Short, waxable ski recommendation

[randoskier]

The man himself!

[Capercaillie]

If you look at what online retailers are stocking this season, it seems like Åsnes has decided to go all-in on trying to push the waxless crap. This will probably be the end of the brand. As @randoskier mentioned, their product in this market is vastly overpriced and underperforming. I don't understand who decided it would be a good idea to change almost their entire product line to an over-crowded market segment where they have no competitive advantage.

A few comments on their marketing BS:

"Waxless skis have come a long way. The position, design, functionality, and length of the patterns have all been adapted and developed for the benefit of increased efficiency and effectiveness, both in grip and glide. That is to say that the new generation of waxless skis are vastly different skis from older skis... In short, waxless bases have become a truly valid option."

If you read any books or magazine articles from the mid-1970s onwards, literally this same BS is repeated over and over again every single season.

"The combination of waxless soles and skins is extremely versatile, simple, and reliable."

The Åsnes kicker skin attachment is very reliable... at peeling the kicker skin off of the ski. IMO it is a seriously flawed design.

[corlay]

scales have their place.
and, as mentioned, Fischer's are about the best out there at the moment.

I like scales for either:
a) warm conditions (>30f) I don't like to mess with soft waxes/Klisters
-or-
b) variable conditions, anticipated large temp swings across the tour and/or varying show conditions (fluff, hard-pak, slush, ice, etc)

but nothing beats a pair of waxed bases in the right conditions.
(and when you've nailed the wax/temp choice!)

[socaltim]

The problem with waxable skis is the same skis can work well in many different conditions if the wax is right. I mean, that is a problem if you sell skis. When the skiing is not so good you think you had better wax differently next time, instead of you had better buy some different skis.

[mca80]

The Åsnes kicker skin attachment is very reliable... at peeling the kicker skin off of the ski. IMO it is a seriously flawed design.

I have never had this happen. Has it been common for you? Granted, I haven't used their skins except for steep climbs and very, very rarely when not wanting to wax for grip, so my dataset is minimal. Also, their NATO ski has a recessed area for the skin attachment point which I would think makes it even less likely to disengage. The rest of your analaysis is dead-on--they occupy a niche for metal edged backcountry waxable skis, dominate this market even with their higher pricepoint, and are instead focusing on something which others (Fischer) do better.

[pacificnomad]

If you look at what online retailers are stocking this season, it seems like Åsnes has decided to go all-in on trying to push the waxless crap. This will probably be the end of the brand. As @randoskier mentioned, their product in this market is vastly overpriced and underperforming. I don't understand who decided it would be a good idea to change almost their entire product line to an over-crowded market segment where they have no competitive advantage.

A few comments on their marketing BS:

"Waxless skis have come a long way. The position, design, functionality, and length of the patterns have all been adapted and developed for the benefit of increased efficiency and effectiveness, both in grip and glide. That is to say that the new generation of waxless skis are vastly different skis from older skis... In short, waxless bases have become a truly valid option."

If you read any books or magazine articles from the mid-1970s onwards, literally this same BS is repeated over and over again every single season.

"The combination of waxless soles and skins is extremely versatile, simple, and reliable."

The Åsnes kicker skin attachment is very reliable... at peeling the kicker skin off of the ski. IMO it is a seriously flawed design.

What are your thoughts on Asnes new Nato specific skin? Looks pretty durable and like it'll stay in place better maybe. They're 100% nylon though, so more like snow shuffling rather than a nice mohair glide.

[lilcliffy]

I cannot comment on EU pricing- but I can say that Asnes skis are priced quite closely to Fischer in Canada-
both Asnes and Fischer Nordic touring skis are significantly more expensive than equivalent Karhu-Madshus/Rossignol models.

Though I love my Fischer backcountry Nordic touring skis, I can say that every equivalent Asnes model that I have seen- or owned- has higher quality materials (wood core, steel edges), which more than accounts for the slightly higher price (eg S-Bound 98 @ $690CAN, vs Rabb 68 @ $700CAN).

I must say that I do not agree that the Asnes kicker skin system sucks- in my experience it is overall as efficient as Fischers- and it is more durable, and more reliable over distance. The Fischer Easy-Skin adhesive is weak- they ice up between the skin and the base- starting at the tail and then progress forwards.
The Easy-Skin is fine for short day tours where one can thoroughly dry out the skin.
The Easy-Skin will not stand up for a 20+k tour- I would not want to rely on Easy-Skin for a true wilderness ski expedition.

[JB TELE]

I use 30mm 100% mohair x-skins on my Rabb 68s. I wanted kicker skins that would have a similar grip to glide as fish scales, but I found that these both grip and glide better than fish scales. The main disadvantage is it's awkward to ski downhill with them on. I can sort of turn but it's janky.
I'm also worried about the x-skins falling off the ski. I would immediately notice if I didn't have kick wax on, but might not notice if I did. I would not feel comfortable heading into the backcountry without my full length skins in case that happened.
With the x-skins I can put them on and take them off without removing my skis. That's huge for me. You can't put the fischer ez skins on without removing the skis, or at least I don't think you can.

[Capercaillie]

I have never had this happen. Has it been common for you?

I use X-skins on my Ingstads in deep snow on steeper rolling trails (hopefully Altai Koms are better at this, I don't like using skins). I did have a skin fall off one time, and I notice that sometimes the X-skin attachment is starting to hang off the bottom of the ski when I go to take the skins off. No surprise, because there is nothing keeping the attachment from falling out. Once it starts, the plastic piece probably acts as a very effective snow-plow to peel the skin off of the ski. So the contraption that is supposed to keep the front of the skin attached to the ski, in effect ends up doing the opposite. If you search the forums, there have been reports from other people having their X-skins come off.

Another thing I dislike about the X-skins is that the "fangs" will tear up your jacket pockets.

Fischer Easy Skins do not have these problems. IDK about the durability of the glue between them, the glue itself has not failed for me on either brand. With Fischers, unlike Åsnes, you can easily cut your own kicker skins from any other skin (re-use existing skins, or Skimo Co and SkiUphill both sell skins off a roll by length).

@pacificnomad No idea about Åsnes NATO skis or skins.

@JB TELE what is your secret to putting on X-skins without taking your skis off?