New G3 skis

[floodster]

seems this is a hot topic rife with misinformation--i'll try to clear up some misconceptions and give a bit of a review of the skis themselves.

 

Paul Parker has an extremely solid rep. in the BC ski industry. If you haven't heard of him, or are skeptical, i'll assume that you are relatively new to the sport, an avid sprayer, or both. Paul is responsible for many of the "progressive" ski design ideas that we take for granted today. he started designing with Chouinard Equipment (before the BD & quality degradation days), and then worked with Tua (fitting, as Tua was making BD/Chouinard skis way back in the day). aside from years of design work with Tua ( a huge favorite in the telemark ski community for years), Paul is also largely responsible for the development of garmont's latest boot line--if you are currently skiing on a pair of Energy's or Synergy's, thank Paul Parker. As has been mentioned, he also wrote THE book on telemark skiing instruction and has helped quite a bit to progress the community of the sport itself. Tua's demise had nothing to do with Paul, and everything to do with mismanagement. (for an interview with Paul on this subject, click here

 

G3 has been working with Paul over the past 2 yrs to design a line of performance oriented backcountry skis. I don't feel G3's entrance into the bc ski market is just an attempt to make money with boring designs. look at their history--they started with a measly avalanche probe as their only product, but made it bomber; then, their binding design essentially revolutionized tele bindings ( stainless steel toe-plates, integrated anti-ice plate, compression springs, etc.), and all of us skiing fat/beefed-up tele skis can thank them for helping our bindings keep pace with our skis. i regard their entry into the ski market as offering a small-batch performance product that seeks to set itself apart from what is already offered. comparing G3 to BD is apples to oranges. BD has used their customers as their R& D department far too many times. yes, G3 had a bit of bad luck with their first try at skins, but at least they were responsible enough to pull shipments and put everything on hold until they could get it right.

 

As for the skis:

 

yes, there is one asymetrical pair--the Ticket. it's main concept is that there is more sidecut on the outside edge of the ski, thus helping it to turn quicker. i think this will be especially helpful for tele-skiers' continual battle to keep that inside ski right where it needs to be (next to your outside ski--not trailing and anchoring you in the pow!). they are also recommending it for AT (this holds true for the whole line), and if you see one of their reps at a demo you can try the ticket mounted AT.

 

i have put most of my time in on the Baron--the "all-arounder" the group. just had a great day at bachelor on them this weekend with 12-14" of fresh. though they are not the fattest ski in the line (116/81/104), they kept a'floatin for some deep lines in the trees and a few runs off the cone. my loudest praise for the baron is that it is everything we are used to in a hard-charging tele ski (think TM:X), yet is really damp (think anything Rossi of late). i believe this is due to their abs sidewalls. it felt a tad softer than the tm:x to me, but what i really noticed was it's smooth stability through the crud and cut-up mank. edge-to-edge quickness was fine for tight trees (i was riding a 184 length). again in comparison to the tm:ex (my top ski for '03-'04), i felt it wasn't as active/snappy or had the same edge hold, but it was close. however, it's smoothness and ability to absorb energy really stood out. makes sense to me, considering G3 is really going for the backcountry user in mind.

 

i did ski the reverend for a few runs at the hoodoo demo this weekend. again, this is a really smooth/damp ski, and suprisingly responsive for it's size. cruising the groomed was fun and it was easy to stay in control the whole time. when venturing into the margins, it buffed over everything and really wants to let you maintain speed! seemed a little softer than the baron, but it's no noodle.

 

the siren is the women's specific model. it is not a tuned-down/softer version of a men's ski. it seems to be pretty stiff compared to most female skis on the market. in fact, i know a few lighter men (sub 150lbs.) that call this their favorite in the entire line.

 

in general, G3's offerings are great for skiers who are demanding of the performance of ther skis and know how to drive them. they may not be the best for someone new to tele that needs to learn how to lead the ski. like any good ski, they know where they want to go, you just have to get them there. i would recomend the baron/reverend/siren to any skier that enjoys cruising big lines and holding mid-to-long radius turns. the ticket (haven't actually been on it yet), is probably the one you want for superior edge-to-edge quickness (bumps, anyone?), but is still geared for the backcountry with it's 120mm shovel & 81mm waist.

 

instead of cranking the rumor mill and confusing us all, why don't we actually ski and let the rest of the community know what we think. i know a number of shops are carrying G3's in their demo fleets this year: check out OMC in Portland, or Marmot in Seattle.

 

enjoy!!

[Greta]

Thanks for that, Floodster. Helpful info. You have givin me some good insight into which G3 set I might look to demo when I get the opportunity.

 

As a side note, I wouldnt say that there is an excessive amount of spray in this thread. Were just exchanging info, and having a good time while we do it. Unfortunately, I dont have as much free time as some, so I tend to have a little fun here. Im actually pretty serious once I leave the computer, as I think most of us are. Keep in mind that this is all about fun and games....and relax a little .

[floodster]

greta:

i didn't mean to come across as uptight re: this thread. i think it's great that everyone is giving their opinion & sharing information. it seemed that in the earlier posts there were a few unfounded opinions, but they were also answered by folks with a bit more facts.

i enjoy reading the spray when it is amusing, not when it only serves to circulate false information--guess i just felt compelled to reply.

thanks for your response--it's good to see everyone doing their homework before throwing down big $$ for the right tools.

[Doug_Hutchinson]

then, their binding design essentially revolutionized tele bindings ( stainless steel toe-plates, integrated anti-ice plate, compression springs, etc.),

 

floodster you obviously know a lot but when anyone talks about G3 revolutionizing tele bindings, I have to laugh. Stainless steel toe plates and compression springs are credited to Mr Rainey. G3 bindings are simply beefed-up versions of ancient tele bindings that offered hardly anything new except additional weight. I know people who have broken about every part on them.

 

Between the problems with their skins and bindings, I think the skeptism with anything G3 is well deserved. With that said, I love what I see in the G3s (finally a replacement for my Tuas?) and I can't wait to try them.

 

I think your review and assessment of the skis were excellent. Sorry for the gripe about the binding comment, I could not resist.

[enem]

for what it's worth, i called up marmot in bellevue to ask if they have the sirens in the rental fleet. they don't, though they have the rest of the line.

 

guy i talked to said his gf has tried a pair and found them rather heavy for bc use, but otherwise liked them.

 

also he said that the construction of the ski is more like a rossi and quite different from the old tuas.

[floodster]

when anyone talks about G3 revolutionizing tele bindings, I have to laugh. Stainless steel toe plates and compression springs are credited to Mr Rainey.

 

yes, i think "revolutionized" may have be some strong language, and credit is due to Mr. Rainey for introducing (or re-introducing?) the aformentioned design features. i guess the real point i was trying to get to was G3's implementation of the various features of what we consider "modern-day" tele bindings, and the way many binding manufacturers seemed to follow suit. compression springs/stainless steel were parts of the old pitbull too--what a classic!