Ski For Medium Length Tours

[corlay]

@lilcliffy , @corlay; why is longer better in this ski? I've learned a lot over the last few years but one of the most elusive properties for me to understand, both alpine and tele, is ski length.

There are two ways to solve "float" in a ski: increase width and/or increase length.
For a "touring ski", I like to solve it with length, primarily. I just don't like laying down miles, kick-and-glide, with a ski much wider than the TR78, nor with a non-leather boot.

For context, my TR78 is my *shortest* ski:
Fischer Traverse 196 (a do-everything ski, especially in variable or even spring-time conditions)
Fischer Transnordic 205 (wish it was longer, but in 2021 a 210 wasnt in-stock *anywhere*)
Anses Gamme 210 (a perfect "all-rounder" when conditions are ripe for a waxed base)
Mashsus Birke Beiner 210 (vintage "woodie" waxable ski. Just wonderful on easy terrain like a logging road, or golf course)
Peletonen 'Metsa Step' 270 (the BIG BOY for *deep* snow)

I don't ski at resorts, or in backcountry steeps, so I don't have a ski specific to "turns" and/or "wide float"

[lilcliffy]

@lilcliffy , @corlay; why is longer better in this ski? I've learned a lot over the last few years but one of the most elusive properties for me to understand, both alpine and tele, is ski length.

Personal experience/opinion/knowledge-

In a Nordic ski touring context- a particular ski's sutiable length is first a function of skier weight- and then secondly a function of intended use and skier technique and preferences...

A ski like the Fischer 88 is a Nordic touring ski- tuned for XC skiing on backcountry/ungroomed snow-
(as opposed to the Fischer 98- also a Nordic touring ski- but more tuned for climbing and turning than XC performance).

So- my opinion is that one should choose a "longish" length for a ski like the 88 in order to maximize its XC performance-
I want this ski's camber to fully release when I stride forwards;
I want this ski's camber to offer some degree of true Nordic kick and glide performance.

If one has a ski like the 88 on the "shortish" side the skier's weight will reduce the effectiveness of this skis camber.

If one is considering a short 88- for climbing and turning performance, for example- then, there isn't much XC performance advantage of the 88 over the 98, and one would be better off with the 98, which has a camber-flex that is tuned more towards climbing and turning in the first place.

I weigh 185lbs and have the "199" Fischer 88 (which is really closer to 195cm)- I would certainly not want it shorter, and would be even happier to have it in a 205 length. I ski the Fischer 98 in "179"- it is a much slower XC ski than the 199 88- but, sooo much more fun on hills!

My point on the length options for skis like the Fischer 78/88 is that MANY skiers are significantly heavier than me- they should make this ski in longer lengths for heavier skiers.

[JohnSKepler]

Coming to the 'sport' late in life, I say 'sport' because it is much more than that, but coming late in life with a wealth of knowledge in other areas and virtually none here, I'm awestruck by these machines. We tend to think of machines as having moving parts but these have none yet are designed across a wide range of parameters to function as intended in various conditions.

@lilcliffy, @corlay, my one concern, and please take that with the caveat above (no knowledge, and I mean zero) my fear (again, no knowledge) is that if I go with a long ski I won't be able to fully engage the scales. All i need is a "Don't worry about it," or an "eh..."

Thanks again as I build my knowledge and experience.

[randoskier]

Hey John,



My #1 recommendation(s)-
Fischer Traverse 78/Excursion 88

Excursion 88 over 78 if-
- flotation and stabilty are more important than weight and speed;
- one is a heavier skier (and/or is carrying significant weight)

As a note-
I used my Fischer 88 last winter more than I ever have- due to an unusually extended season of highly variable weather and snow conditions- including very high but variable snow-ice-rain precipitation- coupled with cold nights and mild days.
Fantastic ski-
slower than the 78- fo shu- but, more versatile if one is regularly dealing with deep and/or unstable snow.
Gareth
.......
The Nansen WL works best if one is using it in combination with grip wax.

I agree Cliff, I have the 88s I find them slow too, I am buying a pair of Traverse 78s if it is true the EZ skin option is back on them. I think the 78 is one of the best all around skis if you don't want to have 10 pairs of specialized skis. It is very popular in Norway and Sweden too.