NNN-BC on narrow alpine skis

[tkarhu]

What @Rodbelan is suggesting here, above 20m radius around 70mm waist could describe my SB98'S. This is my first season on them and I really like em. Easy to turn compared to my M62'S.
[...]
Edit: I have some Rossi Bandit L's that fit this criteria and I've considered mounting them tele. I hesitate because they seem heavy and the camber is quite flat.

I chatted with a guy who was selling Bandit X:s with Hammerhead Axl's. He did not use the Bandits that much because they were heavy. Looks like many people in central europe sell Bandits second hand as touring skis. Bandit XX L is 1735 g according to a Freeride site.
https://www.freeride.se/prylar/skidor/r ... -xx-l.html

In what conditions would the Bandits be better than your Sbound 98's? I guess maybe on groomed snow, but for any backcountry I would rather take the Sbounds. Are the Sbounds OK even on hardpack.

So I'm planning on getting a ski like this with a wax base and was considering the Rabb 68. What would be the advantages/disadvantages/differences between a Nordic inspired ski like the Rabb and something coming from the other end of the spectrum like the K2 Sahale?

Would stiffness be a main difference between telemark and alpine touring? Was it fisheater who wrote above that a telemark ski is somewhat softer than its alpine touring counterpart because telemark is a two ski turn. Some skis seem to have alpine touring and telemark versions (example below).

The K2 Ascent sports the same profile (102-70-91) as the popular tele-touring Piste Stinx but with increased stiffness to meet the demands of a locked heel and the alpine turn.
https://www.skimag.com/gear/randoneealp ... gear-2003/

[wabene]

Thank you @tkarhu

[tkarhu]

What you need is: lightweight, not too much sidecut (above 20m radius), not too fat (around 70mm waist) and a little alpine camber with a good base

What do you think, would a following K2 AT / skimo ski be alright for tele?

Length 168 cm; waist 1300-1400 g; waist 70 mm; radius ~19 m

The K2's are between current Falketind Xplore and Rabb 68 (both 188 cm) models in the image above.

The K2 should be relatively soft in its class. I am 180 cm and 82 kg. Is the shortness of 168 cm a good or bad thing?

not too much sidecut (above 20m radius)

For comparison:
— Rabb 68 has a radius of 15.8 m in 172 cm length, and 19.8 m in 188 cm
— Falketind Xplore radius is 16.7 m (172 cm) to 20.9 m (188 cm)
— Voile Objective 18.0 m (164 cm) to 19.5 (178 cm)

Wouldn't a shorter version be easier with NNN-BC than a long version of the same model? What do you think.

It looks like Rabb 68 tip and tail would have been cut off in the K2's. I guess there is a reason why Åsnes skis have such round tails. On the other hand, maybe you save weight with the K2 tail

EDIT: One difference between old and skinny AT skis and the new Åsnes models might be that the old AT skis do not have any rocker. How important do you think that is?

[fisheater]

What you need is: lightweight, not too much sidecut (above 20m radius), not too fat (around 70mm waist) and a little alpine camber with a good base

What do you think, would a following K2 AT / skimo ski be alright for tele?

Length 168 cm; waist 1300-1400 g; waist 70 mm; radius ~19 m


Falketind Xplore K2 Rabb 68.png


The K2's are between current Falketind Xplore and Rabb 68 (both 188 cm) models in the image above.

The K2 should be relatively soft in its class. I am 180 cm and 82 kg. Is the shortness of 168 cm a good or bad thing?

not too much sidecut (above 20m radius)

For comparison:
— Rabb 68 has a radius of 15.8 m in 172 cm length, and 19.8 m in 188 cm
— Falketind Xplore radius is 16.7 m (172 cm) to 20.9 m (188 cm)
— Voile Objective 18.0 m (164 cm) to 19.5 (178 cm)

Wouldn't a shorter version be easier with NNN-BC than a long version of the same model? What do you think.

