Preview: 2015-2016 Faction CT 3.0

Ski: 2015-2016 Faction CT 3.0

Available Lengths: 176, 182, 186, 192cm

Stated Dimensions (mm): 136-108-131

Stated Sidecut Radius:

  • 26 meters (192cm length)
  • 22 meters (186cm length)
  • 20 meters (182cm length)
  • 18 meters (176cm length)

Core construction: Balsa / fiberglass

Stated Weight per Ski: 1,850 grams (182cm length)

We’ve been trying to get on Candide Thovex’s pro model skis for a few seasons, and we’re more curious than we’ve ever been about the updated CT 3.0.

(Seriously, Faction – we’d love to stop the flood of emails from readers around the world asking why we haven’t reviewed your skis. Time to get in the game.)

For the 2015-2016 season, Faction has nixed the the 3.Zero from their line (which is essentially the 14/15 Candide 3.0, but with a heavier core layup), and made some changes to the Candide 3.0, now called the CT 3.0.

Compared to the 14/15 Candide 3.0, the updated CT 3.0 is a little narrower (now 108mm underfoot, down from 112mm), has a tiny bit more camber underfoot (2mm instead of 1), and a slightly tighter sidecut radius.

But the CT 3.0 still has a lightweight balsa wood core, weighing in at 1,850 grams / ski in a 182cm length. And if you’ve seen Candide’s super-human skiing in his “One of Those Days” edits, you’ll know the CT 3.0 and wider CT 4.0 were designed with playful, freestyle all-mountain skiing in mind.

While Salomon is making touring skis with balsa wood cores, now both Faction and Line are making light, jib-oriented all-mountain skis with such cores. (The redesigned, 2016 Line Sir Francis Bacon, which we’ll be getting on soon, weighs in at a feathery 1,760 grams per ski in a 184cm length.)

We haven’t been able to ski the Candide 3.0 this season, but now we’re dying to try out the new CT 3.0 next to the new Bacon. If “light and fun” are what you’re looking for in a ski, then it sure seems like the 3.0 is worth considering, too.

Here’s to hopefully, finally, finding out.


Blister Gear Review, SIA Tradeshow 2015
Faction CT 3.0



Blister Gear Review, SIA Tradeshow 2015
Faction CT 3.0



Blister Gear Review, SIA Tradeshow 2015
Faction CT 3.0 – Tip Profile



Blister Gear Review, SIA Tradeshow 2015
Faction CT 3.0 – Tail Profile



Blister Gear Review, SIA Tradeshow 2015
Faction CT 3.0 – Bases

9 comments on “Preview: 2015-2016 Faction CT 3.0”

  1. these and the new SFB’s you mentioned look like they have the potential to be a great all mountain ski for us taller and lighter skiers (140-160lbs) with the potential to both charge and be playful. I know I’m holding out hope for one of these two to be a good resort and touring ski for those of us on a budget.

    • I can say this about the 3Zero BB King. Mines the 112 3 Zero 2013 model 183. my daily driver. Other skis I ski often are the 99 DPS Hybird and older Nordica Hell Divers 92 under foot for Icey days. BTW I would ski the 3Zero over any of those other 2 on ice days more often. Im a freestyle coach for our local club and CSIA Ski instructor. One day at the hill there was some powder left over from the day before. While allot of the runs are groomed the higher less travelled runs are not. DPS was having a demo day and I wanted to get on the 112 wailer.i had skied several runs down my favorite run that has moguls to get in then an open steep bowl for slashing some high speed turns and a real steep out run that requires some hard edge grip before the run out you can Mach Snell as fast as you can go. Generally 60+mph. The bowl buy after lunch was getting chopped up but the 3 Zeros can pretty much go as fast as you dare threw anything and slash a turn to check speed before danger areas. Loads of fun but you need to be feeling it or you will get hurt. i straped on the DPS 112 and took them down that run from the top. I loved the ski. Great at slashing turns in the bowl and seemed to do well at be lining the crud that was developing. After two runs down that run I took them down a groomer and they held an edge very well also. Brought them back strapped on the 3 Zeros and did the same runs again that I had just done with the 112. The skis felt the same!! The nod to the 3 Zero in the run out for high speed. But every were else the 3 Zero was so close to the DPS 112 I couldn’t justify the need for the DPS 112. The 3 zero was better at edge grip and straight lining high speed and in the powder and crud both very much the same.

      I ended up buying the DPS 99 without trying one first. i find myself only sking the 3 zero lately. It can do everything very well for a ski 112 at the foot. Icy comp bumps no problem just need to not zipper at high speed because you wont have the grip in there to slow down once you go to far. Im going to get out on the ct3.0 this season. i tryed them last season only for one run. Ill demo a couple lengths and see what i like the best but in talking to guys that have skied them both lots the CT3.0 is all that only with even more edge grip and manoeuvrability. Not as charging as the 3 Zero can be. The 3 Zero is more like the Cochise as a directional charger with a very playfull side.

    • Unfortunately, no. Faction has said they want to get us skis as soon as they can, but it hasn’t happened yet. We’re still super interested, but at this point, we’re on hold. It’s very frustrating, but we’ll keep working on it.

  2. Adam im purchasing a new 2014 3.0 and mounting the schizo to it. im getting the 191cm ski from that year. they have one left were im buying it. {Great deal!!} i mentioned my 3 Zero i have now was a 2013 but it was actually the 2012 it seems with the 5mm camber slight 150 rocker tip and tail. The 2014 is still 112 tones of rocker 300 tip and tail and flat camber. some say 1mm but others say 0 ?? Ether way im thinking it will make a fun fast powder ski and maybe even crud skied out powder with all the rocker. Time will tell. I like the schizo mine have a din of 13 and im normally at 10. I see now your schizo choices are 12 or 14. i would go 14 on a ski like these. i wishh i could have demoed these before I buy them to know were to mount because I have a 9-16 STH steel collecting dust I would have mounted on them had i knew were i wanted them.
    On the 2.0 i would have bought the 2.0 in a 184 if they had any left hear tomorrow. But thheyy only have a 173 leftt and im over 200 lbs at 6ft so a little small for me. The 184 2.0 to me looks like it would be a great, fun all mountain/ park ski. At 102 at the waist even though symmetrical still be fun in knee deep or less powder or soft to firm days. Moguls to trees to park. They hand flex very stout and would have been my ski of choice to buy if they had my length. The 191 3.0 im still looking forward to trying and retiring my old 3 Zeros.Not for any reason I still love them. They hardly have a scratch and probably have over 150 days on them. Just for something different. Im robbing the schizo of them i had mounted last season for the CT3.0.

    The 2016 2.0 vs 3.0 now theirs a comparison i would love to read.Ill be the 3.0 is the better all mountain ski only because it will ski powder better being wider and more directional. The 2.0 more nimble and better switch. Guess they both stomp pretty good and both have great swing weight. Bet the 3.0 carvers on the groomers just as well? All guesses. haha great skiing up north so far this season tip up. :] James

Leave a Comment