I really believe you and lilcliffy are correct Ben - my foot is getting much more workout. I noticed it when I stop skiing and I can feel those muscles are sore.
It's really odd though - seems my feet go through a cycle of hurting and then calm down the longer I go, and then gradually start to hurt again.
I have to be honest it's hard to notice that little bit of extra kick you get from your toe flex when you are skiing in tight woods, but wide open on a flat I definitely do. I'm definitely a NNN-BC convert for skiing the narrower skis. It makes them a lot more fun.
Fischer E89 Crown
-
MikeK
Re: Fischer E89 Crown
Sometimes the mind distorts things when the memory is foggy... such is the case here. I want to revise some of my comparison to the Glittertind as I skied them today over the exact same terrain. Warm temps warranted waxless skis for everyone...
The difference in turning along a trail, not descending a hill, is not that great. Being on the Glitts in the same tight woods as I last skied the E89s, the Glitts did not feel any better or worse. I actually found that they felt MORE DIFFICULT to slide into an angled diagonal stride than the E89 was i.e. turning the ski going slow in one direction or another by sliding into a telemark. I have no idea why that may be. Conditions perhaps? I'm not sure.
Turning using a stem or parallel turn seems much easier on the Glitts on consolidated snow. It's easier to flatten the camber and power the ski. This is where the Glitts felt superior. I'm guessing based on my previous experience skiing these down steeper stuff in powder the Glitt would be superior. The E89 I think would be far too stiff to reverse flex.
The Glitts feel almost dead compared to the E89 - by that I mean the soft camber. The lack of pop off a kick is apparent after skiing the E89.
The Glitts do not glide near as well. They vary depending on the snow like any waxless ski but the felt especially slow compared to the last E89 outing.
Another thing I inflated in my mind - the grip of the Glitt. I was slipping today just like I would with the E89. I think it's just a function of skiing on beat up trail. I'd have to test this more thoroughly with the E89. From what I can muster from today they seem similar.
I did not feel any more stable on relatively easy terrain in beat snow on the Glittertind. The difference is negligible.
Where the rubber meets the road: I believe I had more fun skiing the E89 than the Glittertind over the same terrain.
Off the ski and to the binding - I do not feel any more or less stable with the 3 pin vs the NNN BC. The difference in the stride is apparent, but it doesn't bother me that much. I'm able to get a hard push and lunge with either binding setup. I'm able to drive my forward foot into a turn the direction I want to go. I can definitely feel which one I'm on but I really have to think about it on either to make a distinction in either ski control or stride.
The difference in turning along a trail, not descending a hill, is not that great. Being on the Glitts in the same tight woods as I last skied the E89s, the Glitts did not feel any better or worse. I actually found that they felt MORE DIFFICULT to slide into an angled diagonal stride than the E89 was i.e. turning the ski going slow in one direction or another by sliding into a telemark. I have no idea why that may be. Conditions perhaps? I'm not sure.
Turning using a stem or parallel turn seems much easier on the Glitts on consolidated snow. It's easier to flatten the camber and power the ski. This is where the Glitts felt superior. I'm guessing based on my previous experience skiing these down steeper stuff in powder the Glitt would be superior. The E89 I think would be far too stiff to reverse flex.
The Glitts feel almost dead compared to the E89 - by that I mean the soft camber. The lack of pop off a kick is apparent after skiing the E89.
The Glitts do not glide near as well. They vary depending on the snow like any waxless ski but the felt especially slow compared to the last E89 outing.
Another thing I inflated in my mind - the grip of the Glitt. I was slipping today just like I would with the E89. I think it's just a function of skiing on beat up trail. I'd have to test this more thoroughly with the E89. From what I can muster from today they seem similar.
I did not feel any more stable on relatively easy terrain in beat snow on the Glittertind. The difference is negligible.
Where the rubber meets the road: I believe I had more fun skiing the E89 than the Glittertind over the same terrain.
Off the ski and to the binding - I do not feel any more or less stable with the 3 pin vs the NNN BC. The difference in the stride is apparent, but it doesn't bother me that much. I'm able to get a hard push and lunge with either binding setup. I'm able to drive my forward foot into a turn the direction I want to go. I can definitely feel which one I'm on but I really have to think about it on either to make a distinction in either ski control or stride.
-
lilcliffy
- Posts: 4156
- Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2015 6:20 pm
- Location: Stanley, New Brunswick, Canada
- Ski style: backcountry Nordic ski touring
- Favorite Skis: Asnes Ingstad, Combat Nato, Amundsen, Rabb 68; Altai Kom
- Favorite boots: Alpina Alaska BC; Lundhags Expedition; Alfa Skaget XP; Scarpa T4
- Occupation: Forestry Professional
Instructor at Maritime College of Forest Technology
Husband, father, farmer and logger
Re: Fischer E89 Crown
Great report Mike.
Your experience and your perspective resonates with mine.
Stiff, double-cambered skis excel at what they are designed to do: stride and glide on a stable base.
The Glittertind (seems the Voss is of a similar design) is a fascinating ski- clearly designed to have a soft, full-length, even flex.
Interestingly- the Eon flex is very similar to your descriptions of the Glittertind- despite being designed by Karhu.
Your experience and your perspective resonates with mine.
Stiff, double-cambered skis excel at what they are designed to do: stride and glide on a stable base.
The Glittertind (seems the Voss is of a similar design) is a fascinating ski- clearly designed to have a soft, full-length, even flex.
Interestingly- the Eon flex is very similar to your descriptions of the Glittertind- despite being designed by Karhu.
Cross-country AND down-hill skiing in the backcountry.
Unashamed to be a "cross-country type" and love skiing down-hill.
Unashamed to be a "cross-country type" and love skiing down-hill.
-
MikeK
Re: Fischer E89 Crown
I was just out playing with the skis and hand flexing them all and sighting them. Strangely enough, the E89 has the smoothest flex pattern... The Glitts (and now Voss, yes I bought a pair of Voss) have a wax pocket that is hard to flex out despite the tails and tips being soft (tips feel softer than the tail). So again Fischer impresses me with some little engineering detail that the others lack. I may keep them after all.
The Voss BTW feels and looks IDENTICAL to the Glittertind. I'm retiring pins on my skinny skis so the Glitts are going to the wife and Voss will be my Madshus replacement.
I only plan on keeping either the Voss or the E89, but I need to do lots of testing back to back before I decide.
The Voss BTW feels and looks IDENTICAL to the Glittertind. I'm retiring pins on my skinny skis so the Glitts are going to the wife and Voss will be my Madshus replacement.
I only plan on keeping either the Voss or the E89, but I need to do lots of testing back to back before I decide.
-
lilcliffy
- Posts: 4156
- Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2015 6:20 pm
- Location: Stanley, New Brunswick, Canada
- Ski style: backcountry Nordic ski touring
- Favorite Skis: Asnes Ingstad, Combat Nato, Amundsen, Rabb 68; Altai Kom
- Favorite boots: Alpina Alaska BC; Lundhags Expedition; Alfa Skaget XP; Scarpa T4
- Occupation: Forestry Professional
Instructor at Maritime College of Forest Technology
Husband, father, farmer and logger
Re: Fischer E89 Crown
Good stuff.
I have this gut feeling that the Glittertind/Voss flex pattern is as intentional as the Fischer E-series...
In the ideal conditions- I have no doubt in my mind that the E-series will outperform the Glittertind/Voss. But are the E-series as versatile and forgiving as the Glitt/Voss?
I don't have the answer to these questions- myself. I have no first-hand experience with the Glittertind/Voss. I have tested the E-series extensively, and their xcountry stride/glide performance is second to none.
Would be cool to add the Rossi BC59 and BC68 to the deliberation...I wonder if your wife feels you need more skis like mine does...
I have this gut feeling that the Glittertind/Voss flex pattern is as intentional as the Fischer E-series...
In the ideal conditions- I have no doubt in my mind that the E-series will outperform the Glittertind/Voss. But are the E-series as versatile and forgiving as the Glitt/Voss?
I don't have the answer to these questions- myself. I have no first-hand experience with the Glittertind/Voss. I have tested the E-series extensively, and their xcountry stride/glide performance is second to none.
Would be cool to add the Rossi BC59 and BC68 to the deliberation...I wonder if your wife feels you need more skis like mine does...
Cross-country AND down-hill skiing in the backcountry.
Unashamed to be a "cross-country type" and love skiing down-hill.
Unashamed to be a "cross-country type" and love skiing down-hill.
-
MikeK
Re: Fischer E89 Crown
HAHAHA! No she thinks I'm off my rocker. But she gets to ski some of them too - her favorite ski is the Epoch. I could probably toss all the rest away but I doubt she'd give that one up.
You know that's going to be my conundrum in deciding which I might keep... Glide is SOOO nice when the conditions are right. I really want to try to see if I can make turns in powder with the E89 - that may be the deciding factor because I'm pretty sure I will be able to with the Voss. It's actually easier than it sounds - you sink to your knees so you stay nice and stable... just set the front ski, wait for it to flex and ride it. The E89 may just skid away trying to weight it enough to reverse flex.
By what I saw sighting them I get the feeling of why I feel what I do on these skis. In deep snow I don't think that bump in the middle matters much - the soft tips and tails still approximate an arc. Initiation is non-existent so you just set the ski, weight it... wait... then it reverses and starts to turn. Adjustment is non-existent - what you started with is what you got so just ride it.
On hard snow that little bump there becomes problematic I assume... that's why the Glitts (and I assume the Voss) feel so resistant to do anything until you weight the heck of them and skid the tail (I look at my trails quite often and notice this). The Fischer just takes a lot of weighting, but when it goes, it's not got that terrible bump in the middle and actually can follow a very gradual arc without skidding much. Granted I tried to make some turns down a 15 deg or so slope of beat up snow (exposed and windblown) with the E89 and it was very resistant to initiate and cross into the fall line - once it was there, it was fine. In the same sort of conditions the Glitts have the tendency for me to just skid away, then catch - if the snow has any give to it, they come back to life and feel more stable.
You know that's going to be my conundrum in deciding which I might keep... Glide is SOOO nice when the conditions are right. I really want to try to see if I can make turns in powder with the E89 - that may be the deciding factor because I'm pretty sure I will be able to with the Voss. It's actually easier than it sounds - you sink to your knees so you stay nice and stable... just set the front ski, wait for it to flex and ride it. The E89 may just skid away trying to weight it enough to reverse flex.
By what I saw sighting them I get the feeling of why I feel what I do on these skis. In deep snow I don't think that bump in the middle matters much - the soft tips and tails still approximate an arc. Initiation is non-existent so you just set the ski, weight it... wait... then it reverses and starts to turn. Adjustment is non-existent - what you started with is what you got so just ride it.
On hard snow that little bump there becomes problematic I assume... that's why the Glitts (and I assume the Voss) feel so resistant to do anything until you weight the heck of them and skid the tail (I look at my trails quite often and notice this). The Fischer just takes a lot of weighting, but when it goes, it's not got that terrible bump in the middle and actually can follow a very gradual arc without skidding much. Granted I tried to make some turns down a 15 deg or so slope of beat up snow (exposed and windblown) with the E89 and it was very resistant to initiate and cross into the fall line - once it was there, it was fine. In the same sort of conditions the Glitts have the tendency for me to just skid away, then catch - if the snow has any give to it, they come back to life and feel more stable.
-
lilcliffy
- Posts: 4156
- Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2015 6:20 pm
- Location: Stanley, New Brunswick, Canada
- Ski style: backcountry Nordic ski touring
- Favorite Skis: Asnes Ingstad, Combat Nato, Amundsen, Rabb 68; Altai Kom
- Favorite boots: Alpina Alaska BC; Lundhags Expedition; Alfa Skaget XP; Scarpa T4
- Occupation: Forestry Professional
Instructor at Maritime College of Forest Technology
Husband, father, farmer and logger
Re: Fischer E89 Crown
Hmmm...interesting stuff. Here's my difficulty with a ski like the E89 as an xcD ski. The only reason I would own a ski like the E89 is for xcountry stride and glide on firm and/or dense snow (at least this my assumption at this point). In this context I would want a long ski- too long for me to be able to flatten the double camber and control this ski on the downhill. I have tried this many times- with a long, stiff, double-cambered ski- I am continuously fighting the double-camber in a downhill turn. In fact- I have trouble (at least in my mind) accepting a ski like the E89 as anything other than a xcountry ski.
I have no experience with the Glittertind- and I have only tried the Voss. But for whatever reason- many claim to be able to control these skis in downhill turns because of their flex pattern. The fact that they are double-cambered gives them reasonably efficient (if not high performance) touring performance as well.
The Glittertind/Voss flex pattern is obviously a product of intelligent design (just as the E-series is). But the intended application of the Glitt/Voss is clearly different than the E-series. The Fischer E-series (like the rest of the Fischer Nordic product lines) has a much more focused performance application than the Madshus backcountry lineup. The Madshus backcountry line is clearly designed to offer much more versatile performance.
That being said- some are clearly getting excellent downhill performance out of short, stiff, double-cambered skis - on dense, consolidated snow. The key word here is short. If the ski is short enough, you can force it flat and carve on the hard snow. The stiffness of the ski gives more edge control on the hard snow. But- a short double-cambered ski is extremely inefficient for touring. Personally, I cannot foresee myself skiing in this context. The only situation that I would have snow-terrain conditions that would warrant this application is if I was going to go downhill skiing at a groomed ski hill.
Your comment regarding using the E89 in powder....sounds like a nightmare to me. IME/IMO, stiff, double-cambered skis are not designed for deep powder- regardless of the context. There is no way to consistently flatten out a stiff, double-cambered ski in the pow- you just end up driving the tips/tails deeper into the snow. IME, stiff, double-cambered skis suck in the pow- both on the flats, on the climbs, and on the downhill.
For my intended use (backcountry-xcountry touring on dense, and/or hard snow) the performance of the Fischer E-series is probably exactly what I am looking for. But- the Glitt/Voss are much better value and more versatile...hard to say no to that.
I may eventually have to have both of them! Unfortunately I have not decided on width (e.g. Voss/E89 vs Glitt/E99) either! Could I eventually justify owning the Voss, the E89, the Glittertind, and the E99? (I eventually want a 205cm E109 as well!)
I have no experience with the Glittertind- and I have only tried the Voss. But for whatever reason- many claim to be able to control these skis in downhill turns because of their flex pattern. The fact that they are double-cambered gives them reasonably efficient (if not high performance) touring performance as well.
The Glittertind/Voss flex pattern is obviously a product of intelligent design (just as the E-series is). But the intended application of the Glitt/Voss is clearly different than the E-series. The Fischer E-series (like the rest of the Fischer Nordic product lines) has a much more focused performance application than the Madshus backcountry lineup. The Madshus backcountry line is clearly designed to offer much more versatile performance.
That being said- some are clearly getting excellent downhill performance out of short, stiff, double-cambered skis - on dense, consolidated snow. The key word here is short. If the ski is short enough, you can force it flat and carve on the hard snow. The stiffness of the ski gives more edge control on the hard snow. But- a short double-cambered ski is extremely inefficient for touring. Personally, I cannot foresee myself skiing in this context. The only situation that I would have snow-terrain conditions that would warrant this application is if I was going to go downhill skiing at a groomed ski hill.
Your comment regarding using the E89 in powder....sounds like a nightmare to me. IME/IMO, stiff, double-cambered skis are not designed for deep powder- regardless of the context. There is no way to consistently flatten out a stiff, double-cambered ski in the pow- you just end up driving the tips/tails deeper into the snow. IME, stiff, double-cambered skis suck in the pow- both on the flats, on the climbs, and on the downhill.
For my intended use (backcountry-xcountry touring on dense, and/or hard snow) the performance of the Fischer E-series is probably exactly what I am looking for. But- the Glitt/Voss are much better value and more versatile...hard to say no to that.
I may eventually have to have both of them! Unfortunately I have not decided on width (e.g. Voss/E89 vs Glitt/E99) either! Could I eventually justify owning the Voss, the E89, the Glittertind, and the E99? (I eventually want a 205cm E109 as well!)
Cross-country AND down-hill skiing in the backcountry.
Unashamed to be a "cross-country type" and love skiing down-hill.
Unashamed to be a "cross-country type" and love skiing down-hill.
-
MikeK
Re: Fischer E89 Crown
I actually own the entire North American Madshus line now....
My thought - I can trim away some of the fat. There is no doubt you could have two pairs of each of these and use them for all sorts of different stuff (In the skinnier versions one wax, one waxless, on the fatter, one pin, one NNN BC). But as complicated as I've made things for myself now, I'm going to now try to simplify (it's like a nasty calculus problem that's all splayed out, now I just need to simplify and box in my final answer)
The E89 will most likely be a horrible xcD ski. For me at least. I have to get it out of my mind that I'd actually use this ski for that, but I'll give it a try once or twice.
As far as the Madshus I have a feeling there will be so much overlap between the Voss and the Glittertind that I'd be able to drop one. In some sense what I have is exactly wrong - it probably would be nicer to have a wax Glittertind, although I could talk myself into needing both the wax and waxless version. If it turns out I like the Eon I'll probably drop the Glittertind and stick with the Voss and E89.
On the skinny end I could probably deal with all wax and keep one waxless for Autumn and Spring skiing. I'm guessing the Voss would be the most versatile, but the E89 the fastest and nicest to ski on hard snow, which is where it shines (well if I'm correct in assessing the Voss' similarity to the Glittertind). I want to hang onto some of these ultra skinnies because I need skis I can take in groomed tracks - If not, I might have stopped at the Eon... although the camber is discouraging for the flats, even with wax, it's going to drag...
Because I don't get to ski in much waist deep fluffy powder, I'm almost sure I can cut the Annum. Mine is a 185 and I think I'd be better with a 195, even for turning, so it's really my wife's ski. She can decide if she thinks it's worthwhile.
Having the S Bound I don't feel the need to mess around with the Epoch, and again mine is a 185 - better for my wife than myself - The S98 tours well enough for me but it's dh prowess makes me want to grab a ski like the Eon for flatter stuff - I'll see how that goes but ideally a wax and waxless version of that could be the go to BC Nordic ski for me.
I'm thinking if you were truly nuts about this, even an Epoch could be ground and used as wax ski for deeper snow and turns.
My thought - I can trim away some of the fat. There is no doubt you could have two pairs of each of these and use them for all sorts of different stuff (In the skinnier versions one wax, one waxless, on the fatter, one pin, one NNN BC). But as complicated as I've made things for myself now, I'm going to now try to simplify (it's like a nasty calculus problem that's all splayed out, now I just need to simplify and box in my final answer
)The E89 will most likely be a horrible xcD ski. For me at least. I have to get it out of my mind that I'd actually use this ski for that, but I'll give it a try once or twice.
As far as the Madshus I have a feeling there will be so much overlap between the Voss and the Glittertind that I'd be able to drop one. In some sense what I have is exactly wrong - it probably would be nicer to have a wax Glittertind, although I could talk myself into needing both the wax and waxless version. If it turns out I like the Eon I'll probably drop the Glittertind and stick with the Voss and E89.
On the skinny end I could probably deal with all wax and keep one waxless for Autumn and Spring skiing. I'm guessing the Voss would be the most versatile, but the E89 the fastest and nicest to ski on hard snow, which is where it shines (well if I'm correct in assessing the Voss' similarity to the Glittertind). I want to hang onto some of these ultra skinnies because I need skis I can take in groomed tracks - If not, I might have stopped at the Eon... although the camber is discouraging for the flats, even with wax, it's going to drag...
Because I don't get to ski in much waist deep fluffy powder, I'm almost sure I can cut the Annum. Mine is a 185 and I think I'd be better with a 195, even for turning, so it's really my wife's ski. She can decide if she thinks it's worthwhile.
Having the S Bound I don't feel the need to mess around with the Epoch, and again mine is a 185 - better for my wife than myself - The S98 tours well enough for me but it's dh prowess makes me want to grab a ski like the Eon for flatter stuff - I'll see how that goes but ideally a wax and waxless version of that could be the go to BC Nordic ski for me.
I'm thinking if you were truly nuts about this, even an Epoch could be ground and used as wax ski for deeper snow and turns.
-
lilcliffy
- Posts: 4156
- Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2015 6:20 pm
- Location: Stanley, New Brunswick, Canada
- Ski style: backcountry Nordic ski touring
- Favorite Skis: Asnes Ingstad, Combat Nato, Amundsen, Rabb 68; Altai Kom
- Favorite boots: Alpina Alaska BC; Lundhags Expedition; Alfa Skaget XP; Scarpa T4
- Occupation: Forestry Professional
Instructor at Maritime College of Forest Technology
Husband, father, farmer and logger
Re: Fischer E89 Crown
An Epoch with a waxable base eh? Hmmm...the interesting thing about the Epoch (and especially the Annum) is that I find the flex/camber pattern, coupled with the Omnitrack delivers surprisingly good stride and glide traction in deep, soft snow- as long as they are long enough! If the snow is cold, and hard- the waxless base sucks- but the Epoch/Annum suck on hard snow in general.
