• For more information on how to avoid pop-up ads and still support SkiTalk click HERE.

The Never-Ending Faction Discussion

Thread Starter
TS
GregK

GregK

Skiing the powder
Skier
Joined
Mar 21, 2017
Posts
4,018
Location
Ontario, Canada
Had 2 great days on the 184cm CT 3.0 skiing then in the mornings and swapping to the Blackops 118 in the afternoons when things got really roughed up. Still find stability similar between them but the heavier, more damp Blackops definitely has the better suspension. Love them both!

Also had my CT 2.0 reground after hitting lots of things out west for a month. I did some p-Tex work on some spots and then my tech did 20 passes on the stone to remove almost all the smaller hits and scratches. Will hand tune them today.

On Monday, I was carving a soft groomer at speed and really laying them over. Was side by side an instructor on some Redsters turning at a similar pace for a bit while going down. Was in front of him as we met in the lift line and he said “you really have those GS turns locked down” and said “thanks, not bad for a 112mm wide twin tip” and he then looked down in huge surprise at my skis. Said to him “these skis don’t make sense how great they carve” and he said “no kidding! Wow!”
Hehe

Met up with my one friend that I sold a set of 183cm CT 1.0 too and he’s still loving them!
B89C23F8-5D6F-4E12-90C2-0A021C83F935.jpeg
 

SpeedyKevin

Out on the slopes
Skier
Joined
Apr 14, 2022
Posts
943
Location
Truckee
considering trading in my Deathwish 104 for a 20/21 CT2.0 183... thoughts? I don't plan on using it when their is freshies (CT3.0 for that). Instead, I plan to use it on those +5/7 days after a storm offpiste days. I like the DW104 as its playful but wanting something more damp while still easy to flick around. If I am doing 60/40 (off/on piste), I prefer my Dictators but looking for something for the majority off piste days.
 

Mendieta

Master of Snowplow
SkiTalk Tester
Contributor
Joined
Aug 17, 2016
Posts
4,905
Location
SF Bay Area, CA, USA
considering trading in my Deathwish 104 for a 20/21 CT2.0 183... thoughts? I don't plan on using it when their is freshies (CT3.0 for that). Instead, I plan to use it on those +5/7 days after a storm offpiste days. I like the DW104 as its playful but wanting something more damp while still easy to flick around. If I am doing 60/40 (off/on piste), I prefer my Dictators but looking for something for the majority off piste days.
If it helps, I moved from my enforcer 100 into my 2022 Factions CT 1.0 for exactly that use , and loving them. Definitely worth considering them as well as a daily offpiste driver. I ski Tahoe btw (Palisades/Alpine)
 

SpeedyKevin

Out on the slopes
Skier
Joined
Apr 14, 2022
Posts
943
Location
Truckee
If it helps, I moved from my enforcer 100 into my 2022 Factions CT 1.0 for exactly that use , and loving them. Definitely worth considering them as well as a daily offpiste driver. I ski Tahoe btw (Palisades/Alpine)
I did really enjoy my ct1.0s at mt rose and mammoth but wanted something a little wider for off piste. Hoping the Ct2.0 can fill that gap!
 
Thread Starter
TS
GregK

GregK

Skiing the powder
Skier
Joined
Mar 21, 2017
Posts
4,018
Location
Ontario, Canada
considering trading in my Deathwish 104 for a 20/21 CT2.0 183... thoughts? I don't plan on using it when their is freshies (CT3.0 for that). Instead, I plan to use it on those +5/7 days after a storm offpiste days. I like the DW104 as its playful but wanting something more damp while still easy to flick around. If I am doing 60/40 (off/on piste), I prefer my Dictators but looking for something for the majority off piste days.
The CT 2.0 would definitely be more damp, have much better grip when needed Vs the DW 104 while still being playful. Just a bit more rocker and wider than the CT 1.0 but the same build. If you like one, you’ll like the other. Quieter, better suspension than the Dictators and much more fun off piste too.

The only issue is finding a pair now!
 

TahoeWarrior

Putting on skis
Skier
Joined
Feb 28, 2020
Posts
92
Location
Lake Tahoe
I'm catching up on Faction gear news/updates. I understand there were/are some good years and not such good years with manufacturer facility changes, etc. Appears to be lots of love for the CT 1,2,3.0's; but those are all hard to come by now...

