Åsnes Gamme

[lilcliffy]

Well- you can certainly adjust grip wax forwards- or use a wider/nylon kicker skin if grip is ever and issue.

The extra bit of glide performance will be wonderful when XC skiing...

BUT- do you see yourself making any open-linked turns on these?
I think that you may lose some turn-initiation ability if you mount them aft of BP...

At 200cm you are certainly going to be making step/jump and/or kick-turns to ski steep and tight- therefore in this context turn initiation may not be important...

BUT- in my context, I love flying out into open, steep fields and riding/ripping open turns on skis like these...

If moving mounting point 1cm back from BP improves XC glide, shouldn't it negatively impact turn initiation?

[lilcliffy]

FWIW I would stick w/ BP. The forward location is an advantage of this ski vs. E99 IMO - the BP is located at the same spot as chord center on all my Asnes skis. They handle and glide like full-on XC skis but turn better and feel more responsive this way.

I understand part of this- and agree with the advice to mount at BP.
But I am struggling to understand how mounting at BP gives a forward mounting point even with it lining up with Chord Center...

I know we have had this conversation a number of times on this site...But isn't Balance Point, Balance Point- regardless of where Chord Center lines up? Shouldn't a ski with BP equal to CC, feel the same as a ski where CC is in front of BP?
Isn't the only point of Chord Center to produce a measurable forward mounting point (i.e. forward of BP?)

My understanding is that the traditional use of Chord Center would move mounting forward of BP- improving grip and turn initiation on a XC ski...

If CC and BP are the same then isn't CC meaningless?

And on that note- I actually considered mounting ahead of BP on this ski because of the hilly wooded terrain I ski with it...

I would actually love to try this ski with a BP-mount and then a BP+1cm-mount and see how much it improves grip and turning- and whether the loss in glide is acceptable...

In my context I am actually more interested in a forward mounting position, but I always go with BP on such a XC ski...

[Woodserson]

Interesting thoughts. I agree to a degree that CC is meaningless when the BP falls right on top of it. I think I am struggling a bit in a psychological sense because the BP's on my wood Asnes/Madshus/Takeyourpick touring skis are behind CC (every one consistently so in each ski- beautiful craftsmanship) so moving it up to what is effectively CC on the Gamme makes it look very short up front and especially when compared with my other skis mounted at BP/aft of CC.

I think it would feel the same in terms of handling, probably turn easier, but would it glide the same, especially with the rocker of Nordisk?

I bought Mrs Woods a pair of absolutely gorgeous Eggens, I mean, they are so stunning it hurts your eyes... and they are mounted at BP, in what is clearly the only place to mount the bindings due to the construction of the ski, and it is miles! away from CC. It's the most dramatic example I have of this.

So I guess I should say moving BP to CC seems radical in itself, and gives me pause, especially when I'm using the Gamme for long distance travel, and I want the rocker more for the deeper snow/smoothing out the postholes in the bobsled track.

[lilcliffy]

Yeah...
The Nordic Rocker thingy does make things weird from a XC perspective- especially on consolidated snow...

The XC performance related to the mounting point of a non-rockered Nordic touring is very straightforward.

But- a ski with Nordic rocker has a shortened glide surface on consolidated snow- such that the ski will still feel balanced in terms of weight at BP- BUT, it does not feel balanced when XC skiing on consolidated snow...

(I had my first real experience with this on Saturday. Went out on a full-day 15km tour in a remote valley- with loads of vertical- on my Ingstad BC. As we predicted being out there until after dark- we planned on returning to the car on 3kms of snowmobile track. The Ingstad was a dream in the deep soft snow and hilly terrain- but, it was completely useless XC-skiing out on the snowmobile track!! I said to one of my ski partners that I wish I could transform them into my Gamme 54 with the puch of a button!)

The Gamme 54 feels like it has a forward mounting position at BP because of the Nordic rocker. So- now I think I understand where you are coming from...Are you considering an aft mounting point to compensate for the Nordic rocker when XC skiing?

My 210cm Gamme 54 has significantly less Nordic rocker than my 210cm E-99 Tour Xtralite- and as such, the Gamme has a longer XC glide surface on consolidated snow, and is faster, despite having less camber underfoot than the E-99...

On another note- I had my Gammes out on about 3kms of snowmobile track last week on a return loop. I normally would avoid this- but the Gamme has proven to be the best BC-XC ski I have for dense/compacted snow. They were great, snappy, fast and tracked beautifully- better than my previous consolidated-snow BC-XC ski the E99...

Your reasoning for considering the aft mounting point makes me happy I didn't go ahead with a forward mounting point!

