Curious, what do you think of the skis? What model Factions? Not that I’m in the market for new skis………
I'm really stoked about them. They're the 20/21 Faction Candide 3.0x in 169. This was the one year the CTs were made heavier (previous and subsequent years were ~100-200g lighter, so much less damp). They have quite a cult following on Skitalk forums as being one of the best playful charger skis out there, and I really wanted a pow ski that could also hold up in tracked out Sierra cement conditions too.
See thread:
https://www.skitalk.com/threads/2021-faction-candide-3-0-2-0-and-1-0-reviews.23385/
I was really close to getting the Moment Bella instead, but then the CTs came back on Sierra.com for only $399 and I couldn't pass them up. After all, they're probably never going to be made like this again! And also GregK posted this comparison between the two, which also really makes me feel like I made the right choice
although with 3 different Faction skis, I am starting to feel a bit too much of a fangirl...
GregK:
"As far as the Bella vs CT 3.0x, the Bella has a bit longer radius, similar rocker but much shorter effective edge and it’s quite a bit lighter.
The Moment Bella will pivot very easily but needs more speed to be fun on groomers as it doesn’t pull you into a turn like a CT 3.0 would. The 21 CT are dual radius skis with a shorter radius tip/tail to make it easier to start turns but a nice long radius that’s stable at high speeds once you’re in a turn. Find because of this, the CT 3.0 seems easier edge to edge even though it’s wider.
So you get a ski with better suspension, with better float that has better grip on groomers in the CT 3.0.
The other thing I love on the CT is their unique flex pattern. Most skis(Moment included) are softer tip/tail and then peak to much stiffer underfoot. The 21 CT line are stiffer than most at the extreme tip/tail then gradually increase underfoot to a lower peak and down again towards the tails. Find you get no tip deflection when skiing fast over rough terrain yet when off piste, they are less demanding if you’re not perfect in technique in the bumps etc.
If you look at the side of a CT ski, the sidewall height doesn’t vary much even when extending into the tip/tails vs most skis that are much thicker underfoot vs their tip/tails.
If you have followed the Peak ski thread, this is what they are TRYING to achieve with their skis. Looks like they won’t be as successful with their core/sidewall height not staying as consistent near the tip/tail areas though.
So the CT 3.0x will be more versatile than the Bella and then once you factor in a $399.99 price, it’s a no brainer.
The CT mount line is just a touch forward vs the Bella(-4.7cm Vs -5cm from Center) and I’d recommend a mount of -1cm to -1.5cm back from the CT 3.0x mark to get a bit more stability, carving performance out of them."
Lots of ppl on the forum raving about this ski. One guy in particular has matching 3.0x with his wife, was worried about the length as she had previously only been on 156 Kenjas, but now the 169 CT is her soft snow DD. Supposedly really easy and fun to ski.
