The Never-Ending Faction Discussion

[GregK]

I was seriously shocked at how stiff the tips and tails are. They seem stiffer than my Dictators. These are gonna be one heck of a ride, I'm pretty excited!

Tips/tails are stiffer but not quite as stiff underfoot as the Dictator or even Prodigy 3.0. They live for speed yet you go into bumps and they flex pretty easily.

Find even the 165cm CT 1.0 I have at home hand flexes pretty solid.

 

[SpeedyKevin]

Just a mock up...but Damn. I don't normally care for binding colors but have to say I am really liking this combo. (other than the Forza 1.0 on orange dictators)

 

[GregK]

Just a mock up...but Damn. I don't normally care for binding colors but have to say I am really liking this combo. (other than the Forza 1.0 on orange dictators)
View attachment 172916

The Faction CT line seems to get lots of lift line and chair lift attention but those will be NEXT LEVEL! Make sure @chasinghorizons carries a pen for signing autographs…….

 

[GregK]

Sport-Bittl doesn’t ship to North America without a “middleman” shipper but for the European skiers this is an insane deal on CT 1.0! Only 1 pair of the 178cm and 183cm left.

 

[ScottB]

I maybe wrong about this, but it seemed CT's didn't flex as stiff a after skiing them a few days. They didn't get soft or anything, just settled into a nice flex profile. They charge but they have a nice overall flex that feels good.

 

[GregK]

The CT line hand flexes pretty stiff as you usually are just flexing the tips/tails more. When I flex my Wildcats in comparison, the extreme tips/tails flex easier so it “feels softer” but that’s the only section that is softer than my 190cm CT 3.0.
Skiing the Wildcats through bumpy terrain, the tips absorb a bit better but then in bumps, the softer middle section of the CT 3.0 becomes more apparent.

 

[SpeedyKevin]

Was checking out the effective edge on the ct3 169 and d3 164

Ct3 measured in at 140cm versus 132cm on the d3.

 

[GregK]

Was checking out the effective edge on the ct3 169 and d3 164

Ct3 measured in at 140cm versus 132cm on the d3.

Someone is “Summer bored”……haha

You’ll also notice that even though the effective edge is longer on the CT 3.0x, it’s running length(camber contact length) will be shorter. So flat, it will be easier to pivot and with the larger tail splay and rocker, easier to release the tail in variable snow.

Also, the less tapered tips/tails seem to “bite”harder snow better on the CT 3.0. I went from an Enforcer 104 that was smoother taper at the tips/tails and didn’t grip like my 3cm shorter CT 2.0 do.

Actually did the tape thing on my 190cm CT 3.0 vs the 190cm Wildcat marking the rocker/contact point vs effective edge. The huge difference is that Moment skis don’t like to be sharp above their contact points and I can run the entire effective edge sharp on the CT 3.0. Think it was a 30cm plus difference in “sharp effective edge” on those 2 skis!

 

[SpeedyKevin]

Someone is “Summer bored”……haha

You’ll also notice that even though the effective edge is longer on the CT 3.0x, it’s running length(camber contact length) will be shorter. So flat, it will be easier to pivot and with the larger tail splay and rocker, easier to release the tail in variable snow.

Also, the less tapered tips/tails seem to “bite”harder snow better on the CT 3.0. I went from an Enforcer 104 that was smoother taper at the tips/tails and didn’t grip like my 3cm shorter CT 2.0 do.

Actually did the tape thing on my 190cm CT 3.0 vs the 190cm Wildcat marking the rocker/contact point vs effective edge. The huge difference is that Moment skis don’t like to be sharp above their contact points and I can run the entire effective edge sharp on the CT 3.0. Think it was a 30cm plus difference in “sharp effective edge” on those 2 skis!
View attachment 173120

Yeap, impatiently waiting for winter haha.

I was inspired by that exact post haha. When you say Moments skis arent sharp past their contact points, does that mean they aggressively detune or round off the edges past the contact points? I was speaking with Tyler Curly at moment and he was suggesting I detune to the widest/taper point on my Deathwish 104.

 

[GregK]

Yeap, impatiently waiting for winter haha.

I was inspired by that exact post haha. When you say Moments skis arent sharp past their contact points, does that mean they aggressively detune or round off the edges past the contact points? I was speaking with Tyler Curly at moment and he was suggesting I detune to the widest/taper point on my Deathwish 104.

Yes, with most modern skis I go sharp right up to the widest points tips and tails and then smooth with file and diamond stones above that(above your tape marks). Cuts down on top sheet damage and any catching in deep snow etc and doesn’t effect edge grip as it’s above the effective tipped edge.
All my Faction skis are at 1/3 right up to the widest taper point and super smooth above.

Moment, ON3P, Praxis and some other indies don’t like to be sharp above their contact points. All are set at the factory with 1/1 edge angles with detuning above that contact point but found some have been not perfectly smooth above that point. Had all my Moments base ground flat and have put a 1/2 edge within the contact area for a bit more bite. Nice and loose now and not catchy but good grip when tipped over.

 

[GregK]

Christmas in July at my house today!

Got my backup 183cm CT 2.0 pair and a pair of 178cm CT 1.0 for a friend.
Put them beside the 165cm CT 1.0 for another friend and a pair of 22 178cm Prodigy 1.0 that I got because I didn’t think I could get any 178cm CT 1.0 anymore. I’m sure I’ll find a home for them eventually.

178cm CT 1.0 were just over 2000gr and my CT 2.0 were just under and just over 2300gr…big smile!

 

[James]

Christmas in July at my house today!

