Results 1 to 25 of 111
-
01-03-2019, 06:03 PM #1
Blizzard ZeroG 105s95s 85s new for 2019
BLIZZARD ZEROG 105's ZeroG 95's ZeroG 85's ---->NEW FOR 2019
Placeholder for intellectual dentistry and 3d-printed microparsing here
-
01-03-2019, 06:47 PM #2
Additional discussion and review of 105 to be placed here.
-
01-03-2019, 06:52 PM #3Registered User
- Join Date
- Apr 2012
- Posts
- 348
This will be a question about which one is right for me, but I won't tell you where or how I like to ski.
I'll also stay broke, ensuring no impending purchase.
-
01-03-2019, 07:00 PM #4
-
01-03-2019, 07:17 PM #5Registered User
- Join Date
- Sep 2010
- Location
- SW CO
- Posts
- 5,588
Reserved for hype and speculation based on the mfg specs and maybe some photos
"Alpine rock and steep, deep powder are what I seek, and I will always find solace there." - Bean Bowers
photos
-
01-03-2019, 07:21 PM #6
reserved for a post complaining how anything under 2200g doesn't ski well
-
01-03-2019, 09:29 PM #7pura vida
- Join Date
- Mar 2006
- Location
- The bottom of LCC
- Posts
- 5,750
-
01-03-2019, 11:54 PM #8Registered User
- Join Date
- Nov 2013
- Posts
- 1,109
yeah, but are they red?
TLDR; Ski faster. Quit breathing. Don't crash.
-
01-04-2019, 08:40 AM #9
Hoping losing the Carbon Drive construction won't dumb the skis down too much. There isn't much about the current Zero G series I don't like.
-
01-05-2019, 07:58 AM #10Registered User
- Join Date
- Nov 2017
- Posts
- 70
-
01-20-2019, 07:34 AM #11
Here goes
Trying it out in 180 length. Dimensions for that is 134-105-120 with a turn radius of 23m
Weight in that length with Marker Alpinist is 1890g and 1892g (each ski).
Deducting the Alpinist weight (335g) that's 1555 and 1557g per ski. Ridiculously light! Fairly close to 1550g per ski which was Blizzard's stated weight.
New Carbon Drive "2.0" technology; essentially a carbon frame of woven sheets around a wood core wrapped in 3 dimensions (theoretically with the loads arranged to tune for stiffness yet lightness)
More on the new Blizzard ZeroG line from their site
https://www.tecnicasports.com/zerog/ski-collection/
Measurements
A straight pull measurement of the ski is 178.8cm
Tip splay is 34cms from tip
Tail splay is 22 cms from tail
Mount is -7cms from ski centre
Compare and contrast with the ZeroG 108 which was an insanely fun, fast, stable yet powerful "light" ski coming in at 1740g at the 185 length which I reviewed here https://www.tetongravity.com/story/g...kis-teton-test
Alpinist. Not going to dive into the Marker Alpinist in any detail but here's more info about it
https://www.wildsnow.com/24743/zero-...st-first-look/
and https://blisterreview.com/at-binding...er-alpinist-12
Marketing stuff
Last edited by LeeLau; 01-26-2019 at 09:15 AM.
-
01-20-2019, 09:25 AM #12Registered User
- Join Date
- Dec 2009
- Location
- Sun Valley, ID
- Posts
- 2,527
Alpinist with brakes right?
-
01-20-2019, 10:07 AM #13
That shape looks quite refined and looking nice. More rocker on both sides?
-
01-20-2019, 11:06 AM #14
105 has a noticeably softer shovel than the current 108. Should help for general float and with use of 1kg boots, where I felt the current 108 can be a little overmatch for a TLT6 or similar boot.
-
01-20-2019, 11:26 AM #15Registered User
- Join Date
- Sep 2010
- Location
- SW CO
- Posts
- 5,588
Interesting. Too bad about the softened flex and reduced radius, but will have to try them and see. I don't think the world really needs another light, rockered, soft, turny touring ski. I did think the OG 0G 108 was begging for that rocker profile, which was kind of my only gripe with it.
The increased radius and hopefully a little more rocker in the 95 has my interest piqued.
Question: Any word on the mount point? Still stupid far back, -11.X or whatever?"Alpine rock and steep, deep powder are what I seek, and I will always find solace there." - Bean Bowers
photos
-
01-20-2019, 11:34 AM #16
I prefer to tour on my F1's. 185 Zero G 108's were too much ski. 178's are a great match.
There is some significant variation in rocker profile on the original Zero G's from pair to pair. And my 85's actually change with the ambient temperature. Wonder if this "feature" will continue.
Softer, friendlier Zero G's is bad news. I'm no bad ass BC charger and I love them all the way they were. If they wanted to offer something with more float they should have added a model.
-
01-20-2019, 11:44 AM #17Registered User
- Join Date
- Sep 2010
- Location
- SW CO
- Posts
- 5,588
"Alpine rock and steep, deep powder are what I seek, and I will always find solace there." - Bean Bowers
photos
-
01-20-2019, 01:06 PM #18Registered User
- Join Date
- Nov 2017
- Posts
- 70
Just to clarify a few things:
Old ZG 108 was just a lighter weight Cochise. It shared the same mold so it had some restrictions on what we could do with it. 95 and 85 were their own molds and were drastically different skis than the 108.
They all have their own unique molds now so the whole series is much more similar.
The goal of these skis was to make subtle tweaks to the original series without changing why people liked them and what made them unique. Taking feedback from a lot of folks that ski them all the time the goal was to make the tails a little more forgiving and improving the rocker profile on all the skis.
Overall the ends of the skis are torsionally not as stiff as the old ones. To say they are soft would be a bit of an exaggeration. The old ones were almost as stiff as a Bonafide torsionally. When you get into the lighter weights it just made the skis feel a little unbalanced and incrediby skittish in variable conditions.
New ones are easier to control and maintain your balance on especially with a heavy pack.
For their weight classes they’re very much at the stiffer end of the spectrum. Designed for skiers that like to ski hard and push the skis. They’re not your typical 1300g noodle.
-
01-20-2019, 01:45 PM #19
Stop with the black topsheets on touring skis, seriously. Not everyone lives where it's consistently cold enough for the sun to not fluctuate topsheet temperature above and below freezing throughout the day.
-
01-20-2019, 02:40 PM #20Registered User
- Join Date
- Jan 2018
- Posts
- 656
The black topsheets are just the prototype. The actual retail version has a blue and orange topsheet. I have a pair in hand and the flex is much softer than the current 108’s. THey will be a much more forgiving, less chargey ski. Not much similarity at all to the current model.
-
01-20-2019, 02:50 PM #21
-
01-20-2019, 02:57 PM #22Registered User
- Join Date
- Sep 2010
- Location
- SW CO
- Posts
- 5,588
"Alpine rock and steep, deep powder are what I seek, and I will always find solace there." - Bean Bowers
photos
-
01-20-2019, 03:08 PM #23
I’m reading this as keep my unskied 108s. Was going to send them down the road after falling in love with ‘19 BC Corvus & Shift
-
01-20-2019, 03:19 PM #24Registered User
- Join Date
- Nov 2017
- Posts
- 70
No not the 108 of course... cause it’s heavy. It’s not light enough to really be a touring ski. It’s a bit of no mans land.
I was referring more to the 95s and 85s.
I too have pairs of both next year’s 105s and this year’s 108s both brand new in the wrapper. The only thing that is softer when hand flexing is the tail. The tip and forebody are very similar with the forbody and under foot being probably stiffer in the 105. The new 105 is torsionally stiffer in the tip than the old one actually.
The focus of changing the 108s was to make them float better and make them lighter. Sure they won’t be as damp cause they weigh less but for how much they weigh I’d press you to find something that skis better.
The other tweaks I was referring to were more in regards to the 95 and 85. Those skis were too stiff for their weight class.
-
01-20-2019, 03:20 PM #25
Bookmarks