Åsnes kongsvold vs breidablikk

Touring and Cross-Country skis:

Narrow skis that fit in groomed tracks, which is lighter than traditional BC skis. So I decided to invest in a pair of Norwegian style “dog skis,” lacking steel edges but otherwise built to perform out-of-track and off-piste, in unbroken snow.

The table below is only a guide, however – experience, skill, terrain and individual needs can all influence your choice of length.

Generally speaking, moving through rugged terrain calls for shorter skis than the open mountain plateau. Still suitable for longer trips, but will excel in more varied hilly terrain. Skiers with loads such as backpacks and sledges might consider a longer ski.

Valg av skilengde

Length is determined based on body length and weight.

I went with the shorter length; if there’s a slight tradeoff between tourability and downhill fun, I’ll lean toward the latter.

Performance

The Kongsvold fits nicely into a compromise niche that I have played for years: a ski that kicks and glides well enough to cover 20 km between huts in the morning, but also delivers the fun on an afternoon descent, at least in relatively friendly snow.

Åsnes also makes a few models of topptur (mountaineering) skis for plastic-booted telemark and randonee skiers.

Design and Construction

The word “trekjerne” on the ski tails means wood core. Neptune Mountaineering in Boulder also carries a few models. With Rottefella BC Magnum bindings, my 190 cm pair weighs just under 2.5 kilos, about 250 g more than one of my big rando skis with binding.
The Kongsvold, like all Åsnes skis except some waxless models, come with a pair of slots in front of the binding, extending from the ski base through to the pair of black fittings on the top of the ski, for mounting 1/3 length skins, a relatively recent innovation that provides a solid kick while maintaining some glide or limited uphill climbing power, depending on skin width, at a fraction of the weight of full length skins.

The black and white graphics are nothing fancy, maybe meant to blend into the snowy background so that ptarmigan or capercaillie won’t see you coming.

These skis are easier ski downhill turns with, more playful and in general have better downhill abilities. Lighter skiers might consider a shorter ski; heavier skiers a longer ski. On a hard windpack, they skid more than an edged ski but are manageable.

I can think of many a peak in Norway, some of them on the steep end, where I’d be just as happy to have these skis on my feet as something beefier, at least in consistent powder or spring corn conditions.

Last year my wife bought a pair of Cecilies, too skinny for my taste (the skis, not their namesake), but the short skin option seemed smart, and that was a factor in my deciding to try it for myself.

He had a bad habit of running zigzag in front of me, and early on in our life together caught his leg with a ski edge and cut it pretty badly. The Kongsvold delivers a nice balance of hut-to-hut efficiency and downhill performance that works well for me, with the added bonus that it won’t hurt my dog. These skis also have a softer flex and less camber than the narrower skis, mainly to give better downhill capabilities.