This is the World Famous TelemarkTalk / TelemarkTips / Telemark Francais Forum, by far the most dynamic telemark and backcountry skiing discussion board on the world wide web since 1998. East, West, North, South, Canada, US or Europe, Backcountry or not.
This is the World Famous TelemarkTalk / TelemarkTips / Telemark Francais Forum, by far the most dynamic telemark and backcountry skiing discussion board on the world wide web since 1998. East, West, North, South, Canada, US or Europe, Backcountry or not.
Real reviews by real skiers. What a concept! Add your own today. Reviews only please, questions can be posted as replies but new threads looking for opinions should be posted to the main Telemark Talk Forum.
Cannatonic wrote:those are some nice-looking skis! I'd be tempted to rock a white jumpsuit when skiing them (remember "Captain Powder" from the magazine?) So they've replaced them with white Ingstads today? I wonder when these were made.
210's with a 67 waist is serious flotation for cruising! So basically the only downside is heavy weight? I have an older pair of Kharu XC skis that are fatter in the middle, I'm not aware of anyone selling a straight-up XC ski that wide anymore.
Whoa- which model of Karhu is that?
The Orions were 85-70-80mm- and I believe (I have no personal experience) that they had more camber and a stiffer flex than the current Karhu/Madshus XCDs (i.e. Eon).
I had an old, hand-me-down pair of wood-cored, Karhu BC-XC skis that had a very similar profile and flex to the Combats. They were my fresh snow BC-XC ski for more than 20 years. I have no idea what model they were- the decals were worn off and/or faded away- long before I cared to think about it...
You are correct- a mid-width straight-up "old school" BC-XC ski seems to be currently unavailable. The Ingstad and the E-109 have the flex pattern and camber of a mid-width BC-XC ski- but they have an aggressive sidecut....
Karhu is still making straight-up mid-width BC-XC skis for the local Finnish market.
My oldest son and I have been pretending to be Finnish ski-commandos of the "Winter War" for years (we even have a trail on our woodlot called the "Finnish Commando Trail"). Rowan was extremely excited about having white combat skis in our quiver. He has mentioned a number of times that now all we need is white commando ski suits...
Guess what? I have two authentic swedish commando anoraks for sale. they are white, heavy duty cotton and now quite rare!
I live for the Telemark arc....The feeeeeeel.....I ski miles to get to a place where there is guaranteed snow to do the deal....TM
MikeK wrote:Does anyone know if there is even any glass in these? Might just be wood with a Ptex base.
Metal plate is there for binding reinforcement but the top looks just to be a plastic sheet.
Not sure about glass inc the construction...but making assumptions from drilling them, and the lack of sidewall (on ours)- they seem to be solid-wood construction, with a thin plastic top sheet- which by the way is very prone to abrasion and gouging. My wife took out my 210s instead of her 200s the other day- they now have a long abrasion on the top sheet on one of the tails...
My biggest concern is whether these skis will stand up to routine BC abuse...
But it seems, judging from Connyro's description, that there is some variability in the materials used in these skis- they are not all the same...
Cross-country AND down-hill skiing in the backcountry.
Unashamed to be a "cross-country type" and love skiing down-hill.
I'm gonna break up the comic relief with some actual REVIEW!
Not much, but I actually got a slide on these today. 'Twas on frozen grass and 2" snow drifts but it was plenty cold here... 0F... wind 'a howlin'. I was itching to try these sucker so went up the road to a golf course and slid around.
Only had Swix green as my coldest wax but it worked pretty good. Actually I think a little sticky for how cold it is. 5 layers... WOW.
OK... I know you guys always rave how smooth wax is... but I really just forgot after all these years... given the conditions I didn't find them any faster than my waxless skis, but so, so smooth and quiet. I'm hooked again.
The skis themselves felt fine. They didn't feel heavy on my feet or crazy bouncy stiff. They felt like big XC skis. Where I was is pretty flat, so I couldn't really assess turning ability, but I did make one turn with them. They can do it!
I did feel like a Storm Trooper on Hoth today. The wind was so loud and my skis were so quiet I felt like I was sneaking up on a rebel base. I would have liked to ski more but the wind was getting to me and dirt was starting to stick to my kick wax.
