Thanks for your impressive ski review insights. I am headed on big ski tour to Norway in April and need lighter touring skis.
My Tele 22 Designs Outlaw bindings are quite heavy and I am not ready to go AT (yet).
Would you suggest ZeroG 105, ZeroG 95, or another light tour ski to offset heavy bindings? Goals are lightweight & stable in varied terrain.
I am 6'0, 190 lbs., fit, strong skier & think the 188 length may work better than 180 unless you think otherwise?
Thanks & think snow~
Blizzard Zero G 105 Ski
Ever since taking its rightful place as the head of the Blizzard touring ski stable, the Zero G 105 has made quite a splash, especially amongst aggressive skiers looking to venture to faraway places. Not being content with good, Blizzard has continued their journey towards great by tweaking the Carbon Drive laminate (now in its third iteration). As a result, Blizzard was able to make the ride a little more friendly without sacrificing the hard-charging performance people have come to love. In other words, the ski loses none of its soft snow pedigree but becomes friendlier when the snow is less friendly (or just downright awful). While the tip and tail rocker make the Zero G 105 a powder ripping fiend, the long sidecut combined with Carbon Drive 3.0 laminate ensures it’s no slouch on hard snow, either. Built to explore distant peaks and the powder-filled couloirs that reside on them, the Zero G 105 is a reliable soft snow-oriented partner that will calmly tackle any objective.
- Carbon Drive 3.0 is a carbon laminate that allows Blizzard to finetune ski characteristics.
- Rocker-camber-rocker profile helps the ski float and maneuver in deep snow.
- The long side cut helps provide a tenacious edge hold on steep terrain.
- Biggest powder-focused ski in the Blizzard touring lineup.
| Specifications | |
| Lengths (cm) | 164, 172, 180, 188 |
|
Weight |
1320g [164] 1400g [172] 1510g [180] 1630g [188] |
| Weight (pair) | 2640g [164] 2800g [172] 3020g [180] 3260g [188] |
|
|
131-103-117 [164] 131-103-117 [172] 133-105-119 [180] 134-105-120 [188] |
|
Turn |
18m [164] 20m [172] 23m [180] 24m [188] |
|
Skin |
Tip recession, tail notch |
| Specs Verified | 172 & 188 only |
| Design | |
|
|
Rockered tip, camber underfoot, subtle tail rocker |
|
|
Rounded tip and tails with a long radius |
|
|
Carbon Drive 3.0 |
|
|
Paulownia |
| Skimo Co Says | |
| Usage | Powder touring |
| Notes | Carbon Drive 3.0 gets rid of the harshness but keeps the charge |
| Bottom Line | Competitive weight with exceptional performance |
| Compare to other High-fat Skis | |
Related Products
Questions & Reviews
2/3/2025
Question from
Matty TeleSki 
2/3/2025
Hi Matty!
An impressive ski indeed! The answer to which length largely comes down to personal preference. From a general touring perspective, the 180cm seems more suitable for you and your skiing. The Zero G 95 offers a lot of ski to work with, allowing a skier to get away with a slightly shorter ski comfortably. Additionally, when going with a slightly shorter ski, you are graced with numerous efficiency benefits, such as less weight, easier kick turns, etc. You could go with the 188cm and find more stability, but the speeds needed to realize this are probably quite high. Thanks!
An impressive ski indeed! The answer to which length largely comes down to personal preference. From a general touring perspective, the 180cm seems more suitable for you and your skiing. The Zero G 95 offers a lot of ski to work with, allowing a skier to get away with a slightly shorter ski comfortably. Additionally, when going with a slightly shorter ski, you are graced with numerous efficiency benefits, such as less weight, easier kick turns, etc. You could go with the 188cm and find more stability, but the speeds needed to realize this are probably quite high. Thanks!
Answer this question:
1/22/2025
Hey team, I'm looking to replace some eight-year-old black crows Corvus and contemplating the 105 to pair up with some 85s as a Wasatch quiver. What do you think about these for the fat touring setup here? Are there other models that you think are more worth considering?
I love the Corvus but they're heavy. By comparison really have disliked almost all the BD skis I've owned - they just feel limp/slarvy by comparison.
Part 2 - what do you think about sizing on these things? I'm 5'10" 180lbs and in general I go for something just over 180cm, but the jump to 188cm seems pretty big and I haven't had anything that long since megawatts years ago.
I love the Corvus but they're heavy. By comparison really have disliked almost all the BD skis I've owned - they just feel limp/slarvy by comparison.
Part 2 - what do you think about sizing on these things? I'm 5'10" 180lbs and in general I go for something just over 180cm, but the jump to 188cm seems pretty big and I haven't had anything that long since megawatts years ago.
1/22/2025
Hi James,
If you like the Corvus but want something lighter, I think this could be a great option for you! It is a stiff directional ski with enough rocker to be slippery when it needs to be, but still have great edge hold on steeps. It's a very versatile ski for the width, and likes to ski fast.
Sizing wise, I think 180cm would work well for you! 188cm is pretty long, I think a little longer than you'd want at 5'10 for a touring ski. These don't ski short!
If you like the Corvus but want something lighter, I think this could be a great option for you! It is a stiff directional ski with enough rocker to be slippery when it needs to be, but still have great edge hold on steeps. It's a very versatile ski for the width, and likes to ski fast.
Sizing wise, I think 180cm would work well for you! 188cm is pretty long, I think a little longer than you'd want at 5'10 for a touring ski. These don't ski short!
Answer this question:
1/8/2025
I have these skis in a 180 and I adore them — always feel like they do basically exactly what I want them to do. But I’m going to Japan next month and I’m thinking about getting something that floats even better. What bigger waisted powder touring skis do you like that ski like the Zero G 105?
1/9/2025
Hi Jon,
The Zero G 105 is a great ski! The closest ski that comes to mind in a wider width would be the Armada Locator 112. It is a similarly stiff and directional ski that also has enough rocker - similar to the 105 - to slide around when you want it to, but also the backbone to be driven hard. The La Machine Mega from Faction is the other ski that comes to mind - it has a more rocker than the Zero G and Armada, and wouldn't have quite as much edge feel as a result, but is in a similar stiffness/charginess category and is also easy to pivot and slide around when you ask it to.
The Zero G 105 is a great ski! The closest ski that comes to mind in a wider width would be the Armada Locator 112. It is a similarly stiff and directional ski that also has enough rocker - similar to the 105 - to slide around when you want it to, but also the backbone to be driven hard. The La Machine Mega from Faction is the other ski that comes to mind - it has a more rocker than the Zero G and Armada, and wouldn't have quite as much edge feel as a result, but is in a similar stiffness/charginess category and is also easy to pivot and slide around when you ask it to.
Answer this question:
1/6/2025
Hi! As a smaller woman (5'0) would the 164cm length of these skis be too much to handle? I'm wanting a new ski for mostly touring but the odd resort day here or there. I'm an expert or level 3 skier, but find it hard to find skis in my length (generally prefer around 158-162cm), especially after reading that these skis like to be driven from the front. Thank you!
1/7/2025
Hi Erin,
It would be on the longer side for you! Being an expert skier, I think you could handle it, but it might not be ideal for touring use if you intend to ski these in tight trees/couloirs, and they will feel long on the skin track. They are a ski that likes to be driven, and are pretty stiff.
If you'd like to dive into some skis that might work better for you, feel free to shoot us an email at help@skimo.co with a description of what you're looking for, and we'd love to help you out!
It would be on the longer side for you! Being an expert skier, I think you could handle it, but it might not be ideal for touring use if you intend to ski these in tight trees/couloirs, and they will feel long on the skin track. They are a ski that likes to be driven, and are pretty stiff.
If you'd like to dive into some skis that might work better for you, feel free to shoot us an email at help@skimo.co with a description of what you're looking for, and we'd love to help you out!
Answer this question:
12/1/2024
Any comment between the blizzard zeeo g and fischer trans alp 105s. I'm used to 90mm underfoot for touring, and like trees in the PNW The zeros have great reviews, but I'm not as hard charging as i once was.
12/2/2024
Hi Ryan,
Both are very powerful skis for the weight. The Blizzard is fairly loose, easier to control the turn shape. The Fischer will want to hold their turns a bit more, and maybe a bit better in variable snow. I would lean towards the blizzard if tree skiing is a priority.
Both are very powerful skis for the weight. The Blizzard is fairly loose, easier to control the turn shape. The Fischer will want to hold their turns a bit more, and maybe a bit better in variable snow. I would lean towards the blizzard if tree skiing is a priority.
Answer this question:
11/24/2024
I'm an XC skier getting into backcountry adventures and considering the Blizzard Zero G 105 with ATK raider 13 evo bindings for my setup. I occasionally get some time at the local resort and wonder how this setup would do in the groomers?
11/25/2024
Hi Jim,
That setup would do well on groomers for a touring setup, without weighing you down too much on the uphill! The Raider Evo bindings are an excellent choice for people who want to emphasize downhill performance in a tech binding. The Zero G 105 is a great all-around, wider touring ski that does well in powder and firm snow. You could go a bit narrower if you wanted to emphasize uphill performance more, but the 105mm width is great in the soft stuff and provides a bit more float.
Feel free to email help@skimo.co if you want to dive deeper into skis and bindings!
That setup would do well on groomers for a touring setup, without weighing you down too much on the uphill! The Raider Evo bindings are an excellent choice for people who want to emphasize downhill performance in a tech binding. The Zero G 105 is a great all-around, wider touring ski that does well in powder and firm snow. You could go a bit narrower if you wanted to emphasize uphill performance more, but the 105mm width is great in the soft stuff and provides a bit more float.
Feel free to email help@skimo.co if you want to dive deeper into skis and bindings!
Answer this question:
11/20/2024
I am just wondering if there is a big difference between the Carbon Drive 3.0 vs the Carbon Drive 2.0? I have the Zero G 105s - 172 length that only have the Carbon Drive 2.0 and am wondering if it is wondering if it is worth upgrading to the newer skis that have the Carbon Drive 3.0.
11/20/2024
Hi Dan,
The Carbon Drive 3.0 layup is more progressive and friendlier. Still a stiff, precise ski, but less chattery in bad snow and a bit more forgiving.
The Carbon Drive 3.0 layup is more progressive and friendlier. Still a stiff, precise ski, but less chattery in bad snow and a bit more forgiving.
11/20/2024
Thanks Emmett! It sounds like the 3.0 is a great improvement, but do you think it is a great enough improvement that I should upgrade from the 2.0 to the 3.0? I just got the skis that have the 2.0 btw, they are brand new.
Answer this question:
5/1/2024
Rob
(used product a few times)
I have not used them in deeper pow, but mostly variable firm, icy, crust, corn to 6” of pow. No matter the conditions they inspire great confidence. I was worried the 180 would feel small, but feels perfect. I’m 6’ 186lbs. They do require to be skied actively, pressuring the tips and staying forward, but that allows me to rip through pow, crust and firm snow you find later in the season without much adjusting. Great ski I wish I could have a heavier resort version.
Comment on this review:
1/1/2024
Are these skis too light to mount with hybrid bindings like the Marker Duke PT? I'm a heavier skier and spend on good deal of time in bounds but still like having the option to tour around my home in the mountains too. I understand the differences between hybrid bindings and pin (tech) bindings.
Would it be too much force on the ski to even bother to ski Zero G 105s hard in-bounds with hybrid bindings comfortably? Am I going to have to slow down so much with these light skis that I might as well just have tech bindings on them anyway?
Would it be too much force on the ski to even bother to ski Zero G 105s hard in-bounds with hybrid bindings comfortably? Am I going to have to slow down so much with these light skis that I might as well just have tech bindings on them anyway?
1/1/2024
Hi Richmond,
The Zero G 105 is a pretty powerful ski. Of all the touring skis to take in bounds from time to time, this would be a good one. There will be no issue skiing it hard with hybrid bindings. Of course, it will not be as damp as a heavier resort ski, but it sounds like you also want something with a more tourable weight. I think it would be a good match! Tech bindings will go uphill better of course, but for lots of resort time, hybrid bindings have their place and will improve the power transfer and give you a more resort-binding feel.
The Zero G 105 is a pretty powerful ski. Of all the touring skis to take in bounds from time to time, this would be a good one. There will be no issue skiing it hard with hybrid bindings. Of course, it will not be as damp as a heavier resort ski, but it sounds like you also want something with a more tourable weight. I think it would be a good match! Tech bindings will go uphill better of course, but for lots of resort time, hybrid bindings have their place and will improve the power transfer and give you a more resort-binding feel.
Answer this question:
12/16/2023
I just bought the zero g 105 in a 188cm. I also bought the ATK freeraider evo 15 binding in size 108mm but it does not seem to fit over the waist. Any ideas? Do you have different brake sizes in stock for that binding?
12/16/2023
Hi Ross,
Not sure what's going on there! A 108mm ATK brake should easily fit over a 105mm ski. They usually fit even a slightly wider ski than the stated width would indicate. We do have replacement brakes, but would like to figure out what's going on here first. If you send some pictures of what you're seeing to help@skimo.co, we can take a look!
Not sure what's going on there! A 108mm ATK brake should easily fit over a 105mm ski. They usually fit even a slightly wider ski than the stated width would indicate. We do have replacement brakes, but would like to figure out what's going on here first. If you send some pictures of what you're seeing to help@skimo.co, we can take a look!
1/4/2024
Hi - I was considering this ski/binding setup. Did this issue ever get resolved. Would you need a break wider than the 108?
Thanks,
Jamey
Thanks,
Jamey
Answer this question:
4/13/2023
Hey Y'all,
I'm curious about your opinion on the two mounting points on the Zero G 105. I bought the ski for mountaineering objectives. I ski a lot in the San Juans and wanted something that's light enough to swing in tight spots but also has some float for the runout. I skied mantras on the resort for years but lately have gravitated toward reverse camber skis because I like how easy they are to manage in technical terrain, and I have kind of wanted something that skis slightly similarly (more upright, less forward pressure) in the backcountry. Obviously didn't fully go that route, but I have been thinking that mounting the Zero G's at the forward line would make the ski a little more balanced and manageable in steep, tight terrain. Do you think the +1.5cm (I think) will make much of a difference or compromise the ski's float in deep snow?
Thanks for your help.
I'm curious about your opinion on the two mounting points on the Zero G 105. I bought the ski for mountaineering objectives. I ski a lot in the San Juans and wanted something that's light enough to swing in tight spots but also has some float for the runout. I skied mantras on the resort for years but lately have gravitated toward reverse camber skis because I like how easy they are to manage in technical terrain, and I have kind of wanted something that skis slightly similarly (more upright, less forward pressure) in the backcountry. Obviously didn't fully go that route, but I have been thinking that mounting the Zero G's at the forward line would make the ski a little more balanced and manageable in steep, tight terrain. Do you think the +1.5cm (I think) will make much of a difference or compromise the ski's float in deep snow?
Thanks for your help.
4/13/2023
Hank,
I'd say the balance you gain in steeps would be much outweighed by the loss of float in other terrain. The new Zero G has less stiff tails than the older models, but they're still pretty stiff. You might find the ski would run away easily if you mount them further forward. You could also go forward just a hair, like 0.75 or 1 cm.
I'd say the balance you gain in steeps would be much outweighed by the loss of float in other terrain. The new Zero G has less stiff tails than the older models, but they're still pretty stiff. You might find the ski would run away easily if you mount them further forward. You could also go forward just a hair, like 0.75 or 1 cm.
Answer this question:
4/6/2023
Hi, wondering if you might comment on the zero G 105 V the QST Echo, i'm wondering how they might compare. The QST is slightly heavier, (damper?) the rockers are comparable, and both have similar radius and are billed as playful. So do they have a similar feel, or is one more..... (?) than the other? I'm guessing the Zero G 105 is a tad more directional and the Echo more slarvy(!) but would love to hear any comments as there are not many Echo comments out there as its new. Many thanks.
