ON3P Kartel 108 vs Faction Candide 3.0

McSenderson

McSenderson

Member
Hey, I'm looking at at the Kartel 108's as well as the Candide 3.0's. I'm a bit skeptical of the Kartel's stability and the Faction's durability. I'm wanting the ski to rip on all conditions while not being to soft and flexy in crud while not being so stiff that I can't slash it and pop off features. Thanks!
 
you can custom order the kartel and make it stiffer or make the tail/tip stiffer more like the center of the ski. I've never skied faction but just to look at them you can't compare to on3p, those on3p can take a beat and last a long time
 
So I'm a bigger dude, been skiing the kartel 116 all season, and started on it last March. I previously had been on the Billygoat for about 4 years. While the Kartel does not charge as hard as BG's or Wrens. It fucking goes. Holds up real well, and does not let me down when conditions get variable. 108's follow the same vein.
 
I own Kartels and rode the 3.0s for a half day recently... The kartels are a great all around ski. They can rip through crud, hold an edge on groomers and have good float. They are also a very slashy ski due to the amount of rocker in the tip and tails. I love being able to throw the ski completely sideways on a moments notice in soft snow. The 3.0s remind me of the 4frnt devastors. Lots of rocker, but it is very gradual whereas the on3p is very drastic in the tip/tail. I though the 3.0s tracked very will through cut up snow but I could not throw them out as quickly and the lack of camber meant edge to edge movement on hard snow was more effort than the kartels. Both are great skis that will do exactly what you are describing. I think if you want a slashy ski the on3ps will suit you best.
 
13782681:patagonialuke said:
If you're looking for a stable ski and deciding between those two, I'd echo what others have said and recommend the Kartel 108. The CT 3.0 is a very light ski compared to the 108 and is definitely not designed to blow through crud.

Cy goes into a bit of detail about the skis crud performance in his review, and it sounds almost exactly like what you're looking for:http://blistergearreview.com/gear-reviews/2016-17-on3p-kartel-108
Click to expand...

i object.

i have the 2016 3.0 in a 186cm and I am 5'11 140lbs and ski very fast and aggressively. the 3.0s are quite simply the funnest things i've ever put on my feet. just the other day we got a 90cm day at castle mountain resort and they floated amazingly, and were suuuper stable as i was fucking bombing throw all the chopped up pow at the bottom of the hill, but they were still super playful due to how lightweight they are. heres a little insta vid i made of some of the day:https://www.instagram.com/p/BQOAPJxj0Cg/?taken-by=rballs_&hl=en

But on top of riding well in pow, they also hold a solid edge on hardpack and charge through shitfuck conditions easily. I ride these skis as a daily driver for any mountain day i have.
 
13786164:rballs_ said:
i object.

i have the 2016 3.0 in a 186cm and I am 5'11 140lbs and ski very fast and aggressively. the 3.0s are quite simply the funnest things i've ever put on my feet. just the other day we got a 90cm day at castle mountain resort and they floated amazingly, and were suuuper stable as i was fucking bombing throw all the chopped up pow at the bottom of the hill, but they were still super playful due to how lightweight they are. heres a little insta vid i made of some of the day:https://www.instagram.com/p/BQOAPJxj0Cg/?taken-by=rballs_&hl=en

But on top of riding well in pow, they also hold a solid edge on hardpack and charge through shitfuck conditions easily. I ride these skis as a daily driver for any mountain day i have.
Click to expand...

also to add to this, I've been riding these since the start of the season, 1 or 2 days a week and havent seen any durability issues at all (which says a lot because i break skis very often)
 
You really couldn't go wrong with either of those skis.

But I would say On3p is the toughest ski I've ever ridden.
 
13786164:rballs_ said:
i object.

i have the 2016 3.0 in a 186cm and I am 5'11 140lbs and ski very fast and aggressively. the 3.0s are quite simply the funnest things i've ever put on my feet. just the other day we got a 90cm day at castle mountain resort and they floated amazingly, and were suuuper stable as i was fucking bombing throw all the chopped up pow at the bottom of the hill, but they were still super playful due to how lightweight they are. heres a little insta vid i made of some of the day:https://www.instagram.com/p/BQOAPJxj0Cg/?taken-by=rballs_&hl=en

But on top of riding well in pow, they also hold a solid edge on hardpack and charge through shitfuck conditions easily. I ride these skis as a daily driver for any mountain day i have.
Click to expand...