If we can get a couple more inches I can get in the shelter of the trees and take them for a real slide.
lilcliffy wrote:
Not sure about glass inc the construction...but making assumptions from drilling them, and the lack of sidewall (on ours)- they seem to be solid-wood construction, with a thin plastic top sheet- which by the way is very prone to abrasion and gouging. My wife took out my 210s instead of her 200s the other day- they now have a long abrasion on the top sheet on one of the tails...
My biggest concern is whether these skis will stand up to routine BC abuse...
But it seems, judging from Connyro's description, that there is some variability in the materials used in these skis- they are not all the same...
You know. They are nice skis actually, but seen as how they were so cheap I'm just going to beat them. If the top sheet gets all gouged up I could care less. If it de-laminates, I'll glue it back down. The edges of the wood will probably get knicks from the metal edges, but it shouldn't hurt the performance.
As long as they keep their spring and the bases and edges don't delam, I think they will be fine. I think they are tougher than they look and that soft, plastic top sheet is superficial.
Did another ski with these today in very different terrain and conditions.
I had some issues... did a lot of flailing today. Yeah I don't know who thinks stiffly cambered wax skis climb well, but it ain't this guy. They do better in soft snow, it allows the camber to work a little more I think. Real sensitive to sticks and logs and anything hiding under the snow... whooop... backwards you go! Scales kind of grip that stuff at times. I kept thinking if I had my S bounds I could have stomped right up some of the stuff I was flailing in today.
I fussed around with wax quite a bit today. It was cold again, around 3F when I started. Put a few layers of Swix Green over what I had yesterday. Glide was nice but I couldn't climb for beans. Fat bikes were out and about and it was even worse if I tried to get in their tracks. Zero grip on compacted snow.
I put a couple layers of blue on. Still was sliding backwards. I was running out of ideas here, I only had those two waxes with me. I decided to start fresh. Scraped off as much as I could and layered up 5 layers of Blue. I had grip now... still would slip if I couldn't engage the wax pocket fully flat. Lost a lot of glide for that though. Was sticking a bit in the fresh, deep snow. Then I tried adding a few inches of green at the front and rear edges of the wax pocket. I was hoping to get some glide back. It worked. It was the best I had it all day in terms of grip and glide. I'd still say it was kind of pitiful compared to my S 98s. When I got back to the car 3hrs late the temps were 9-10F.
I made some turns with them. They do turn. Off in fresh they work OK. Large radius turns. I had a bear of time really swinging them around trying to do stops and such. I dunno, any 200cm ski is kinda tough for that.
Fat bikes were all over today, and so I decided to ski some singletrack and stay in their rut. This is where these skis just fail miserably. Hard, compacted snow... bleh... they don't know what direction they want to go and the don't have any appreciable side cut to dig in and follow an arc when you edge them. They really need some kind of 3D snow to work IMO. I was again flailing in a situation where I feel I would have just been flowing with my S Bounds.
I also skied in someone elses tracks. They excelled at this, as they should. Tracked great, glide was the best, grip was the best. The fat bike tracks were rutted up and had postholes - even scaled skis slip a lot on this but skis with lot of camber stiffness really struggle because they can't conform as easy to the crud. A ski like the Epoch or S 98 will do a reasonable job of finding grip even though it's not in full contact with it's scale pattern. Probably a more forgiving wax ski would do the same.
So it's not great mystery where these skis do the best. Fresh pow. Ski tracks. Pretty much where an XC ski would excel. In the fresh pow they didn't have much float though. I saw other tracks of skinnier skis and I was sinking just as deep as they were.
Another thing I noticed is I don't feel as stable on these skis as say an Eon or S78. I mean they are pretty close in width but I feel more roll-ey, and not in a good way, like the ski doesn't want to stay as flat to the ground. I wonder if it's the thickness? Or perhaps the straightness?
Great link! I've read this stuff before, but always a good read, great accurate info. For those interested in Asnes, keep in mind the RAGO pictured here is the predecessor of the AMUNDSEN. I have a feeling the guy who write this has a really tight grip. A lot of the skis (E99, E109 & RAGO) he mentions are classed as 1.5 camber. I would be a little more generous...
I live for the Telemark arc....The feeeeeeel.....I ski miles to get to a place where there is guaranteed snow to do the deal....TM
