Excursion 88 to Ingstad

[ianjt]

Hello. I got a lot of awesome help on this board last year when looking for a backcountry nordic setup. I ended up with Fischer E88s and NNNBC with Alpina Alaskas. I have realized, since then, that most of my options for touring involve lots of steep ground. I live in Idaho, and in my corner of the state, the snow seems to only be found in the mountains, which demand a lot of downhill capabilities in the touring that I do. Of course, I don't mean downhill in the sense of true backcountry downhill. But I find myself doing 50/50 touring and downhill or even 75/25 downhill/touring. Regardless, I am not after epic downhill runs. Just the ability to turn and control myself on low angle descents.

The Excursions are lots of fun, but where I typically ski, I need a little more control and confidence on the downhill portions. I have been thinking of making the jump over to the Ingstad or an S-Bound 98. I would like to keep NNNBC bindings. I have 13.5 feet, so not many options as it is, and it seems that NNNBC provides more boot options than 3 pin. That said, I can get some Scarpa T4's for a good deal.

I'd like to see what you all think about making the move from E88 to Ingstad. Too similar to justify the price? Would it be appropriate to combine Ingstads with 3 pins and plastic boots? Thoughts?

[jalp]

ianjt,

What part of Idaho are you in? I'm in Boise and happen to have a pair of Ingstads set up with NNN BC. I also wouldn't mind checking out the E88. If you are interested in meeting up sometime and trying them out, drop me a pm.

John

[Nitram Tocrut]

Hello. I got a lot of awesome help on this board last year when looking for a backcountry nordic setup. I ended up with Fischer E88s and NNNBC with Alpina Alaskas. I have realized, since then, that most of my options for touring involve lots of steep ground. I live in Idaho, and in my corner of the state, the snow seems to only be found in the mountains, which demand a lot of downhill capabilities in the touring that I do. Of course, I don't mean downhill in the sense of true backcountry downhill. But I find myself doing 50/50 touring and downhill or even 75/25 downhill/touring. Regardless, I am not after epic downhill runs. Just the ability to turn and control myself on low angle descents.

The Excursions are lots of fun, but where I typically ski, I need a little more control and confidence on the downhill portions. I have been thinking of making the jump over to the Ingstad or an S-Bound 98. I would like to keep NNNBC bindings. I have 13.5 feet, so not many options as it is, and it seems that NNNBC provides more boot options than 3 pin. That said, I can get some Scarpa T4's for a good deal.

I'd like to see what you all think about making the move from E88 to Ingstad. Too similar to justify the price? Would it be appropriate to combine Ingstads with 3 pins and plastic boots? Thoughts?

I won’t answer your question but suggest you look at the FT62 as well as I suppose you would keep the 88. I have never tried the 88 but do own the Ingstad and FT62 and of course I love both. If you are really looking for better dh capability and still have quite capable touring potential the FT62 could be a better complement to your 88. Last year I had the 188 that I sold to get a pair of 196. I still have to try them as snow is b/o in my corner of the world. I was really happy with the 188 but I bought the 196 on the assumption that they would perform even better for touring... of course there as to be turns to do, if not I take my Ingstad as they are better XC skis.

I will report as soon as I can on the 196...

I am quite sure your question will stir up some interest and hopefully my suggestion helps mix things up in your head

[lowangle al]

Get a single camber ski like the FT 62 mentioned above, vary your quiver. Maybe someday you will be doing epic downhill turns, it is the icing on the xcd cake.

[Rodbelan]

I agree with Al...

In fact, I just mounted a pair of those E88 for a friend a couple of days ago, and noticed the high and strong camber... Not a bad ski if it is sized correctly, if that's what you are looking for... but not really a fantastic turner (from what I saw). Should have taken a picture...

The Ingstad is probably not the same but still too similar to what you have (I am referring to this board and a vid from Gamme explaining the difference in Asnes skis). Nansen has a rounder more supple flex than Ingstad supposedly. Ft 62 seems also like a good suggestion...

The Arvinen Kaplov would also be good...

[Tom M]

I haven't skied the Ingstad, but I agree with others that if your main goal is downhill performance, then you should go one step further and get a ski designed more for turns than for touring. I have a set of Sbound 98's and ski them with a leather 75 mm boot. It is a great ski, but it is still a cross country ski at heart. It is my favorite ski setup for rolling terrain where there is a combination of flats and some moderate downhill under good snow conditions. I'm a big fan of the Voile Objective BC ski and ski it both with a leather boot and a plastic boot as conditions warrant. My 98 setup with 3 pin weighs 6.42 lbs @ 179 cm and my Objectives with the 3 pin traverse (no cable) weighs only 6.66 lbs @ 178 cm, so there is not much difference in weight. One word of caution though, is that Voile does not warrant the Objective with a telemark binding. There is lots of discussion on this board regarding this. The Objectives paired with a Scarpa T4 would give you more turning power than you can imagine. I'm happy with a 3 pin binding on mine, but I have a beefier tele ski setup for the steep and deep when I'm with my AT skiing friends. I've just met a skier in my valley (NW Wyoming, near the Idaho border) who has both the Ingstad and the FT 62, mounted with an NNN-BC binding. I'm hoping that he will let me try them out, so I can experience what others on this board rave about. The FT 62 interests me the most but they are nearly impossible to get here in the US. If the rumor is true that Rottefella will come out with a new pin based XCD binding next year, I plan to pair it with the FT 62. Of course, this rumor pops up every year so I don't hold my breath.

[lilcliffy]

Good to hear from you Ianjt!

