Telemark Talk / Telemark Tips Forum

Hi all, first time-er here, from the hill country of NE Iowa (aka "driftless" region, "little Norway", etc). Not mountain powder country by any means but beautiful country for skiing nonetheless.

First things first, I'm greatly in need of new all-purpose OTBD run-around-the-farm-and-through-the-woods XCd skis (with the rare longer outings). More about conditions and thought process below, but after a good bit of research here and elsewhere lately, I've tentatively settled on the E99 easy skin with Alaska NNN BC boot/bindings, BUT I CAN'T FIND ANY in the US. Can folks here point me towards best sources for half-way affordable prices (I HAVE seen them for $400+, ugh)? I'm very open to used equipment as well, though I doubt there are too many folks wanting to pass along 15/16 E99 in 200cm (maybe 205).

Background: I'm an Iowa farm boy, spent HS years (80s) with a buddy and a pair of waxable Rossignol "Caribou" 205s (tip about 60), teaching ourselves the basics of K&G, skating, and yes telemark turns in cow pastures, bushwhacking through the woods, or winding down hills on unplowed gravel roads. Cheap lowcut leather traditional 3-pin boots, but I rigged a V and pin setup at the back end to help with control. Used these through college years as well (Indiana, not much chance, but long Xmas vacations), worked away and abroad for 20+ years, now returned to the home place and am still on these things and ready for a change.

Snow conditions here as you can assume are just all over the place. New/old/warm/cold/crusty/grainy/hard/ice/anything ... what we DON'T have consistently is deep powder, relative to mountainous regions of course (though we can get a foot or more, most of our snows are 2-8 inches). Most of my skiing is out the door around the farm and sometimes through the woods. Breaking trail 25-50% of the time, often for my girls. Sometimes looping around flats, just for a bit of air and exercise, other times gently rolling fields with maybe 50-100 feet elevation, and sometimes woods/hills with 2-300 feet relief (also "gently rolling" for some of you <g>). I'm definitely looking for a XCd ski, general K&G performance is more important than D but I do enjoy the hills and look forward to more play in coming years.

So my thinking: I've researched many of the newer "BC" skis and am not happy with the trend towards short skis. Maybe it's the Swede in me (this is very Scandinavian country), maybe just a purist, but I do like to glide. For similar reasons I can't quite convince myself to go waxless, even though they work fine for my girls and they'd probably be easier on my tight schedule to grab and go when I have little time. I want something at least as wide as my current Rossys and I've always thought just a bit wider would be good and metal edges would be much help ... but I just don't think the width of 80s and way up that seems to help with "flotation" in deep powder would be especially useful here. And, as I've said, I need an BC XCd, focus on XC much more than D.

Which has led me to the E99 easy skin. I like the longer ski options, waxability, but also the skins seem like something I've always wanted - a way to "shortcut" in especially hard conditions, but also an adaptation to woods, or even lakes/rivers, where sometimes waxes just won't cut it (especially klister in woods). I'm 5'10" and 150s, so I figure the 200 would probably be about right given the camber of the E99s, though I may consider the 205.

Thoughts, suggestions? I'm open to all advice, though I'd be much appreciative if someone could point me towards better sources than I am coming up with on google, or just tell me it's too late in the season and I'll have to wait. I was hoping to have these in hand to play with a bit in a week or so prior to a quick jaunt into the BWCA on the 10th but that appears unlikely, no big deal there.

thanks!

I did some internet searching - no sign of Easy Skin. However, I did find this - fishscale (crown) E99's from a couple years ago for $200 - plenty of 200's and 210's left - maybe it's time to consider blowing off the Easy Skin idea? You'd have to call somewhere like Akers Ski and ask them to order from the distributor, it will cost ~$400.

https://www.skatepro.com/en-us/744-19931.htm

Unless you're climbing something really steep you'd won't need the skins.

PS, here they are in Canada. You'd have to find a place willing to ship to the US....look at the price:

https://www.mec.ca/en/product/5049-867/ ... alite-Skis

Hi ia. if those rossi skis are metal edged and you like them, stick with em. My wife and I out on our 30 yo skis today and we had a blast. If the change you are looking for is for improved dh performance I would get the shortest ski recommended for your weight. I also agree with Cannatonic that fish scaled skis would be more practical than skins for you.

