Åsnes Combat Nato vs. Fischer Excursion 88 for Trail breaking/icy crust

[lilcliffy]

@mca80
Good stuff!

[lilcliffy]

To try and offer perhaps more focused explanation of the Combat vs Amundsen-
the Amundsen is even better in breakable crust because it has less sidecut-
the Combat would be just as good if it had less sidecut.

[lilcliffy]

Thank you!! That makes a whole lot of sense. Then it must be the non-rockered tip of the Nato that makes it a better trail breaker in any condition?

Yes.
(non-rockered skis offer better climbing traction as well)

What about camber? Isn't the higher camber of the Fischer putting more weight on the shovel tips compared to the more even spread force on a lower cambered ski? More foce on the shovel = better crust breaking?

Interesting question...
I have certainly found that highly and stiffly cambered skis can be a real challenge on deep soft snow- making it near impossible to compress the camber (I have particularly noticed this with light skiers)-
I am not sure whether a highly cambered ski would necesarily break crust more effectively than one that is not...

For example- the Nansen breaks trail (and crust) much more effectively than a rockered TN66/82 XL (or Ingstad), despite being less cambered...

[mca80]

I use Nansen in 190 (and am like 62kg) which was a great introductory ski and still has utility and provides great fun. But I second everything @lilcliffy has said. My next ski purchases will be something strictly for downill, and an Amundsen for getting the most efficient mile-crushing ski in variable (including breakable crust) terrain. In my terrain if I had to ski unbroken trail all the way to town I would consider a Peltonin in 230 or 250 (270 for your weight) but thats because we can get 3 ft of deep snow. But since I plan to get to town on more consolidated base (whether by sun and wind or snow machine) the Amundsen makes the most sense. If the snowmobiles havent been around, and there was up to a foot of new snow folllowed by warmth and then freezing... this is theoretical, mind you, I havent skied an Amundsen--that would be the ski I want on a relatively flat or rolling surface. If more snow than that perhaps nato, but I dunno, havent skied one of those either. The Amundsen will track straighter though, which means less energy expended trying to go straight.

Edit: if you need more float go longer. Longer skis will give more floatation at the expense of turnability while wider skis will usually have more sidecut which makes downhill turning easier but giving up xc efficiency and speed. Looking at your photos, if you aren't navigating steep downhills with trees the Amundsen in 208 is the choice. But take this all with a shovel of salt, I am no expert. @lilcliffy certainly has way more insight than I.

Plus with your climate, albeit coastal so some warmth, you may find what, 90% of your skiing for 3 full months of the year under 29F (i.e. under -1c?) That lends itself to waxing. Swix blue extra most of the time, swix green sometimes. Decent enough grip without fiddling around.

[mca80]

The more Iook at your photos the more i want an Amundsen. My question is 194 for optimal diagonal stride vs 187 for skating on plowed roads.

[DG99]

Hmm, this idea of rocker being bad for trail breaking is strange to me. Maybe just a skinnier ski thing.

When I got Voile Chargers, rockered, 112 mm mid, and with a free pivot binding for touring, it absolutely killed all kinds of bad snow, uphill and downhill. Quite a revelation.

Sorry, I don’t know what you use when crossing windblown sea ice, we don’t have that anywhere around here!

[telerat]

Not sure it will help, but I can add a few less known alternatives to confuse or hopefully make you choose a suitable ski:
Rossignol BC100 Positrack and BC80 Positrack. Both are skis with more focus on crossing distances than turning and especially the BC100 got a good test in utemagasinet.no (9/10 points). Good luck.

[fgd135]

Have to agree with other comments--my Åsnes Combats are great at trail breaking, and most skiing actually, as are the older Åsnes MT65 military skis, although the MT65s are heavier and don't turn as well. Rockers are not much fun in hard snow, as it feels like they're swiveling under the balls of your feet rather than being supportive, and gliding.

[CwmRaider]

Combat Nato is awesome ski, but for exclusively flat terrain an Amundsen seems like a better tool. In my opinion. That extra sidecut and width in the Nato will result in some efficiency loss.

[LaplandPaul]

The Amundsen is my best XC ski in these conditions you describe- with the Combat NATO a close second for the most part.

The Amundsen will track straighter though, which means less energy expended trying to go straight.

Combat Nato is awesome ski, but for exclusively flat terrain an Amundsen seems like a better tool. In my opinion. That extra sidecut and width in the Nato will result in some efficiency loss.

If I would not already own the TN66, I would definitaly get the Amundsen! Seems just too similar in width to me. Wouldn't the NATO make a better 2-ski quiver?

The Metsa has reverse sidecut and a flex profile for covering distance in very deep snow- the core of the ski has zero sidecut and offers a completely stable platform- the softer reverse-sidecut shovel tapers up to a raised, pointed tip- when pushed through deep soft snow, the combination of the soft-flexing, reverse-sidecut shovel and raised, pointed tip, produces an extreme version of a traditional raised Nordic ski tip- perfect for breaking trail in very deep soft snow. I am not sure how this design would work in breakable crust...There are Finnish forest ski designs that have stiffer shovels- perhaps intended for spring snow and breakable crust?

Very informative!! Could be a great third ski in the quiver for deep snow days. We also have a local ski manufacturer here that makes BEAUTIFUL wooden skis:
https://www.tegsnasskidan.se/
They seem to be less pointy and are available in 70, 75 and 90mm withds. The base is wood and the edges are reinforced with wardwood. They recommend putting tar on the base. I wonder if they could be kick-and-glide-able

Rossignol BC100 Positrack and BC80 Positrack

Thank you, great suggestions. Only thing that bothers me is the lack of a kick-skin attachment which makes the Fischers and Åsnes Nato more versatile I think. Madshus Panorama M62, M68 or M78 would also be comparable skis! The older vesions had also an Intelligrip feature on the M62 and M68 with short, attachable kick skins.