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.
MikeK wrote:Yeah they were unwieldy and I really had some issues getting them to grip in packed down snow, but I'm comparing to a lot of other modern skis which do everything really well. I don't think it had anything to do with my base treatment.
Sorry to question this- but if these skis don't grip on packed down snow, then I would suggest it has everything to do with base treatment. However- there are specific snow conditions where grip wax is very challenging to get right. My humble opinion is that in the backcountry, a mixed quiver of waxable and waxless skis is the most effective answer. (The idea of an integrated kicker skin (e.g. "skin-lock"; "easy-skin") may be just the ticket for difficult snow- and it can be quickly removed for downhill skiing!)
Waxing is hard. I'm not going to lie there. A better waxer probably could have done better, but I'm also remembering my previous pair of wax skis, and I never had much issue climbing with those.
I don't agree that waxing is hard- but again that may be entirely a product of my colder climate?
Cross-country AND down-hill skiing in the backcountry.
Unashamed to be a "cross-country type" and love skiing down-hill.
lilcliffy wrote:
Sorry to question this- but if these skis don't grip on packed down snow, then I would suggest it has everything to do with base treatment. However- there are specific snow conditions where grip wax is very challenging to get right. My humble opinion is that in the backcountry, a mixed quiver of waxable and waxless skis is the most effective answer. (The idea of an integrated kicker skin (e.g. "skin-lock"; "easy-skin") may be just the ticket for difficult snow- and it can be quickly removed for downhill skiing!)
Well they would either stick or slip - it was hard to find the right combination to get them to work. I had them working in a number of other conditions, it was one particular day and snow - it was kind of icy and crystallized - perhaps a difficult condition?
MikeK wrote:
Well they would either stick or slip - it was hard to find the right combination to get them to work. I had them working in a number of other conditions, it was one particular day and snow - it was kind of icy and crystallized - perhaps a difficult condition?
Icy and crystallized- DEFINITELY a difficult condition for grip wax! (As an aside Fischer's Offtrack Crown is perhaps the only waxless scale design I have ever tested that gives decent grip on icy crystallized snow.)
Klister is the stuff for icy crystallized snow. I have never managed to find a complex of grip wax that performs on this kind of snow.
IMO- this is the place for waxless traction- scales and/or skins.
Cross-country AND down-hill skiing in the backcountry.
Unashamed to be a "cross-country type" and love skiing down-hill.
As long as it isn't too abrasive, the best method I've found for waxing for icy/crystalized snow is using a spray klister(Toko Grip spray) OVER kick wax. Putting it over kick wax seems to make it last a little longer and makes it a lot easier to clean up.
If you have wet/warm snow over a very dry powdery layer, this is the worst condition to wax for in my opinion. Even glide waxed fishscales will want to pack up with globs of snow. In this instance, kick wax for the dry snow over klister for the wet snow is the only solution and is really difficult to get right.
Really hardpacked, abrasive, icy snow: base klister and klister on top. Bring more and reapply as needed.
anrothar wrote:
If you have wet/warm snow over a very dry powdery layer, this is the worst condition to wax for in my opinion. Even glide waxed fishscales will want to pack up with globs of snow. In this instance, kick wax for the dry snow over klister for the wet snow is the only solution and is really difficult to get right.
So- kick wax layer on top of a klister base? I have never tried this- but have talked to some that have...Do you let the klister partially freeze before you add the kick wax layer?
Cross-country AND down-hill skiing in the backcountry.
Unashamed to be a "cross-country type" and love skiing down-hill.
anrothar wrote:
If you have wet/warm snow over a very dry powdery layer, this is the worst condition to wax for in my opinion. Even glide waxed fishscales will want to pack up with globs of snow. In this instance, kick wax for the dry snow over klister for the wet snow is the only solution and is really difficult to get right.
So- kick wax layer on top of a klister base? I have never tried this- but have talked to some that have...Do you let the klister partially freeze before you add the kick wax layer?
Yep, which can be difficult, considering you're usually using one of the more solid kick waxes in that situation. It's not ideal by any means, especially if you're using klister from a tube. Spray klister makes it significantly less difficult and messy.
