Telemark Talk / Telemark Tips Forum

Roelant wrote: ↑

Sat Dec 04, 2021 6:53 am

20211204_114030.jpg
The snow was a bit tricky, about 20cm of semi crusty powder without a base. I hit some rocks on the first descents so I was very careful afterwards, and it was just a short tour with some steep narrow climbs. I waxed for the climbs (heel to 15cm in front of snakebite), this caused some more drag than I would like on the flats but was very grippy.
I'm happy so far but given today's conditions i cannot provide any real objective info apart from that they are very nice and nimble to use.
Anyone else had a go?

WOW yes!!!
You got the 205, correct? And you are about 190lbs/86kg if I remember?

I am mounting my Sverdrups tonight-
We had rain on Thursday night, followed by very cold weather-
lost our decent snow!

Flexing them regularly-

The Sverdrup have a more flexible shovel and tail than the Nansen- more cambered and stiffer underfoot than the Nansen.

I skiied thursday on 1-2inch fresh snow over a consolidated base...some areas have very heavy foot traffic (scarred with deel foot prints). It was very cold at 4F and very dry. Moderate/low angle. My 175cm Sverdrup was a dream. The conditions were easy enough that I could have used any ski...even the mt51. But what I liked most was that turning was so easy. Offtrack was deep powder (well over 1ft in many areas...pole sinks all the way down)...Sverdrup struggled through this as expected but still doable (most likely due to the short ski length Ive chosen).

I think all the other skis, FT62, Skog, MT51 would have had a hard time on the areas with heavy foot traffic. I was able to ski right through those areas just fine.

I used 2 coats of swix polar wax tip to tail. then green wax from 10cm in front of snakebite to heel. then one coat of swix HS5 -18C tip and tail. It was very grippy so I didnt get good glide on the flat...but the climb up was perfect and skiing down was great.

I am going out again today. it has warmed up 13F. I won't be putting any additional wax...k&g should be better today with the warmer temp and with some the wax worn off.

will report again later.

jyw5 wrote: ↑

Sat Dec 04, 2021 12:32 pm

I skiied thursday on 1-2inch fresh snow over a consolidated base...some areas have very heavy foot traffic (scarred with deel foot prints). It was very cold at 4F and very dry. Moderate/low angle. My 175cm Sverdrup was a dream. The conditions were easy enough that I could have used any ski...even the mt51. But what I liked most was that turning was so easy. Offtrack was deep powder (well over 1ft in many areas...pole sinks all the way down)...Sverdrup struggled through this as expected but still doable (most likely due to the short ski length Ive chosen).

I think all the other skis, FT62, Skog, MT51 would have had a hard time on the areas with heavy foot traffic. I was able to ski right through those areas just fine.

I used 2 coats of swix polar wax tip to tail. then green wax from 10cm in front of snakebite to heel. then one coat of swix HS5 -18C tip and tail. It was very grippy so I didnt get good glide on the flat...but the climb up was perfect and skiing down was great.

I am going out again today. it has warmed up 13F. I won't be putting any additional wax...k&g should be better today with the warmer temp and with some the wax worn off.

will report again later.

Nice DUDE! I love it!

So the foot traffic = postholes? Is that it? Why do you think the Sverdrups excelled here?

Jalla wrote: ↑

Tue Nov 30, 2021 4:07 am

My latest conclution is the Ingstad 195(im 85kg) with a 75mm and stiff boot, but the sverdrup is tempting for the days all about xc. How big is the difference between these skies in reality? Can i go wrong with either?

Sverdrup versus Ingstad (geometry and flex):
- Sverdrup is narrower
- Sverdrup has slightly less pronounced rocker (very close though)
- Sverdrup has significantly more camber and stiffness underfoot than the Ingstad
- Sverdrup has a moure flexible shovel and tail than the Ingstad
- Sverdrup has more tapered, and slightly raised tail compared to the Ingstad

Have not skied the Sverdrup yet-
I am expecting the Sverdrup to be a more efficient XC ski on consolidated snow- compared to the Ingstad.
I do not expect the Sverdrup to be a more efficient XC in deep soft soft snow- compared to the Ingstad.

As far as comparitive performance in steep terrain- we shall see!

Assuming that one chooses an appropriate length in the Sverdrup- I would suggest that the Sverdrup will be a more versatile ski than the Ingstad.

I predict that the Sverdrup will not offer as much stablilty in deep snow as the Ingstad-

The Sverdrup should still be quite supportive in deep snow- it still has a stable longitudinal flex- despite having a more flexible shovel and tail.

For example- the shovel on the Sverdrup is more stable than the shovel on my Eon/E99 Xtralite/E109 Xtralite.

Breakable crust and the Sverdrup aren't going to get along though- that rockered shovel is going to ride on top of crust, while the midsection of the ski will break through.

Woodserson wrote: ↑

Sat Dec 04, 2021 10:51 am

WOW yes!!!
You got the 205, correct? And you are about 190lbs/86kg if I remember?

105 kg / 230 lbs, and the 205s are obviously not too stiff for me...

KnoxPolk wrote: ↑

Sun Nov 21, 2021 11:00 am

I currently own the new Rabb 68 and Ingstads, there’s definitely much less camber in Rabb and is much softer than Ingstad. I am sending some quick photos with comparison between those two.

Hi @KnoxPolk! I wonder if you had the chance to ski the Rabb? The new version seems way different in term of camber. The previos Rabb has more of an alpine like camber. I am curious to read about your experience with them. Take them out and report back

Another update- just mounted my Sverdrups-

Balance point on the 205 Sverdrup is a full 2cm forward of blance point on the 205 Nansen WL.

@lilcliffy A 210 cm Amundsen??? Did it come with wings too? I hope the snow falls fast, (for all of us) you have lots of ski reviews to write this season!

fisheater wrote: ↑

Sat Dec 04, 2021 8:03 pm

@lilcliffy ... you have lots of ski reviews to write this season!

Dude, you do!


Thinking about the forward shift on the Otto, makes sense, based on ratio of tip to tail width for the Nanson vs Otto.
Otto has a proportionally wider tip and narrower tail that would tip the balance point forward.