Ski Review: 2018-2019 Fischer Traverse 78

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.
User avatar
fisheater
Posts: 1398
Joined: Fri Feb 19, 2016 9:06 pm
Location: Oakland County, MI
Ski style: All my own, and age doesn't help
Favorite Skis: Gamme 54, Falketind 62, I hope to add a third soon
Favorite boots: Alpina Alaska, Alico Ski March
Occupation: Construction Manager

Re: Ski Review: 2018-2019 Fischer Traverse 78

Post by fisheater » Thu Nov 11, 2021 8:44 pm

lilcliffy wrote:
Thu Nov 11, 2021 6:41 pm
Woodserson wrote:
Thu Nov 11, 2021 6:06 pm
Krakus wrote:
Thu Nov 11, 2021 5:36 am

Then, what ski would you recommend as more turnable, in similar shape (width) and scale-based? Madshus Eon, now Panorama M62?
Eon/Panorama
T78
E109/TN82
Ingstad

Are all comparable skis dimensionally. But I think lilcliffy means completely out of this class when it comes to turning.
So- the thing is I don't get or buy in to the idea of a "short" XC ski for "downhill" skiing".
What I am speaking to here is that skis that are tuned for distance and XC kick and glide should be sized with that in mind.

There are- certainly are- XC skis that are tweaked to climb- tweaked to plane- tweaked to be turned- but that doesn't make them downhill skis.

I cannot speak to the current Fischer 78- I haven't even seen one- and it is starting to sound like it is tweaked again towards XC performance (i.e more camber and stiffness underfoot).

The Eon/XCDGT is "easier" to turn- for some- than my T78, because it softer underfoot than the my T78. I don't find our T78 harder to turn than our Eons- but I am 180+ lbs and a bit of an assertive skier. My wife does not find our T78 hard to turn, but she is an expert downhill skier and agressively weights her downhill/leading ski.

My point- some people will find the Eon easier to turn than the T78- some will not.
Regardless- I bet everyone/anyone would find the 78 to be a more efficient XC ski.

On the subject of "go short for hills"-
If one is going ot go "short for the hills" then why not consider a ski that is more downhill focused than either of these skis?

If you go short enough on a 78 to make it "manageable" in steep terrain, then it is going to be dead on the flats- so why not reach for a ski that is actually going to be fun downhill?
Hello Gareth and Woods,
In regards to the more turnable XC skis list, what is the most turnable while still offering kick and glide performance?

We talk about turnable here. I can turn my Gamme. I ski twisty steep trails on Gamme. It has made me think about what I mean by turnable? I have thought turnable should mean that I can bend the ski in a somewhat equally weighted two footed Telemark turn. However from correspondence I’ve had, there isn’t a ski with XC performance that I can bend in that equally weighted 2 footed turn.
I did come up with a definition of what I am looking for in a turnable ski. My definition would be a ski, that has XC performance, but that a skilled skier can link turns in reasonable snow conditions on moderate terrain. However even as I write this, I’m shooting myself in the foot, because I’m sure I could link some decent turns on my Gamme on a groomed Green piste.
This leaves me to believe perhaps the Holy Grail of turn ability lies with judiciously engineered rocker. Of the four skis on the turnable list, three are rockered.
T-78
E-109/TN82
Ingstad
Before I talk about the rockered skis, I will comment that the reviews I’ve read don’t speak glowingly of the XC performance of the Eon/Panorama 62. That is definitely reported for a guy in my 190 lb weight class.
So perhaps I’ve answered my own question, as I write this. It seems the answer is pick one of those three remaining skis on the list. We have enough reviews here to pick which ski suits the individual best, correct? The only other apparent alternative is to order a Otto, if it is even possible.
I would still appreciate your comments.
Thank you

User avatar
Krakus
Posts: 23
Joined: Wed Oct 15, 2014 5:14 am
Location: Southern Poland
Ski style: many falls
Favorite Skis: Tua Grande Neige :), Asnes Nansen, Salomon XADV89
Favorite boots: Fischer BCX6, BCX675

Re: Ski Review: 2018-2019 Fischer Traverse 78

Post by Krakus » Fri Nov 12, 2021 7:06 am

Lilcliffy,
My question was also a sort of an ongoing quest for Holy Grail, looking for something more turnable without significant sacrifice of XC performance
lilcliffy wrote:
Thu Nov 11, 2021 6:41 pm
On the subject of "go short for hills"-
If one is going ot go "short for the hills" then why not consider a ski that is more downhill focused than either of these skis?
If you go short enough on a 78 to make it "manageable" in steep terrain, then it is going to be dead on the flats- so why not reach for a ski that is actually going to be fun downhill?
Totally agree on above. Some years ago, inspired by Steve Barnett enthusiastic opinion on this forum on Madshus Glittertinds, I bought them in 195 cm (scalebased), at least two sizes down with regard to my weight. As a result, I can turn them quite nicely, especially on groomed tracks, but as for XC performance they are close to hopeless.



User avatar
lilcliffy
Posts: 3077
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2015 7:20 pm
Location: Stanley, New Brunswick, Canada
Ski style: Nordic backcountry touring
Favorite Skis: Asnes Ingstad BC; Asnes Gamme 54 BC; Asnes Storetind Carbon; Madshus Annum; Asnes Comabt Nato
Favorite boots: Alfa Guard Advance BC; Alpina Alaska BC; Crispi Svartisen BC; Scarpa T4
Occupation: Forestry Professional
Instructor at Maritime College of Forest Technology
Husband, father, farmer and logger

Re: Ski Review: 2018-2019 Fischer Traverse 78

Post by lilcliffy » Sat Nov 13, 2021 6:51 pm

fisheater wrote:
Thu Nov 11, 2021 8:44 pm

Hello Gareth and Woods,
In regards to the more turnable XC skis list, what is the most turnable while still offering kick and glide performance?

We talk about turnable here. I can turn my Gamme. I ski twisty steep trails on Gamme. It has made me think about what I mean by turnable? I have thought turnable should mean that I can bend the ski in a somewhat equally weighted two footed Telemark turn. However from correspondence I’ve had, there isn’t a ski with XC performance that I can bend in that equally weighted 2 footed turn.
I did come up with a definition of what I am looking for in a turnable ski. My definition would be a ski, that has XC performance, but that a skilled skier can link turns in reasonable snow conditions on moderate terrain. However even as I write this, I’m shooting myself in the foot, because I’m sure I could link some decent turns on my Gamme on a groomed Green piste.
This leaves me to believe perhaps the Holy Grail of turn ability lies with judiciously engineered rocker. Of the four skis on the turnable list, three are rockered.
T-78
E-109/TN82
Ingstad
Before I talk about the rockered skis, I will comment that the reviews I’ve read don’t speak glowingly of the XC performance of the Eon/Panorama 62. That is definitely reported for a guy in my 190 lb weight class.
So perhaps I’ve answered my own question, as I write this. It seems the answer is pick one of those three remaining skis on the list. We have enough reviews here to pick which ski suits the individual best, correct? The only other apparent alternative is to order a Otto, if it is even possible.
I would still appreciate your comments.
Thank you
Which ski is the fourth ski?

Of the three you list- in my experience- from easist to turn to least:
E109
Ingstad
78

(Can't speak for the TN82 as I still don't know if it is the same as the most recent E109 Xtralite)

Of the three above- the E109 is unstable in deep snow.
A 205cm E109 and a "199cm" 78 are equivalent in XC efficiency.
The Ingstad and the 78 are roughly equivalent in terms of stability and deep snow performance.
The Ingstad is equally efficient as a XC ski in soft and deep snow.
Cross-country AND down-hill skiing in the backcountry.
Unashamed to be a "cross-country type" and love skiing down-hill.



User avatar
Stephen
Posts: 441
Joined: Thu Aug 06, 2020 12:49 am
Ski style: Aspirational
Favorite Skis: Gamme (210), Ingstad (205), Objective BC (178)
Favorite boots: Alfa Guard Advance
Occupation: Beyond

Re: Ski Review: 2018-2019 Fischer Traverse 78

Post by Stephen » Sat Nov 27, 2021 4:04 pm

lilcliffy wrote:
Sat Nov 13, 2021 6:51 pm
fisheater wrote:
Thu Nov 11, 2021 8:44 pm

Hello Gareth and Woods,
In regards to the more turnable XC skis list, what is the most turnable while still offering kick and glide performance?
.
.
This leaves me to believe perhaps the Holy Grail of turn ability lies with judiciously engineered rocker. Of the four skis on the turnable list, three are rockered.
T-78
E-109/TN82
Ingstad
Before I talk about the rockered skis, I will comment that the reviews I’ve read don’t speak glowingly of the XC performance of the Eon/Panorama 62.

