Fischer E-109 vs. Asnes Ingstad

[lilcliffy]

This is a call to those who would help me make a decision...

A decision between the Fischer E-109 and the Asnes Ingstad. Although I would very much like both of these skis- my budget will only allow one for the time being- and I will probably have to wait until late winter/early spring.

I am intending to use either ski in primarily an XCd ski application. Until my children get older I am unlikely to get away for much big-mtn touring. Therefore, the terrain is gentle to moderate, with occasional steep slopes. I typically do at least 20kms in a day-tour (I don't get away for overnight trips much either these days). The focus will be backcountry-xcountry K&G performance, with moderate downhill turning- therefore I want long (205cm E-109, or 210cm Ingstad) and a waxable base (ultralite E-109 model).

I have very limited experience with the current E-109- but my initial test is that it is double-cambered, with a smooth even flex, and a slightly rockered tip.

I have no experience with the Ingstad- I have never even held them in my hand. But, I am under the impression that it is single-cambered, with a bit of rocker in the tip (perhaps too similar to the Eon and S-Bound 88 to be worth the money? But at 210cm length- might be worth a try!)

Some links on product info and tests:

https://www.fischersports.com/en_en/e10 ... alite-5736

http://www.en.asnes.com/produkt/ingstad/

http://www.utemagasinet.no/Utstyr/TEST-Ski-for-fjellet

http://www.utemagasinet.no/Utstyr/TEST-6-multiski

[MikeK]

Man that's a tough one.

I would opt for the Ingstad even though it's a bit heavier, that is if I were going to use it in fresh snow conditions. That camber would actually probably be more ideal and it would probably give you better soft snow performance. If the snow was harder I'd opt for a skinnier ski than either the 109 or the Ingstad.

My other concern with you and the Fischer is the sidecut profile. You seem to be very sensitive to the S Bounds, and if the 109 has a similar cut, just with different camber, then it will likely be as jerky, maybe worse due to the double camber.

I'm also guessing based on weight that the Ingstad is built like a tank i.e. probably solid core. Not ideal for speed maybe, but if you are going to be racking up miles on them, they will probably last forever.

The last, most selfish reason is we need a Asnes review on the board!

Also, I'm not going to lie, ever since Asnes has been available in NA that has been the ski that has my interest.

[MikeK]

One other reason I'd go for the Asnes: I like their kicker skin attachment system better than the Fischer.

Granted I'm only going by photos and words... I might think otherwise if I tried them.

[bgregoire]

I don't think you'll find anyone active here that has a pair of the Ingstad. I though, have had the chance to frolick a pair in my hands and own the Amundsens, albeit a little too long for me. There is something supremely sweet, magestic, emanating from Asnes skis. They are very well built. But keep in mind that they are primarily built for the scandinavian hills.

Having tested both E-109s, the newer version is a great improvement in my books (more versatile). Lighter, less stiff, rocker and wider up front. The older E-109 is more like the current Asnes Nansen while the newer E-109 is probably more like the Ingstad. If the newer E109 is double cambered, its gotta be one of the softest double cambered skis I have ever tried).

As for the insgtad, I would expect it to be quite stiff at the front. The insgtad and most if not all Asnes fjell skis's tips come up higher and more inclined upwards (for lack of better words). This greatly helps stiff skis stay on top of the snow. The new E109 Xlite tip's are relatively quite small, even compared to the E99 Xlite. They rely more on their softness and "rocker" to stay above the snow.

If your on a budget, have you considered these:
https://colemans.com/shop/cold-weather- ... is-2-pair/
Or do you already own 2 pair?

PS: For also those interested in some details about scandinavian ski gear, I am heading to Sweden for the Holidays and always shop around a little so I'd be happy to look into a few things for you guys.

[lilcliffy]

If the snow was harder I'd opt for a skinnier ski than either the 109 or the Ingstad.

With you on this one- but I think the same goes for the E-109- at least as XC-focused skis...they both are designed to offer some moderate downhill performance though- certainly more than a XC-glide-focused ski like the E-89 or the Vikafjell.

My other concern with you and the Fischer is the sidecut profile. You seem to be very sensitive to the S Bounds, and if the 109 has a similar cut, just with different camber, then it will likely be as jerky, maybe worse due to the double camber.

I'm not sure that this is as big an issue with a ski like the E-109 (as opposed to the S-Bounds). With the extra camber- if they are long enough- that narrow sidecut waist should be off the snow surface during the glide phase. Can't say for sure, but the extra camber should allow the E-109 to track straighter than an S-88.

I am not sure about the flex/camber of the Ingstad either. I have asked Asnes directly about them. They described the camber/flex by comparing it to the Amundsen- which is a very stiff, double-cambered expedition ski (designed for carrying/pulling heavy weight- often with kicker skins on). I probably should not jump to conclusions- saying that they are softer and less cambered than the Amundsen, does not mean that they are single-cambered! Asnes describes as having a "shallow wax pocket"- so they could easily have a similar camber/flex to the E-109.

[lilcliffy]

One other reason I'd go for the Asnes: I like their kicker skin attachment system better than the Fischer.

