| Author |
Message Text |
|
schweady
|
We stopped at Hoigaards on Saturday to look at skis. It has been 40 wonderful winters on our hickory skis but it feels like the time to retire them to the wall. I would hate to break them almost even more than I would hate to break a leg.
After telling the rep our history and desires -- moderate skiing, classic style, near 100% tracked trails -- he directed us to a couple of Madshus models: the Beitostolen and the Ultrasonic Classic.
Any thoughts?
|
|
jwartman59
|
i've always trusted the ski guys at hoigaards, and i probably have several pairs of madshus ultrasonics in my basement. madshus are very well made skis. the madshus ultasonics are considered an entry level race ski, the Beitostolen are considered touring skis.
i'm not sure where you do most of your skiing. here in the cities most of the trails are groomed to perfection by either the three rivers park district or the city of minneapolis. it is my opinion that the majority of the grooming effort is making sure that the skate deck is perfect. here in minneapolis we have had perfect skiing for a week already. for these trails i would want the performance ski, the ultrasonic.
outside of the cities and duluth the trail grooming, while often world class, is sometimes not as spectacular. in these cases a touring ski probably would be the best choice.
also if you really loved your forty year old wood skis the performance skis are going to be a whole different animal to ski. they are much more physical, though this effort is rewarded with speed, you may come to love this.
|
|
schweady
|
Thanks, jwartman. Our skiing is nearly 100% at Spidahl Ski Gaard in Erhard, Snowflake Nordic in Duluth... Almost always on outstate tracks that are groomed by folks who seem to very much know what they're doing, but they can still be iffy based on the weather. Also some state park stuff, and the occasional Three Rivers at Elm Creek or Maplelag in Callaway. Once at Clifton French, too. Always classic in-track skiing. I see a small difference in grooming quality that you talk about when we do the Three Rivers trails, but not sure how that determines which ski I would want. Are you saying that I wouldn't get the performance I would desire on a less-than-perfectly groomed track, and might as well stick with the cheaper ski? It was only about $20 difference. Also, I'm not sure what you mean by a ski that is "much more physical"... could you elaborate? My Sigmund Rudd skis are 2" wide at the boot and widen to 2.25" near the tip; my wife's Janoy Norse skis are just a hair over 2" wide throughout. Thanks again for the reply.
|
|
jwartman59
|
race skis might feel squirrely if the track isn't good, a touring ski may feel more stable. if i were to make a canoe comparison it would be like the MN2 compared to the spirit 2. both would work just fine, the performance mn 2 will be a bit more delicate, but much faster. myself i would always go with the entry level race skis.
with a good waxing these skis (either) will be much faster than your wood skis. the glide and kick much more efficient. you will be working harder just keeping up with your skis.
waxing these skis will be different than your wood skis. you may want to have the pros at hoigaards do the initial base wax. it's worth the twenty + dollars.
|
|
Banksiana
|
I also vote for the race skis. They are lighter which has surprising benefits when working difficult corners. Other than when I'm breaking heavy trail I ski almost exclusively on racer skis- and most of the trails I ski are "hand-tracked" (in the b-dub so no snow machines allowed). Nothing better than soaring through the woods on the North Arm Trails on skinny skis and the perfect (luck sometimes) combination of kick and glide wax. Madshus usually has enough shovel in the tips of the skis to provide stability in softer tracks.
|