We’ve been using Carv’s ‘Digital Ski Coach’ system for multiple seasons, and we’ve been impressed by its impact on our own skiing — and all the data it can add to our product reviews.
At Blister Summit 2025, we sat down with Carv CEO, Jamie Grant, to get the full breakdown of how Carv’s sensors work; the data they collect; how they turn that into useful instructions; the updates and new features they’ve added this season, and more.
For a more in-depth look into all the updates Carv made this winter, check out ep. 374 of our GEAR:30 podcast
Share This Post:
As someone who has used Carv myself and shared it with friends of very different skiing levels, I can say that Carv is not a true coaching system. It collects a wide range of skiing metrics — speed, rotational G-forces, parallel ski position, turn shape etc.— and it does this with impressive accuracy.
But data alone isn’t coaching. Knowing someone’s numbers doesn’t replace understanding their fitness, strength, coordination, or technical background.
Another issue is that Carv promotes one specific type of turn as “ideal.” Racing turns, mogul turns, and off-piste turns all require different approaches. Even fundamentals like body position and upper-body stability are nothing new — they’re in every ski manual. And metrics such as edge angle vary significantly with body size and shouldn’t be used as a main performance marker.
It’s easy to achieve a high score on gentle slopes, but the same habits often fail in steeper or more challenging terrain. This can create a false sense of skill without preparing someone for real mountain skiing.
For me, Carv is a fun gadget if you have the money, and its measurement technology is genuinely impressive. But it’s not a substitute for proper training, and there’s no solid scientific proof that it truly improves skiing. I’ve also seen that reducing everything to numbers can take some of the joy out of skiing.
If you enjoy using it, that’s great — but it’s worth considering whether you want your skiing experience to revolve around metrics.
Best regards,
Michael