The only other apparent alternative is to order a Otto, if it is even possible.
.
.
Which ski is the fourth ski?

Of the three you list- in my experience- from easist to turn to least:
E109
Ingstad
78
.
.
The 4th ski was the Eon/Panorama 62.

However, the reason for the post is to wonder how the Otto compares to the Traverse 78?
They have the same dimensions. Only visual difference is T78 traction pattern.
I’m sure they are different skis, and am wondering how they compare?
@lilcliffy, @Woodserson?
If the 20% sale at Varuste hadn’t popped up, I wouldn’t be thinking about this, but…
:roll: :roll:



User avatar
lilcliffy
Posts: 3077
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2015 7:20 pm
Location: Stanley, New Brunswick, Canada
Ski style: Nordic backcountry touring
Favorite Skis: Asnes Ingstad BC; Asnes Gamme 54 BC; Asnes Storetind Carbon; Madshus Annum; Asnes Comabt Nato
Favorite boots: Alfa Guard Advance BC; Alpina Alaska BC; Crispi Svartisen BC; Scarpa T4
Occupation: Forestry Professional
Instructor at Maritime College of Forest Technology
Husband, father, farmer and logger

Re: Ski Review: 2018-2019 Fischer Traverse 78

Post by lilcliffy » Sat Nov 27, 2021 5:35 pm

@Stephen
I am going to answer in the "speculation" thread on the main forum-
#1 I don't know that the current 78 isn't changed from the 2018 model that I have
#2 I haven't strode on the Sverdrup ski yet, so it is still speculation at this point
Cross-country AND down-hill skiing in the backcountry.
Unashamed to be a "cross-country type" and love skiing down-hill.



User avatar
lilcliffy
Posts: 3077
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2015 7:20 pm
Location: Stanley, New Brunswick, Canada
Ski style: Nordic backcountry touring
Favorite Skis: Asnes Ingstad BC; Asnes Gamme 54 BC; Asnes Storetind Carbon; Madshus Annum; Asnes Comabt Nato
Favorite boots: Alfa Guard Advance BC; Alpina Alaska BC; Crispi Svartisen BC; Scarpa T4
Occupation: Forestry Professional
Instructor at Maritime College of Forest Technology
Husband, father, farmer and logger

Re: Ski Review: 2018-2019 Fischer Traverse 78

Post by lilcliffy » Sat Nov 27, 2021 5:37 pm

Note-
Flexing my 78 again this evening (or should I say Rebecca's 78...)- I am reminded that- alhtough these are significantly cambered Nordic touring skis- they lack the very stiff resistance underfoot of skis like the E99/Gamme 54/Sverdrup.
Both the Ingstad and the E109 are more resistant underfoot than the 78.
Cross-country AND down-hill skiing in the backcountry.
Unashamed to be a "cross-country type" and love skiing down-hill.



User avatar
Woodserson
Posts: 2540
Joined: Wed Feb 11, 2015 11:25 am
Location: New Hampshire
Ski style: Bumps, trees, steeps and long woodsy XC tours
Favorite Skis: DH: Voile V6, Altai KOMs, XCD: Asnes FT62, XC: Nansen, E99, Bonna 1800
Favorite boots: T2Eco, T4, Rossignol BCX10
Occupation: Retro Rager-grouch. Flailmeister. E99 Nerd

Re: Ski Review: 2018-2019 Fischer Traverse 78

Post by Woodserson » Sat Nov 27, 2021 8:36 pm

lilcliffy wrote:
Sat Nov 27, 2021 5:37 pm
Note-
Flexing my 78 again this evening (or should I say Rebecca's 78...)- I am reminded that- alhtough these are significantly cambered Nordic touring skis- they lack the very stiff resistance underfoot of skis like the E99/Gamme 54/Sverdrup.
Both the Ingstad and the E109 are more resistant underfoot than the 78.
I can close the Traverse 78 quite easily. The SBound78 less so, but it's still not some big double camber.



Post Reply