2022 Falketind 62 Xplore 196 cm First Impressions

[lilcliffy]

Thanks for the input guys It's right on the money about wax pocket issues. Only for me I fear it's the other way around. I think at my weight (110kg) I'd get god traction even on 210 Falketids if they existed. I do think the 180 would be best for me downhill, easier to turn and handle. They would allso be ideal for tight woods when I go hunting etc. My consern is with the k&g on flats. To smaal wax pocket for my weight.

At your weight, I can almost guarantee you that there will be no "wax pocket" on a Falketind. I don't think a board test will tell you anything with a ski like this- not at your weight.
If you are leaning towards the shorter length for making tighter turns- I would get the Rabb over the Falketind
What boot are you planning on using?

Would a 188 be any better on that point or would I still compress the wax pocket just as much as on a 180, thus gaining nothing on k&g but loosing out on handling and turning downhill. And if so am I better of just sticking to 180 or even go a totaly different ski, like the Ingstad who have a higher wax pocket?

The longer FT will be more directionally stable in XC mode- it won't offer you a more effective wax pocket.
The Ingstad is even more directionally stable, but has a much wider turn radius.
At 110kg you will completely compress the camber of even a 205 Ingstad when evenly weighted- but the "wax pocket" of th Ingstad will release as you stride forwards.

I gess my best option is to try find a way to test the different lengths on a weight board like @The GCW sugest.

Please let us know the results of this if you manage to do it.

[lilcliffy]

The wax pockets on most backcountry/mountain skis are quite low, and especially on a ski like Falketind. As you state you would probably compress both 180 and 188 cm, and I do not expect you would notice much of a difference in glide. Float. stability and turning radius would be the difference.

The question is what you prefer and prioritize;

An alternative with better float and xc performance could be Rossignol BC 100.

The Rossi BC 100 is a uniqie ski design at the moment-
-very low camber, with round flex;
- very low profile tip, with no rocker
- little sidecut with a full 80mm underfoot!!

You state that you have NNN-BC boots on your Gamme; which model is it and do you plan on using it with the Falketind?

Yes- this would be useful to know.

[lilcliffy]

The FTX’s tracked well on the soft ground, but swam a little around on a harder and mushy skate track. On the uneven skate track, the skis wanted to turn like alpine skis on a groomed piste.

[lilcliffy]

I am about 175 cm, 86 kg. I ski a 196 cm Falketind X. I find it supportive in deep snow, offers acceptable kick and glide, and is very maneuverable downhill.

The reason I have the Falketind is to tour, and to turn. The Falketind does both quite well.

I ski it at 196 cm, I don’t think it would tour as well at 188, but I don’t think I would turn the 188 cm noticeably easier. The 180 cm would definitely be noticeably less efficient touring, and that less efficient touring might also translate to turning downhill.
Perhaps if you want to ski short, you should consider the Rabb? It would be a bit wider, and would be a bit more supportive shorter.

Yes- as I mentioned above-
I think that the advantage of the Falketind over the Rabb is only effectively realized in a longer length- offer more directional stability.
I don't think that there is any advantage of a short Falketind vs a Rabb...

[lilcliffy]

[telerat]

...
I think that the advantage of the Falketind over the Rabb is only effectively realized in a longer length- offer more directional stability. I don't think that there is any advantage of a short Falketind vs a Rabb...

Åsnes states that Falketind is more like a BC ski e.g. Ingstad, while Rabb is more akin to alpine touring ski, e.g. Nosi, but the difference is not large. The similarities sounds larger than the differences, so length probably makes more of a difference.

I kind of want a pair of Ingstad in addition to my Falketind 62 XP for flatter and longer tours, but I already have an old pair of Fischer E109 in 188 and Ingstad also only comes in 185 or 195 cm length. I will try my Falketind 62 XP 180 cm and see if it can replace the E109 for my use, or if E109 or Ingstad would have a place. I have Ousland in 190 cm for use on flatter tours, on harder snow, in prepared tracks, or a combination.


is possibly a better video for English speakers, but Chriso is actually Norwegian so..

[Chriso]

You state that you have NNN-BC boots on your Gamme; which model is it and do you plan on using it with the Falketind? A more through discussion on the different ski alternatives and boots deserves its own thread in the main forum.

