The first really well designed telemark skis for lifts and steeper backcountry terrain were made by Trucker, out of Aspen, beginning about 1981 or 82. At the time, however, it was common to refer to any metal edged XC ski as a "telemark ski"-E 99's, Skiloms, Epoke, and so on and on. The E99 was never considered, even then, to be anything other than a backcountry touring ski with metal edges, but that didn't prevent folks riding lifts with them, wearing their Vasque Telemarks, (NOT a telemark boot) and trying out some technique. It may be a matter of perspective, i.e., what was considered a "telemark" ski, during what time frame.įor some reason there is no mention of the 1980's skis, although many listed already existed in the early-mid 1980s. I've never really looked at that old website before, but his classifications are generally good, I think. One might make telemark turns with an E99/Gamme 54/Amundsen/Glittertind etc.- but I don't think that makes the ski a "Telemark" ski from my perspective.īack to Pinnah's ski categories- what is the point of calling a XC-tuned ski a "Telemark" ski? And is the Rago that Pinnah describes a XC-oriented "Old School Tele" ski or a downhill-oriented "Old School Tele" ski? the Rago (which I had assumed was the Amundsen) is listed under "Old School Tele", and has the same sidecut geometry as the current Amundsen- but he comments that they have a soft tip/tail.Does the current Amundsen match this camber-flex pattern? I think not. Pinnah also lists the Nansen under "Cirque Class Skis" with the same sidecut profile as the current Nansen, but again no descriptin of its camber and flex. Pinnah lists the Nansen under "Old School Tele"- different geometry than current model- but there is no description of the camber and flex pattern of this ski. On the subject of the Nansen and Amundsen/Rago. old-school Telemark skis) other than their sidecut profiles.Many of the skis he has listed in that category are clearly XC-tuned skis. So, for example- I don't really understand why Pinnah groups all of those skis under the classification of "Old School Teles" (i.e. Yes, one can make a telemark turn with a XC ski (with any ski), but making a telemark turn with a XC ski does not necesarily make a XC-tuned ski a "Telemark" ski from my perspective.
as a downhill skiing discipline- therefore, I would choose not to classify a ski that has been tuned for efficient XC travel as a "Telemark" ski. Ha! This could take this thread on a number of tangents as well as some rabbit holes.Īlthough I appreciate- very much- Pinnah's overview of Nordic BC skis- I have never really understood his classifications/categories.Why group skis together purely because of their tip width and sidecut geometry- ignnoring their camber-flex profile and associated performance?įor my part, I view "Telemark" skiing and "Telemark" skis/boots/bindings etc. I was under the impression the Asnes Nansen AND Amundsen (Rago) were both downhill oriented telemark skis in their earlier days. The E99 is a fantastic BC-XCd ski in hilly terrain, but I still consider it a XC ski. The Gamme- as is the E99 (oops does this ski still exist )- is more XC-oriented from my perspective. I think that the Nansen is Asnes' old-school Telemark ski. I don't know if I would call it the "Telemark ski" though.
Once Asnes has perfected a waxless-scaled verson of the Gamme 54 I will have one.
0 kommentar(er)