I have both the current 88 and the Ingstad in "XC" lengths- 199cm 88 and 205cm Ingstad BC. (I have skied the older versions of the Fischer 88 (e.g. Outtabounds) in multiple different lengths).

Although these two skis are "very" different- they are both XC skis- intended for covering distance.
The geometry and flex are very different.

The Ingstad BC has a lower profile camber than the 88, but it still has a stiff, resistance underfoot- intended to release kickwax/kicker skin when striding forwards.
The 88 has a higher, stiffer, initial camber- but its overall flex is more uniform.

What length is your 88? Perhaps it is a little long for your weight on hills (i.e. difficult to compress the camber?) If one is going to use the 88 on truly steep terrain it is probably best to stick to Fischer's weight recommendations. For XC skiing a longer 88 is much better...

One can get away with a longer Ingstad vs 88 on steep terrain because the Ingstad is less cambered.

All things being equal, I don't see how moving to the Ingstad would give you more "control and confidence" downhill than the 88...Unless it is the camber that is "killing" you...

A single-cambered more downhill-oriented ski is definitely going to be more stable and be easier to turn than the 88 (and the Ingstad for that matter).
Other options in that range that are much cheaper than the Ingstad- Madshus Eon (also the new "Panorama 62" that has kicker skin insert), and the wider, softer Epoch and even wider and equally soft round Annum...

The S-Bound 98 might be more stable downhill than the 88- especially if it is less cambered (I have not compared an 88 vs 98 in many years so I cannot comment)- it has more sidecut than the 88, so has a narrower turn radius...

The other thing is that you may well want an actual Telemark boot...
And if you think that you want a Telemark boot you are going to have to switch to 75mm bindings.
I am not aware of any current NNNBC boot that has the stiffness and support of a Telemark boot.
If you mounted 75mm-3pin, you can switch between XC and Telemark boots on the same ski...

Not sure if I am helping you- but I kinda doubt that switching to the Ingstad is going to solve your problem...

[ianjt]

Good to hear from you Ianjt!

I have both the current 88 and the Ingstad in "XC" lengths- 199cm 88 and 205cm Ingstad BC. (I have skied the older versions of the Fischer 88 (e.g. Outtabounds) in multiple different lengths).

Although these two skis are "very" different- they are both XC skis- intended for covering distance.
The geometry and flex are very different.

The Ingstad BC has a lower profile camber than the 88, but it still has a stiff, resistance underfoot- intended to release kickwax/kicker skin when striding forwards.
The 88 has a higher, stiffer, initial camber- but its overall flex is more uniform.

What length is your 88? Perhaps it is a little long for your weight on hills (i.e. difficult to compress the camber?) If one is going to use the 88 on truly steep terrain it is probably best to stick to Fischer's weight recommendations. For XC skiing a longer 88 is much better...

One can get away with a longer Ingstad vs 88 on steep terrain because the Ingstad is less cambered.

All things being equal, I don't see how moving to the Ingstad would give you more "control and confidence" downhill than the 88...Unless it is the camber that is "killing" you...

A single-cambered more downhill-oriented ski is definitely going to be more stable and be easier to turn than the 88 (and the Ingstad for that matter).
Other options in that range that are much cheaper than the Ingstad- Madshus Eon (also the new "Panorama 62" that has kicker skin insert), and the wider, softer Epoch and even wider and equally soft round Annum...

The S-Bound 98 might be more stable downhill than the 88- especially if it is less cambered (I have not compared an 88 vs 98 in many years so I cannot comment)- it has more sidecut than the 88, so has a narrower turn radius...

The other thing is that you may well want an actual Telemark boot...
And if you think that you want a Telemark boot you are going to have to switch to 75mm bindings.
I am not aware of any current NNNBC boot that has the stiffness and support of a Telemark boot.
If you mounted 75mm-3pin, you can switch between XC and Telemark boots on the same ski...

Not sure if I am helping you- but I kinda doubt that switching to the Ingstad is going to solve your problem...

Excellent insight. And great insight from other posters as well. Thanks!

I may have confused. I am not interested in big downhill pursuits. I want to keep the touring capabilities of the ski, but also be more comfortable on the descents. I can carve some basic tele turns in deep powder, but with the elevation we have on skiable terrain around here, anything else is difficult.

Perhaps I keep the Excursion 88s as a touring setup and, as Tom mentioned and you mentioned, go for a burlier setup that isn't quite all about downhill, but allows me more control than what I have now.

Can you recommend some single camber skis that will still give me some touring capabilities? I notice the Panorama is single camber. Would that be a good choice? Altai skis?

[Woodserson]

I want to keep the touring capabilities of the ski, but also be more comfortable on the descents. I can carve some basic tele turns in deep powder, but with the elevation we have on skiable terrain around here, anything else is difficult.

Can you recommend some single camber skis that will still give me some touring capabilities? I notice the Panorama is single camber. Would that be a good choice? Altai skis?

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

You could slap a 75mm on the 88's and then use a plastic boot for more downhill days and an Alaska for touring days. It won't change the ski characteristics however, just how you interface with the ski, and as lilcliffy states, give you a boot with stiffness and power.

If you want a more downhill capable ski that is still-almost-but-maybe-not-quite a XC ski, that you can use your softer boots on... the answer is, of course, FT62.

Otherwise Annum/Epoch good choices too.

The Altai's, while excellent, are up&down skis. Go up, go down. Going sideways on flat stuff is numbing. They are not designed for this. THAT BEING SAID I SAW a guy with a full-on AT set-up at the XC center the other day!!! You wanna talk about pain? Full skins on miles of flats? WTF dude, there are better tools

[CwmRaider]

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