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. Maybe we can convince Atomic to re-release the TM22.Once Asnes has perfected a waxless-scaled verson of the Gamme 54 I will have one. This is my primary backcountry ski, and it has served me well on a variety of Sierra fourteeners and steeps. Stand at the top of a perfectly set-up backcountry corn slope with these, and you're about as close to heaven as you can get. The TM22 has achieved legendary status as a Telemark and Alpine Touring ski-and it's easy to see why. I ski mine at 170cm, which cuts down a little more weight and makes them generally more manageable on your backpack. The TM22 can wash out when pushed hard on groomed snow-then again, that's not what you're buying them for. Fat ski enthusiasts may find the TM22 a little too narrow in the waist, especially if things get mushy.Īt high speeds on hard snow, you'll begin to notice the TM22's compromises compared to Atomic's alpine line (such as the 10.20 or R11). The ski is particularly at home on steep, icy terrain. By today's standards, the TM22 is a narrow ski, suited for carving snappy turns on hard snow. Obviously, since this ski is made by Atomic, one of the industry's heavyweights, you won't suffer any of the usual (and annoying) design or manufacturing quirks so common to dedicated A/T gear. This gives the ski outstanding torsional stability, making this one of the better choices for backcountry skiers in love with the Atomic's Alpine skis. The Atomic TM22 uses the same Beta profile technology as Atomic's alpine skis. But alas, I've only got one pair, and they're staying right here. If any of us had known these skis were going to become such classics, we'd have bought up a gaggle and made a killing selling them. More than any other item of gear, the TM22 draws visitors to my site, looking to find a pair. If popularity is any indicator, the Atomic TM22 must be one of the best Randonnée/Alpine Touring skis ever made.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |