My wife’s new skis, Åsnes MT51 waxless-first impressions

[Eärendil]

It was time for my wife to get a pair of backcountry oriented skis. Her old Rossignol spears in SNS are a hazard once outside the groomed tracks. She had tried Fischer E89 Crown a while back which seemed to fit the bill quite well. Unfortunately, they are now discontinued in favor of Fischer Twinskin. I am not totally sold on integrated skins. On race skis, they usually come with an adjustable binding which can dial in the right grip/glide balance. This is not available with NNNBC.

With me skiing on E99 Crown, waxless was a pre-requisite. In the end it came down to either E99 Crown or Åsnes MT51 WL. As we are well into the skiing season, supply is starting to dwindle. We could not find a E99 in right size so we went with MT51 195 cm.

We brought the skis home and did the old DIY version of camber test using a piece of paper between ski and flat wooden floor. The actual wax pocket stretched about 6 inches in front of where the waxless pattern starts. Still when my wife stood on one ski she could close the camber fully. Seemed Ok even thought she is on the lower limit of recommended weigh for 195cm.

Today we went for the first tour on these skis. She on MT51 and me on E99. Our neighbouring surroundings here, close to Stockholm are mainly flats with some small hills here and there. Easy terrain. Even with the flat terrain it was obvious that she lacked grip with her skis. On small inclines where I just kick and glide with no problem, she had to herringbone. A wife without grip seeing her husband with full grip gets a bit grumpy so naturally I proposed to switch skis. Actually on my E99 210, she had much better grip and on her skis I was struggling to get the grip I seek. I had to ski a bit more dynamically using ”race tempo” to get the waxless base to work.

Naturally, my wife was not pleased. However, seeing as the wax pocket stretched further than the waxless base, it occured to me that I could try to wax that flat part on the ski. 6 inches of Blå Extra in front and about 2 inches back from the waxless base and then off to test. This actually did the trick. Much better grip with this solution. Nevertheless, I have some concerns going forward:

Will the short waxless Åsnes solution ever work on its own to create grip or will it always need extra wax or even going to X-skin? If not, what is the purpose of the waxless pattern? If I have to wax the ski, I would be better off with wax base.

Does anyone have similar experience with the Åsnes waxless base?

Which X-skin to get first? 30mm? Mohair or Pomoca? Nylon a must for icy conditions?

//Rickard//

[CwmRaider]

Hi Rickard,
Unfortunately I have similar experience with waxless Åsnes Nansen although maybe it is a little bit less problematic with those as they are less cambered than the MT51. For me it's just passable on flatter sections or shorter hills. I also end up waxing in front of the waxless pattern to be happy with grip. This works but it isn't waxless. I wish the pattern were almost twice as long. Some people here seem OK with the grip but I am not one of them (I am 105 kg, and use 205cm Nansen for 85kg + recommendation from Åsnes)

30mm x skin will work also, glide suffers a bit. The Nylon to me is like skiing on velcro, I much prefer the mohair.

As you are both frustrated from the beginning, I think the best solution is to change the skis. Sorry it is not nice to hear but it is better to wax waxable than waxless skis, and occasionally use skins when necessary.

In Norway some shops have a "100% satisfaction guarantee", if you have this option, use it! If not I would try to sell them second hand before they see much use and get other skis instead. If you go waxless hunt down some Fischer Crown. In my opinion grip is at least as important as glide in tours.
And a happy wife is the best thing to have on any tour

Regarding integrated skins, no idea about the Fischer but for track XC skis they require quite active technique for good grip also. Not something I could keep up for 25km tours with a backpack.

[lolo]

[Edit: And Roelant chimed in! Before I even posted this.. but FWIW]

Your post reminded me of this thread about the waxless Nansens:

viewtopic.php?f=19&t=2997

@Roelant had this to say:

I love the design, stability, predictability and flex pattern of the Nansens. I think they are perfect touring skis for my use and I cannot fault them.Except for the grip.
Its been steadily cold here and we got 50 cm of fresh snow the past week. When I could get time to ski I have been alternating between the waxable Falketind 62s and the waxless Nansens.
Although I got the FT62s to work good for me in the first and great in the second outing, with the Nansen Waxless I achieve good grip results only when I wax a layer of hot polar all the way to the tip and appropriate wax of the day forwards from the waxless pattern in a length of about 45 cm. I do find the waxless pattern to be relatively silent.

Here is the catch though. Isn't it silly to use a waxless to have grip when conditions are too warm to wax effectively, only to find that you're only really happy with the grip when you can complement it with wax anyways?

Some here seem happier with the grip offered by these skis than me. I noticed that they usually seem to have shorter skis ie. 185 cm for instance. The extra 20cm in my 205s is only extra glide zone and therefore there is relatively less grip zone for a heavier skier like myself. I also wonder if such a short grip zone is best on a ski with a long Nordic rocker sich that the grip zone is a higher proportion of the ski base touching the snow.

The bottom line is, I now regret selling the waxable Nansens earlier. Looking at my priorities, for the next 10 years I'll probably be touring in my back yard, or with a heavy pack, or with a Pulk or with a kid in tow. When wax is not working the glide penalty from an x skin won't be an issue.