It looks like Rabb 68 tip and tail would have been cut off in the K2's. I guess there is a reason why Åsnes skis have such round tails. On the other hand, maybe you save weight with the K2 tail

EDIT: One difference between old and skinny AT skis and the new Åsnes models might be that the old AT skis do not have any rocker. How important do you think that is?

To answer the EDIT question first, rocker does help the ski tip to come up to the surface, which helps considerably when turning in deeper snow. However I will add while rocker is very helpful for turning, how that rocker is engineered into the overall flex pattern makes all the difference in the world for other aspects of ski performance.
Now I know very little about skimo, my understanding is you skin up the mountain, then ski down the mountain. My point is that I do not believe they do much kick and glide touring. I mention that, because my assumption is the middle ski would be a terrible tracking ski on NNN-BC. Note the shape and taper of the Rabb and FT X. I know the FT tracks very well. The skimo ski doesn’t say tracking to me.
More concerning to me is a statement by @bauerb whom is a skimo racer. He was saying that the best skimo racers load the tails for more speed as they downhill race. The shape of the K2 looks like it may be designed to be skied by pressuring the tails. Back in the 80’s slalom skis were designed that way, they called it unbalanced flex, it didn’t suit me, and I really don’t think it would suit two footed Telemark turning.
If you are looking to save money an all mountain ski is all you need. If you are spending money to go light, I know the Falketind Xplore is a really sweet ski, the third version of this ski really is the charm. It seems the reviews of the Rabb are quite good as well. Just my thoughts

[lowangle al]

I wouldn't worry about the lack of rocker on an older alpine ski. I did a run on an old alpine ski yesterday (70mm UF) that I used to ski with leather boots. I then did a run on an old double camber ski to compare them. As expected the difference in turning was like night and day. I think the difference between a traditional alpine ski and a rockered one would be minimal.

[tkarhu]

@fisheater and @lowangle al, thanks for your thoughts! I understand the concern about the K2 tail shape. I asked the seller, and he says the skis are for AT and thus quite soft. Other people on forums have described the skis easygoing and suitable for beginners. Maybe they are not most race oriented climbing skis.

Yes Falketind Xplores would be great! Yet I look for a ski for 25 cm of snow on uneven base with rocks, pieces of wood etc. My Gammes have already gotten a lot of scrapes there, so a pair of rock skis could be nice. The K2 skis should be all mountain in the sense that they should work on all kinds of snow. Yet for tours with even a couple of miles of approach on flats, I would probably choose my Gammes instead of the K2’s. The FTX’s would excel in on such tours, yet for a rock ski settings the K2’s might feel more comfortable.

@lowangle al Were the double cambers Karhu XCD GT’s? I read on another thread you have had those. I had a pair in 210 cm, which were alright for the one-week pulk tours back then. Yet the Gammes have a more playful soul for turns.

[lowangle al]

They were the white ones on the left, waxable from the 80’s. They were a better ski than the later model no wax ones on the right.

The single camber ski was an AT ski from the early 90’s. Atomic tour cap lite with a riva binding. One of my favorite skis.

[Rodbelan]

If you want to do some touring with the skis, don't go too short; I take them at least at my height (but that's not a rule but more a matter of preference). The shorter they are, the more squirrelly they get on the flats. Of course, if you want to mostly go downhill, you can take shorter. But I ski my Sahale at the resort once in a while and they are superbe! I should have bought 2 pairs...

[lemon]

I have a 90s k2 slalom ski with nnn bc on it. I think it's a fun and silly combination that's only worth doing if you can do it for very cheap.

[BigJohnS]

I just mounted some NNN-BC Magnum bindings to an old pair of K2 Four R's I had laying around. Took them out to an alpine ski area yesterday with some Fischer BCX Transnordic boots. They worked great in the soft corn snow but it got sketchy when I had to go across some ice patches. The set up felt surprisingly capable and I was even able to make it down some blues and easy blacks with them.