Request for input - current gen E99 vs Ingstad waxless

[MicahE]

Don't know much about the Nansen other than-
- less camber than an E-99-class ski
- softer flex than an E-99-class ski
- much less tip rocker than the Ingstad BC/E-109
- more sidecut than E-99-class ski- similar to the Ingstad/E-109

The Nansen seems to be somewhat in a class of its own at the moment. I don't see it being as efficient a XC ski as an E-99, but it would be more manageable downhill...Don't know how stable its flex is in deep snow- we have mixed reports on this site regarding that. Heavier skiers seem to report that it unstable in deep soft snow...

If waxless scales are a must and you want a kicker skin then you could consider these-
https://www.blackdiamondequipment.com/e ... 1_cfg.html
I have used this for years with my Karhu/Madshus waxless-scaled touring skis.

AND- going back around the big circle-
There is NOTHING wrong with the Fischer 78/88- they are just not as efficient as the E99.
The Fischer 78/88 are just as versatile a BC-XCD touring ski as the E99.
If you must have scales and you want the integrated kicker skin- and you want a BC-XC ski that performs in all snow contexts- then I think a 199cm 78/88 are the best bet. And- at your weight I would go for a 199cm 88 if you are going to encounter deep soft snow.
Believe me- you won't be disapointed with a 199cm 88.

Ok, I'll see about some 199cm 88's. I may have an opportunity to rent some 189's of this ski this weekend as we are meeting some friends for a snow filled weekend and they come from a town that rents these skis. While not the same length, I think it'd get me a lot further toward understanding them and the 199's would only be an improvement, in terms of float/glide.