Q: is there similar love for the new line up? Old CT is now Prodigy? I'm still reading/researching around for a 90's to 100 or so ski to fit between my AR (LOVE) and my Rutler 11 (LOVE); (Ski Palisaides Tahoe 99% of time) and as the over researcher I am....I'm all over the map. Was about to pull the trigger on a used Fischer 99ti; then on a MSP 99. There are some good sales on new Factions; and the Prodigy and Dancer lines are both interesting....
Bottom line Q: How do these newest lines compare to the much loved CT line in both durability (or lack of) and behavior?
 
Last edited:
Thread Starter
TS
GregK

GregK

Skiing the powder
Skier
Joined
Mar 21, 2017
Posts
4,018
Location
Ontario, Canada
I'm catching up on Faction gear news/updates. I understand there were/are some good years and not such good years with manufacturer facility changes, etc. Appears to be lots of love for the CT 1,2,3.0's; but those are all hard to come by now...

Q: is there similar love for the new line up? Old CT is now Prodigy? I'm still reading/researching around for a 90's to 100 or so ski to fit between my AR (LOVE) and my Rutler 11 (LOVE); (Ski Palisaides Tahoe 99% of time) and as the over researcher I am....I'm all over the map. Was about to pull the trigger on a used Fischer 99ti; then on a MSP 99. There are some good sales on new Factions; and the Prodigy and Dancer lines are both interesting....
Bottom line Q: How do these newest lines compare to the much loved CT line in both durability (or lack of) and behavior?
Faction skis have always designed and engineered their skis in Verbier, Switzerland but source out the actually manufacturing of their skis. In the beginning, the manufacturing plants were smaller and had variable build quality issues back then. Since about 2018/19 they have used larger manufacturing facilities for their skis and build quality got much better. For many of us on this thread(especially myself!), the big change came when they moved to the Fisher plants for manufacturing in 21 and decided to overbuild the CT line to put all the durability issues in the past. The 21 CT were much heavier, stiffer and more damp than any previous versions. Weren't a huge sales success as the target market(SkiTalk and TGR members) didn't know about them and lovers of the previous versions(Newschoolers) thought they were too heavy and stiff.
Faction moved their Manufacturing to the Amer/Atomic plant for 22 onward and the 21 CT shapes remained the same but they went back to lighter builds in them. So they are still well built, high performance skis but don't have the same quiet, damp and solid feel of the 21 versions. In 23 they renamed the CT line the Mana line when Candide left Faction, so the 22 CT 2.0 and CT 3.0 are now just renamed Mana 2 and Mana 3 but the same skis with different top sheets. They dropped the 22 CT 1.0(was actually just a 22 Prodigy 1.0 with different top sheet) and CT 5.0 as that was "Candide's official ski" and replaced it with the Mana 4 as their widest ski in the range now.

Prodigy line is the more playful, more tapered line line that most freestyle skiers and team riders switched to when the CT got heavier and stiffer. So the CT/Mana line is the "more precise" twin and Prodigy is the "more playful" one now.
The Dictator/Dancer is the flat tailed, more traditional ski with 2 thin sheets of metal for those wanting a solid ski thats still has a more playful feel than their heavier competition.

In your desired width range of around 100mm, the 21 CT2.0 is a fantastic ski that fun on or off piste and never out of place regardless of conditions. The issue is its hard to find now! The 22 CT 2.0 or 23 Mana 2 are the same shape just lighter and less damp. In this width range there are some current skis that I'd probably prefer to the 22 Faction CT 2.0/Mana 2 like the Nordica Unleashed 98 and the Rossignol Blackops 98. Both have a low taper/long effective edge shape and both have some metal in increase torsional rigidity. The BO98 has rubber tip/tail like the 21 CT 2.0 to damp and quiet the ski. Both are around the same weight as current Mana 2(around 2000gr in the 180ish cm length) vs around 2300gr in the 21 CT 2.0 183cm. Both those skis are available on deals too if you can't find a 21 CT 2.0 anywhere. Did see a Quebec place with stock on the 178cm 21 CT 2.0 but not sure if they ship to the States or not.
 

