Fischer 2015-2016 product line-up???

[Woodserson]

Whoah! Granted, I don't get out much, but I've never heard of that book before. Just bought a used copy online. Thanks for the tip!

Tell me what you think! You gotta be in a certain mindset... maaaaan.

*****
OK, so Randonée racing. I didn't know it had a special in-the-know name. Do I need spandex? I guess that means it's going in a certain direction. In Switzerland there's a big race every few years called Patrouille des Glaciers. It's famous ever since WWII. (with some big gaps) It's still run by the military. It's a big deal. http://www.pdg.ch/

When I was a kid, I could never get clementines in America, and I pined for the clementines I would have around Christmastime in Switzerland. (and Nutella, also nonexistent). Now, there are clementines of varying quality all over America (Spanish ones are best). Course de Randonée wasn't very far behind the clementines I guess, probably with varying qualities of races as well.

[bgregoire]

I think Ski Mountaineering is cool. I'd most probably do it myself if I lived in the Alps.

[lilcliffy]

WOW- you fellas have been grinding this week...it took me quite a bit to catch up this evening!

Ski mountaineering is really cool. I would love to be in a life situation where I was able to pursue that- as well as long distance Nordic ski expeditions...

I don't get worked up by skiers using big mountain tech to xcountry on gentle to moderate terrain...not that I completely get it...

I am disappointed about the erosion and loss of Nordic ski touring culture and skills in North America- it is obviously alive and well in Northern Eurasia.

I am also concerned about the infectious spread of misinformation such as:

- "kick wax is only for high-performance track skiing" (the comment about kick wax in the above posted "earn" article only proves that the author knows nothing about it)

- "waxless traction climbs better than grip wax and works better than kick wax in the "backcountry"" (I find it strange that most people that claim this, ski in the stable snow conditions of western mountains, and have no idea what it's really like to ski "variable" snow conditions- such as Scandinavia and North-Eastern NA. Kick wax seems to work just fine in the humid Northeast- why would it work "worse" in dry, western mtns?)

- "wider is always better"

- "if in doubt size down" (in length) (e.g. "I was told to buy short skis for XC-skiing because they are easy-turning")

- "AT tech offers better K&G than Nordic tech" (this one makes me crazy)

- "Nordic binding resistance causes ski tips to plummet into the abyss" (this one is bizarre)

AT tech is amazing stuff- if I still lived in big-mountain-country I would have an AT setup ready to go 24/7.

The issue I have is the suggestion that big-mountain tech outperforms trad Nordic in all applications.

It seems every time I look- some AT skier is suggesting that if "you just switched to AT- you'd cover ground more efficiently- plus you'd have a locked heel for the down". These kind of statements just demonstrate that they know nothing about Nordic ski tech.

Some of the ideas are bizarre- I have no idea where they came from...

For example- where did this notion that traditional Nordic 75mm tech causes ski tips to "sink into the depths" come from? This is simply misinformation. Every time I turn around someone is going on about the K&G performance of their AT free-pivot binding...

A properly-functioning Nordic boot/binding transfers boot/binding resistance downwards into the wax/traction pocket (underfoot)- not directly out to the ski tips! (Yes- a trad XC binding setup spreads weight evenly to tip and tail- in order for the camber to be compressed into the "kick"- that's the point)

When "kick" and "gliding" in an AT setup, there is no flex or binding resistance- the only so-called "kick" you get is from the skier's weight compressing the camber underfoot (if there even is any to begin with)- this is not the "kick" of a Nordic diagonal stride. I would suggest that, skiers that think it is, need to spend some miles on a classic XC track and realize what real "kick" is in Nordic K&G.

In order to actually get a Nordic "kick" in AT tech, you would need a second ankle joint- above the boot- so that you could "kick" downwards with your toes, while still standing up!

Increasingly too few people know what the performance of Nordic ski tech really is capable of.

I am totally cool with the claim that Alpine tech offers downhill power beyond most people's Nordic-downhill skills.

Suggesting that AT tech offers better XC-performance is just wrong, ignorant- and to be honest it just pisses me off.

Yes- to each their own- XC ski in AT- ski down K2 on Glitts- but spreading misinformation about ski tech is just lame.

[bgregoire]

Every time I turn around someone is going on about the K&G performance of their AT free-pivot binding...

Fortunately, live has made it so that I have been mostly shielded from such comments. I might have grown into a much greyer man otherwise.

[MikeK]

Lot's of comment I'd like to make in regards to your post lilcliffy, but I'll keep it brief.