Without being able to compare it to a fore/aft mounting point- I can confirm Cannatonic's experience- at BP they feel great and responsive both in terms of XC glide and turn initiation (despite their wide turn radius! )

[Cannatonic]

LC - I think all the answers to your questions are "yes" IMO. The chord center basically tells you where the midpoint of the ski length is located, there's no special significance to it. I noticed that BP on my 2011-vintage E99 210's was about 1.5 inches behind CC, then I got the Gamme 54 210's and I noticed that BP was virtually on top of the CC.

It made a big difference for me - when tele-turning down hills in the E99 I feel like I"m in the back seat too far, it gives a wild, out-of-control feeling versus the Gamme 54 where I feel more centered. All my years of alpine experience make me feel uncomfortable if I'm mounted too far back. At least on downhills.

Also the distance from BP to CC varied on those E99's, at 210 it was 1.5 inches behind, at 205cm 1 inch behind, at 200cm only .5 inches behind. It made the 200's work more like tele skis.

BTW, have no fear about mounting Rottefella Super Teles on the Gammes, they fit with room to spare. I also have the Super Teles on the Mountain Tour 51, no problem there either.

[fisheater]

I had a half season my first year on my Gamme, Green Man version. That season I thought I was living a curse for bringing Gamme south of 45 degrees north. It seemed that last half season was cold and dry, or warm and wet.
Last season we had some snow, but trails were always packed by the time the weekend came around.
This season started on thin hard bases, but finally I have had the Green Man on a couple inches of fluff over a firm base. Well I have always been pleased with both kick and glide of the Gamme as well as tracking. However narrow trails, hard packed by hikers, and I found that I was mostly step turning. On hard, uneven trails I couldn’t bend Gamme’s stiff camber to bend and while being a great tracking ski, getting rotation on a ski that I can’t bend was problematic for Telemark turns. Turns were more step turns. I got a little more aggressive with edge detuning, and then I got a couple inches of soft snow over the typically hard uneven base and what do you know, Telemark turns! That Nordic Rocker does nothing on hard trails. Just a little fluff gives that ski just a little bend. Combine that with turning the ski on edge a bit, a little rotation, and I’m flying around tight downhill turns doing Telemark rather than step turns or just standing on the outside ski alpine style. Btw the Green Man has not given up any tracking with the added detuning, it has just really allowed the use of more rotation in my turning, a win/win. If I was in deeper snow, you wouldn’t be able to rotate, however the skis would bend a lot more. I somehow don’t know if the added bend would prevent ludicrous speed down steeper fall lines. I have other skis that Gamme gets so much time as it is. I will pick different skis for those deep snow days.
For skiing trails, covering distance over rolling backcountry terrain, this is a no comprise ski. It’s made to go fast, but to also engage the wax pocket climbing in soft snow. A decent skier will be pleased with the difficulty of terrain this handles. If I had a complaint about the Gamme, is that it’s kick and glide performance is so good, I don’t appreciate other skis as much. I had to purchase an old E-99 for a rock ski. The ski that I had been using for a rock ski just didn’t compare. Funny thing is, when I first got that ski I was very happy with it’s kick and glide performance. The Green Man just raised the bar too high!

[Cannatonic]

You're a brave soul to run 210 Gamme's on hiking trails with turns! I need lots of room to arc the E99's and Gamme. If you love this type of ski another alternative is to have a 210 pair and a 200 pair. The 200's will still be light & have camber but will be vastly easier to turn in tight spaces. Sometimes you don't need flotation and 200's are perfect.

[bgregoire]

You're a brave soul to run 210 Gamme's on hiking trails with turns! I need lots of room to arc the E99's and Gamme. If you love this type of ski another alternative is to have a 210 pair and a 200 pair. The 200's will still be light & have camber but will be vastly easier to turn in tight spaces. Sometimes you don't need flotation and 200's are perfect.

Hi Canna. Nice to read you.

You bring forth an excellent reason to go shorter, something that it unfortunately not too popular on this forum. I like and ski in Québec and we have lots of trees, and a lot of my ski areas include narrow trails and lots of snow. I nearly never go with a ski longer than my recommended length (I'm 5.10, 160lbs), which would be about 200cm in an E99. My favourite ski for a few years now is an older 195cm E99 (pre xtralite). Probably very similar to the Gamme. Anyways, its great, awesome for all terrain. At that length, its "really easy" to make em turn and tele when I feel like it (compared to other skis in that class). So yeah, sometime is really smart to go a tad shorter or at least stick to recommend length.

[wabene]

Dang you guys got me all revved up to buy the Green Man Gamme, but alas, they are no more. Replaced by the regrettable White and Teal Man.

[Woodserson]

Dang you guys got me all revved up to buy the Green Man Gamme, but alas, they are no more. Replaced by the regrettable White and Teal Man.

Tell me about it. Apparently the ski is improved but the new graphic is T E R R I B L E.