Consider looking into the Asnes options. A Gamme would probably be the ideal counterpart to an E99 although I'd say a little bit wider ski like the E109 or Ingstad (or S Bound 78 should you go waxless) would give you better all-around performance. I personally prefer skiing those wider skis unless I'm in tracks or wet snow.

All those skis are relatively difficult to find in the US at the moment, but I wouldn't give up hope. I doubt you will find any of them used as they seem to stay with their original owner (must be because they are good skis ).

Thanks for the advice all. I do want waxable, got a pair of Fischer Crown Country for my wife and they're pretty good but plenty of crazy snow conditions they don't handle well. Definitely want waxable, the easy skin isn't absolute necessity but looked like it would be fun to experiment with on the range of conditions we have.

I also have no problem with 30 y/o gear in theory, but no my Rossy's aren't metal edge unfortunately (in fact there's no edge left to speak of, thanks to general use and sporadic skating on crust), and my boots are pretty well falling apart, so needing to spring for something new. I'm comfortable on longer skis and not looking to max downhill performance, so I think I'll stay away from the short trend.

I had looked at the Gamme but like you say, they're hard to find to. The third model of interest that does appear available is the Glittertind, can anyone compare those three for me (Gamme, Glitt, E99), strengths and weaknesses in a variety of conditions, with focus on XCd, and mostly an absence of deep powder? If you had all three in your quiver, when you would take each one out over the other?

iasetter wrote: I had looked at the Gamme but like you say, they're hard to find to. The third model of interest that does appear available is the Glittertind, can anyone compare those three for me (Gamme, Glitt, E99), strengths and weaknesses in a variety of conditions, with focus on XCd, and mostly an absence of deep powder? If you had all three in your quiver, when you would take each one out over the other?

Having used the older E99 and the current Glittertind, I can tell you I liked the E99 a bit better. Like all Fischers it was a little bit stiffer than the Madshus counterpart.

The Glitts are fine skis. Mine went to a new home and they were waxless, so perhaps not a completely fair assessment for you but they did OK. They are pretty tough, they have enough camber and stiffness to tour OK, but they are not as poppy as a real XC ski... kind of flat. Turning is pretty miserable except in perfect conditions in which case they are actually pretty fun. But don't expect that too much.

The older E99s my wife was skiing were a bit stiffer all around, both camber and tip/tail flex but felt a bit nicer to ski. Being 10cm shorter than my Glitts, they felt manageable dh but I really doubt they were significantly better. Probably splitting hairs compared to other skis available today. I'm also under the impression that since the E99 went to the Xtralite version it is a different ski. It has less sidecut and might even be stiffer than it was previously. Ours were the grey BCX version before they made that change. A good ski, but once my wife got better I put her on more turny skis when she needed them and longer skis for flatter touring. I'm not sure she ever did more than a snowplow with the E99s.

I'd suspect the Gamme is a little bit better ski. Probably a little more tuned to try to get some DH performance out of a relatively narrow XC ski profile. It's not like you are going to get much but Asnes did add rocker to them. Generally it seems Asnes are a little lighter and have a smoother flex profiles than Fischer or Madshus. They've done their hw in trying to get the most out of their skis. Bases and edges are a bit nicer as well - thicker edges and the stone grinding on the bases is nicer than Fischer (which IMO is nicer than Madshus).

Overall, I think any of those skis will get you around and last a reasonable amount of time, but you might have a bit more fun on the Fischers vs the Madshus and likewise with the Asnes vs the Fischers. Your wallet will be heavier in the other direction though. The option of being able to add that skin when the hard kick wax won't work is a benefit, but personally I think I'd just rather grab my scales, unless of course it's an icy crust and they don't work...

Welcome "iasetter"!

Been very busy of late with work and have not had time to respond to you.

A quick search has demonstrated that you are correct- I do not see the E-99 Tour Easy-Skin in stock anywhere in obvious in the US...SUCKY.

Lots here in Canada- and loads in Europe. Ordering from Europe might cost you less than you think...

The E-99 Tour Easy-Skin is an incredible ski. I would expect that the Asnes Gamme 54 with Skin-Lock would be the closest comparison. Cannatonic has stated that the Gamme is a bit stiffer and more ruggedly built. But skis like the Amundsen are WAAAY stiffer than the E-99/Gamme 54- and the Nansen is a different class of ski.

