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 would like the Traverse 78 in a 199 because of increased efficiency and speed. I have the Traverse 78 and Excursion 88 in a 189cm and I wouldn't go lower.
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. So there came along a "new technology" called "compact geometry" to make XC skiing fun and accessible to the masses. 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. 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. There are Europa 99's of similar vintage to your Country Crowns that pop on on Ebay- 210's and 205's. 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. 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.
The boots are fine and if you fit and you like them, it would be a good pairing. You can always put the new bindings on the old skis. It would be slow and draggy and you'd want to throw them in the garbage. The 179cm Spider would be a little short for you coming off the longer Country Crown- not to mention your weight. Apologies for a long post, thanks for creating such a welcoming and supportive online community. 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). Swings in temperatures and a mix of precipitation make waxless my choice. This Southern New England locale gets wind, so trails constantly fill with blowing snow. I weight 175 lbs and thought metal edges might provide some advantage. Is the Spider/Brown-BCX5 setup right for me? I want to go out the back door an ski (less than 10 miles) in orchards, farm fields, rolling wood lots, and avoid snowmobiles.
For boots a pair of (new/brown/old style) Fischer BCX-5 (that I have not committed to).Ībout this time, I found the Telemark Talk web site ( better late than never) and started reading.
Fischer otx spider 62 manual#
I was looking for NNN-BC manual bindings when a pair showed up on Craigslist with Fischer OTX 62 Spiders attached (179cm- 62/52/60) so I purchased those. The Alpina boots fell apart and nothing available would fit the older NNN's, so I went looking for new boots/bindings. Looking for input on a ski/boot/binding combination.įor the last 20 years I skied on Fischer Country Crowns (210cm- 60/55/56) with the orginal NNN bindings.
0 kommentar(er)