Roelant of course could chime in speaking for himself! But I thought it was interesting that he refers to himself as a "heavier skier". Presumably weight-matched to the correct length (205cm?) of Nansen? Yet I experience the same issues with my 195cm Ingstad BC waxless and I think I am more like your wife—i.e. a bit light at 68kg for that length—and over the past two seasons I've been blaming my lack of grip on this. But no matter the snow conditions, even when ideal for fishscales in theory, I cannot seem to get any functional grip even in relatively flat terrain. The Ingstads are amazing and I wanted 195s for the extra flotation for long distance tours in deep snow. But the waxless is utterly useless. And if you have to wax your waxless skis to literally be able to ski even on flat terrain, why not just have waxable bases? (Hence why I took @Woodserson up on his magnanimous offer of used 195cm Ingstad wax!)

It seems like there are folks out there who have no complaints about their waxless Asnes ski (grip). But I wonder if it's like goldilocks... all the variables have to be juuuuuuuust right. Less forgiving than other waxless skis out there.


A couple things. Roelant writes: "I also wonder if such a short grip zone is best on a ski with a long Nordic rocker such that the grip zone is a higher proportion of the ski base touching the snow."

The Ingstad waxless pattern is 53 cm long for a 195cm ski. It does have a Nordic rocker though, if we're talking about proportions of glide zone to grip zone.

My Madshus Epochs, which climb like a dream!, are 185cm long (and I am also too light in theory for these, though not as underweight as I am for the 195cm Ingstads) and the waxless pattern is 79 cm long.

Not taking into account the Nordic Rocker, this means the grip zone is 27% of the base on the Ingstad.
The grip zone is 43% of the base on the Epochs.

And the Epochs are, of course, a bit wider underfoot than the Ingstads, 68mm vs 62mm.

And they are softer flexing. Etcetcetc. It's not apples to apples.

Nevertheless, I am wondering if 27% just makes for a finicky waxless situation.

Wish it wasn't so expensive to experiment! I'd sure like to try a 175cm waxless Ingstad. Maybe I'd have grip out the wazoo. But then, what about flotation? What about glide? Am I doomed to short skis?

Maybe those "women's specific" Asnes skis should have differences that are more than graphics-deep. Could they perhaps be tuned so that lighter skiers could still ski longer skis without paying penalties like: no grip?

On the other hand, even some "heavier skiers" out there seem less than satisfied with the Asnes waxless pattern... so there's more to it, surely.

Oh and here we go, just found this tidbit from @Cannatonic from a thread on the MT51s.

viewtopic.php?t=2450

Been skiing the MT51's more....the fishscale section is too short on the 205's. I've been out a few times where the traction wasn't nearly good enough to ski normally....just kick & glide, not even climbing uphill. I still like the skis, but I've permanently attached the 30mm mohair skin to them. That works great & gives me the traction I need in wet or icy snow.

I suspect the scales would be sufficient in dry powder, but I use wax skis for that. The skin works great, if there are issues with the skin I have the scales for backup. But I'd like to see the waxless pattern extended on these. Especially on the Ingstad's & other wider models that would be good for telemark laps on spring snow.

Anyway. Gotta pull myself up out of this rabbithole now!

Peace!

[Stephen]

@lolo
I love it — my head is spinning.
You could give lilcliffy a run for the money on analysis.
And I mean all that most respectfully.

I started out the season with great waxing results, and, as I read the waxing woes of others, felt smugly competent (I can guess what you think about that, and it might be true).
The last couple of weeks, I have had nothing but problems:
No grip;
No glide;
No grip OR glide at the same time (seriously — how can that be — it was like having skins on backwards?).

I began to think I should just give up and get “no wax” skis.
Apparently, it’s not that easy.

The thing with wax skis is: It’s like mice and cheese.
I don’t always get the cheese (and sometimes get worse) but when I get the cheese (great grip AND glide) it’s fantastic, so keep coming back looking for more cheese.

But, back to the main topic, @Eärendil needs a sustainable solution, and it seems like Roelant is on the right track.
This is supposed to be fun, not a struggle.

[lilcliffy]

Yes- Lolo- that was a wonderful and brilliant post ↑!!!

@Stephen
Are you trying the kicker skins when the snow is hard to wax for? If so- results?
Have you tried klister when the snow is not great for grip wax?

Waxless scales are not going to better on icy snow- in fact they are terrible IME.
................
@lolo
Your notes on the Epoch vs the Ingstad WL are very interesting for me (I was a LONGTIME diehard Karhu "xcdier" and we have multiple pairs of XCD 10th Mtns and Epochs in our clan).
Interesting and revealing that the Epoch has more effective grip than the Ingstad WL, becasue- although I have always been happy with Karhu's Omnitrack on the flats- I have never been happy with it climbing hills (except on perfect spring corn). If your Epoch outclimbs the Ingstad WL- the Ingstad WL is really bad. My Fischer 78/88/E99/E109- with the Offtrack Crown insert- outclimbs every Karhu/Madshus Omnitrack model we have (Eon/Epoch/Annum).

