Mid width fishscaled ski comparison.

[lilcliffy]

My friends new model M68 has no groove and in pictures it appears the M62 does not either.

The M68/Epoch/XCD 10th Mtn never did have a track groove-
but, the M62/Eon/XCD GT always did-
the report above confirms that it no longer has one.

I'm no sommelier of snow, lol. When the temp is going to be above about 25f (-4c) I'm finding myself grabbing a scaled ski. Yes a waxed ski can still be better above that temp, but you've gotta be willing to fail and head back to the drawing board. There is value in the grab n' go nature of a scaled ski. The kick is reliable. Again they are sucky slow on cold snow.

I should have been more clear in my last post-
I am not questioning the value of a scaled ski (I agree!)-
I am just wondering what the snow depth and stability is like-
Wondering whether you would be better with 62mm (eg Madshus 62; Fischer 78), or 68mm underfoot (eg Fischer 88).
Although I generally prefer the narrower Fischer 78- there is no question that the wider Fischer 88 offer more stability and grip. Madshus has never made a ski like the Fischer 88 (Karhu-QC did).

[wabene]

The M68/Epoch/XCD 10th Mtn never did have a track groove-
but, the M62/Eon/XCD GT always did-
the report above confirms that it no longer has one.

Good to know that the 68 never did have a track groove. I was finally out on my SB98's on fresh today and even with that track groove, you can smear all you like. I don't see the downside.

I should have been more clear in my last post-
I am not questioning the value of a scaled ski (I agree!)-
I am just wondering what the snow depth and stability is like-
Wondering whether you would be better with 62mm (eg Madshus 62; Fischer 78), or 68mm underfoot (eg Fischer 88).
Although I generally prefer the narrower Fischer 78- there is no question that the wider Fischer 88 offer more stability and grip. Madshus has never made a ski like the Fischer 88 (Karhu-QC did).

Oh, well yeah I'm always choosing my ski based on expected snow depth and vertical. A snow event may trigger what kind of outing I pursue. Choice of ski makes or breaks a tour. My two friends who introduced me to backcountry skiing have the 88. The width underfoot, combined with the lack of sidecut and strong camber make it a very versatile and unique ski. I always considered it but got the M62 partially due to the price and availability at the time and when I wanted a wider scaled ski for turns I chose the 98.

[Grace875]

Fish-scale skis work great on warm snow. Fischer offers the best grip, while Åsnes has a less aggressive pattern. I'm looking for 62 mm underfoot skis to ease ascents and maintain maneuverability. Does anyone have experience with Madshus M62, Fischer TN82, or Rossignol Positrack 80?

[randoskier]

Fish-scale skis work great on warm snow. Fischer offers the best grip, while Åsnes has a less aggressive pattern. I'm looking for 62 mm underfoot skis to ease ascents and maintain maneuverability. Does anyone have experience with Madshus M62, Fischer TN82, or Rossignol Positrack 80?

The M62 (Eon) by Madshus should be extinct by now, it does nothing particularly well. My 195 Eons have a thick coating of dust on them. The scales are simply awful on the Madshus.

The TN82 does not have crown scales.

Why not the Traverse 78? Great ski, very light, good camber, Crown scales; best scales in the business, Easy-skin; best kicker-skin in the business, reasonably priced. Without all the Asnes drama and their ridiculous price.

[wabene]

Fish-scale skis work great on warm snow. Fischer offers the best grip, while Åsnes has a less aggressive pattern. I'm looking for 62 mm underfoot skis to ease ascents and maintain maneuverability. Does anyone have experience with Madshus M62, Fischer TN82, or Rossignol Positrack 80?

The M62 (Eon) by Madshus should be extinct by now, it does nothing particularly well. My 195 Eons have a thick coating of dust on them. The scales are simply awful on the Madshus.

The TN82 does not have crown scales.

Why not the Traverse 78? Great ski, very light, good camber, Crown scales; best scales in the business, Easy-skin; best kicker-skin in the business, reasonably priced. Without all the Asnes drama and their ridiculous price.

I agree the Fischer skis are better IMO. I am considering the T78, but would prefer if I could get the T82 with crown.

[riel]

I should have been more clear in my last post-
I am not questioning the value of a scaled ski (I agree!)-
I am just wondering what the snow depth and stability is like-
Wondering whether you would be better with 62mm (eg Madshus 62; Fischer 78), or 68mm underfoot (eg Fischer 88).
Although I generally prefer the narrower Fischer 78- there is no question that the wider Fischer 88 offer more stability and grip. Madshus has never made a ski like the Fischer 88 (Karhu-QC did).

I have some Fischer Traverse 78 skis (with Alpina top sheet and scales, but made in the Fischer factory on the same line), and also Asnes Ingstad in the same width class.

There is no comparison.

The Ingstad glide better, turn better, are more stable in manky snow, and grip better than the Alpina scales.

The Fischer scales probably grip a little better still, but when you get to the point where the Asnes scales get questionable, the Fischer scales get questionable too, and you'll probably want kicker skins anyway.

The Nansen offers great stability, too.

With the right flex and torsional stiffness, the entire length of the ski helps create stability, not just the area underfoot.

[wabene]

I have some Fischer Traverse 78 skis (with Alpina top sheet and scales, but made in the Fischer factory on the same line), and also Asnes Ingstad in the same width class.

There is no comparison.

The Ingstad glide better, turn better, are more stable in manky snow, and grip better than the Alpina scales.

The Fischer scales probably grip a little better still, but when you get to the point where the Asnes scales get questionable, the Fischer scales get questionable too, and you'll probably want kicker skins anyway.

The Nansen offers great stability, too.

With the right flex and torsional stiffness, the entire length of the ski helps create stability, not just the area underfoot.

Sounds like you are highly recommending the Ingstad and the Åsnes traction pattern. Honestly that is the first I can recall of a glowing review of these scales. Now I'm intrigued. I would like a ski in this class to break trail well, but I know you can't have everything and I know the Ingstad is supposed to be great for turns. I've read the Ingstad has pronounced nordic rocker that would impede trail breaking. What are you thoughts on this?
It's crazy Neptune Mountaineering has the ski for $619 with shipping right here in the USA, but I can get it from Varuste in Finland for $385 to my door. That's not bad and now I'm interested. Tell me my plan to get through this season without buying new skis is foiled, lol.

[satanas]

Hopefully Åsnes have dramatically overhauled their pattern bases sometime in the last few years, because in the past they've been basically worthless IME - no grip on transition or wet snow. The best one could hope for was to *maybe* have enough traction to get along on the flat. Climbing - not possible. The Fischer and Voile patterns OTOH do actually work.

Disclaimer: I haven't skied on anything Åsnes recently, but they disappeared from the Oz market for yesrs due to general discontent with their bases; every other brand worked much better.

[riel]

Sounds like you are highly recommending the Ingstad and the Åsnes traction pattern.
[/quote]

Not quite. The Fischer traction pattern is much better than the Asnes pattern.

However, the Rossignol skis I tried were much worse than the Asnes pattern, and the Alpina skis weren't any better than the Asnes pattern, either. I have heard (but not experienced myself) that the Madshus scales are no better, either.

The kicker skins make all the difference in crappy snow conditions.

When you have a glazed over breakable crust, all fishscales will be terrible, but skins work great.

[satanas]

FWIW, I've had success with both the Fischer and Voile patterns in all conditions except ice (where skins are essential), and dry powder - which basically doesn't exist here, so I can't really comment on that. The rest of the time all is good..