2019-2020 G3 SENDr 112

Sam Shaheen reviews the G3 SENDr 112 for Blister Gear Review
G3 SENDr 112

Ski: 2019-2020 G3 SENDr 112, 188 cm

Available Lengths: 174, 181, 188, 195 cm

Blister’s Measured Length: 187.3 cm

Blister’s Measured Weight (188 cm): 1816 & 1872 grams

Stated Dimensions (188 cm): 139-112-127 mm

Blister’s Measured Dimensions: 137.4-111.4-125.6 mm

Stated Sidecut Radius: 25.8 m

Tip & Tail Splay (ski decambered): 59 mm / 14 mm

Traditional Camber Underfoot: ~2.4 mm


  • Poplar/Paulownia core
  • Four layers of carbon fiber
  • Two full layers of titanal
  • Low friction nylon topsheet
  • Polyurethane (PU) sidewalls

Blister Measured Mount Point: -11.3 cm from center; 82.4 cm from tail

Boots / Bindings: 17/18 Scarpa Maestrale RS / G3 Ion 12

Days Tested: 30

Test Locations: Front, Ten Mile, Elk, & Gore Ranges, CO; Wasatch Range, UT; Jasper National Park, Alberta; Mount Rainier National Park, WA.

[Note: Our review was conducted on the 17/18 SENDr 112, which was not changed for 18/19 or 19/20, apart from graphics.]


G3 says that the SENDr 112 brings hard-charging power to the backcountry, which is a pretty bold claim for a 112mm-wide ski that weighs about 1850 grams in a 188 cm length. But the SENDr isn’t like other touring skis on the market. It uses a unique combination of carbon fiber, PU sidewalls, and two sheets of metal titanal. Yes, you read that right; this ski weighs 1850 grams and has two sheets of metal in it.

One of the trends we noted this year at SIA was companies bringing back metal laminates, but G3 is the only company we know of that is doing it in a touring ski. So the real question is, how does it actually perform?

Flex Pattern and Shape

Unsurprisingly for a ski called the SENDr, the ski flexes pretty stout. I would sum up the flex like this:

Tips: 7 or 8

Underfoot: 9.5-10

Tails: 8-9

Some wide, light skis can be a bit flimsy and lack torsional rigidity, but the SENDr feels really solid. It has a thin profile, which makes it feel quite dense (there’s a lot of relative mass in that thin profile), but at the same time the ski feels unnaturally light overall, given its length and width.

The shape of the SENDr 112 is confidence inspiring; a fairly big 25.8 m sidecut radius gives way to a long, straight tip that doesn’t have much taper and a fairly modest amount of splay relative to the length of the tip rocker line.

Uphill Performance

The SENDr feels exactly like you would imagine on the uphill. It’s long, pretty light, wide, and has a touch of camber. It grips well enough on the skintrack, and while it doesn’t feel feather-light at 1850 grams, when you consider it’s a 112 mm wide, 188 cm ski, the SENDr feels much lighter than it should.

Sam Shaheen reviews the G3 SENDr 112 for Blister Gear Review
Sam Shaheen on the G3 SENDr 112, Rocky Mountain National Park, CO.

Kick turns were tough at first as the 188 cm SENDr is pretty long for a touring ski, but do a little more yoga and you’ll be fine.

Downhill Performance

The first thing I noticed about the SENDr is that it absolutely loves to be driven hard. The more you pressure the front of your boots and the more effort you put into skiing aggressively, the more this ski comes alive.

It is stiff, pretty traditionally-shaped, and light — a combination that I found lends itself to carving hard with the ski on edge. However, because of its low weight, the SENDr doesn’t thrive while straight-lining or reaching extremely high speeds. The ski is most comfortable at a fairly fast pace and can definitely handle very fast turns, but if you stop driving the ski hard on edge (i.e. straight-lining), it can get kicked around a bit. Again, it only weighs 1850 grams.

Much of my soft-snow testing for the SENDr was done in light, deep powder on Berthoud Pass. The terrain ranges from open wind lips to steep, craggy trees and everything in between. But none of the lines are very long. And charging in this terrain is exactly where the SENDr shines.

Sam Shaheen reviews the G3 SENDr 112 for Blister Gear Review
Sam Shaheen on the G3 SENDr 112, Berthoud Pass, CO.

The SENDr excels while skiing fast in technical terrain, jumping off stuff, and shutting down speed when you need it, slashing turns and plowing through soft variable snow.

One of the most comforting characteristics of the SENDr is the ride quality. In most carbon skis that are this light and stiff, you get a chattery and harsh ride. However, with the combination of twin titanal sheets and G3’s PU sidewalls (which are softer than ABS to reduce vibration), the SENDr achieves a surprisingly plush ride. The only unexpected chatter is likely due to the low weight of the ski, not the construction used on some lighter touring skis.

But with all that being said, the SENDr is not forgiving. The tail is stiff and long, and while that support is great to have on big airs and high speed turns, if you get into the backseat, the SENDr will kick your ass (not quite as badly as the Faction Dictator 3.0, though).

NEXT: Soft Snow, Hard Snow, Bottom Line, Etc.

30 comments on “2019-2020 G3 SENDr 112”

  1. Hi Sam,
    Great Review. A couple of comments. This set up seems a little odds, the Ion G3 bindings are great touring bindings but not really known for power transfer (see the Marker King pin). Also The boots you were using seem on the soft side for a powerful, stiff ski. Maybe the Freedoms would transfer power better. Also have you skied the Volkl Katana V-Werks? They sound similar sort of.


    • Hey Jim,

      I got these skis mounted with the Ion demos straight from G3 so binding choice wasn’t a decision I made. However, I think the Ion is a good fit for this ski because it keeps the weight reasonable. Besides the harsh feedback in firm conditions, the Ion skis great and makes this setup very reasonable for big days (I did several LARGE days in this setup, including Mt Rainier).

      The new Maestrales aren’t Freedoms, that’s for sure. But they are a solid boot and the best version of the Maestrale to date by a huge margin. With Freedoms and Kingpins, I think you would want a heavier ski to really get everything you can out of the setup (especially from the boots).

      I haven’t skied the Katana V-Werks… it’s on the list.


  2. Great Review. Thanks- I’ve been waiting for a good review of this ski!

    You say the SENDr excels while skiing fast in technical terrain, jumping off stuff, and shutting down speed when you need it, slashing turns and plowing through soft variable snow. But you also comment that it is a very demanding ski. My question for you is, if you are a strong skier, can you easily transition from locked-in, driving the tips, to breaking the tails free and slashing quick turns or shutting down the speed? Examples would be tree skiing, or navigating rock-bands and tight terrain, or checking speed after a jump to set up for a consecutive jump (i.e. cliff bands and pillow lines), or surfing sideways down steep terrain..

    I currently have a rockered skis that excel at the above, but rockered skis do have their disadvantages, and I’m also looking for a lighter set-up. So I’d appreciate any feedback on whether the stiff, straight tails of the SENDr really make this ski too locked in, or, with a good pilot, the tails can also be freed up for alternate turn shapes, maneuver in tight spots, and check speed in the conditions I describe above. I already have a ski-mountaineering set up, so I’m more looking for something fun, fat and fast for those deep days.

    Thanks for any feedback you can provide!

    • Hey Connor, thanks for the feedback.

      To (attempt to) answer your question:

      The SENDr doesn’t really have a “locked in” feel like you describe. They slide, smear, slarve and break free rather easily. However, they do all those things best from an aggressive, driving stance. If you want to surf around, you have to find a very small sweet spot for the neutral stance. But as long as you drive through the fronts of your boots, you can definitely make more technical turns.

      Personally I wouldn’t like this ski for the deepest days (granted, with a limited quiver, this would make a good compromise there). I prefer a little surfier ride in the deepest snow. The best way to describe the SENDr is precise. So if you value precision in any given condition, they will likely work well for you.

      I hope that answers your question!

  3. Thank you Sam. I greatly appreciate the feedback and super-speedy response. I want a precise ski I can drive. I also want a surfy ski! haha. I’d love to have them all, but unfortunately, at >$1000 per setup for the skis I’m considering, trade-offs will have to be made. So I greatly appreciate the detailed feedback (and Blister Reviews in general!) to help me decide which skis strike the best blend for my personal tastes.

    Thanks for differentiating between maneuverability/variety of turn shapes and surfability. I’m looking for a deep powder ski, and when I think about it, I think I desire a surfy ski for those conditions too. I’ll definitely try to demo the SENDr if I can though, as it sound pretty interesting.


  4. Great review!

    Could you recommend this ski to someone who is new to backcountry touring? I want a damp, stable ski that I can drive for all things backcountry. How does this ski and the Corvus Freebird compare?

    • Hey Aaron,

      Though I’ve never ridden the Corvus Freebird, I don’t think the SENDr is inherently bad as a first touring ski. The only caveat being that it better not be your first ski period! There isn’t much difference between alpine skiing and touring on the way down, so as long as you’re looking for a precise, stiff and lightweight ski that likes to be driven, then the SENDr should work for you,

  5. Hello Aaron, How would you compare these skis to the Zero G 108? More surfier ? Little bit of a compromise on the dampness for a gain in float? Thanks!

