Woodserson recap, TL;DR wrote: Fantastic, accessible, friendly, straightforward. If you can't or don't want to parse the details on all the skis in Asnes' lineup, and you only really want one ski, get the Nansen.
Woodserson wrote: ↑Thu Feb 11, 2021 6:51 amI should really get on that review.
My take on Gamme vs Nansen:
Gamme = Horsepower under the hood, but you need the skills to successfully access and apply said power = Land Rover
Nansen = Everyman go-everywhere but not as fast or flashy = Fiat Panda
https://www.telemarktalk.com/viewtopic.php?f=19&t=1411
https://www.telemarktalk.com/viewtopic.php?f=19&t=2997
https://www.telemarktalk.com/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=3733
The Nansen was my most used ski during the 2020/21 season in New Hampshire. This was not an intentional decision, it was due to practical use. I loved skiing the Nansen.
The Nansen is a mission flexible ski that provides stability and utility in many snow types and varying terrain. Forgiving and predictable, it is not the fastest ski but it is not a slouch either. Better for under 200lb/90kg skiers if used for long distance touring. Size up from the Asnes recommendation for speed at the expense of turnability. Size normally for turns.
My Specs:
76kg/160lbs without gear
188cm/6'2"
Strong skier, can go all day
Chooses XC skis for touring- traveling over distance in snowy terrain- rather than XCD/turns.
My XC skiing involves all sorts of snow from great to terrible, and rolling terrain in hardwood forests on single track to forest roads. Very limited open slope skiing.
Nansen Specs
Dimensions: 76-56-66
Lengths: up to 205cm in 5cm increments
Weight: 1025g/200cm
Rocker: NO
Camber: Traditional softer XC full-length camber. Initially low camber with resistance in the squeeze.
Less cambered than Gamme and Ingstad.
So the Nansen was this ski that I was just not interested in, but then it just kept popping up in sexy snow videos from Norway like this one in particular:
And I just had to have it. Also, as much as I love my GAMME and my E99's, I wanted a WAX version of the Fischer Traverse 78 for those days when the snow was deeper and I didn't want to roll my ankle or sink in rotten snow. Since Fischer doesn't make one, the Nansen, with very similar dimensions, fit the bill. I ended up ordering a 200 and a 205 and after much deliberation and hemming and hawing and moments of deep angst I kept the 205. Interestingly, the 200 has the same wax pocket as the 205, at least via the Card Test. The difference was imperceptible so I kept the longer ski as I knew my turning on this ski was going to limited and long skis truck. If I was buying the Nansen and going to see hillier more open terrain I'd probably go with the 200 for turnability especially as the camber difference was minimal.
I mounted the ski up at Balance Point with NNN-BC and took them for a spin. What elation! The Nansen is smooth and predictable with an easy grace. The forgiving camber lets one be sloppy in Kick & Glide technique, but there is enough camber for good release and decent glide that will keep most skiers happy while they are in backcountry terrain.
The wider overall platform of the ski contributes to great rolling stability. I often get a Gamme or E99 caught in hard snowmobile tracks and the ski will drop to one side and ride on edge, but the Nansen is wide enough, especially in the shovel, to stay flat on an even keel. In snowmobile country this is both an attribute and an energy conserver. The tip, proportionally stiff to the rest of the ski, breaks trail and busts through crust with little complaint. The tail is long and stiff and releases very nicely.
On firm snow, like wind-scoured lakes, the ski holds it own. It is not the fastest ski for this type of skiing due to the lower camber. I would take a Gamme for faster lake skiing. On manky, cruddy, or otherwise sloppy snow the Nansen really comes into its own and forges a path ahead. I find that the ski excels in variable snow conditions as the ride is so smooth and comfortable. Fatigue is reduced and pleasure is increased. In very deep snow, I found the ski was also quite in its element-- HOWEVER, I am skiing these 10cm OVER the Asnes recommendation. If I went with a 195 I am sure I would be singing a different tune. Many skiers comment that the Nansen goes into the dreaded "banana" shape in deep snow, and I am sure this is the case. This thread here demonstrates the profile of the camber compared to other skis in its class (wider less cambered BC skis). I, at my weight and chosen ski length, can get away with it. Other heavier skiers may not be able to.
I brought my skis to the local downhill ski area a few times and ripped around on them as well. The skis, on groomed snow, turned very nicely with traditional step telemark turns. The lack of rocker, such as on the Ingstad, made them less squirrelly at speed, though they took a bit more technique to initiate the turn. In deeper snow, I found the Ingstad to be a better turning ski and more stable. While both skis are stable, the Ingstad rides though other ski tracks with aplomb while the Nansen will get thrown around and needs some discipline to stay on track.
The only remiss I have with this ski is that the lack of pronounced second camber, as is found on the Gamme or Ingstad. This makes me choose other skis if I am going to use skins for long distance or klister. I think I would much prefer a less draggy ski when using high-drag skins or maybe even klister than the Nansen. If I am climbing a hill, the skin won't be much of an issue. But if I am using the skin to overcome icy snow conditions, the skin won't clear as easily as it does on the Gamme, and I could anticipate wasted energy over day-long distances.
Overall, this ski is one of my most user-friendly pleasant skis I own. When I strap in, the Nansen is a good friend joining me for a ski. The Nansen just FEELS so good! They ski like wood skis, that same feel, and it's a good one.
Comparisons:
-Gamme vs Nansen: The Gamme is narrower, rolls easier, and has much more secondary resistant camber. The Gamme is a faster, more technical ski and depends better technique. See my comparison at the top of this thread.
-Ingstad vs Nansen: The Ingstad is wider still, has rocker, and more camber underfoot. The Ingstad and Nansen break fresh snow at the same level of stability and speed. The Nansen is the faster ski on packed down powder snow than the Ingstad in its respective length due to the Ingstad's rocker which shortens the length. The Ingstad's extra camber underfoot makes skins or klister less of an issue for wonky snow conditions. The Ingstad turns easier and is more stable downhill skiing and in turns, especially in softer snow.
Who is it for?
Lighter skiers, optimally under 90kg/200lbs, who wants a quiver-of-one BC ski and for traveling distance over variable terrain. Also very well suited to less advanced skier looking for a very good BC ski that can be grown into. Or, a heavier skier who wants to really bend and turn a classically shaped BC XC ski. Also, anyone who experiences a broad range of snow conditions and wants to keep the quiver down to 1 ski.
Caveats:
Not a very stiff ski, can banana in deep snow if chosen in shorter lengths of if heavier skier. No banana for me.
This is me skiing on the Nansen:
This is Nansen at required lakeside tea-time:
