Telemark Talk / Telemark Tips Forum

How steep are these hills you are coming down?
I ask because the Ingstad BC might even be "worse" than the 88 in the context you are skiing in...

Let me explain-

The Ingstad BC and the 88 may both be XC skis- but their geometry is very different-

The Ingstad BC is FAST man- VERY FAST- MUCH FASTER than the 88.

I LOOOVE the Ingstad BC- and I LOOOVE pointing them downhill- but man- you'd best keep them on a moderate slope if you got XC boots on!

The Ingstad has way more tip rocker, a narrower waist, and less camber than the 88- you point the Ingstad BC straight down a very steep hill and you will hit Ludicrous Speed in a few seconds.

As far as replacing the 88 with a downhill ski-
That really depends on whether you want to primarily downhill ski (and also what the snow is like).

My intuition is suggesting to me this-
You are XC skiing in mountainous terrain- yes?
Many of the descents are very steep and you feel out of control- yes?

Are these steep descents on trails/roads- below tree line?

Whether you end up trying a downhill ski or not- I am thinking that you want/need a Telemark boot...

A note on the FT62-
Yes, it is single cambered, has tip rocker and a lot of sidecut-
BUT- the FT62 is a narrow, torsionally stable rocket that wants to go fast-
I do ski my FT62 with XC boots- but again, I am sticking to moderate slopes with it.
If these descents are very steep- I don't know that you are going to feel more in control with a FT62 and your Alaskas- unless the snow is ideal and you have a short, tight-tuning length...BUT- a short FT62 is going to be VERY slow as a XC ski...

I keep thinking that your answer might be 75mm and a Telemark boot...
And if so- then the Ingstad BC might well be a huge improvement in performance- especially if the typical snow is soft..

Hopefully we are helping you!

Heh, I just posted a kind of similar inquiry.

IMO camber is important, you want a lower camber ski, single camber. And also on the flexible side as far as x-c skis go. Camber and stiffness are the big reasons why the fischer boundless skied so much better than the next step down in their line (at the time) the outtabounds. Not a lot of difference in width but totally different skis.

The annum, imo, is too wide if you are going to spend some time cruising groomed surfaces. The side cut also slows you down.

I don't have a lot of experience with nnn-bc, but you will have greater control with a leather 75 mm boot and not much of a heavier feel, if at all. Of course going to a plastic boot and burly binding is a game changer, but a real tradeoff as to feel and speed on the flats.

I'm a little confused about your first two sentences above. What are the limitations you are specifically experiencing?

Sorry for the confusion. I mean that conditions have to be very favorable if I want to achieve any turns. Usually my tours are leaving my truck and going uphill for ~1000 feet over a few miles and then turning around and going back to my truck. So there is less rolling terrain and more straight up and straight down. In between there will be chunks of flat ground with packed snow.

I've skied neither the Ingstad nor the E88 but they are clearly meant for similar tasks. I imagine that if you were to switch one for the other you would not be able to expect hugely different results (with the exception of the crown vs wax grip systems).

As others have suggested, take it a step further. Single camber skis with a lot of sidecut:. FT62, SBound, Madshus Annum/Epoch, Alpina discovery (the wider ones) seem good choices.
It may also be useful to ask yourself if you have the right technique level to power skis with leather boots on NNN-BC bindings, or whether 75mm and the powerful boot range à la T4 which this unlocks, are the way to go.
Telemarking with NNN BC is difficult but possible, and at the same time something you can probably vastly improve (although that statement is just a guess). Find the Telehiro YouTube channel for some inspiration for incredibly precise skiing.
Edit: I tried to be constructive but all my points have already been made. Oh well

Very helpful. I didn't really know if the Ingstad was too similar to the 88s to justify the expense or not. Thanks!

The Ingstad BC is FAST man- VERY FAST- MUCH FASTER than the 88.

This is a really good point I hadn't thought of. I don't think I want to go faster. I want more control...

Heh, I just posted a kind of similar inquiry.

Awesome. What setup do you run? I noticed you're in the Teton Valley, which isn't too far from me. What works for you there?

Base on your last post, you would definitely have much more control on an FT 62. It has sufficient kick and glide for your rolling sections, X-skin can help with the climb. It is a wax ski, you will want to learn about kick wax, which is not difficult.
I do not know of a ski similar to the FAlketind 62. It is a single camber ski, that has a bit of tension underfoot. It will preserve a wax pocket in soft snow. That pocket will drag on a hard trail. It has enough torsional rigidly to ski more difficult resort runs in decent snow conditions. It is a light ski, it’s not for mank, or ice, or tilled ice. However you can rip a black on a packed powder day in a moderately stiff leather Telemark boot. It’s fun on moderate backcountry powder as well.

fisheater wrote: ↑

Mon Dec 21, 2020 2:45 pm

Base on your last post, you would definitely have much more control on an FT 62. It has sufficient kick and glide for your rolling sections, X-skin can help with the climb. It is a wax ski, you will want to learn about kick wax, which is not difficult.
I do not know of a ski similar to the FAlketind 62. It is a single camber ski, that has a bit of tension underfoot. It will preserve a wax pocket in soft snow. That pocket will drag on a hard trail. It has enough torsional rigidly to ski more difficult resort runs in decent snow conditions. It is a light ski, it’s not for mank, or ice, or tilled ice. However you can rip a black on a packed powder day in a moderately stiff leather Telemark boot. It’s fun on moderate backcountry powder as well.

They seem to be elusive in the US...

But your advice echoes some others' I have received.

Ianjt, I hear you on the availablity of the FT. I like it, but others have mentioned the S-98/112, Madshus Annum/Epoch, and Alpina also has a turn oriented XCD ski. I don’t believe any of those skis have the torsional rigidity of the FT, but some folks really like all of these skis. I can personally say the S-112 is easy to turn, I believe the S-98 turns just as easily

Rossignol's BC line up are great for Steep stuf and meadow skipping. I have a BC-90 and a Newish BC-110. I feel the 110 is as heavy as my Leather boot (andrew's North Rim) can handle. The Asnes seem to be more $$