Any information on Faction 3.zero and a few other skis?

[Mountain Relish]

A few days ago I posted a review of my Cochise (193cm size). I have been fairly happy with the ski, but there are times it just feels too much at slower speeds, and in tight spaces. I am trying to decide what to do to solve this problem. I am thinking that I could either keep my Cochise, and buy a more playful powder ski (next season), or I could sell the Cochise, and buy a slightly more playful, but versatile ski now.

I have been offered a very good price on some Faction 3.zeros, but there is not a chance to test, and there is not a huge amount of information out there on them (and some of what there is implies they may be equally tricky at slow speeds). If anybody has skied the Cochise, and the 3.zero, and could give me any advice it would be great. Generally I would love to know whether the 3.zero (191cm) is anymore playful and easy than the Cochise (193cm), and if so what is the cost when it comes to the crude busting performance.

Beyond this if I was to buy a more playful powder specific ski next year I would be looking at the Automatic (but concerned by some reports of a soft tip that deflects a lot in cut up stuff), the Rocker/Quest 115 (but concerned by the 188cm size, and the fact that my mates who love it are all a lot smaller than me), and the Gunsmoke (I hear there is a stiffer 193cm size next year, but concerned by the really mixed reviews I've read).

For reference I am 6'4" and about 183lbs, and I am a technically good skier who likes to ski fairly fast, but not at the charging levels of most people here. I also ski in the Alps, so any ski has to be able to handle variable skied out snow fairly well.

Thank you so much for any help you can give me.

[Caucasian Asian]

I have not skied the Cochise, so I can't comment on them.
However, I did own a pair of 191 3.Zeros for a few seasons. I would not call them playful. Or easy to ski at slow speeds or in tight spaces. I wouldn't even really classify them as a powder ski. More of a big-mountain-planet-charging-kill-everything-in-sight ski. They do not like to go slow.

FWIW, I now ski 189 4frnt Turbos, 186 EHPs, and 186 Renegades.

[FlimFlamvanHam]

It's too bad you're so tall so almost any ski under a 190 looks short to you, cuz @ 183lbs you'd probably enjoy the 185 Cochise a whole lot more than the 193.

You're coming off the Cochise (the 193 no less....) and still want some crud busting, do NOT look at the Automatic. Just my opinion.

The Rocker 115 in the 188 straight pulls at almost a true 188 so it's still a long ski. At 183lbs it should be plenty of ski.

Is 183lbs huge in yurp or something?

Bibby 190, 115 in a 188, Rossi Squad 190 should all fit in the burlier all mountain pow ski but still easily managed area.

Cannot comment on the Faction, but based on CA's comment above it would sound like a similar ski to the 193 Cochise.

[Mountain Relish]

It's too bad you're so tall so almost any ski under a 190 looks short to you, cuz @ 183lbs you'd probably enjoy the 185 Cochise a whole lot more than the 193.

Is 183lbs huge in yurp or something?

I have lost around 15lbs this winter, so I am normally not quite such a lightweight, but I have certainly never claimed to be huge. In all the other skis I've had (including 195cm Mothership) I have liked the 190+ skis better than the shorter options, but in this case I suspect you are right, and the 185cm option would have been more fun for me. Thank you for your advice on the other skis, I think I need to try and borrow my mates 115s.

Thank you as well Caucasian Asian. You have definitely confirmed my fears with the 3.zero. I think I'll get some Agent 100s for when things get too tight for the Cochise, and then I'll look for something more playful next year.

Thanks again for the help.