Out for my first tour on these this season. We got some more fresh stuff yesterday- on top of 3 ft of dense consolidated base- about 6 inches of soft, but relatively dense fresh snow. About -15C.
Some more observations:
1) The elongated, raised tip on this ski kicks ass when breaking trail. Until I break in my new Combat Natos- this ski is the best xcountry trail-breaking ski in my quiver. When it comes to breaking trail- it kicks the E-99/E-109's ass.
2) The extra width underfoot makes for excellent grip and tracking.
3) This ski- although snappy underfoot- really is HEAVY- particularly compared to the feather-weight E-99/E-109. In a BC-XC context- this is not a big deal. BUT- when downhill skiing, the weight of these skis is a real liability. These skis are stiff, cambered and lack much sidecut. Picking them up to turn them is a bit of chore- due to their weight.
4) The flex pattern is totally different than the other double-cambered BC-Nordic skis I have (e.g. Eon/E-99/E-109). It's almost like this ski has a high, and very stiff SINGLE CAMBER...The stiffness of this ski seems consistent throughout its camber. It does not seem to have a lower second camber like the E-99/E-09/Eon. And although I claimed that the "wax pocket" is easy to engage- it is actually not as easy to engage as the E-109 or even the E-99. Regardless- the flex pattern of the E-99/E-09 is much more finely tuned than this ski.
As a current conclusion- the Asnes USGI Combat ski is still an excellent BC-XC ski. It is clearly a xcountry ski- best suited to gentle and rolling terrain. This ski falls down when you get into hilly and steep terrain.
Although there are things I like better about a modern high-performance ski like the E-99- it is hard to beat the price of this surplus ski. In fact, this ski- in XC context- has some performance advantages over a ski like the E-99, such as trail breaking and grip underfoot.
Cross-country AND down-hill skiing in the backcountry.
Unashamed to be a "cross-country type" and love skiing down-hill.
I just got a pair of these in a 210 length, which weigh 3200g give or take. My question is what kind of binding will work best with these skis; am leaning towards NNN BC but worry they are not heavy duty enough given the weight of the ski. Alternately a 75mm binding, though would have to then get the boots. Any thoughts?
My perspective on at least my USGIs is that they perform best as XC skis- and with their width and flex- my 210cms perform beautifully as XC skis in deep soft snow.
I have NNNBC mounted on them- using Alpina Alaska boots (which are XC boots)- this setup is all you need for XC skiing on rolling to moderate hilly terrain.
If I am in the open- I can turn these skis- though they have a very wide turn radius- and they are stiff- bending them in an arc is not easy.
I would think one would need a pretty powerful Telemark boot and binding if one wanted to drive these skis downhill. I have more downhill-oriented skis for that.
Really the only drawback I have for these skis is their weight. I do not find the weight an issue when XC skiing (though it would be if I was doing any serious vertical climbing with them). I find the weight an issue when downhill skiing, because- unlike my lighter BC-XC skis (e.g. E99/E109/Eon/Combat Nato)- they are too heavy to easily pick up and swing around in step/jump turns.
Mine are fabulous skis- and if I could not afford other BC-XC skis- I would be perfectly happy with them!
There is considerable variability between pairs of these skis. Yours could actually be quite different than mine.
Gareth
Cross-country AND down-hill skiing in the backcountry.
Unashamed to be a "cross-country type" and love skiing down-hill.
i would like to 2nd the opinion from lc by saying that i am very happy with the usgi and nnn-bc setup. now i am on the 200's so i don't know the weight difference, or what it's like to ski 210's. i think it's a stellar setup for my area, but i'm not a particularly burly dude and don't muscle my skis around. quite frankly, i must also echo the further above opinion that they are most excellent trail breaking skis with this setup. also, gliding on them is a real cadillac experience i must say. turning on them isn't as bad as i expected, but i'm not doing bomber runs either, so ya know...
i've been crushing them this season now as my go to evening ski and i really, really dig em. so i say, go for it!