4/6/2023
Hi Clum, all of those descriptors are pretty spot on. If you are looking for the more playful, damp, and slarvy ski, it is the Echo. If you want something stiffer, lighter, and like opening up turns, it would be the Zero G 105. The Blizzards have a slightly different shape, with less tail rocker and a stiffer tail.
12/7/2023
Which skis is closest to the Echo shape but in a lighter package? My Echo 106 weighs 1860 and 1877g/ski, bought yesterday so can't say much of the skiing.
Answer this question:
3/28/2023
I am planning to upgrade my bc skis next year and do you know if this ski will be available in the 180 length? I understand they are made in Ukraine--
3/28/2023
Hi Carl! The Zero G of next year will go unchanged and remain available in a 180cm length. Most of the Blizzard skis including the Zero Gs are made in Austria. Thanks!
Answer this question:
3/18/2023
I've skied a pair of Volkl V-werks Katana 177 for the past 8 years with Marker F-12 bindings. These are the perfect skis for me in terms of downhill on piste performance. I can't imagine a better ski. I'm looking for an alpine touring ski that can replica (as much as possible) the downhill performance of the V-werks Katana with a much lighter weight for touring.
I recently rented/tried tour skiing on a pair of Black Diamond Navis. They were great uphill but very underwhelming on the descent. They felt chattery and flimsy with a week edge. I assume the weight savings can contribute to the flimsy effect of a touring ski. This was my first time skinning up a mountain and we descended on piste which is obviously a certain type of skiing.
I like to ski fast and am looking for a stiff ski that will hold an edge and charge on fast turns/general descent on piste, but are much lighter and can handle the variable conditions of touring off piste as well as powder.
Basically, if there's a much lighter V-werks Katana, I'm all in.
Any suggestions would be appreciated.
Cheers,
Daniel
I recently rented/tried tour skiing on a pair of Black Diamond Navis. They were great uphill but very underwhelming on the descent. They felt chattery and flimsy with a week edge. I assume the weight savings can contribute to the flimsy effect of a touring ski. This was my first time skinning up a mountain and we descended on piste which is obviously a certain type of skiing.
I like to ski fast and am looking for a stiff ski that will hold an edge and charge on fast turns/general descent on piste, but are much lighter and can handle the variable conditions of touring off piste as well as powder.
Basically, if there's a much lighter V-werks Katana, I'm all in.
Any suggestions would be appreciated.
Cheers,
Daniel
3/18/2023
Hi Daniel, lighter touring skis are going to feel less damp than burlier resort skis. There's simply just not as much stuff under your feet! But, some of them are certainly stiffer and damper than others. The Blizzard Zero G 105 here is a good such option. Elan's Ripstick Tour 104 is another, and it packs a carving punch. The DPS Pagoda Tour series is known for its dampness as well. Please feel free to reach out to help@skimo.co and we'd be happy to get into the details!
Answer this question:
2/16/2023
Question from
Christian
How is zero g 105 compared to voile hyper charger ?
Except from weight difference ?
Except from weight difference ?
2/16/2023
Hi Christian, the Voile Hyper Charger is going to be more soft snow oriented and playful, due to its more rockered tips and tails. The Zero G 105 has plenty of width to float, but geared more towards variable snow and harder pack with plenty of camber underfoot.
Answer this question:
2/7/2023
Hi there: how would you compare the Zero G 105 to the Armada Locator 104? On paper they seem quite similar/a worthy competitor and with the Locator being even lighter than the Zero G I'm super curious on where/how they differ performance-wise. Thanks
2/7/2023
Seth,
The Locators are very energetic and playful. Easy to break out of turns and easy to get back into them. At high speed in chop they keep gaining energy long after other skis become unstable. The Zero Gs are more of a traditional ski, not to say they're outdated of course. A bit stiffer and more locked in, and probably more stable in steeps.
The Locators are very energetic and playful. Easy to break out of turns and easy to get back into them. At high speed in chop they keep gaining energy long after other skis become unstable. The Zero Gs are more of a traditional ski, not to say they're outdated of course. A bit stiffer and more locked in, and probably more stable in steeps.
Answer this question:
2/6/2023
I've been wanting to buy my first pair of touring skis. I've read 100 different reviews on lots of skis, but I think I'm basically down to the Blizzard Zero G 105 or the K2 Dispatch 101. I'm a novice ski tourer, but have grown up inbounds skiing. My resort ski is a Nordica Enforcer 100 that I love. I ski hard, I'm willing to ski pretty much any terrain. I'm 6'4" 215.
I'd love any input or thoughts on those two skis. Also, if you think there's a better ski for me/my skiing please feel free to share!
I'd love any input or thoughts on those two skis. Also, if you think there's a better ski for me/my skiing please feel free to share!
2/6/2023
Bryan,
This would be a great ski! Stiff like the enforcer, but keep in mind that this ski doesn't have the weight to soak up crud like the enforcer. You might want to also check out the Dynastar M-Tour 99. In my experience, it skis very much like an alpine ski and is much more stable than the weight would imply. I don't have any experience with the K2 ski, but in my mind, it's heavier than what I would want to use as a dedicated touring setup.
This would be a great ski! Stiff like the enforcer, but keep in mind that this ski doesn't have the weight to soak up crud like the enforcer. You might want to also check out the Dynastar M-Tour 99. In my experience, it skis very much like an alpine ski and is much more stable than the weight would imply. I don't have any experience with the K2 ski, but in my mind, it's heavier than what I would want to use as a dedicated touring setup.
Answer this question:
1/17/2023
Question from
Ian
Any thoughts here between the Blizzard Zero G 105 and Black Diamond Helio 104. I'm looking into my first proper/light weight-ish touring setup for the Eastern Sierra. I'm 6'2" 190 lbs. In the Helio 104 I am looking at their longest ski at 184 cm. The Zero G, I would opt for the 188, fearing the 180 would be too small, I haven't skied on any skis 180cm or less since I was probably 13.
1/18/2023
Ian,
The Helios are very damp - think "wet noodle". Not necessarily a bad thing, but the ski will carry very little energy from turn to turn.
The Zero G is more energetic and easier to ski, probably more fun for most people to ski.
As always, it's personal preference!
The Helios are very damp - think "wet noodle". Not necessarily a bad thing, but the ski will carry very little energy from turn to turn.
The Zero G is more energetic and easier to ski, probably more fun for most people to ski.
As always, it's personal preference!
Answer this question:
1/4/2023
Chooch
(used product regularly)
Fantastic all-round backcountry ski: lightweight, durable and handles variable snow extremely well. Low-key graphics a perfect contrast to most skis in this era of attention-seeking hype, however, topsheets do collect a bit more snow than other glossier skis on occasion. Currently using them with TLT low tech race binding and enjoying the lightweight performance.
Comment on this review:
11/23/2022
Hi there, I can't decide between the 180cm or the 188cm Zero G 105?
I am 6'1" 175ibs.
In bounds I ski a Rustler 11 188 and a Atris 184 but for touring I have used a 180cm Rossi Soul 7, which felt nice going up but feels to short on the way down for how I ski.
I am worried the a 188 would be harder for kickturns and tight trees.
But I also want to make sure I have a ski that can charge down hill and feel comfortable on.
What do you recommend? 180 or 188 in the Zero G 105?
I am 6'1" 175ibs.
In bounds I ski a Rustler 11 188 and a Atris 184 but for touring I have used a 180cm Rossi Soul 7, which felt nice going up but feels to short on the way down for how I ski.
I am worried the a 188 would be harder for kickturns and tight trees.
But I also want to make sure I have a ski that can charge down hill and feel comfortable on.
What do you recommend? 180 or 188 in the Zero G 105?
11/23/2022
Hi Matthew, you have analyzed the differences quite thoroughly. A lot of us round down for touring practicality, but yes, on those dream runs we may have enjoyed rounding up. But we always had a dream run nonetheless! You could also look at splitting the difference in another model of course.
Answer this question:
Earn store credit by writing reviews. Learn more.