TahoeWarrior

Putting on skis
Skier
Joined
Feb 28, 2020
Posts
92
Location
Lake Tahoe
@GregK Very good summary - thank you!!! So the current lack of metal in the Mana line is of concern for my goal, perhaps this is why the Dancer has caught my eye. But there's very little feedback on it...I like the idea of a bit damp yet playful (as is obvious - opposing forces). A rustler 11 style in a 90-100 (btw, I own the R10...fun and great but too floppy at speeds and not great through our west coast Sierra Cement). I've toyed with the E104free and but only glanced at the 98 unleashed (not sure it has metal). BO98 and Mindbender 99ti have both recently been mentioned. Next years revised SR 95 might be really good for me too....
These are such fun problems to have!! The long search for the holy grail of all mountain for my personal light weight, aggressive style, and west coast action.
 
Thread Starter
TS
GregK

GregK

Skiing the powder
Skier
Joined
Mar 21, 2017
Posts
4,018
Location
Ontario, Canada
@GregK Very good summary - thank you!!! So the current lack of metal in the Mana line is of concern for my goal, perhaps this is why the Dancer has caught my eye. But there's very little feedback on it...I like the idea of a bit damp yet playful (as is obvious - opposing forces). A rustler 11 style in a 90-100 (btw, I own the R10...fun and great but too floppy at speeds and not great through our west coast Sierra Cement). I've toyed with the E104free and but only glanced at the 98 unleashed (not sure it has metal). BO98 and Mindbender 99ti have both recently been mentioned. Next years revised SR 95 might be really good for me too....
These are such fun problems to have!! The long search for the holy grail of all mountain for my personal light weight, aggressive style, and west coast action.
Find the Rustler 10 too light and too wants to turn too much unlike the Rustler 11. The Enforcer 104 is a great ski and owned it before the CT 2.0 but found it again liked to turn too much for the speeds i ski at and the edge grip was just okay. The Unleashed series has 1 partial sheet of metal that runs tip to tail with cutouts in the shovel and tail, so more metal than any Rustler. The Unleashed 108 is a bit more substantial than the 98 so if I had the Rustler 10 already, I'd go to that one for it's increased crud performance and stability. The Unleashed 108 will outgrip and out carve the Rustler 10(or Enforcer 104), yet its more playful with just a slight hit in crud performance vs the heavier Enforcer.
Mindbender 99Ti, SR 95 or the Dancer(same as the 22 Dictator) would be a more traditional tailed and mount(especially SR) that would engage more quickly on groomers but less playful off piste(again especially the SR).
The Blackops 98 is pretty damp for it's weight with the rubber tip/tail and it has a metal sheet underfoot. You'd mount it back a bit from the freestyle mount and would be able to drive it while it still being playful.
None are super heavy but their longer radius would be more stable at speed than the Rustler 10. All decent in crud like the Unleashed 108.

You say you're lightweight, so what length of ski are you searching for then? if you're smaller, there's a chance you could find a 21 CT then.
 

Mendieta

Master of Snowplow
SkiTalk Tester
Contributor
Joined
Aug 17, 2016
Posts
4,905
Location
SF Bay Area, CA, USA
@GregK Very good summary - thank you!!! So the current lack of metal in the Mana line is of concern for my goal, perhaps this is why the Dancer has caught my eye. But there's very little feedback on it...I like the idea of a bit damp yet playful (as is obvious - opposing forces). A rustler 11 style in a 90-100 (btw, I own the R10...fun and great but too floppy at speeds and not great through our west coast Sierra Cement). I've toyed with the E104free and but only glanced at the 98 unleashed (not sure it has metal). BO98 and Mindbender 99ti have both recently been mentioned. Next years revised SR 95 might be really good for me too....
These are such fun problems to have!! The long search for the holy grail of all mountain for my personal light weight, aggressive style, and west coast action.
You are very welcome to try my 2021-2022 1.0 CT, these are 178 cm. I downsized a bit on these because I wanted something that is easy to pivot in bumps, because, let's face it, Palisades and Alpine are a big bumpfield offpiste. And I love them for that, a lot more than my longer, heavier, burlier Enforcer 100.

Anyways, I have demo bindings, so it's easy for you to try them if you'd like. I can't believe how much I like them. At least you'll know if you want to look for used or NOS .. they are fairly unconventional in many ways, so they take a bit getting used to, but they work perfectly for me.

You can PM me to arrange of course :beercheer:
 

SpeedyKevin

Out on the slopes
Skier
Joined
Apr 14, 2022
Posts
943
Location
Truckee
You are very welcome to try my 2021-2022 1.0 CT, these are 178 cm. I downsized a bit on these because I wanted something that is easy to pivot in bumps, because, let's face it, Palisades and Alpine are a big bumpfield offpiste. And I love them for that, a lot more than my longer, heavier, burlier Enforcer 100.

