Asnes Nansen Review

[HBS]

Oh - I didn't mean to insinuate that you are beginner, but just that I like the way he outlines basic/intermediate/advanced.

Advanced is where most people have to work a bit harder with XCD.

Oh no problem - I shouldn't have taken it that way. I'll probably wait to work on that stuff until the next decent powder day at the local ski hill.

Thanks for the excellent video regarding the Nordic rocker on the Nansen- Asnes needs to promote that!

I was also wondering what the Nansen feels like- and looks like- when you attempt to reverse-flex the entire length of a single ski.

UTE's flex test describes the Nansen- or at least the model they tested- having a full-length, round reverse-flex. For comparison, they describe the Ingstad as having a more pronounced wax pocket underfoot- I can personally testify to that.

The reason I ask is that I tend to be suspicious of narrow XCD skis with this much sidecut. If one weighs anything- I weigh 185lbs without a pack (I cannot believe how many featherweight skiers there are out there)- a ski like the Nansen needs a lot of integrated flex and resistance in order to support that narrow waist. A soft, round flex on a narrow ski might be fine in a downhill turn- but it really sucks in a XC context if one is too heavy...

I am greatly interested in the Nansen as a xcD ski- but, only if it is strong enough for that skinny waist to support my weight and a powerful kick...

I can try and shoot a video with the help of the lady friend sometime reverse flexing the ski but could you describe the procedure? The other night I was holding the tail still with my foot, ski vertical, one hand on the tip and the other hand pulling the binding toward me with the snow side facing away from me. Is that right?

FWIW I weigh about 170-180 and carry a 10-15 lb pack for day ski trips and it has been plenty strong for me. Like I said earlier, excellent kick, glide and grip. I do find that in softer snow when I kick I end up compressing the track more than the lighter skiers on skinnier tip width skis ahead of me.

[Woodserson]

FWIW I weigh about 170-180 and carry a 10-15 lb pack for day ski trips and it has been plenty strong for me. Like I said earlier, excellent kick, glide and grip. I do find that in softer snow when I kick I end up compressing the track more than the lighter skiers on skinnier tip width skis ahead of me.

What length did you get?

Great review, thank you

[HBS]

200 cm - sorry should have said that earlier.

[lilcliffy]

I can try and shoot a video with the help of the lady friend sometime reverse flexing the ski but could you describe the procedure? The other night I was holding the tail still with my foot, ski vertical, one hand on the tip and the other hand pulling the binding toward me with the snow side facing away from me. Is that right?

The simplest technique that I know of is to place the tail of the ski firmly on the floor/ground; hold the tip with one hand- base facing away from you; then push down on the mid-section of the ski- and, simply "feel"/observe the stiffness and shape of the reverse-flex of the ski. A ski with a pronounced wax pocket will resist being reverse-flexed in the midsection. A ski with a significantly softer tip and/or tail will be obvious as well.

The dude from ORS in this video demonstrates this simple qualitative measure at 0:46:

FWIW I weigh about 170-180 and carry a 10-15 lb pack for day ski trips and it has been plenty strong for me. Like I said earlier, excellent kick, glide and grip.

If you are on the 200cm and getting enough resistance and support- that says a lot. I want one...

I do find that in softer snow when I kick I end up compressing the track more than the lighter skiers on skinnier tip width skis ahead of me.

Not sure if I understand you here...

[HBS]

I can try and shoot a video with the help of the lady friend sometime reverse flexing the ski but could you describe the procedure? The other night I was holding the tail still with my foot, ski vertical, one hand on the tip and the other hand pulling the binding toward me with the snow side facing away from me. Is that right?

The simplest technique that I know of is to place the tail of the ski firmly on the floor/ground; hold the tip with one hand- base facing away from you; then push down on the mid-section of the ski- and, simply "feel"/observe the stiffness and shape of the reverse-flex of the ski. A ski with a pronounced wax pocket will resist being reverse-flexed in the midsection. A ski with a significantly softer tip and/or tail will be obvious as well.

Ok so I think my initial test was what you were looking for - most of the flex on the tip end comes in the top 1/4 of the ski but the tail seems to flex more consistently to the middle of the ski. There's a pronounced thickening of the core at about where Mr. Nansens neck is near the tip that creates this where the core nearing the tail tapers more gradually.

Not sure if I understand you here...

Just that if the tracks are fresh/soft I do feel the middle of the ski sinking a bit when shifting my weight to the new ski.

[Musk Ox]

I'm thinking of either buying or trading something for a pair of these. Maybe my Gammes. I'd like something a little more fun and shwingable, maybe to visit otherwise steep and ankle-breaky bits so I can execute sexy turns and be a little more cool and flirt with people in GoreTex (the frontline staff of the Troms og Finnmark air ambulance).

So... who has these?

How much am I giving up on the flats for the pleasures of the steeps?

What's the practical difference between the Gammes and the Nansens on deeper snow? What about consolidated snow?

[bgregoire]

I'm thinking of either buying or trading something for a pair of these. Maybe my Gammes. I'd like something a little more fun and shwingable, maybe to visit otherwise steep and ankle-breaky bits so I can execute sexy turns and be a little more cool and flirt with people in GoreTex (the frontline staff of the Troms og Finnmark air ambulance).

So... who has these?

How much am I giving up on the flats for the pleasures of the steeps?

What's the practical difference between the Gammes and the Nansens on deeper snow? What about consolidated snow?

Its a trade-off. I'd consider the FT62 or Ingstad instead and keept the Gammes until you've tried em out. You might end up decided to keep both.

[fisheater]

Musk Ox, you really need a Gamme! Speed thrills! Lilcliffy has warned us of the danger of ludicrous speed pointing Ingstad downhill! The Falketind certainly turns, and is acceptable touring to the turns, however it is not a touring ski! Still it is fun, and is part of my 3 ski quiver.
Now, what about Nansen??? The most useful information (for me) came from Roelant, he stated the Nansen is an E-109 class ski. I think this year is the year when we get a review from a skier that can compare Nansen to Gamme, E-99, even Falketind! I am quite confident that review will come this year. I believe I have already seen a Nansen on snow teaser photo, hopefully a preview!
Now if I could be so bold as to offer Musk Ox of the Great North a piece of advice. I believe the Nansen to be less cambered and we know it has more side cut than Gamme. However, Nansen is still a cross country ski, made to cover miles. So while one should be able to turn Nansen more easily than Gamme, I do not believe that Nansen would safely descend significantly more difficult terrain than Gamme (as Falketind would). However I do believe all things being equal, one could turn on consolidated spring snow more stylishly on Nansen than Gamme. Gamme will be faster.
I would wait for the review.

[Musk Ox]

Food for thought... mm.

We actually need some kind of master comparison thread/ spreadsheet for ski vs ski.

There's also this, which is useful.

http://www.telemarktalk.com/viewtopic.p ... 4&start=20

[Musk Ox]

So while one should be able to turn Nansen more easily than Gamme, I do not believe that Nansen would safely descend significantly more difficult terrain than Gamme (as Falketind would).

This is interesting. You make the case for the Gammes for the specific stuff I have in mind...