Fischer E-109 vs. Asnes Ingstad

[bgregoire]

Wish I would have bought Mohair.

There is a little paper that comes with them and tell you how much to trim off for each ski under 200cm.

Yeah. and given those should fit their longest double cambered ski (210) as well, you will have better glide cutting them shorter. But you will figure it out quickly on your first outing with them, the difference in FEEL is huge. And by FEEL is how you should cut them IMO.

[MikeK]

I think these ones will only fit the Ingstad and up. They are wide, they go right out to the edges.

Either way, you are right, they are made to fit a 210 as well, but the instructions do not say there is a need to trim for those skis. But of course, they are only recommendations and it's in Norwegian, so I can only really understand the numbers and diagrams

[bgregoire]

I think these ones will only fit the Ingstad and up. They are wide, they go right out to the edges.

Either way, you are right, they are made to fit a 210 as well, but the instructions do not say there is a need to trim for those skis. But of course, they are only recommendations and it's in Norwegian, so I can only really understand the numbers and diagrams

Oh, you got the 60mm? I would have paired them with a 45mm mohair....perfect for touring with a heavy backpack. I'd rely on wax for XCD.

[MikeK]

Yeah I have the 60mm.

Gareth got the 60mm mohair. I think I may wind up getting a pair of those eventually. These I think will only be good for climbing steep shit.

[lilcliffy]

Well there is camber and then there is flex pattern...

Mike et al- have any of you tested the flex pattern of the Ingstad against an Eon or S-78?

It seems that at least Mike's set of Ingstads have similar camber to his Eons/S-78s (near identical to the 195cm Eon). I wonder what they "feel" like if you hold the tail against the floor and try and reverse-flex them?

My biggest issue with the Eon is that they reverse-flex to easily for a heavy skier- which serious compromises both their flotation and their K&G performance.

The fact that all three of these skis are single to camber-and-a-half makes sense to me- for their downhill/clmbing performance (and touring performance on soft snow). What concerns me is whether they have enough longitudinal strength in their flex pattern to support the waist of the ski.

For me- the flex of the Eon, even at 205cm is too weak for my weight of 185lbs.

Although I have tested the S-78 a number of times- I am not sure what the "flex-strength" of the S-78 is compared to the Eon (appears that it is stronger- at least based on Mike's extremely thorough testing- thanks Mike!)

By all reports- including dealers and Asnes themself- there is deliberately a fair bit of difference in terms of flex between individual pairs of Asnes skis. The Norseman and Neptune (and Asnes) told me they prefer to have the dealer select a specific set to suit the weight, and desired skiing performance of the individual skier. This has been perhaps my primary anxiety about mail-ordering an Asnes ski! (IME- Fischer and Madshus skis are very uniform in their construction and flex pattern...)

SO- I not only want the Ingstad/Combat Nato in a 210cm for the K&G peformance- I am also hoping that it gives me some more assurance that the flex pattern is strong enough for my weight!

An BTW- the Grey Man is very cool- but I personally prefer the Combat version!

[lilcliffy]

The 88 is definitely not the 78. I own and have skied both. Very different. Additionally, I've had all 3 of my S-Bound skis up on my flex-test table, and they are all flexing different from each other.

Now the EZ-Skin.... there's another story.

SO...you have been flex-testing all three S-Bounds!!!!

COMPARISON REVIEW!!! PLEASE!!!

And what is the story on the easy-skin? Or can I find it in the "kicker skin" thread"?

BTW- in case your wondering what I'm doing sipping tea in my kitchen- rather than out skiing on this fine Saturday morning- we had our skiing wonderland completely destroyed by a coastal rain storm on Tuesday night!!!!!!!!!

My skis are grounded for the moment...I had been out every day since Dec. 27....it's only February- WTF?!

It's now being called a "Super El Nino"! I believe it.

[lilcliffy]

also I did the paper under the wax pocket test for fun - the paper is held tight under the Gamme 210's when I stand on the skis. Not sure what that means! need to ski them.

So- your Gamme's have no effective wax pocket? Even at 210cm? Wow...

How do they compare in camber/flex to your E-99s?

I am starting to wonder whether I have the Asnes Fjellskis all wrong...I have no experience with them...

The Amundesn and the Nansen are clearly stiffer and more cambered than the S-Bounds/Madshus XCDs- but the Gamme and the Ingstad seem more like them than I expected...

Starting to sound like the E-99 has more camber than the Gamme 54....

Starting to sound like the E-109 has more camber than the Ingstad...

This obviously makes for "better" downhill performance...but what about K&G?

What's the reverse-flex pattern of the Gamme like?

[Woodserson]

SO...you have been flex-testing all three S-Bounds!!!!

COMPARISON REVIEW!!! PLEASE!!!

And what is the story on the easy-skin? Or can I find it in the "kicker skin" thread"?

BTW- in case your wondering what I'm doing sipping tea in my kitchen- rather than out skiing on this fine Saturday morning- we had our skiing wonderland completely destroyed by a coastal rain storm on Tuesday night!!!!!!!!!

My skis are grounded for the moment...I had been out every day since Dec. 27....it's only February- WTF?!

It's now being called a "Super El Nino"! I believe it.

It's all very unscientific and mostly prone to personal judgement as I fiddle with the skis during this no snow winter. But the 98 is the easiest to flex underfoot and has the roundest pattern, the 88 is snappier, the 78 the stiffest underfoot. I thought we discussed this on another thread, can't remember where. It's certainly as I expected for the skis.

The EZ-Skin is pretty decent... I at first was worried about it's robustness in the location where the skin meets the plastic hook, but the clip-on portion that's built into the ski is very well designed and I think it distributes the load keeping the stress off the ski-plastic connector. The skins are super light, and the glue is very strong, and they grip fantastic. They take up little room. The locking feature is nice. I seriously pooh-poohed these last season, and I admit I was wrong.

I was watching that rain storm last week-- certainly thinking of you, it wrecked us down here in New England something good before barreling into NB. Very disappointing and quite difficult to deal with, honestly.

[MikeK]

I agree with Woods 100% on the 98 vs 78 (don't now about the 88, assume it would be somewhere in between).

You notice a big difference skiing them down hills, the 98 just wants to make short, quick turns. The 78 is willing to turn, but a much, much larger radius unless you really bounce on it or something.

Gareth - I know what you mean about the Eon. The difference is when I flex them all the side by side is the tail stiffness, the Eon has a really soft tail, the Ingstad and the S78 feel the same, the tail is much stiffer. They also might have a touch stiffer tips, but it's not much.

That might explain why the camber stiffness is about the same but the way they reverse flex or bow in deep snow feels different.

[Cannatonic]

Starting to sound like the E-99 has more camber than the Gamme 54....

LC - first of all, no carping about melting snowpack when you've already skied dozens of days! People are starving here man!

as for the Gamme's, I would say hell no! They're noticeably stiffer than the E99's with more camber. Stiffer flexing in every way. I think the Ute magazine review was right when it said the Nansen flex matches the E99. The E99 are nordic-shaped skis and have double camber but are fairly soft-flexing IMO.

I can't speak to the Combat/Ingstad but the Breidablikks have more camber than my S-bound 78's. The Breidablikks are not close to double camber, but they have that last little bit of hard resistance where the ski doesn't want to press all the way flat. They have a stiff flex in the middle but the tips of the Breidablikk are noticeably softer than the SB78. The three 84/62 skis from Asnes seem like nordic powder skis to me. If you look at them from a nordic perspective they're big fatties for deep snow. If you look at them from an alpine/downhill perspective it doesn't make sense.

If you do some reading on Fjellforum.no you will see people complaining that Nansen doesn't have any camber and is slow in the flats. To me, only the Gamme is a snappy XC touring-type ski, the wider ones all compromise on camber. But Nansen and the 84/62 ones still have more camber than old-time tele skis like Tua, Kazama, etc.