I stand corrected - that looks fun as hell. I guess I figured the light weight would compromise crud-charging performance, but sounds (and looks) like their stiffness (?) helps with stability.
 
13786220:patagonialuke said:
I stand corrected - that looks fun as hell. I guess I figured the light weight would compromise crud-charging performance, but sounds (and looks) like their stiffness (?) helps with stability.
Click to expand...

yeah they're decently stiff! if OP is a heavier and aggressive skier, then I'm not sure how they'd hold up, but if he's as light as me he should have loads of fun. also you can see how candide rips em... then again it's candide.
 
13790034:rballs_ said:
UPDATE: Yesterday I snapped my 3.0s after about 7 days of riding. I guess they were too good to be true. They snapped pretty easily, you can see in this video---->https://www.instagram.com/p/BQt06ESAQxe/?taken-by=rballs_
Click to expand...

Gutted! Dunno if anything will come of it but I had some 2.0's few seasons back and the edge separated from ski without any rail time. Sent Faction an email and after a few photo/emails they offered to send me a new set, at the time they where sold out of the size I required. So they sent me next years models when they were available, still on them today! Excellent service, so its worth an email man.
 
Slightly different sizes but I had a pair of 98's and am now on the 2's after retiring the k 98's. I wasn't expecting the 2's to be as chargey and as stable as the 98's but was pleasetly surprised! They've handled well in a few different snow conditions and feel good at speed. The lightness is nice too. Haven't skied the 2's enough yet to decide which one I like more but I don't think you'll be disappointed with either!
 
I own jeffery 114s and 3.0s. The only reason i got the 3.0s vs the kartels was because it was for a somewhat light kingpin touring setup. They are both great but if your not touring or hiking get the kartels 100%.
 
not to hijack this thread completely, but I'm currently in the same boat. And i would for sure be getting kartels, however two things are stopping me: 1.kartels are on back order a week and i am currently without a ski. 2. I found the faction 3.0 for literally half the price. is the kartel worth it that much more or are they similar enough that this is a good deciding factor?
 
13791934:4man said:
not to hijack this thread completely, but I'm currently in the same boat. And i would for sure be getting kartels, however two things are stopping me: 1.kartels are on back order a week and i am currently without a ski. 2. I found the faction 3.0 for literally half the price. is the kartel worth it that much more or are they similar enough that this is a good deciding factor?
Click to expand...

Sameish as far as what the ski is intended to be used for, but really different in design and style of ride/rider it appeals to IMO.

Candides are lighter and more traditional in shape and specs. Kartels are going to have more abrupt and higher rocker. Factions my friend has also seem a bit softer than the Kartel too, but hes had a good many days on his this season. Given the same skier, I'd think the Kartels would be the ticket for a hard charging sort of rider that wants a stable ski with a backbone, but can still be playful and buttery when asked. Factions would probably be more surfy and softer.
 
Are the kartels 500 dollars more stable though I guess is what I'm asking. If they are similar to what my Jeffery 110s were is be okay with losing a little bit to gain some extra playfulness and maneuverability. As long as they aren't an absolute nightmare carving and even straight lining crud so long as I'm on top of it.
 
13786238:rballs_ said:
yeah they're decently stiff! if OP is a heavier and aggressive skier, then I'm not sure how they'd hold up, but if he's as light as me he should have loads of fun. also you can see how candide rips em... then again it's candide.
Click to expand...

Ya, i dont know if it would be great choice for my size based on how you said it'll be great for lighter skiers. i'm over 6'1" and 195 lbs.
 
13792100:pnwripper3654 said:
Ya, i dont know if it would be great choice for my size based on how you said it'll be great for lighter skiers. i'm over 6'1" and 195 lbs.
Click to expand...

I am pretty well the exact same size as you and decided to pull the trigger on the 3.0 (couldn't pass up the price difference). I'll be taking them out in about a week's time when I get back home from work and can report back on any stability issues. I've ridden Jeffery 110 and Kartel 98s so I should be able to give a decent insight.
 
I'm 190lbs+ and 6'3 so i dont know how well the candide 3.0 would work for me. But im trying to decide on a touring set up. I currently have kingpins for bindings. Anybody have any experience with the kartels as touring set up? I know they are super heavy so I wonder how that would be trekking with a heavy ski like that.
 
13792541:StevenH24 said:
I'm 190lbs+ and 6'3 so i dont know how well the candide 3.0 would work for me. But im trying to decide on a touring set up. I currently have kingpins for bindings. Anybody have any experience with the kartels as touring set up? I know they are super heavy so I wonder how that would be trekking with a heavy ski like that.
Click to expand...

Get candides for touring. I have 3.0 mounted with kingpins and love them. Light enough the uphill doesnt suck and burly enough to actually enjoy the skiing. Its honestly the perfect touring setup and i love mine so much. I also have jefferys which are pretty close to kartels and imo they would suck to tour with, pretty heavy skis.
 
13792556:tfsh said:
Get candides for touring. I have 3.0 mounted with kingpins and love them. Light enough the uphill doesnt suck and burly enough to actually enjoy the skiing. Its honestly the perfect touring setup and i love mine so much. I also have jefferys which are pretty close to kartels and imo they would suck to tour with, pretty heavy skis.
Click to expand...

sweet thanks man!
 
13792145:4man said:
I am pretty well the exact same size as you and decided to pull the trigger on the 3.0 (couldn't pass up the price difference). I'll be taking them out in about a week's time when I get back home from work and can report back on any stability issues. I've ridden Jeffery 110 and Kartel 98s so I should be able to give a decent insight.
Click to expand...

Well i got on my new 186 faction 3.0 the other week so i figured it's better late than never haha I am pretty big (6'2" 200lbs) and do ski very aggressively in all kinds of conditions. I can say the CT can definitely still rail in crudand chop, however you definately do need to be on top of it a bit more than the on3p's i've skied. They are actually reasonably stiff so i think this os down to them being a lot lighter so they get knocked around a bit whereas the jefferys/kartels just steam roll. The difference however is small in my opinion and worth the trade off that the CT RAIL on groomers and are so fun for jibbing and spinning off natural features. i think it's the more tradtonal shape that helps with grommers but they can hold an edge better than the on3p imo and the lightweight and near centre mount ( have them on the candide line) means they can pop and spin off anything. they are easier than my 90mm park skis to spin off natural features (my on3ps on the other hand were a bit difficult at times to whip around and maneauver). the long tails and stiffer flex also helps with absoluetly stompng landings in aything. they are at least as good the on3p in this regard, however if it is choppy they can get knocked around afterwards potentially.

Honestly they do have many of the same upsides as the on3p with only one downside being they aren't quite as damp and also they do not float quite as well from what ive seen. this is due to the more forward mount but also i think because they have noticeably less rocker than the kartels. the rocker also probably helps the kartels a bit more in super rutted up crud. The biggest difference i think so far though is the lack of taper compared to on3p means it likes to hook up a lot more and it is a bit harder to break lose to scrub speed or schmear around. i'm wondering if detuning the edges at the tails or a more back mount would bring someof that back.

All in all i can say i'm happy with them and would take them over the on3p just because of how maneuverable (nice on the steeps and techincal), jibby and poppy they are and how easy they are to trick and stomp anything and everything. definitely way better in firmer conditions than the on3ps too. they rail. i don't mind the slight trade off in bumpy snow stability (within reason, the stiffer flex means they can still rip if you keep a bit loser and "hop" over and between crud bundles or are strong and just manhandle them) and it just took me a bitto get used to how they tend to hook up and it takes more effort to break them loose. If you care way more about stability and really deep snow ability however i would say the on3p is slightly better. That being said i have a set up for deep pow days already so it's not as important to me.

I'll be throwing this in the reviews too, just thought i'd add it here since i said i would.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top