12 comments on “2015-2016 G3 Zenoxide Carbon Fusion 105”

  1. Got a chance to demo both the 167 G3 Carbon Zenoxide and the 185cm G3 Empire Carbon 115 skis on two separate backcountry days in steep to moderate angled chutes. Both were ‘one and done’ runs at the end of May and early June so, very limited reviews. Boot sole center was about 1cm forward of the line on both skis and edges were sharp tip to tail. Dynafit Mercury boots, no tongue; G3 Ion rental/demo bindings.

    Carbon Zenoxide: Snow was soft sun dimpled on moderately angled open slope transitioning to smooth somewhat more classic corn in a steeper chute to 45 degrees then to deeper soft suncups for the moderately angled runout. Initial concerns about lack of length for the skis proved to be unfounded…167cms are probably the shortest ski I’ve been on since high school but felt substantial enough for the conditions. Echoing the general ski feel of your comments; the skis liked to be driven from the tip but with the shorter length, could be enjoyably worked through the middle and finally through the tail to carve medium radius turns in the moderately angled start of the run. Dropping into the chute proper, tight hop turns from a centered position felt balanced and feeling the solidity of the ski, encouraged opening up the radius and charging some g.s. turns down the belly of the upper part of the widening chute. The skis remained solid, predictable and damp as speeds were cranked up…still encouraged tip initiated turns but the tails felt great to really push into to either complete the turn or release into speed shaving slarves. Pretty amazed to feel this confidence on skis severely lacking in running length. Once the more schmooey snow for lower third of the run was reached, turn radius was tightened to short skidded z’s. Nothing funky to report…skis provided a firm platform and allowed for consistent confident mank cranking. I would consider this ski as a special purpose little shorty for “2D snow with a solid or progressive base” spring/summer projects or winter inbounds groomers…I kinda felt a longer length would be a bit too stiff for my preferences in a more versatile performer in varied snow conditions.

    Empire Carbon 115: Snow was firm transitioning to slightly sun softened sun dimples and sun cups. Some pretty steep hard snow to upper 40 degrees slowly transitioning to more moderately angled terrain below. Only took me two turns to find the sweet spot for harder snow on pretty committing terrain; centered or ever so slightly aft of center. Forward weighting in steeps would result in slight ski overturn, centered to aft of center felt solid. Minimal chatter, felt pretty damp in firm but not frozen suncups. Easy pivoting and slarvy skidded short and medium radius turns. Lower angle wide open terrain high speed big turn carving on suncups proved enjoyable; these babies railed; damp, torsionally stiff and had a solid tail. Could employ just a bit more shin/tongue pressure turn initiation through the big carves. In general, a highlight was the impressive underfoot/heel pressured turn edge feel for a 115mm waisted ski. Can’t wait to try ’em in winter snow of all sorts.

    gopro footage of the Empire 115 run here: https://vimeo.com/130351878

    • Semi-interesting non-note: I have skied the Zero G 108, but *only* on 3-4 runs at Taos, on alpine bindings, on pretty firm snow. So my opinion here really isn’t relevant (which is pretty funny, given that most ski magazine tests don’t put even this much time on a pair of skis…). But at no point while skiing the Zenoxides did I think of the Zero G 108. I don’t know the weight of the 185cm Zero G, but given my limited experience on them at Taos, my initial sense is that I would have preferred to be on the Zenoxide in the same conditions. So not quite ready to assume that the Zero G is as damp as the Zenoxide 105, but I do hope to get more time on the Zero G.

      • On paper they seem like similar skis. I had a very enjoyable few runs demoing a pair of Zero G’s with Kingpins at Kicking Horse in pow, blue ice and everything in between. I did my best to get them out of their comfort zone, something I tend to be fairly good at and I was impressed, particularly when they were on edge. Would you say that the Zenoxide is a damper, more stable ski given your limited observations?

  2. interesting. your comment on this being the ski for crappy snow conditions is what I say about my carbon katana s.

    how would YOU compare them?

    • First, the Zenoxide vs. the V-Werks Katana is very apples-to-oranges. In my review, I compare the Zenoxide to a touring version of the Volkl Mantra, so it’s quite a bit like asking how you’d compare the Mantra to the Katana — quite different skis, right?

      As I reported in my review of the 184 V-Werks Katana, that ski floats extremely well, so is the MUCH better tool for deep snow skiing. (Duh.) And in very punchy snow, the wider + tip & tail rockered Katana would probably work better.

      But on firm steeps — or bulletproof to very steep steeps? I’ll easily take the Zenoxide 105 over the Katana — as I would easily take the Mantra over the Katana in such terrain / conditions.

  3. Thanks for another fantastic review, Jonathan!

    I’ve been on skis for nearly 30 years, but just starting to get into AT, and need to figure out a setup for this season. I do have a side country setup (Dukes + Bibbys), but I’m mostly in the dark when it comes to choosing equipment for a full day of climbing. I’ll be spending a lot of time touring in the Northeast (NY, VT, Tuckerman) and anticipate my season culminating in something like the Haute Route.

    Is the Fusion 105 the ski to rule them all? I read the reviews of the DPS 112’s and sounds like they get squirrely in less than ideal conditions. Leaves me a little nervous considering something like the Haute Route is in my future. Not to mention, snowfall in the Northeast is usually shallow and variable (this last season is hardly an accurate representation). I also travel a few times a season to areas with more snow – Colorado, Utah, Japan, wherever – but I wouldn’t say these trips will constitute most of the use of my AT gear. Just mentioning bc I still want some float to whatever skis I end up with.

    Anything that strikes you as the perfect fit?

    As for me: 5’11”, 160lbs, aggressive expert (downhill), slothlike beginner (uphill).

Leave a Comment