Got my backup 183cm CT 2.0 pair and a pair of 178cm CT 1.0 for a friend.
Put them beside the 165cm CT 1.0 for another friend and a pair of 22 178cm Prodigy 1.0 that I got because I didn’t think I could get any 178cm CT 1.0 anymore. I’m sure I’ll find a home for them eventually.

178cm CT 1.0 were just over 2000gr and my CT 2.0 were just under and just over 2300gr…big smile!

View attachment 173200

Does it matter if you mounted them backwards, are they symmetrical?

 

[GregK]

Does it matter if you mounted them backwards, are they symmetrical?

Yes it matters due to the slight decrease in tail dimensions along with the larger tip rocker vs tail rocker. The tip is only 2mm wider in the narrowest ski CT 1.0 and they decease tail dimensions by 2mm Vs the tip as they go wider. Black/red CT 2.0 is 4mm different, CT 3.0 is 6mm different and CT 5.0 is 8mm different.

The tip rocker can be almost 5cm longer though so you can mount super forward like you can with a Black Ops Gamer/118 that has very similar tip/tail rocker and dimensions.

 

[GregK]

The-House.com now has the 21 Candide 1.0 listed at $399.99 US and the 15% coupon code works on it as well to take you down to $339.99 with free shipping in the US. They wont ship to Canada without a "middle-man" shipper but Momosports.ca still has stock of the 178cm, 172cm and 165cm on for Canadians for $449.99 CAN with $20-$30 shipping.

 

[GB_Ski]

Between this and Kastle on steep & cheap, oh boy! I'm 5'9, 160#, good skier. I'll be using them as my east coast all mountain OSQ. Should I go with 178cm?

 

[GregK]

Between this and Kastle on steep & cheap, oh boy! I'm 5'9, 160#, good skier. I'll be using them as my east coast all mountain OSQ. Should I go with 178cm?

2 great skis that are similar in some ways but very different in others. The Kastle MX 83 or MX 88 will be a much more traditional ski with a flat tail and binding mount mount much further back from Center.
The CT 1.0 will be a bit heavier with a longer turning radius and slightly more tapered tip/tail.

The MX skis will fully engage it’s long effective edge even with a slight tip of the ski Vs the CT 1.0 that allows the skier to vary edge engagement more depending on how much they tip the ski. On firm snow, the Kastle will grip sooner and hold that edge a bit better vs the CT 1.0 that will be easier to release the tail and pivot off trail or in bumps.

The tip shape, extra weight along with the longer turning radius of the CT 1.0 would separate itself in variable snow/crud at higher speeds vs the MX. CT 1.0 would have a more playful feel and you find yourself hitting side hits to get them in the air.

The MX 83 would be a more precise ski that I favour more for traditional skiers who spend more time on firmer snow on groomers. The more time you spend off piste, in bumps, in afternoon crud or chasing around with kids/family the more I’d lean towards the CT 1.0.

What length skis do you normally ski? The MX 83 will “ski longer” with its reduced rocker and further back mount point. The CT 1.0 will look short in front of the boot with it’s more centered mount but a few runs and you will be surprised how stable it is a speed. If you were thinking 175cm MX 83, then 178cm CT 1.0 mounted about 2.5-3cm back from their freestyle “Candide” mark would be comparable.

 

[GB_Ski]

2 great skis that are similar in some ways but very different in others. The Kastle MX 83 or MX 88 will be a much more traditional ski with a flat tail and binding mount mount much further back from Center.
The CT 1.0 will be a bit heavier with a longer turning radius and slightly more tapered tip/tail.

What length skis do you normally ski? The MX 83 will “ski longer” with its reduced rocker and further back mount point. The CT 1.0 will look short in front of the boot with it’s more centered mount but a few runs and you will be surprised how stable it is a speed. If you were thinking 175cm MX 83, then 178cm CT 1.0 mounted about 2.5-3cm back from their freestyle “Candide” mark would be comparable.

I skied between 170-178. I skied the MX84 176(?) for half a season and find it just fine. My current ski is the i-Magnum at 170cm since I ski with kids a lot. I'm looking for something a bit wider.

 

[ARL67]

^^^ I'm your H/W and have skied many a Kastle MX / FX / BMX in previous years, but haven't been on any of the newest MX. I have the CT 1.0 in 178, mounted with a demo binding, and it is quite the chameleon ( in a great way ) depending on mount point. As I mentioned previously in this thread, for my home hill in Collingwood ( 2hr north of Toronto ) , I could happily get by with just my K2 STi 170cm ( 72mm ) and the CT 1.0 178 ( 92mm ). I've never had a twin-tip before, and enjoy its different skiing experience.

 

[GregK]

I skied between 170-178. I skied the MX84 176(?) for half a season and find it just fine. My current ski is the i-Magnum at 170cm since I ski with kids a lot. I'm looking for something a bit wider.

The MX83 would just be a few mm difference in the tip and 1 underfoot to the MX 84 so very similar to what you’ve skied already.

Was going to mention in my previous post of how much more fun the CT 1.0 when following kids through the trees or mini terrain park so that’s an extra bonus for you then.

If you have the i-Magnum already for very firm conditions, then the CT 1.0 is would give you more separation between skis than the MX 83 would. The CT 1.0 would come out in anytime is not going to be firm all day(although would just be a bit less grip there), in afternoon crud, Spring skiing and chasing after the kids.

You’ll also find yourself moving the bindings a few notches forward on the I-Magnum to get them more into the sidecut Center and make them initiate turns quicker and feel more playful after being on the CT 1.0.

 

[GB_Ski]

So, 178cm? And mount the binding what, 2cm from the line?