Asnes Falketind 62 versus Rabb 68

[Johnny]

Notice that there is no "New" mention on the Norwegian website...

The 2019-2020 FT62 is a redesign of the older white/red FT62... And the "new" 2018-2019-2020 Rabbs are the new updated Falketind 68s... Which were themselves updated versions of the more cambered Storetind 68...

[xcdski]

Re Asnes FT and Rabb
I think that the time has come to recognize that the first iterations of the Falketind 62 and the Rabb 68 are very poor skis.
Despite the lineage or pedigree I would rate them as a fail or caviat emptor. I ordered a pair of FT and Rabb unseen because of the performance of my old Storitinds. I was extremely disappointed when I tried them. An acute case of buyer's remorse quickly followed.

With both skis, the concept and profile are brilliant. It is, however, in the cambering and ski tension where both skis fail. Perhaps these deficiencies have been remedied with the 21-22 editions, but from my point of view, the earlier editions should not have made it out of the factory door. With both skis the early rise is ridiculously too long at the expense of grip and stability at the front of the ski. While the early rise presents an edge readily upon initiation you cannot rely on its grip at speed. A lot of chatter unless on edge.

The FT 62's lack of camber underfoot cause the ski to have poor glide when striding and with frequent re-application of grip wax. When using the mohair skins virtually no glide at all. At speed on hard snow I was able to torque the shovel out of its groove. While flat at speed -again on hard snow the ski chatters and vibrates. As said (written?) the front early rise is too long and affords no grip or stability. Its downhill performance is fine if in a few cm.s of soft snow and turns readily with an even arc front to back. This is the kind of arc you want in a wide powder only ski. XC missing in the xcd ski. When skiing on hiking trails the ski is adequate and lively until one encounters ice. On steep sections of icy trail the edge grip is compromised by the softness of the shovel. Sound the slow down alarm.
I have not seen the 21-22 skis perhaps this is remedied. it should have a was pocket like any xc skis- at least enough that you can glide with the kicker skins.

The Rabb suffers similar problems with some similar and some different consequences. Unlike the FT, the tension at the rear of the ski is much stiffer than the front. This mean s that while initiation is easy you have to work the tail a bit harder by mid turn while in a carve and if pivoting you need to be more forceful.at the end of the turn. As with the FT the shovel is too soft and you cannot "rip" on them like you could the Storitind. As another contributor wrote they start having "fits" in crud and broken snow. Even exquisite pressure control does not stop the skis from protesting.
The tension imbalance also creates another problem. In deep powder and worse, in wind crust, the giant early rise tips the skis back so the tails sink deeper than the front making pivoting more challenging. The On the East slope of the Rockies wind crust is guaranteed on any long tour. In those conditions you need to stem turn ofrforcefully project mass forward into the turn to release the tails. Uneven arc, flimsy upfront when you need it. Not a ski for all conditions or speeds.
I became a fan of Asnes after buying combats and Storitends'. I would not recommend them now. Asnes needs to do more betas before putting sub par designs on to the market. Weight obsession driven design has created skis that are poor in design. A camber-less XC ski is the FT is inexplicable. Early rise beyond 15% of the ski is almost unheard of. You cannot make the early rise that long without causing other problems.
I am retired from ski instruction, formerly certified in XC, Telly and Alpine, Successful Telly racer and have done multi-day tour on glaciated terrain, on occasion portering. I ski in and out of resorts 100 + days a year. I do not recommend Asnes anymore.

[jyw5]

wow. that's a harsh review. but I think you are right. I try so hard on the asnes ...other than being lightweight and beautiful, the ft62 is a very narrow focused ski that only excels on perfect snow...which is a small fraction of the winter here. I'm glad I didn't get the Rabb 68.

the mt51 is great but I guess they discontinued them?? (why???)

I love my skog 185cm. they work great as long as the descent isnt too steep and icy.

I will wait before buying another pair of asnes. I would like a short length ski that does well on challenging variable snow. Maybe the new Sverdrup 170cm...will wait for real world reviews first.

[Woodserson]

Re Asnes FT and Rabb
I think that the time has come to recognize that the first iterations of the Falketind 62 and the Rabb 68 are very poor skis.
Despite the lineage or pedigree I would rate them as a fail or caviat emptor. I ordered a pair of FT and Rabb unseen because of the performance of my old Storitinds. I was extremely disappointed when I tried them. An acute case of buyer's remorse quickly followed.

With both skis, the concept and profile are brilliant. It is, however, in the cambering and ski tension where both skis fail. Perhaps these deficiencies have been remedied with the 21-22 editions, but from my point of view, the earlier editions should not have made it out of the factory door. With both skis the early rise is ridiculously too long at the expense of grip and stability at the front of the ski. While the early rise presents an edge readily upon initiation you cannot rely on its grip at speed. A lot of chatter unless on edge.