I have never tested a wide XCD ski with a waxable base. Would love to...if I was going to, I think I would test one of these before I ground the base off an Epoch:
http://www.ebay.ca/itm/Unused-Karhu-Bac ... 1339424149
https://colemans.com/shop/cold-weather- ... is-2-pair/
I have heard rumors of even wider waxable XCD skis out there...
The overlap between skis is interesting as well (e.g. Glittertind vs Voss). The Eon, Epoch and Annum are much further apart then the Voss/Glitt. The Voss is potentially faster than the Glittertind- at least over a stable base. The Glittertind is wider, more stable, better flotation, better climber...but certainly no powder ski. I would guess that the Glitt/Voss- as you stated- are "identical" in profile/flex/camber design. But I would think that the Glittertind is a better XCD ski than the Voss.
As a xcountry ski- I am predicting that you might end up liking the Glittertind over the Eon. As a telemark ski- the Eon over the Glitt!
On hard snow the Eon does "drag". In unbroken, soft snow- not a big deal.
The Annum...oh, the Annum...what can I say- I love that ski! I am afraid that I am an obnoxious broken record- I will always want the Annum for truly enjoying powder. From my perspective I would rather have both an Eon (or maybe an E109- depending on terrain) and an Annum- and leave the Epoch.
There's a shop over here selling Rossi BC125 for $200CAN. My friend is seriously considering buying the Rossi BC125 and trying it as a xcountry ski in deep powder- testing it against the Annum- with NNNBC Magnum bindings!
I have never tested a wide XCD ski with a waxable base. Would love to...if I was going to, I think I would test one of these before I ground the base off an Epoch:
http://www.ebay.ca/itm/Unused-Karhu-Bac ... 1339424149
https://colemans.com/shop/cold-weather- ... is-2-pair/
I have heard rumors of even wider waxable XCD skis out there...
The overlap between skis is interesting as well (e.g. Glittertind vs Voss). The Eon, Epoch and Annum are much further apart then the Voss/Glitt. The Voss is potentially faster than the Glittertind- at least over a stable base. The Glittertind is wider, more stable, better flotation, better climber...but certainly no powder ski. I would guess that the Glitt/Voss- as you stated- are "identical" in profile/flex/camber design. But I would think that the Glittertind is a better XCD ski than the Voss.
As a xcountry ski- I am predicting that you might end up liking the Glittertind over the Eon. As a telemark ski- the Eon over the Glitt!
On hard snow the Eon does "drag". In unbroken, soft snow- not a big deal.
The Annum...oh, the Annum...what can I say- I love that ski! I am afraid that I am an obnoxious broken record- I will always want the Annum for truly enjoying powder. From my perspective I would rather have both an Eon (or maybe an E109- depending on terrain) and an Annum- and leave the Epoch.
There's a shop over here selling Rossi BC125 for $200CAN. My friend is seriously considering buying the Rossi BC125 and trying it as a xcountry ski in deep powder- testing it against the Annum- with NNNBC Magnum bindings!
Cross-country AND down-hill skiing in the backcountry.
Unashamed to be a "cross-country type" and love skiing down-hill.
Unashamed to be a "cross-country type" and love skiing down-hill.
-
MikeK
Re: Fischer E89 Crown
I didn't measure it but the undeflected camber on the Epoch is actually greater than the Eon. Might be the difference in length, 185 v 195, the Epoch being shorter... but it's a tad less gap! The stiffness between the two feels almost identical to me.
When I get back home I'll put a tape to it to prove it. I didn't believe it when I looked!
The Annum feel the like the oddball. The camber is noticeably less and they are much softer to close the gap. It's no doubt as most would use that as a more dedicated xcD ski.
When I get back home I'll put a tape to it to prove it. I didn't believe it when I looked!
The Annum feel the like the oddball. The camber is noticeably less and they are much softer to close the gap. It's no doubt as most would use that as a more dedicated xcD ski.