The ever-so-popular Madshus Eon

[lilcliffy]

I hear the Grey Man's call as well...

After skiing on the Asnes Combats this winter- I am beginning to wish that the Grey Man was a little wider at the waist...

[MikeK]

I'm really hesitant to say anything because I've not had enough skiing this year on either ski, side by side, to really make a call but the S78 seems to just be better from the skis I've had this year. I've been switching back forth between the two.

Snow varies here. It could be a few inches of fresh over an old refrozen base in which the Eon does quite well. It could be deep, wet pow, in which the Eon is horrid both for float and grip. It could be crusty, refrozen in which the Eon is not great, and S78 seemed to do better (although it does sound like skiing a chainsaw in that stuff, the scales buzz lounder than any other ski). It could be wet, slushy snow, in which the Eon is good. The only waxless ski I know of that didn't do well in wet snow was our old E99 with the negative scale pattern (Mtn Crown).

I don't expect the Eon to work in every condition, but I'm trying to really see where a mid-width ski like this start to fail and where it excels. It's really great all around. I love the turning ability. The glide is good on fresh snow (not so great on hard or packed snow compared to a DC ski).

And as far as the pattern, yes, all the S Bounds are more forward and longer than the Madshus patterns. I'm sure that helps their grip but it seems when the Omni Grip doesn't grip, it's like you have nothing. Even a slight incline needs a half herringbone to get up.

I really wonder how the ski would perform if Madshus put the MGV+ pattern on the wider skis. It may drag horribly, but it's a really similar pattern. It just seems to have tighter spacing of the scales, especially under the foot. And I'm confident it works better.

[Cannatonic]

I just took a short spin around the woods on my Sbound 78's for the first time (199's). big thumbs up! The length seems perfect. I had 205 Eons and these feel much better, not sure why, maybe the Sbounds are stiffer flexing, maybe I needed shorter length. Considering that most of the base is the off-track pattern they glide decently. I'm set for scales now with these and the 210 E99's, that covers everything I need to do.

I want some Nansens next year to get this ski in a wax/skin model. 200 or 205? I'm right on the border in terms of height & weight. Fischer cut the 199 from this year's Traverse 78 model! So Fischer E109 and Nansen are now the only way to get 200-205cm length in this ski.

[MikeK]

The graph, the graph!

http://www.telemarktalk.com/viewtopic.php?f=19&t=855


I don't know what it is about Madshus vs Fischer, but they FEEL different. That graph is what I measured. Not extremely accurate measurements, but close enough for some kind of comp.

If graphs aren't your thing, let me explain.

The Fischer has a little bit lower initial camber height, and it starts off a little stiffer. The Eon has a little more camber height, but it starts off a little softer. Moral of the story is around mid point in their camber height, the lines start looking like they are parallel. This means the stiffness is the nearly the same.

This is only compressing the camber, not reverse flexing. That may be entirely different although my simple brain doesn't quite understand quite how, but there may be ways... might just be shape of the flex too.

So what did I find? Well it seems that they have almost the same damn camber stiffness. I have no idea why when I ski them, the Fischer feels stiffer to me. Might be where the force is applied. Might be something else tricking my brain into thinking it feels stiff. I dunno?

I also put these right on top of each other like I did with the Epoch and the S 98. Shape is almost identical. On the S 98 it's just that flared tail that makes it different. The 78 is a little straighter overall than the Eon and tad wider in the shovel, but they are pretty damn close in shape.

To me, the big difference is the scales. Position and shape. I feel like the S Bounds work better with the limited skiing I've got in with them this year. They certainly work better on the 98 vs the Epoch and the layout is the same.

Oddly enough, I kind of felt the opposite way on the skinny end. I feel the like on the Voss's I had, the scales worked better than the E89. The Voss and the Glitt have different scales than the Eon, Epoch and Annum though.

PS I read your other post about the S Bound scales feeling really slow on cold snow. Last year I got a couple skis in on really cold snow with the E89 and they felt slow as death. I was on harder, packed stuff though. The couple really cold days I skied in deep stuff, I used my S 98 and they gripped and glided AWESOME...

What I've learned about the Fischer scales:

Grip awesome in cold, loose snow where waxless skis usually choke
Glide awesome in pretty much any snow but cold, hard, squeaky snow.

I haven't really found any condition where they don't grip well except hard ice, and no scale will grab that.

[lilcliffy]

I'm pretty sure that the tips/tails of the current S-Bounds are sintered. The "off-track crown" is an insert- allowing a sintered base on the tips/tails. This gives significant performance, in terms of glide. Very smart.

[MikeK]

Yup you are right about that. I'm not sure if the scale pattern is sintered or if the tips and tails are, but it would make sense that the tips and tails would be. Whatever the scale pattern material/processing is, it is really hard, and very slippery. It almost doesn't even need wax.

I haven't had any issues to so far with the bases on the S Bound absorbing wax.

[Cannatonic]

that graph link and your measurements are great data! Very cool, I have to say this is why the internet is great, magazines and manufacturers should be providing this type of info.

I normally love longer skis, but I suspect the Eon 205 was just too long, making it feel heavy and cumbersome, and still too soft for good glide. Mabye the design just doesn't work great at 205. It's strange, the Sbound reminds me of the 195cm Epochs I had - the flex feels the same, even though the 78's are much lighter and skinnier. The flex in the 205 Eon just felt wrong somehow.

I'm thinking maybe 200cm is the right length for me in these flatter-camber but still skinny skis like Nansen. Going longer doesn't give you the feel of the double-camber E99 type ski, so you might as well take something shorter & easier to handle in turns. Still too narrow for deep powder, so no need to go longer for that either.

[MikeK]

This is what happens when you put an engineer in a room with skis and there is no snow.

I gotta be honest though, I'm still learning what to look at and trying to figure out how it translates to actual skiing. A lot of stuff I learned on here from my first attempt at comparing two skis.

And as far as the info they give.... bleh... if it were up to me and I had the info the engineers at the OEM had I'd have 5 pages of data for each ski model. Probably too much, but the marketing guys cut it down to almost nothing and then hype it up with stuff like 'Nordic Rocker' and 'Air Core'.

Anyway, I *think* the Fischers have more glass in them. They are a tad heavier even with the air core.

[lilcliffy]

Well, all I can say is that I find the difference in flex and XC performance VERY significant between the the different lengths in the Eon...

My wife skis on a 195cm Eon- and loves them- compared to my 205cm- I can't stand them!

That being said there is a very narrow range of conditions were I truly enjoy the Eon. I just find the flex too soft- they reverse-flex too easily for my skiing "style".

It is just not stiff enough to respond to my desire for performance- especially in a XC-context. On the downhill in moderately deep snow- the Eon is a real pleasure.

My wife is not alone- many, many people love BC-XC skiing on the Eon. And perhaps because she comes from a very strong Alpine-skiing background- she likes the way the Eon flex responds when turning.

And if you are a light and perhaps less powerful skier- I think the Eon performs a lot better in any context. The things that my oldest daughter does on her Eons is amazing!

[anrothar]

Relatively new here. Long time lurker, from the old forum(registration never got approved there), and I've benefited greatly from the XCd focused topics. I prefer long distance focused skiing on and off trail, in low angle terrain. I like to go far. XC skiing is my winter version of backpacking and mountain biking.

I've had a waxless Eon in my quiver for the past 3 years. I've used it for most of my off trail winter backpacking here in south-central Alaska. This is it's ideal purpose as far as I can tell.

On either side of it I use: Mashus Pellestova, waxable, for faster trips on firmer conditions. Atomic Sierra (Rossi BC70 with negative pattern/sintered base) for fast/firm/warm and singletrack. Fischer SBound 98 for really deep conditions or off trail play.

I weigh around 210 at 6'3" and am on the 205 Eon. I've been using them with NNNBC Magnums, modified to prevent freezing up, the entire time, but am about to switch them over to AT toe pieces and chopped at boots, which is what I have on the Pellestovas, Sierras and SBounds. At size 49, I've found the sturdeist Rossignol and Alpina boots to be too easily twisted in the forefoot in comparison. The AT toepiece setup, with properly cut down boots, weighs less, turns infinitely better, skates better and k & g's about as well.

The skis have been very durable for me. I have patched one big deep gouge in the fishscales with ptex, and they've held up fine since that.

Snowmobile trails:

They do fine, but are slow. I'll use them for situations where I'll be off trail or breaking trail for a significant portion of the trip. I mostly prefer to be on the Pellestovas for snowmobile trails.

Singletrack:

They do well as long as it isn't too twisty and doesn't have too many steep climbs where the length is prohibitive. The Sierras are much, much better for singletrack. In fact, I would say they're almost the ideal singletrack ski.

Skier set trails in the backcountry:

They work well for this, and this is closer to their ideal use. They glide reasonably quickly, especially in a kick-double pole.

Breaking trail in the backcountry:

If the base is less than 15" or so down, Eons are the perfect ski, especially with an overnight pack. controllable, stable, grippy enough.

I definitely consider them to be a little more than single camber. They're easy to compress fully with one hand, but there is a slight, noticeable step up in resistance to compress the middle section, and they glide reasonably quickly for a wide, fishscaled ski.

VS Pellestova 210cm: Eons are slow on hardpack, sketchy on bumpy hardpack and not worth skate skiing when conditions favor skating. They float significantly better and are faster only if conditions require a lot of trailbreaking.

VS Sierra 190cm: Eons are less maneuverable on singletrack and slower on snowmobile trails. Both suck for skating with the fishscales, but the Sierras are marginally faster and skate OK on warm snow or ice. As with the Pellestovas, the Eons float much better where conditions demand it and track straighter in soft conditions, even soft snowmobile trails churned up by paddle tracks.

VS SBound 98: Eons are faster everywhere less float and turning is required. The SBounds float better and turn faster, as you would expect with the wider and shorter skis. SBounds climb almost as well as Eons with BD kicker skins. The SBound fishscales climb better than any others I've tried.