My first pair were the GT version as well, only they were the dark blue. I think that was the first year of that model. Kahru did have one other XCD that year that was the downhill version. In 1984, they came out with a softer, fatter model as well. It was a darkish green(?), and I recall the GT was white that year.
Yes, the GT was a XC cut compared to the other two models. I went that route as I was using the skis to access mountains that hadn't ever been skied, and probably weren't again until the helicopters started flying up there. The problem with the GT was that the camber underfoot was impossible to bend; hell, the ski stood 1.5 inches underfoot. Of course, we really only knew the old school telemark technique back then. I had to do some crazy hop turning to get down some of the chutes. Hop turn to bended knee, and hope you could hang on.
Personally, I like my equipment to be easy enough to ski on that I survive and burly enough for the equipment to survive. I have memories of a 6 mile ski back on the Harding icefield with one ski snapped in half. Of course, in those days, we were thrilled to have metal edges at all, and some of us could even afford Pieps. If you had money for that, you prbably had money for those new fangled leather boots with the plastic cuff that went around the ankle, instead of the Merrill singles. I still have my knotted avalanche cord, though.
XCD weren't really XC skis. The D stands for downhill. I had the white ones, XCD GT. I think they were more like XC skis compared to the other XCD model (models?). Mine had smooth bases, not the waxless version. The most challenging runs I skied with them were Paint Brush and one of the Expert Chutes at Jackson Hole.
I did like the fact that my equipment made skiing more challenging. Sort of the same attitude that people who insist on using piste skis for powder have, I suppose. Some like skiing to be as easy as possible and some do not.