The FT 62's lack of camber underfoot cause the ski to have poor glide when striding and with frequent re-application of grip wax. When using the mohair skins virtually no glide at all. At speed on hard snow I was able to torque the shovel out of its groove. While flat at speed -again on hard snow the ski chatters and vibrates. As said (written?) the front early rise is too long and affords no grip or stability. Its downhill performance is fine if in a few cm.s of soft snow and turns readily with an even arc front to back. This is the kind of arc you want in a wide powder only ski. XC missing in the xcd ski. When skiing on hiking trails the ski is adequate and lively until one encounters ice. On steep sections of icy trail the edge grip is compromised by the softness of the shovel. Sound the slow down alarm.
I have not seen the 21-22 skis perhaps this is remedied. it should have a was pocket like any xc skis- at least enough that you can glide with the kicker skins.

The Rabb suffers similar problems with some similar and some different consequences. Unlike the FT, the tension at the rear of the ski is much stiffer than the front. This mean s that while initiation is easy you have to work the tail a bit harder by mid turn while in a carve and if pivoting you need to be more forceful.at the end of the turn. As with the FT the shovel is too soft and you cannot "rip" on them like you could the Storitind. As another contributor wrote they start having "fits" in crud and broken snow. Even exquisite pressure control does not stop the skis from protesting.
The tension imbalance also creates another problem. In deep powder and worse, in wind crust, the giant early rise tips the skis back so the tails sink deeper than the front making pivoting more challenging. The On the East slope of the Rockies wind crust is guaranteed on any long tour. In those conditions you need to stem turn ofrforcefully project mass forward into the turn to release the tails. Uneven arc, flimsy upfront when you need it. Not a ski for all conditions or speeds.
I became a fan of Asnes after buying combats and Storitends'. I would not recommend them now. Asnes needs to do more betas before putting sub par designs on to the market. Weight obsession driven design has created skis that are poor in design. A camber-less XC ski is the FT is inexplicable. Early rise beyond 15% of the ski is almost unheard of. You cannot make the early rise that long without causing other problems.
I am retired from ski instruction, formerly certified in XC, Telly and Alpine, Successful Telly racer and have done multi-day tour on glaciated terrain, on occasion portering. I ski in and out of resorts 100 + days a year. I do not recommend Asnes anymore.

It's a shame you didn't start a new thread, or add this to the Rabb68 or FT62 Review threads, where it would have gotten more traction. Worthy post with a lot of good info to digest and discuss.

Several of your points have already been discussed, and I think you'd find at least some of us would agree with you on many of them. The Cult of Gram-Counting has definitely done a disservice to many ski models in downhill performance. The pendulum has swung too hard.

I too also think that the Rabb and FT are too light. They would definitely benefit from some more mass. I find that the Rabb68 tail, especially, is too wide. Because of this the ski chatters forcefully on steeper hardpack especially on edge, and is hooky in softer snow. Disappointing. The dimensional profile did not change for 21/22 unfortunately. Tucking the tail in and adding some weight would make for a killer ski.

I disagree on your opinion of the rocker profile of the FT62. I DO like the deep rocker lines on the FT62. I use them on narrow New England ski trails and the like and I find them to be very adequate. The easy pivotability of the ski is much appreciated in tight spots. It's a fun ski and one of my favorites. While yes, it could be heavier, and yes, maybe a bit more tension underfoot, it's a ridiculously easy and fun ski for what I use it for. I don't have a lot of issues with grip wax wearing off too early. FrenchFred has been ripping Europe in his with NNN-BC and enjoying it as well. Maybe you are pressing yours into service in which the ski was not designed for? This is a light-on-your-feet ski, not a hard charging ski.

I do not recommend Asnes anymore.

Don't be ridiculous. You're going to discount the entire line of superlative Asnes XC skis? Gamme, Ingstad, etc? Come off the drama horse. Maybe a qualifier is warranted here.

[xcdski]

i understand the utility of the FT's on forest trails- described as adequate and lively on hiking trails. But as I said, with limits to grip.

It remains my opinion that a premium ski maker who charges premium prices should not produce a flawed ski. By revising the skis Asnes has tacitly agreed with the multiple negative opinions expressed in many posts. As said I do not think they should have made it out of the factory door.
A professional skier cannot recommend a ski or ski brand that he has not tried nor one that they thinks is not a good . Based on experience I cannot recommend Asnes. Brand loyalty needs to be empirically based. The pejorative description of "drama horse" inappropriate and surprising from a frequent contributor. You can disagree based on your experience. Name calling is inappropriate.

[jyw5]

maybe part of the problem with Asnes is that when they test them before selling them, the testers are professional skiiers...so the "flaws" are not noticeable or discovered... what I find is that pros don't need top notch skis to get the job done. I've seen skiiers here in alaska use xc/nnn gear and ski up and down the steep gnarly bowls and do multiday traverses in under 12hrs with an old pair of nordic skis. I am sure you have all seen the videos... the reality is, almost all recreational skiiers will have a tough time when conditions aren't optimal on any setup with leather boots. I think the ft62 ski particularly was designed for elite skiiers and/or perfect conditions. Unfortunately, its not marketed that way. The average skilled (and above average) consumer assumes that these skis can be purchased and just click in and go...which I personally quickly found was totally not the case. it took me a year to ski decently well on the ft62 after alot of practice in variable conditions (100+ days in 2020, 60+ in 2021) and with 4 different pairs of skis...and a full week of ski mountaineering, touring and professional instruction...as well as cross training with winter hiking and spring/fall biking. But having done all that, I appreciate the gracefulness and responsiveness of the ft62 (and the mt51 and skogs too!). I don't get from my other skis. I also understand how it can be disappointing for some people because some have the viewpoint that a pair of skis should be designed to make it easier to ski downhill. 90% of my journey is uphill...whether carrying them or skinning/climbing...so weight matters. On the downhill, a perfect turn on any of these skis is incredible... fast, light, smooth, exhilarating. It's like a drug and I want more. but I have also had days where it's miserable and I want to take the skis off and walk.