I am personally avoiding the Asnes WL models until they get better reviews...

[Stephen]

@Stephen
Are you trying the kicker skins when the snow is hard to wax for? If so- results?
Have you tried klister when the snow is not great for grip wax?

I think a lot of my problems have been in the high 20* range and maybe wind blown snow (not as sharp?)
I have resorted to X-Skins a few times and had much better K&G with those than with wax (key point — better glide).

I have not thought to try klister, but that would preclude skins (without scraping).
So far, I have been ok with skins on violet (cross fingers).

One time, maybe low 20s, I had a situation where I had bad glide.
If I stopped for a few minutes, I would then have great glide for a few hundred feet, then back to no glide.
I tried downgrading the wax (lower temp wax) and again, great glide for a few hundred feet, then back to horrible drag.
I went through this several times and finally gave up and suffered the drag back to the trailhead.
I now carry a good scraper and, in this case, would have scraped the kick wax off and started over.

[Stephen]

But, back to @Eärendil’s post:

Nevertheless, I have some concerns going forward:

Will the short waxless Åsnes solution ever work on its own to create grip or will it always need extra wax or even going to X-skin? If not, what is the purpose of the waxless pattern? If I have to wax the ski, I would be better off with wax base.

Does anyone have similar experience with the Åsnes waxless base?

Which X-skin to get first? 30mm? Mohair or Pomoca? Nylon a must for icy conditions?

//Rickard//

Others should chime in, but, if you keep the skis, I would consider the 45mm mohair for the Mountain Tour. I have had good results with almost full width skins (58mm on 62mm Ingstad and FT62). I wax the skins (ironed in), which might help with glide? I use Black Diamond Glope Stopper. I get more glide than I would expect with something like that on the bottom of the skis.
For rolling terrain, skins seem like a bit of a disappointment. Yes, nice on the ups, but miss the great glide on the downs.
The “no-wax” skis are supposed to be a good compromise, but without the grip for up, kind of a cruel joke, since you are also getting the drag on the downs.

Maybe Asnes tipped the scales a little to far towards performance.
Often, manufacturers dumb things down, so a competent person misses out, but in this case, maybe it takes a racer to get the best out of some of their no-wax grip patterns?

[Transplantskier]

As a skier of both the waxless Nansen and waxless MT51, I sometimes find myself wishing that I had a bit more grip with the MT51s as well.

I ski them both at 185cm (I'm 66 kg), and the Nansen's grip/glide is typically perfect, but the MT51 requires me to be using my best (race-ish) technique to get satisfying grip for the kick. Some cold/hard snow days the grip isn't there even if I'm using my best form. On MT51 days when I don't feel up to skiing like a racer (or when the snow isn't in my favor) I use the kicker skins and find it fairly satisfying, but obviously lose a fair bit of glide.

I still think the MT51s are great skis (and they're doing great things for my more active technique), but I definitely think the Åsnes scale pattern doesn't lend itself to buying skis longer than their sizing charts suggest.

[CwmRaider]

@lolo:
Thanks indeed for compiling this excellent post!

@Eärendil in another part of the thread from @Cannatonic that lolo mentions, he suggests the camber of the MT51 typically results in enough glide with the 30mm x-skin anyways.
So it IS worth considering, however if I were you I would still trade them in (as the waxless pattern is not useful to you).

Another relevant post by @FrenchFred :

I read you might buy an Ingstad bc waxless... Be carrefoul of the edge quality !
In fact, i don't know why, but the edges are not flat just at the limit of the scale and it create a rail when you are skiing downhill ! The Asnes waxless skis have all the same finition... You will not find this on the flat wax skis like the FT62 for exemple.

I was not sure what he meant until last week, but the edges are indeed protruding above the waxless pattern by maybe half a mm.
Here is a picture from my review post:


So the pattern is "negative" rather than positive.
This is NOT the case with my brother's Fischer E99 Crown nor with my wife's Madshus Glittertind MGV+, I just checked.
The edges are in contact with the snow before the waxless pattern, exacerbating efforts to get grip especially on narrower skis.
Even so, Åsnes WL skis without metal edges still dont have a lot of grip, reading the reviews of the Finnmark 54 waxless and Breidablikk Waxless...

[Eärendil]

Great input, guys. The conclusion to me is that Åsnes should re-think the design of their waxless skis. Waxless skis should be as forgiving as possible for people willing to compromise glide for better grip. Logic would have it that the waxless pattern should be longer than the X-skin part.

Waxing above the pattern makes the ski functional for now in dry cold snow. For wet or icy snow, it seems from what Cannatonic said, that the 30mm mohair also made it work ok. We will try this route first before we give up on the skis.

I would actually not feel good selling these skis and possibly kill nordic skiing for some poor guy.

The good thing is that my wife can ski on my E99 210 leaving me to deal with the MT51 For a lighter skier those 210s actually have quite a good glide except in really fresh cold snow.

Actually, I might explore the MT51s for doing more high endorphin work in groomed trails. They are shorter than I prefer for this, but I like that I can use my Alaska boots instead of a narrow fitting Salomon racing boot from 1996!

//Rickard//