Results 1 to 10 of 10
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Posts
    395

    Agent 3.0 v 4.0?

    So, deciding on my CO/Rockies winter touring ski (well occasional lift-served) for next year. Have it narrowed down to the Agent 3.0 or 4.0. Anyone been on either/both of these? If there was a 110-112mm underfoot option, I’d go with that. They’re both actually within 100g or so of each other. For days with boot-deep and less I’ll probably be on my 90mm skis that do just fine. Should I just go fat? I’ll be mostly on TLT6s touring and probably Vulcans for more aggressive days and lift-served. No drops or super-charging, but can get down everything just fine. I’ll be going with 179/180cm. How’s the 3.0 in deeper stuff?

    Previously on Nunataqs they were just great except for the deepest days, and VW Katanas seemed to do everything great except for keeping up with fit friends on the up on hot-lap days.

    Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Posts
    224
    I think the 3.0 is perfect for that intended use. I'm pretty sure the 180/188 sold really well this year which should be a good indication.

    IMO it skis bigger than the size and better than a normal "touring" ski.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Posts
    395

    Agent 3.0 v 4.0?

    Quote Originally Posted by adrian.bee View Post
    I think the 3.0 is perfect for that intended use...IMO it skis bigger than the size and better than a normal "touring" ski.
    Thanks! Yeah, it’d be a preorder for next season. From what I’ve read, mounting at the “progressive” MP of +3.0 is recommended. Your thoughts?


    Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums
    Last edited by dub_xion; 02-25-2021 at 09:56 PM.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Posts
    395
    Anyone been on the 4.0s?


    Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Anchorage, AK
    Posts
    33
    Surprisingly little info to be found on these skis. I just got a pair of 191s and think I'm gonna mount them between +1.5 and +3. Very excited to get them on the snow.

    Sent from my SM-N986U using Tapatalk

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Posts
    395
    Quote Originally Posted by we-ski View Post
    Surprisingly little info to be found on these skis. I just got a pair of 191s and think I'm gonna mount them between +1.5 and +3. Very excited to get them on the snow.
    Awesome, keep us posted with field testing.



    Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Swiss alps -> Bozone,MT
    Posts
    671

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Posts
    224
    yeah i've heard from friends at the brand that +1.5 is $$. I went on recommended on my 2.0s but they are my 100% touring setup.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Anchorage, AK
    Posts
    33
    I went +2.25, and wouldn't go further forward. Maybe would like +1.5 better, as I have a more traditional stance. Love the ski though, like a damper, fatter version of a Zero G 108, and maybe a touch softer. In steep technical terrain the swing weight on my 191s was minimal, but opening it up on a deep powder run I could see liking +1.5 or even factory better.

    Sent from my SM-N986U using Tapatalk

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Aug 2020
    Posts
    130
    Quote Originally Posted by dub_xion View Post
    So, deciding on my CO/Rockies winter touring ski (well occasional lift-served) for next year. Have it narrowed down to the Agent 3.0 or 4.0. Anyone been on either/both of these? If there was a 110-112mm underfoot option, I’d go with that. They’re both actually within 100g or so of each other. For days with boot-deep and less I’ll probably be on my 90mm skis that do just fine. Should I just go fat? I’ll be mostly on TLT6s touring and probably Vulcans for more aggressive days and lift-served. No drops or super-charging, but can get down everything just fine. I’ll be going with 179/180cm. How’s the 3.0 in deeper stuff?

    Previously on Nunataqs they were just great except for the deepest days, and VW Katanas seemed to do everything great except for keeping up with fit friends on the up on hot-lap days.

    Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums
    You can compare our measurements in the online Sooth comparator:
    https://compareskis.shinyapps.io/com...=%22Compare%22

    The Agent 4.0 179 that we measured was 1717g instead of the quoted 1880g from Faction. That makes it slightly lighter than the Agent 3.0 in 180 cm (https://cdn.shopify.com/s/files/1/22...CH_PAGE_EN.pdf)! I thought it was worth mentioning. The Agent 4.0 is also less stiff overall, but that is mostly in torsion (20%). As much torsional stiffness as the Agent 3.0 might not be needed in softer snow.

    Obviously, you also have more tip/tail rocker (height and starting point) with the larger Agent 4.0.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •