Faction CT 2.0 VS Head Framewall 2017

T

TheDelta

New member
Hey guys, so I'm looking to buy some new skis. Started this season out with a pair of K2 Press 2017 (159 cm) skis. I am newish to skiing (first year) and thought I wouldn't advance as quickly as I have (though I'm athletic and pick things up quickly). I quickly went from starting on the Blue runs to now going down Double Blacks without much hesitation (I'm an adrenaline seeker for sure). My only hesitant feelings are with my skis and their capacity (or lack thereof) to keep up. Obviously the K2s are park specific skis and I can't really do much of the proper carving or powder floating in comparison to other skis. I have been looking at some skis at the 400-600$ price range for a more all-mountain/park inspired ski. I came across the framewall and the faction ct series and seem to be a good fit. I just wanted to know from ya'll's personal experience is and which rides better? I want to hit side features, tree ski (can't turn my current skis quick enough to avoid trees) charge hard down groomers, and huck a couple 5-15ft cliffs here and there without worrying about my ski not being able to support me when I land in the pow. I'm looking at the 165 cm youth version of the CT simply cause I'm 20 but only 5'7 or 5'8 and weigh 135 - 140lbs so I'm not the biggest dude and don't think I'd really overpower the youth set. Any help would be appreciated!

**This thread was edited on Feb 26th 2018 at 3:29:37pm
 
If you are feeling unstable, the problem is not just the skis but also the length. If you are an improving skier, at your size you should be skiing something in the mid 170s to low 180s for all mountain skiing. For a ski like the framewall that is decently stiff and full camber, a length around 176 would be perfect, whereas a ski like the CT 2.0 with more tip and tail rocker the 182 would be better. Hope that helped
 
I'm not very well educated on the Faction lineup, but the framewall is a stiff, narrow full camber park ski. Awesome ski as a designated park ski, but might struggle elsewhere on the mountain (mainly in deeper snow) compared to some other wider options with a bit more rocker. Look at skis like a Nordica Soul Rider, Armada ARV, ON3P Kartel, etc. Basically something with a 90-100mm waist width and tip/tail rocker is what you want for an all mountain ski that can still shred the park.
 
I normally ski groomers and some off-piste/cliff type stuff and when my friends I'm with wanna hit tree runs, we go do that. All mountain skiing is what I do. If I can get to it, I'll ski it

**This post was edited on Feb 28th 2018 at 3:51:51pm
 
13899508:TheDelta said:
I normally ski groomers and some off-piste/cliff type stuff and when my friends I'm with wanna hit tree runs, we go do that. All mountain skiing is what I do. If I can get to it, I'll ski it

**This post was edited on Feb 28th 2018 at 3:51:51pm
Click to expand...

I meant what region, east coast, rockies, bc, pnw etc. It will help the good people of ns tailor their suggestions based on the predominant conditions in you area.
 
13899535:mystery3 said:
I meant what region, east coast, rockies, bc, pnw etc. It will help the good people of ns tailor their suggestions based on the predominant conditions in you area.
Click to expand...

Gotchaaa, I'm up in Montana
 
13899590:TheDelta said:
Gotchaaa, I'm up in Montana
Click to expand...

You want the CT for sure then. You may even want to check out the Prodigy 3.0 for some more width. 105 - 110 under foot is pretty common for all mountain skis out here.
 
13899727:Gnar_Shralp406 said:
You want the CT for sure then. You may even want to check out the Prodigy 3.0 for some more width. 105 - 110 under foot is pretty common for all mountain skis out here.
Click to expand...

This, next year’s prodigy 3.0 has a whole new design, and it’s been testing really well!
 
13900033:skidemon22 said:
This, next year’s prodigy 3.0 has a whole new design, and it’s been testing really well!
Click to expand...

I think I'll look into it! I have tried the last 2 days of using these K2s and I basically overpower them. The speed I go, they don't hold edge worth shit really. And on powder, it's a joke. I always fall no matter how well I'm riding on the pow. It just sinks in. So the 3.0s will probably be the way to go
 
13900429:TheDelta said:
I think I'll look into it! I have tried the last 2 days of using these K2s and I basically overpower them. The speed I go, they don't hold edge worth shit really. And on powder, it's a joke. I always fall no matter how well I'm riding on the pow. It just sinks in. So the 3.0s will probably be the way to go
Click to expand...

They’ll be 104mm at the waist (this years is 106) and get the flax treatment that this years prodigy 4.0 has (the whole line has the fiberglass replaced with flax for next Year)

**This post was edited on Mar 4th 2018 at 12:48:59am
 
13900516:skidemon22 said:
They’ll be 104mm at the waist (this years is 106) and get the flax treatment that this years 4.0 has (the whole line has the fiberglass replaced with flax for next Year)
Click to expand...

I'm definitely a noob when it comes to ski material but, what difference would fiberglass make compared to flax?
 
13900551:TheDelta said:
I'm definitely a noob when it comes to ski material but, what difference would fiberglass make compared to flax?
Click to expand...

They pretty much ch do the same thing, as far as laminates go, but we decided to switch because it’s lighter and better for the environment, and the prodigy series is also coming down in price point for next season
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top