Thats why at ski resorts, most skiiers have heavy fat skis. they are more stable and very forgiving. they carve well on icy moguls and float in deep heavy powder. I have a pair like that. they are horrible in the backcountry because the setup including boots weigh 22 lbs...vs. my nnnbc setup is 10.5lbs.

lightweight skis like Asnes are not forgiving and the profile and flex are very technique sensitive ...good form is rewarded with incredible performance. bad form = faceplant and eat snow.

as my form and fitness improve, I am finding that the ft62, mt51, and skog are quite awesome...it was a challenging season. the changes made on the new model of ft62 insures that more skiiers will be able to use them and for more days in the season...but the uniqueness will be gone...it will be interesting to see how they perform and what other shortcomings they will have.

I don't regret my purchase as I have a quiver of skis and dont mind its narrow focus...but for those looking for 1-2 pairs of skis, the old model ft62 is definitely not right for them. and as said before, the new changes Asnes makes for the ft62 makes them just like every other ski...the old model is truly unique. the skog and mt51 are also unique. the 185cm longer length I chose make them lightning fast for my long approaches despite the longer turning radius. the length is especially good for gradual slopes on the descent where quick/sharp turns are not needed.

I think what makes the Asnes brand great is that they make unique skis. The ft62 is definitely not an all arounder. I can't comment on the old Rabb 68 as I have only read about them. I hope the Sverdrup is the right ski for my intentions. I like the Asnes skis because they are lightweight, good looking, durable (so far), and the xskins are great. and when my technique/form is good, I am rewarded with solid performance. For my next pair, I am looking for skis that are a bit more forgiving and will work for a wider range of conditions, but still lightweight and durable. My 3 pairs of asnes can cover about 50% of what I do...my S112 and traditional classic xc skis do almost the rest (but they are clunky, mediocre, and boring). It would be great to have a mythical Asnes pair that does more and better than the Fischer S112 in nonideal conditions...I am hoping the Sverdrup is it.

Thanks for reading!

[Stephen]

I don’t know if it matters, but it looks like @xcdski’s comments are based on the 2017/18 skis (red and white)?
He had them for sale back in 2018.
https://www.telemarktalk.com/viewtopic. ... 323#p26323
On the FT62 there are three iterations of the ski, red and white, green and white, and new black and white.
It seems Asnes has been fine tuning the FT62.

[xcdski]

Hello Stephen,
You make my case. Both the Ft 62 and the Ft 68/ Rabb had to be redesigned twice in a period of 5 years. The "fine tuning" as you describe it should be done before the ski is released not after at the expense of the consumers. Asnes charged its customers a premium price for what was essentially a prototype. As previously written, Asnes makes a tacit admission that the FT62's and Rabb's are not well designed by yet again reworking them. Three designs each in 5 years. Skis that cost 30% than their competitors should not be in the beta phase.

[riel]

maybe part of the problem with Asnes is that when they test them before selling them, the testers are professional skiiers...so the "flaws" are not noticeable or discovered...

This definitely seems to be the case. However, I have yet to see a brand that doesn't ship XCD skis without some major flaws.

Every ski vendor I have experience with seems to fall into the trap of highly optimizing some new technology (eg. a new fishscale pattern) with one particular model of ski, and then slapping that technology on across their product line without any modifications.

That reminds me, I owe Christer an email with some fishscale placement ideas...

[Woodserson]

So I'm not sure what you want? Companies to sit on ski designs for years to "get it right" before release so they can be absolutely perfect for you, tailored for your individual tastes absolutely? What company anywhere does this for any product?

Just because a ski is being refined over time does not make it some clunky one-off prototype with a bunch of guys at Asnes slapping each other on the back saying, "we got them good Olaf!" Every single ski company refines their ski lines. And at some point, they scrap them and start a new ski line. Every single ski company does this. It is not a problem. Maybe it's frustrating, but it's not a conspiracy. Sure, is some part of it to make more money later? Yup. Ever look at the bike industry? They are inventing solutions for problems that don't exist every single year.

The FT62 is an XCD ski unlike ANYTHING on the market. Nothing comes close. It might not be perfect, it may have a way to go, but it's innovative and a wonderful break from the Sbound-hasn't-changed-in-a-decade-98. The line up of Asnes BC XC skis absolutely crush the competition on every metric.

Gamme was Green. Then he was internally improved, and now he's Teal, and it's an even a better ski! Should we have never had the initial Green Gamme because they released a new version?!?

The logic here is more than shaky.