Anyways, I have demo bindings, so it's easy for you to try them if you'd like. I can't believe how much I like them. At least you'll know if you want to look for used or NOS .. they are fairly unconventional in many ways, so they take a bit getting used to, but they work perfectly for me.

You can PM me to arrange of course :beercheer:
Kind of wish I got the 178 for pally. I know i love the 183 for mammoth but alpine, eh not as much
 

TahoeWarrior

Putting on skis
Skier
Joined
Feb 28, 2020
Posts
92
Location
Lake Tahoe
You are very welcome to try my 2021-2022 1.0 CT, these are 178 cm. I downsized a bit on these because I wanted something that is easy to pivot in bumps, because, let's face it, Palisades and Alpine are a big bumpfield offpiste. And I love them for that, a lot more than my longer, heavier, burlier Enforcer 100.

Anyways, I have demo bindings, so it's easy for you to try them if you'd like. I can't believe how much I like them. At least you'll know if you want to look for used or NOS .. they are fairly unconventional in many ways, so they take a bit getting used to, but they work perfectly for me.

You can PM me to arrange of course :beercheer:
Generous offer - thank you. I normally ski low 170's, but I'll consider and PM you in advance...we're at Alpine most weekends. :)
 

EG-NJ

Putting on skis
Skier
Joined
Oct 14, 2022
Posts
101
Location
NJ
Generous offer - thank you. I normally ski low 170's, but I'll consider and PM you in advance...we're at Alpine most weekends. :)
To me, the 1.0 skis true to length (and then some) despite the rocker and my -1.25 mount. Glad I chose the 172cm over the 178cm given I'm only 5'8" and 150 lbs. The instant short turns are great in bumps and trees as expected, but what surprised me was that I haven't found any nervousness, chatter or instability at speed. Granted, I'm not a hard charger and typically stay tight to the fall line, but have yet to feel a speed limit nor yearn for the next size up.

Also, I assumed the shorter length and narrow width would be limiting in knee-deep powder, slush, crud, etc. But just like my longer/wider boards (178cm/108mm), they manage to smooth out all terrain types and provide a consistent feel no matter what. The metal and rubber dampening do a great job delivering bite and confidence, especially if you're used to a more centered stance.

That said, if you're larger or more aggressive and prefer open terrain, then the 178cm (probably at -1.5) may be the better choice. But if you're mostly on Sierra cement versus hardpack, then I'd suggest a wider and more rockered ski than the 1.0 despite its surprising versatility and float.
 

Prosper

This is the way.
Skier
SkiTalk Supporter
Joined
May 2, 2017
Posts
1,111
Location
Ken Caryl, CO
To me, the 1.0 skis true to length (and then some) despite the rocker and my -1.25 mount. Glad I chose the 172cm over the 178cm given I'm only 5'8" and 150 lbs. The instant short turns are great in bumps and trees as expected, but what surprised me was that I haven't found any nervousness, chatter or instability at speed. Granted, I'm not a hard charger and typically stay tight to the fall line, but have yet to feel a speed limit nor yearn for the next size up.

Also, I assumed the shorter length and narrow width would be limiting in knee-deep powder, slush, crud, etc. But just like my longer/wider boards (178cm/108mm), they manage to smooth out all terrain types and provide a consistent feel no matter what. The metal and rubber dampening do a great job delivering bite and confidence, especially if you're used to a more centered stance.

That said, if you're larger or more aggressive and prefer open terrain, then the 178cm (probably at -1.5) may be the better choice. But if you're mostly on Sierra cement versus hardpack, then I'd suggest a wider and more rockered ski than the 1.0 despite its surprising versatility and float.
I concur with the above assessment of the CT 1.0 172cm (5'6", 135-140lbs). I'm riding it at -2cm and really like it there. For me it's the best combo of stability and quickness. I did have some problems in 6" of really heavy new snow with breakable crust at Copper on the backside of Union Peak a few weeks ago but that was likely more user error. The 1.0 has been a really awesome ski and is so much fun.
 