PS. I am curious on where you live. I live in Trondheim and have done the classical tours around here like Storhornet, Kråkvasstind and Roksdalskammen in Oppdal, as well as Trolltind, Fløtatind and Dronningkrona in Sunndalen, as well as others, on telemark equipment.

On my Gamme i have BC Magnum. Boots are Old Alfa Quest Advanced. Not planing to use this on a new ski. I got hold of a pair of Alfa Skaget the other day. They seem perfect for my foot and my use. "Storetested" both the Free and the Vista, but i did not like the fit over the toe of the Free and the Vista seemed to give less support than the Skaget. Also the pricetag on the Skaget were nice. 2k NOK (190 usd) So for the new ski i would go with the Xplore system.

As to my location, it seems we live in the same city I do moust of my skiing near my cabin in Meråker. I have not done any of the tours you mention. Looks like you are on a higher XCD level than me. I have been to Storsnasen in Sweeden and many different summits in Meråker, tho most of them on a Rando setup.

[Chriso]

Thanks for all the response guys, realy apriciate it!

What i take back from this so far is that my conserne about the weight/waxpocket/lenght issue is comfirmed. Allso it seems to me that many of you prefere the Flaketind in a longer ski for more stability, both xc and downhil. Then again i guess this is totaly user prefrence related. What works for me might not work for you.

My lokal dealer should be back from Austria next week. Hopefully i can get some weight testing done before i decide on a ski. I will do a follow up with my decition and reasoning.

[fisheater]

I am curious as to how you measure the wax pocket on a Falketind X. I’ve seen Asnes use the word tension, in the past describing the wax pocket on their skis. As an example, I have a Tindan 86, which is now discontinued. The ski is pretty much a flat cambered alpine touring ski, except that tension gives the ski a pocket that will hold wax. I can both kick and glide, and climb with only wax.
As for Falketind X at 196 cm, I can squeeze the skis together with one hand, but on either side of my hand you can see light. It’s not traditional camber. I am curious as to how they measure it. I know it works.

[The GCW]

Fisheater and T.T.'ers,

Fisheater & T.T.’ers,

I mostly don’t know what I’m talking about or saying but maybe something can be gained from My limited observations… regarding the F62E.

I can hold the F62E together with 1 hand, however I don’t see light on either side. -I can hardly hold 2 Gamme’s together with both hands.
There is an evident camber.
The person testing indicated My weight would only put very small / noteworthy amount (patch) of grip / kick wax on the snow during kick and glide with the 180 cm.
The tester indicate I would have more desirable / effective kick & grip with the 172 cm (My words).

Today’s tour, with up and down and also plenty of flattish skiing, started with some trail having lots of packed walkers, snowshoers packed down trail (but still mostly soft) and all else diminishing to 1 single ski track (for the majority of the outing) and nearing the other end having the familiar heavily packed trail. Ranging from 21° to well above freezing air temperature. 2 1/2’ of new snow this week with cold temp’s before today.

When climbing the steeper sections, I had trouble with grip where it was fine on humpy convex micro places and not good on the concave micro spots. So pick and choose where You kick…. -A lot like the Gamme, where climbing even works best in a jogging tempo because a skier throws weight down on the ski to aid in grip.

The F62E doesn’t get help as much when throwing weight down because it doesn’t spring You back up into the next task because the Gamme has that awesome 1 1/2 or double camber. Perhaps consider Gamme a jogging ski but this doesn’t work that way.

What I’m getting at is the longer, next size F62E would give Me even less grip when climbing and that would be detrimental.

BUT WHAT I REALLY WANT OUT OF THIS SKI is the combination of K&G after most importantly getting better control on the descent; single track and wider & open terrain, downhills. Don’t want to give up K&G but want the turning qualities which I hope is better than the other’s I have. It’s not all downhill rather a combination, and often climb up ski down…

DOWNHILL IS SPOOKY FOR ME ON SKINNING SKIS!

Today, I gotta say this ski helped turning. My new boots are another story for another post but they feel less rigid.

BTW, I hooked them up with Alfa Vista’s & Explore bindings. It’s only about 4 outings, too soon to say much is this post is getting too long.