  6. Hi Sam,

    Thanks for the informative review! I just acquired a pair of Sendr’s 174cm and I was hoping you could help me out with some mounting tips based on your experience with the skis. I’m putting the Ion bindings on to have these as my touring setup. I live in BC, so I ski a lot of steep and tight trees. The factory recommended mount is pretty far back from the true centre, and as a smaller rider (5’5″, 125lb) I’m considering mounting forwards +2 or 3cm. What’s your take on the factory recommended mount? And what do you think of mounting a bit forward? In your review you talk about skiing the ski from a neutral stance, with a very small sweet-spot. Do you think a forward mount would make it easier to ski from a neutral stance, or make the “sweet-spot window” bigger?

    • Hey Kine, thanks!

      As far as mount point goes, I think going +2-3cm would make the SENDr a touch quicker but I doubt it would make it easier to ski from a neutral stance (you’re effectively just making the stiff tail longer at that point). However, because of the light weight, the SENDr is already pretty quick. I’m not a huge fan of changing around mount points (granted, I did have a good park skiing phase…) and, for me, the SENDr never felt like it needed a more forward mount.

      I would also make sure that your mount point keeps the binding in the little flat spots for the toe and heel piece built into the core.

      Be sure to let us know what mount point you decide on and how your new setup skis!

      • I mounted the SENDr 188 w/ G3 zed +2cm to get more tail out of the ski. I’ve now bought the Maestrale XT to replace my old Maestrale’s which will send me back farther a tiny bit farther. I believe I’ll enjoy this as I’m found the ski to feel a bit short and would probably rebuy at 195cm length and mount on the recommended length. I was worried about washing out the tails when sending a cliff.

        That being said, the pivot point and snap in the crescendo of the turn is gorgeous on a nice fall line.

  7. I know they are totally different skis, but would it be fair to call the Sendr a happy middle point between the very traditional feel of the old G3 carbon zenoxide and and the ultra surfy feel of the G3 empire? Having owned both those skis, I’d say a middle ground between the two would probably be a fairly badass one ski quiver for a bigger, more aggressive skier who only earns their turns.

  8. Hi Eric, though I’ve never skied the Carbon Zenoxide or the Emprire, I would guess that the SENDr is more similar to the Zenoxide as you describe them. It likes traditional technique but it also excels in conditions and terrain where traditional shapes tend to falter. It really isn’t a surfy ski (though it does a have a very small neutral stance sweet spot).

    I agree though, the SENDr is a badass one ski quiver for an aggressive skier who tours frequently. The bigger you are, the more forgiving you’ll likely find it too.

    Hope that answers your question,

  9. Sam,
    Trying to sort out the length on these. Can you tell me your height and weight? It almost sounded in your review like the 188 was a lot of ski and wondering if shorter (181) would be a good fit for me or just dumbing down the ski. I’m a 180# 5’10” aggressive skier. Thanks.

    • Hey Andy, I’m 5’10” and ~140lbs. I think the length question really comes down to skiing style and terrain. If you are planning to ski more trees and tight, techy terrain, then the 181cm would probably work. The more you expect to ski softer/deeper snow and make bigger turns, I’d lean towards the 188cm.

      If you’re an aggressive skier, I wouldn’t worry about the 188cm being too much ski.

  10. Hey Sam,

    Great review, always love reading your stuff.

    Any idea how the 195 SENDrs would compare to the 192 DPS wailer RPCs? They seem very very similar.

    I am 6’6, 230 lbs, and an aggressive (directional) backcountry skier. I currently tour on 192 DPS RPCs with kingpin 13s. I like the RPC a lot, but sometimes I find myself wanting just a little bit more ski when I go to drive the shovels..sometimes I feel like I’m literally going to go over the bars (over the tips?) on bigger landings. However, I still really want to retain the quickness edge to edge and floaty/slashy-ness of the RPCs in pow, as well as their ability to bite into shit snow on sketchy steeps when they have to.

    I’m looking to replace my RPCs with another one-ski backcountry quiver. My short list is currently the following skis (mounted w/ either kingpins or fritschi tectons):
    – 204cm Faction Candide 3.0
    – 196 Faction Prime 4.0
    – 196 4FRNT Renegades
    – 196 G3 SENDr

    With the exception of the Renegades (Full rocker) I think all these skis are in the same ballpark

    I’d love to see if you have any idea as to how the other options stack up to the G3 SENDr, as well as how the SENDr compares to my current ski (the 192 RPC).

    Any and all help appreciated!

