![]() ![]() Would wider skis ( Gamme 54, E99, S-bound 98) be more stable (less tipping side-to-side) when breaking trails, do I need more than one type of ski, beefier boots (Alaska, Crispi). Apologies for a long post, thanks for creating such a welcoming and supportive online community. The 179cm Spider would be a little short for you coming off the longer Country Crown- not to mention your weight. It would be slow and draggy and you'd want to throw them in the garbage. You can always put the new bindings on the old skis. The boots are fine and if you fit and you like them, it would be a good pairing. I don't think you'd need beefier boots for this combo unless you started to get wider skis and were planning on turning more. ![]() Since it just sounds like you're nordic touring through variable terrain with not a lot of turning I would certainly look around for a Europa 99/E99, Fischer Traverse 88/Excursion 88 in the 189 or 199 length- I would personally go for the 199 for stability on loose snow and speed when touring. There are Europa 99's of similar vintage to your Country Crowns that pop on on Ebay- 210's and 205's. The Asnes Gamme 54's are my favorite ski in this context right now- but in S New England you'd be skiing a lot with the mohair kicker since they are NOT waxless, which is what I do to hardly any negative effect. The metal edges are nice, but not necessary unless in the past 20 years you can think of many times you wish you had metal edges.? Fast, stable, really nice- a perfect ski if there ever was one in this category, but more difficult to find, and again, a wax ski. So there came along a "new technology" called "compact geometry" to make XC skiing fun and accessible to the masses. In my dumb-opinion-that-no-one-cares-about it failed, everyone got snowshoes, and now we're all stuck skiing short skis that were supposed to be more maneuverable but are actually slow and draggy with the mechanical scales and short lengths that are not tuned to efficient kick and glide skiing. I have the Traverse 78 and Excursion 88 in a 189cm and I wouldn't go lower. I would like the Traverse 78 in a 199 because of increased efficiency and speed. Yes, sometimes going up a frozen trail I don't get the best grip I could with the longer length- this is true, but when it's flat at least I'm going somewhere without having to make many little kicks on little skis. I had for one hot minute a pair of Fischer OTX 68 which are the next step up from the Spider in a 189cm (same size/weight recs) and they were so terrible I sold them after one day. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |