Telemark Talk / Telemark Tips Forum

I just got back from a meeting with the World XCD Council... The whole new NNN-BC trend seems to be slightly problematic for the Council.

The official maximum ski tip width for a XCD is still 109mm. Wider than this, it's almost impossible for anyone to go downhill efficiently on cableless pins and leathers. Now thanks to all the internet NNN-BC heroes, the NNN truth is spreading all around. Would it be possible to drive wider skis, let's say 120 or 125mm, with soft leathers with no clips and NNNBC bindings? I do believe so. And that's what that I brought forward to the rest of the Council today.

Those are actually very exciting times for XCD. The Knights will have to speak about it soon, since NNN-BC opens a whole new world of possibilities. It could be a rule-changing thing. The Council was not closed to the idea of raising the maximum width of XCD skis. It's been around for quite sometime, but since there's more and more converts everyday, they start taking the issue more seriously. But they still need to see more of what can be done and wait some time before taking a decision. Because this could change cross-country downhill forever...

Very, very exciting indeed...!

Well Fischer and Rossi pushed it to 125mm... that has to be the size they vote on!

KOM would also squeeze in too at 124mm max width.

This would open up some new skis to those devoted to the Knights.

Where was the World Council held this year?

The meeting was held in beautiful Jakku... Very interesting meeting...
I have to say I was a bit surprised not seeing you there this year Paul...

I anticipate that if the World Council is seriously considering approving the use of NNN BC on wider than 109mm, they will have a hard time prohibiting the same using pins. Our local delegates are working overtime on this very issue as we speak.

I will expect hell to freeze over (we could use the snow) if Vectors/V6's are certified let alone even considered, though they are both under 125...and what about the Hoks?!?

When I was on the Board I advocated to make any ski that will take you over the river and through the woods to Grandmothers house with kick wax or fishscales should be considered XCD, regardless of width. I think it was too progressive of an idea at the time.

Johnny, IME fat skis with leather boots and three pins are a blast in the powder, but I would have prefered a light cable binding instead. I would also recomend a light ski and stay off anything packed hard even on the flats.

Yeah that was my main concern too... Allowing a larger width would simply create a totally chaotic situation where everything will be considered XCD and every bad skier will consider itself a 'XCD' skier. The term would be just even more confusing to the profane...

I will start building a case and documenting my future experiments with NNN-BC on wider-than-109 skis for the next meeting. In the meantime, if you have any experience with fatties and NNN, please share it here...!

What fat skis are you skiing with pins & leathers Al?

Well Johnny I would like you to present an even MORE important issue to the Knights...

That is, as you so eloquently said once:

LoveJohnny wrote: They are to the skier what antlers are for deers... The bigger the better... The more they will impress other skiers... Or should I say, the fatter the better...

The Knights need to carefully consider if FUN is being had, or if we are simply following marketing trends and trying to impress other skiers.

We don't want to be fooled with 200% marketing and 5% science like the NNN-BC Magnum binding!

Johnny, 3 pin hard wires w/o the heel throw with merril ultras. I would like to mount a wide pair of skis with either a light riva cable or a voile 3pin cable. I don't need the cable for tip preasure for turning, I like the predictable way the skis act when they are unweighted and also for the sidestepping traverses I do to gain elevation.