Granted I'm only going by photos and words... I might think otherwise if I tried them.

The Asnes "skin lock" expedition-grade tried and proven.

The Fischer "easy skin" needs to do the same.

[lilcliffy]

Having tested both E-109s, the newer version is a great improvement in my books (more versatile). Lighter, less stiff, rocker and wider up front. The older E-109 is more like the current Asnes Nansen while the newer E-109 is probably more like the Ingstad. If the newer E109 is double cambered, its gotta be one of the softest double cambered skis I have ever tried).

This is a very interesting observation...how do we accurately judge camber? It seems that the Fennoscandians seem more interested in overall flex pattern, than trying to define camber. Some ski flex patterns, at a long enough length, offer a "wax pocket" (i.e. our "double-cambered" skis), others do not (i.e. our flat, rockered, or single-cambered skis).

The E-109 certainly has a softer flex pattern than the E-99 or E-89- this makes sense as it is designed for deeper, softer snow. But the E-109, at least in my test, at a long enough length (I would want 205cm) has a pronounced wax/traction pocket that stays off the snow during the glide phase- hence I would describe it as being "double-cambered".

Every time I have asked Asnes about the "camber" of a ski- they have replied with a detailed description of the flex pattern- without specifically defining it's camber.

As for the insgtad, I would expect it to be quite stiff at the front. The insgtad and most if not all Asnes fjell skis's tips come up higher and more inclined upwards (for lack of better words). This greatly helps stiff skis stay on top of the snow.

This is a traditional design...and I agree it does facilitate trail breaking on traditional xcountry skis. (As an aside- Altai has gone with the same trad tip shape on the Kom, but with a rockered tip as well)

If your on a budget, have you considered these:
https://colemans.com/shop/cold-weather- ... is-2-pair/
Or do you already own 2 pair?

Already got them back in May! Have had them out a couple of times last week...just started a review of them in the "Reviews" board.

PS: For also those interested in some details about scandinavian ski gear, I am heading to Sweden for the Holidays and always shop around a little so I'd be happy to look into a few things for you guys.

Thanks for letting us know! Ski trip? Right now I am looking at the Alfa Quest Advance and the Ingstad...with the weakness of the Canadian dollar it is actually a little less expensive to buy them from the supplier in QC- then to order them from Norway.

[MikeK]

Every time I have asked Asnes about the "camber" of a ski- they have replied with a detailed description of the flex pattern- without specifically defining it's camber.

I'm starting to think this may be of better use, hence my approach with the Eon and the S78. I want to make a fixture to show the deflected shape. It should be simple.

Surely double camber can be a real thing. There are literally two arcs in the ski shape, usually a large camber going out to the contact point near the tips and tails and a smaller 'wax pocket' under the foot. You could also have a stiff single camber that will perform poorly for turning because it is too stiff to be flattened and reverse cambered.

But where the rubber meets the road we can look at this in terms of force vs displacement and deflected shape. I have some ideas to easily measure this on any ski. Your hand and your eye can tell you a lot, and maybe give you some limited qualitative idea of two different skis, but if you purchase via the internet, you may not have that option, and if you don't have the skis back to back, you may not be able to really distinguish... it might simply feel stiff. But how stiff is too stiff, and how stiff is stiff enough? That all comes down to the relation to your weight.

[lilcliffy]

it might simply feel stiff. But how stiff is too stiff, and how stiff is stiff enough? That all comes down to the relation to your weight.

Bang on.

Also- your comment/concern about the sidecut in the E-109...my biggest beef with it is that the E-109 is the widest double-cambered xcountry ski readily available in NA. But- then they go ahead and chew up all that width underfoot to make them "easy-turnin".

Unless you are on an E-109 that is short (i.e. not a xcountry K&G length)- the E-109 isn't going to be easy-turnin anyway. The E-109 is intended to be a backcountry XCd ski for fresh, soft snow. The XC-focus is what separates it from the S-Bounds.

No single ski can give you every performance advantage in the world of backcountry XCD.

I just wish I could have the E-109 with 80mm of wax pocket and traction underfoot!

I'm going to have too stride down the hill on a double-cambered, 205cm E-109 anyway- so give me the extra traction underfoot instead.

[Cannatonic]

I could not resist the Asnes spring sale at Neptune last year - I went with the Gamme 54 - 210's - basically the Asnes version of the E99. (at some point in spring all the Asnes skis they have left go on sale). Comparing those two skis - the Gamme 54 camber is the same height off the ground, but the flex of it is stiffer than the E99 - it's harder to push the ski flat to the floor. The Asnes appear to be stiffer skis than Fischer.

Which makes sense, the Norwegians like trekking around on their massive plateau. The new E99/E109 are lightweight, the Asnes are going to be more durable. The Asnes edges are much thicker than Fischer. The Gamme54 are waxing skis, it's nearly impossible to get waxing E99/E109 in the US. The Fischer skin design may be better - the Asnes has small metal clips at the front, the Fischer does not.

I have to say one reason I did not consider the Ingstad is the graphics - black-and-white Ingstad staring at you all day might be a little creepy! But my choice would be Asnes if you can get them for the same price as Fischer. They are a more solid, durable ski