balance point. The ski right under/behind the heel gets a lot of friction (it is the first spot where wax wears out), so making that glide better should be a priority.

Conversely, the deep fishscales can go all the way out to the X-skin attachment point, because there just isn't much friction on that part of the skis. Wax doesn't wear out until you get about 15-20cm in front of the X-skin attachment. Having fishscales go much of the way out to that point (shallow fishscales up to 10cm in front of the X-skin point?) would make ski placement much less critical for getting good grip.

[Woodserson]

I suspect the Asnes waxless pattern works great on the ski it was originally developed on: the Nansen/Cecilie.

It just has not been fine tuned when it was moved onto double cambered skis. It's alright on the Ingstad, though it takes a LOT more focus than the kick on Fisher or Alpina skis, and nearly useless on the Mountain Tour 51 even with the same kick technique that works great on the waxless Ingstad. No idea how the waxless Finnmark performs.

I totally agree the waxless pattern needs to be made more beginner friendly.

If they want it to also glide well, they can move the deep part of the waxless pattern further forward, and have the shallow pattern start at maybe 25cm back from the balance point. The ski right under/behind the heel gets a lot of friction (it is the first spot where wax wears out), so making that glide better should be a priority.

Conversely, the deep fishscales can go all the way out to the X-skin attachment point, because there just isn't much friction on that part of the skis. Wax doesn't wear out until you get about 15-20cm in front of the X-skin attachment. Having fishscales go much of the way out to that point (shallow fishscales up to 10cm in front of the X-skin point?) would make ski placement much less critical for getting good grip.

100% agree with this entire post.