Post
by Ira » Sun Jan 30, 2022 1:54 am
Hi everyone, sharing an update so far, and a question.
I did get the 98 (too short, they didn't have 169) and like it except for the length. Grip is good, and, when I ski in a campground in icy conditions, it turns ok when I need to avoid trees. But it's too short for decent glide on most days. I'm looking for those in 169.
Since the S-bound in 159 didn't have good enough glide, and I couldn't find the Fischer 78/88/98's in 169, and REI has Asnes Ingstad, I got the Ingstad, but in 165 for safety due to the feedback about Ingstads being too fast for beginners, and the waxless pattern not engaging. I tried it for for the first time, for 20 minutes today (right after the S-bound 98's in 159, to compare them). It turned to have even worse glide than the too short 98's (but I also was skiing in my previous 98's tracks). What was strange about the Asnes Ingstad WL in 165, was that they felt a little herky-jerky (and I wasn't wearing skins), meaning it would glide, then stop or seem to get caught -- as if I was wearing skins even though I wasn't, and that was in many-times-melted-and-refrozen conditions, at 3pm in the afternoon, in the same tracks and conditions that the too-short 98's had been smooth (but slow) on from 2-3pm. There were a lot of pine needles, so wondering if those somehow impact the Ingstads more than the S-bounds. Or perhaps it might be that the extra rocker gives it a shorter effective length, which accentuates the stop-and-go effect of getting them too short?
For Ingstad, the 165 is for weight up to 125 and I'm 130.
For S-bound 98, 159 is for weight up to 120. And Ingstad tends to favor glide while 98 favors grip, so I was surprised that it felt smoother on the 98's than the Ingstad (but perhaps the 98's spread out that lack-of-glide over more of the ski?)
Has anyone else experienced the Asnes Ingstad to be stop-and-go, and is that entirely due to the too-short length, or is it also less forgiving of pine needles on packed hard snow than the Fischers? I'm thinking of trying again but not in the Fischer's tracks to see if that helps.
It hasn't snowed here in weeks, so the snow is old, wondering if that made a difference.
On the positive side, I did find that the S-bound 98's seem to track well while also turning well -- I just wish they had them longer. I also had an easier time turning with the trail than I used to when I had skied (for 5 years) on Rossi BC-90's (except for the length of this specific pair, I prefer the S-bound 98's to the Rossi BC-90).
Still looking for either Fischer 98's or 88's or 78's in 169.
Thanks!
