Excursion 88 Sizing and Bindings.

[Will Wall]

Long time downhill telemarker here, but I've decided that what I really enjoy is cross country and touring, so I'm going sell my old resort planks and make the switch to a completely new set up.

What I'm thinking:

Alpina alaska 75
Fischer excursion 88
Volie 3 pin cable binding

I'm skiing east coast and upper mid west, snowmobile and off trail terrain, rolling hills. I'll also be gear hauling for multi day trips, either a pulk or heavy backpack.

I was originally looking at the s bound 98's, but after some consideration it seems like those are more downhill focused than I want. I still need something that's wide enough to work in off trail powder, so the 88's seem like a good compromise for size and touring efficiency.

I'm not sure if I want to go NNN BC or 75mm. I'm leaning towards 75mm for the beefiness factor, but I'm not sure if it's really necessary. I've seen that NNN BC has been used a plenty of serious polar expeditions, so maybe the durability difference has been exaggerated.

Lastly I'm not sure if I want to go for 179 or 189cm. I weight 165-170 lbs, and the 189cm's are recommended for 175lbs+. When I'm gear hauling I'll easily be in that range. But I'm worried that when I'm just out for a day with no load that I'll be too light to get good grip scales.

[Woodserson]

You are on the right track.

The ski is a tried and true piece of kit and the Fischer Offtrack Crown (the scales) is excellent at grip. Very grippy, wonderful design. If you get the EZ Skin option you can even add mohair skin which works very well for steeper climbs. This is a classic BC ski that has stood the test of time. It has high camber, is very springy, and launches you into the next glide.

Binding wise you can go either way. Lots of opinions on this. A Voile 3pin Cable gives you options for more control on longer planned for descents, but you have to install and un-install. NNNBC is difficult to go wrong, and people are very successful using this binding for turning coming from strong telemark backgrounds but it's as neutral as you're going to get and no cable option. Real skiin'! I learned to do it, but with lots of practice as the local hill.

If I am going to be 75/25 touring/turning then I go NNNBC. If I want to turn more and use the ski for mostly turns then I go 75mm. That's ME.

If you decide to go 75mm, the Rottefella Super Tele (no cable option, unless you order the cable version from Europe) fits the Alaska duckbill tighter than Voile unless you get an older Voile binding. If you go Voile, add the anti-ice plate to take up a bit of room in the binding.

Now for the real meat of the matter, ze ski size. Don't screw yourself here. Forget the 179 completely: Too short and you will drag the scales and the ski will be slow. The nordic rocker on the Excursion removes gliding surface off firm snow and leaves you with more drag. I have the 189cm and at 6'2" 155lbs I find it perfectly suitable for good kick and glide, unless I'm going up a steep hill in loose snow. My brother skis this ski at 189cm at 165lb with weak XC technique, works very well for him. Be honest with yourself: are you in shape? do you want to get good at XC kick&glide technique? Do you want efficiency? Do you ski on firm snow or will these conditions predominate? Will you have a pack most of the time? You may even want to consider the 199cm version. There is nothing more miserable than buying a ski and going slow because you got it too short.

Will you have a pack on more than not and trying to put down miles on flatness? Go 199. Will you be day tripping mostly in hills with tight trees with lots of up and downs? Are you not willing to learn good kick&glide technique? Go 189.

BE HONEST with yourself and what you are planning to do, actually do. Not what your cubicle-inspire-snow-dream is telling you, but what are the realities on the ground.

Remember this is a whole new type of skiing, turning these things may not come naturally, or it may, but be prepared to flop around like a dying fish.

But wipe the 179 from your memory, it does not exist for you.

WELCOME this little place of nerds

[Will Wall]

If you decide to go 75mm, the Rottefella Super Tele (no cable option, unless you order the cable version from Europe) fits the Alaska duckbill tighter than Voile unless you get an older Voile binding. If you go Voile, add the anti-ice plate to take up a bit of room in the binding.

What are your thoughts on the cable option?

It seems like most people think that a cable is always unnecessary with a leather boot. But I like the idea of having a backup if the pins fail. And I don't think it would hurt to have the option for descents.

I'm trying to find the differences between the voile 3 pin cable and the rottefella super telemark cable.

Reviews say the rottefella is better quality, and like you said it should fit the duck bill on the alpina's better. What I'm not sure of is the cartridge style compression springs, I'm thinking that might be significantly stiffer and heavier than the voile springs, which is something that I don't want. But there really isn't much information out there....

[lowangle al]

I think I would skip the cable on a dbl camber ski like that. I do like the feel of a cable binding because I can feel edge contact even on an unweighted ski, but I don't think you would get the same feel on a stiff dbl camber ski.

[lowangle al]

I just want to add that you can use your heavy tele set up in the bc by using kick wax.

[lowangle al]

Another benefit of a cable is that you can turn the ski with tip pressure. My guess is that that ski has very little tortional rigidity and would not respond to tip pressure anyway. In my limited experience skiing dbl camber skis with a cable is that they don't help much for turning.

[Woodserson]

I agree with Al, on this kind of ski with this big camber you are using it to efficiently move across terrain in variable snow conditions. I have the Voile's on mine, but I only use the cable when I'm skiing them inbounds at a resort on firm corduroy and it's such a chore I usually do it for one run or two just to say I did it.

Quality wise both bindings are equal. I have more Voile's than RT ST's. But the bail fits the Alaska better, and it has the little slots for emergency repairs. Same mounting pattern on either.

[Will Wall]

I just want to add that you can use your heavy tele set up in the bc by using kick wax.

Oh yeah, I've done a fair bit of BC and touring with my resort planks and I'm tired of schlepping around in massive boots and slow skis, which is why I'm switching.

[Tom M]

My 2 cents. I have two setups where I have a 75 mm / cable option: Volie Objective / Voile cable traverse, and Fischer SBound 98 / Voile 3 pin cable. I rarely use the cable with either setup. The main reason is that the spring cable is very restrictive in the forward flex of the boot. It does add some stability on the downhill, but if the conditions are such that I can't comfortably ski a leather / 3 pin combination without a cable, I'd rather be in a set of plastic boots. The main advantage of the 3 pin Voile system over the NNNBC setup is the fact that you have a choice of a leather or plastic boot. If you never intend to ski the 88 with a beefier boot than the Alaska series (either NNNBC or 75), then I think I would recommend the NNNBC setup for the Excursion 88's. As others have said, the 88's are not really a "ski for turns" ski. They are a great off trail ski and pair nicely with the Alaska NNNBC class boot. My experience with the Excursion 88 is limited to skiing my wife's 88's (too short for me) with a set of NNNBC Alfa Skarvet Boots. She uses the skis for forest service roads, rolling terrain and snowmobile trails. They work well in everything from cold dry deep powder to warm wet melting snow. The 88's would work great for the type of skiing you described. I've heard a lot of good things about the Asnes Ingstad skis, but have not skied them. They would be suitable for the type of skiing you describe. I've been thinking about trying out a pair this season and if I get them, I'll be setting them up with an NNNBC binding.

[fisheater]

Hello, I do not own or have I skied an E-88, however I have two USGI skis one mounted NNN-BC and one mounted 75 mm. I am attaching a review of the E-88 that might be helpful.

https://www.telemarktalk.com/viewtopic. ... SGI#p27205

I have not been on my 75 mm mounted USGI since I mounted my 2nd pair NNN-BC. However that is because I can just flat out trail ski faster on my Alaska BC boot than my Ski March boot. That being said I can ski blue runs (when groomed conditions are decent) on the USGI and Ski March with 3 pin cable bindings.

I now own an Alaska 75 boot. I’m very pleased with the boot, but it has not seen snow yet. I purchased this boot really for just one ski I own my Falketind 62. It is a downhill oriented ski. There are definitely times I want to ski it with a boot beefier than the new Alaska. Well at least up until now.

So do I have a point to all this??? Yes I really do. From the reviews I have read, the Excursion 88 handles easier than my USGI skis. Based upon my experiences that would push me towards the Alaska BC boot. While there is an advantage to being able to have a cable in your pack utilizing a 3 pin cable binding. I find NNN-BC to offer excellent performance. Also there are reports of failures of the Alaska 75 boot when pushed in challenging conditions. I have not heard of the same issues with the NNN-BC version.

I really don’t think either choice would not be good. Good luck, and don’t be surprised when you start enjoying touring on this light gear. I never would have believed it when I first started!