The Glitt is definitely in the same class of ski as the current E-99, but it has a VERY different flex pattern. The Glitt is has much softer flexing tip/tail, but it is MUCH stiffer underfoot than the E-99. Gamme the Elder's measured test measures the stiffness of the Glitt underfoot to be as much as the standard Amundsen!
https://www.utemagasinet.no/Utstyr/TEST-Ski-for-fjellet
The Glittertind is a very popular- legendary in fact- distance-oriented BC-XC ski. But- I have to admit that I prefer the flex pattern of the current E-99 over the current Glitt. My friend bought a 210cm waxable Glitt with NNNBC that I tried before I bought my current E-99s.

In the meantime- while you search for an E-99- why not consider these BC-XC machines:
https://colemans.com/shop/cold-weather- ... is-2-pair/
Yes they are HEAVY. Yes they are crude. But they are excellent BC-XC skis. They are trail-breaking BC kick and glide machines. I love them to be honest.

As far as the E-99 in the US- I would suggest directly contacting Akers Ski in Maine.
http://www.akers-ski.com/category/bcski ... y=name_asc
Akers specializes in exactly the sort of skiing you are going to do: backcountry-xcountry. I have bought a few skis from them. Excellent company. If they don't have any E-99 Tours- I bet they can get one for you.

Otherwise- you may end up ordering from Canada or Europe.
Gareth

lilcliffy wrote: The Glitt is definitely in the same class of ski as the current E-99, but it has a VERY different flex pattern. The Glitt is has much softer flexing tip/tail, but it is MUCH stiffer underfoot than the E-99. Gamme the Elder's measured test measures the stiffness of the Glitt underfoot to be as much as the standard Amundsen!
https://www.utemagasinet.no/Utstyr/TEST-Ski-for-fjellet
The Glittertind is a very popular- legendary in fact- distance-oriented BC-XC ski. But- I have to admit that I prefer the flex pattern of the current E-99 over the current Glitt. My friend bought a 210cm waxable Glitt with NNNBC that I tried before I bought my current E-99s.

I find this quite odd, because I never felt what they say and I had those same two skis, that exact gen of the BCX E99 and the blue Glitts. I'd honestly have a hard time distinguishing the camber difference. Both were quite stiff IMO.

My wife also skied both and had no issues with the camber.

It was very obvious the difference in the tips and tails and it made the Glittertind feel unbalanced because of the stiffness underfoot coupled with the floppiness at the ends. The Fischer was remarkably smoother in its transience, and I really think this is what they mean in that article.

Again I'll point out, the skis you have have I believe to be entirely different beasts. I've not skied them but studied a pair and they are straighter, lighter and more XC feeling in their flex.

Although I have never tested the previous gen of E-99- agreed the current model is a complete redesign. However- there does seem to be two generations of the current "xtralite"- my 2014(?) E-99 Crowns have no Nordic rocker- the 2015 E-99s have significant Nordic rocker- at least as much as the E-109- perhaps a bit more...

I REALLY like the Glitt. I have pondered and handled the Glitt for years- wanting one. They are excellent value. It is not that I don't like the Glitt- I just prefer the flex of the E-99 (I also love the "Easy-Skin").

I find that I prefer skis that have a stable, integrated feel to their flex, throughout the length of the ski. I don't mind greater stiffness underfoot in a XC-focused ski (like the Glitt)- I just prefer the more integrated flex of the E-99. I have no doubt that some prefer the flex of the Glitt over the E-99.

Good price on the Glitt btw:
http://www.akers-ski.com/product/16MG.html
http://www.akers-ski.com/product/17MG1.html

Yeah - I had thought there was a non-rockered xtralite.

Honestly, those BCX skis were really, really good. I bought them as NOS for my wife, and it was the ski that convinced me I should look into Fischer some more. Previously I was looking more at Rossi and Madshus.

Anyway, my guess is the new xtralite with Nordic Rocker is Fischer's backfire to the rockered Gamme 54. The addition of the easy-skin and Nordic rocker seems to suspiciously coincide with the market that ski started to infiltrate, and most likely dominate due to those features.