Thread Starter
TS
GregK

GregK

Skiing the powder
Skier
Joined
Mar 21, 2017
Posts
4,018
Location
Ontario, Canada
Generous offer - thank you. I normally ski low 170's, but I'll consider and PM you in advance...we're at Alpine most weekends. :)
If that’s the case, your ski might be available then in the 173cm 21 CT 2.0x(just different/more exciting color strips on the topsheet but same ski as the CT 2.0)!

Saw a place in Quebec with one pair of the 178 21 CT 2.0 and the 173cm 21 CT 2.0x in stock. They have the 178cm at 40% off at $480 CAN and the 173cm at 30% off but was pondering contacting them to see what they would do if I took both pairs. I’m sure I’ll run across a buddy or someone on here for both pairs and they don’t ship to the States so will have to go to me first anyway.

Same builds as the CT 1.0 just wider and a touch more rocker. VERY similar skis.

I’ll let you know what they say on Monday or so. Would get them stone ground and hand tuned them before shipping and just charge you what I paid for them plus shipping. Under $450 US plus shipping I assume?

What the 173cm look like

F9B3ADD8-DCDF-4912-8B02-A364B9BB8905.png
 

locknload

Out on the slopes
Skier
SkiTalk Supporter
Joined
Feb 3, 2016
Posts
1,589
Location
Carlsbad
Does anyone have any feedback on the Dancer 4? Has anyone tried those in deep POW? They look sweet!
 

EG-NJ

Putting on skis
Skier
Joined
Oct 14, 2022
Posts
101
Location
NJ
If that’s the case, your ski might be available then in the 173cm 21 CT 2.0x(just different/more exciting color strips on the topsheet but same ski as the CT 2.0)!

Saw a place in Quebec with one pair of the 178 21 CT 2.0 and the 173cm 21 CT 2.0x in stock. They have the 178cm at 40% off at $480 CAN and the 173cm at 30% off but was pondering contacting them to see what they would do if I took both pairs. I’m sure I’ll run across a buddy or someone on here for both pairs and they don’t ship to the States so will have to go to me first anyway.

Same builds as the CT 1.0 just wider and a touch more rocker. VERY similar skis.

I’ll let you know what they say on Monday or so. Would get them stone ground and hand tuned them before shipping and just charge you what I paid for them plus shipping. Under $450 US plus shipping I assume?

What the 173cm look like

View attachment 198005
If I were to buy the 2.0, I'd likely choose the 178 mounted on Candide's line to get the additional float versus the 173 but optimize its maneuverability. Though -1.5 probably wouldn't be a mistake, I'd want to offset the extra length, width, weight and turn radius compared to the 1.0 given my preference for bumps and trees, especially since the 2.0 line already is -1.5 further back than the 1.0. Then again, I prefer a more centered stance than most on this forum.
 

EG-NJ

Putting on skis
Skier
Joined
Oct 14, 2022
Posts
101
Location
NJ
If I were to buy the 2.0, I'd likely choose the 178 mounted on Candide's line to get the additional float versus the 173 but optimize its maneuverability. Though -1.5 probably wouldn't be a mistake, I'd want to offset the extra length, width, weight and turn radius compared to the 1.0 given my preference for bumps and trees, especially since the 2.0 line already is -1.5 further back than the 1.0. Then again, I prefer a more centered stance than most on this forum.
Then again, I'd probably buy the 178 3.0 instead of the 2.0 since it's wider, has more rocker/float and is more appropriate for the terrain and conditions I'd use it for instead of the 1.0. But the 2.0 is sounds like a good compromise for a single ski quiver.
 
Thread Starter
TS
GregK

GregK

Skiing the powder
Skier
Joined
Mar 21, 2017
Posts
4,018
Location
Ontario, Canada
If I were to buy the 2.0, I'd likely choose the 178 mounted on Candide's line to get the additional float versus the 173 but optimize its maneuverability. Though -1.5 probably wouldn't be a mistake, I'd want to offset the extra length, width, weight and turn radius compared to the 1.0 given my preference for bumps and trees, especially since the 2.0 line already is -1.5 further back than the 1.0. Then again, I prefer a more centered stance than most on this forum.
The CT 2.0 is a little heavier than the CT 1.0 and a metre longer turn radius along with the further back mount as you mentioned. So the 173cm CT 2.0 would still be a great option if you mount back a bit still from the CT mark. The 178cm even forward would fell like a lot more ski so it might not be as playful still as you like. Would definitely float and charge harder though!
 

Sponsor

Staff online

Top