    • to distill down the previous long winded comment: How do you see these comparing to other light and long touring skis with more directional shapes?

      • Hey Brett, I haven’t skied many of the skis you’re looking at but I think the SENDr will be a bit more versatile, especially in hard snow, than the RPC’s. However, the SENDr doesn’t have a lot of “slashy-ness” as you indicate. Hopefully I’ll get some time on the other skis on your list this year and can weigh in with more info.

        • Hey Sam,

          Randomly stumbled upon this 1 year later…..any follow up thoughts on this, now that you have probably skied many similar skis since then?

          Mostly interested in a comparison to the corvus freebird, but curious to hear your “year after” thoughts as well.

          Rock on!

          • Hey Brett,

            The closest comparison ski I’ve been on since I posted this is probably the Scott Scrapper 115, and the SENDr is more precise, demanding, and predictable (though it doesn’t float quite as well). Overall I still love the SENDr in the very small category of game on, charge-y touring skis. For the advanced to expert skier looking to push their skiing, the SENDr is still my top pick.

  11. I know they are very different skis, but when compared to the G3 Synapse 109 which is fully rockered, does the Sendr 112 gain enough stability on hard snow to make it worth the loss of playfulness and quick turn ability?
    Or put another way – does the Synapse 109 have a significant step down in hard snow capability which would make the sendr a better choice despite the loss of quickness in good snow? Looking for touring ski for Colorado mostly for mid winter but I do some spring touring which would include variable conditions. I am leaning towards the Synapse as I want something more powder oriented but am concerned the icy or spring snow capability will be severely lacking.

  12. Hello,

    Any idea how these might compare to the Volkl V Werks 122? I am looking for a deep-er day touring setup. It is hard to checkout these skis around here nevermind demo them.


  13. Have you guys been able to get on this year’s Seekr 110 and/or Roamr 108? Can’t seem to find any first hand accounts of how those skis behave. I’d be interested in learning more about the Seekr and Roamr, especially as the Sendr seems like it’s way more ski than I’m looking for.

  14. I’m an avid in bounds skier and occasional BC skier. I ski aggressively on groomers, powder, steep terrain and trees (although I’m not dropping cliffs by any means).

    To give you an idea of my average ski season:
    a. 50 + days of lift served skiing
    a. 1 or 2 4000+ ft ascents in backcountry
    b. a few 1500 to 2000 ft ascents in backountry
    c. 1 or 2 hut trips
    d. a couple dozen 1500 ft uphills at the resort before work

    This is all in the Aspen, CO area.

    I’ve been skiing the Black diamond Amperage, 176 for all terrain and conditions for the past 5 years or so. I have Dynafit FT bindings and BD quadrant boots. I absolutely love skiing powder on these skis but they’re heavy on uphills.

    I’m finally considering trading them in. Due to cost, I’m not willing to have 2 set ups and I’m going to stick with my current boots and bindings for the meantime.

    I’m 5’10” and 170 lbs. I’m looking at the G3 Sndr, 181cm. Considering the info. that I’ve laid out, do you think this ski will be a good option for me? If not, do you have other recommendations?

    • Hey Roger,

      I think the SENDr would be a good choice if you’re a skier that rarely makes mistakes and you tend to drive your skis through the fronts of your boots — hard.

      For more forgiving options, I’d check out the G3 ROAMr 108, Line Sick Day 104, and Elan Ripstick 106. All of those are great skis.

      Hope that helps!

  15. Hey Sam wondering if you had any thoughts on the Sendrs vs the 4frnt Hoji, a ski I have loved in the past…not having skiied the Sendr myself, could you speak to any obvious similarities/differences??

  16. To clarify…I’m 5’10 185, if I did Sendr I’d mount with CAST forward of recommended. My thoughts being that with the camber profile and footprint of the SENDR it could be made to perform like a stiffer, damper Hoji. Your description of this being a ski you have to DRIVE hard with the front of the boot is a little confusing/at odds with my first impressions from seeing the G3 in person and hand flexing FWIW…curious to hear your feedback on the “slarveability” of these might be affected with a different binding, mount point and heavier skier!

  17. I was thinking of upgrading my G3 District 112 for the Sendr. Overall, I really enjoyed the Districts in the wetter snow we get in Chile – any thoughts on how the Sendr compares? I also have the Zenoxide 105, and always had more fun (unless it was blower pow) skiing on the rockered districts than the traditional Zen.

  18. Bumping this. Considering a set of 195 sendrs as soft snow touring skis in the PNW. I am 6’3″ 205 and prefer straightish skis with traditional mounts. How will these do in old growth trees under someone my size?

Leave a Comment