You are on the money with a lot of it. I looked into AT gear before I got back into xc skiing. It wasn't about money for me really because I've probably spent about the same on every bit of xc gear I have as I would have for one AT setup. And the reason I couldn't do it was because I knew my wife would never go with me, and I also couldn't see using more than once or twice a year (that may be the case with my xc gear this year tho ).

The only thing I'm still clinging on to is the fact that a lot of the times in our climate, waxless is just way better. Having fussed with wax before it used to frustrate the heck out of me, especially near home where our temps are generally 10deg or so higher than the mountains. Now that I've been skiing exclusively waxless, and get out on some really cold snow, I pine to have the wax back. I really do want both, but I still think my waxless skis will see far more use.

Out west I don't see why wax wouldn't be preferable except for extra fuss. If I lived nearer to the arctic circle, I'd surely use wax only. And the thing I've brought up before is there are times when the waxless pattern on our skis is absolutely worthless... zero grip! It's not a good feeling and not one I'd like to encounter in big mountains.

Also I'm really wondering about the Asnes skins... I'd really like to compare that performance to waxless skis on warm snow. I expect probably won't be as good, and will likely just be a steep climbing aid... but I'm curious.

[bgregoire]

Also I'm really wondering about the Asnes skins... I'd really like to compare that performance to waxless skis on warm snow. I expect probably won't be as good, and will likely just be a steep climbing aid... but I'm curious.

Climbing with half skins is great on warm snow. It really helps to apply hard wax on the skins (against the hairs) to help them shed water. You really have to keep them dry cause when the temps finally go below freezing, the hairs mat up and you can loose all grip. There are specific conditions though, were just like waxless skis, the snow starts sticking and accumulating below, causing you to feel like the Goodyear Man.

[Teleman]

LC been doing this for a long time....We all sort of laugh when we see some of the above....If people don't get it...well they don't get it!!!!!! Have to say we have gone beyond it though....Keep up the chatter with the folks as it is good to hear another voice....Nordic is different as the name of the game is to go SOMEWHERE and skiing happens along the way....Not being an engineer or a mathematician.....I focus on the ride....getting help on the technical issues is appreciated....LJ should put up a thread for You Mike and Ron....A party, a get together, a place to discuss without rancor or snark the finer points of the technology of xcd. Bri, too! TM

[MikeK]

Bri is a mad scientist Teleman! Have you seen his gifs!

I had some professors that used to call me a mad scientist in college... but I'm nowhere near as good Bri!

[MikeK]

LJ should put up a thread for You Mike and Ron....A party, a get together, a place to discuss without rancor or snark the finer points of the technology of xcd. Bri, too! TM

I had the mad idea of doing something just like this. I was hoping Pinnah might lend us the rights to his info and I was throwing out the idea of expanding upon this website with all the new skis and information that has amassed since it's inception.

I wanted to try to take all the technical info from this site and organize into into tables and such like on Dave's site. As much as I like discussing technical aspects, sometimes we talk too much and lose some of the important points in the discussion. It would be nice to have a concise resource for Nordic Backcountry that was up to date. I always loved Dave's site, and it would be a million times cooler to have the old and the new!

[lilcliffy]

The only thing I'm still clinging on to is the fact that a lot of the times in our climate, waxless is just way better. Having fussed with wax before it used to frustrate the heck out of me, especially near home where our temps are generally 10deg or so higher than the mountains. Now that I've been skiing exclusively waxless, and get out on some really cold snow, I pine to have the wax back. I really do want both, but I still think my waxless skis will see far more use.

I hear you man- there are conditions when waxless is just the most practical choice- especially for us backcountry skiers that ski through the woods. The conditions that call for klister are fine if your skiing on a clean debris-free track. But fine forest debris and klister are not compatible!

As much as I prefer kick/grip wax- I will always want waxless skis in my quiver.

Also I'm really wondering about the Asnes skins... I'd really like to compare that performance to waxless skis on warm snow. I expect probably won't be as good, and will likely just be a steep climbing aid... but I'm curious.

The Asnes "skinlock" (or Fischer "easyskin"), as a kicker skin, should offer way more traction than a waxable or waxless base- but of course less glide. The impact on glide will greatly depend on the whether the ski has an effective wax/traction/"skin" pocket.

I don't think that these skins are intended for climbing steep slopes (Asnes and Fischer still recommends full skins for that). These kicker skins are for extra, heavy-duty traction on the flats and low-angle ascents. And just like full skins- take em off on the way down.