In Search of the Best All Mountain Telemark Ski

[@Absolutetelemark]

Remember that this is a ski that I like for my style, the terrain I like to ski, and the mountain resorts I ski. Please check the blog post I wrote for more details on my journey to find a great all mountain ski. absolutetelemark.com/category/telemark-2/

[@johns3106]

Nice to see a ski review that covers EXACTLY the conditions and terrain we encounter here in northern Vermont!

[@OCteahead]

Glad to hear your opinion of these skis. I’ve spent my entire rookie year of tele dreaming of Bishop Gonzos and BMF-3 bindings.

[@Absolutetelemark]

Definitely worth the try.

[@shannononeal7375]

Love mine

[@kazeone1000]

Nice turns RM. I love my 180 Gonzos w/ BMF/3. Super fun for the resort, even here in AK.

[@Absolutetelemark]

Great to hear that. Thanks for the kind words

[@ReinerMusicus]

I have tried this exact setup out last year here in Colorado and it was amazing! …et René, je regarde tes vidéos de télémark depuis que je vis au Québec : toujours inspirant !

[@Absolutetelemark]

Merci. Woot

[@aeh2194]

Love the MRG shout out in the description! Will have to give these Bishop’s a try next season. Big fan of your videos from a fellow free-heeler in Vermont!

[@Absolutetelemark]

Thanks Andrew!

[@allanyeti]

Merci René pour l'info. Comme nouveau patrouilleur en telemark 75mm, je cherchais justement un set-up pour gardé mes bottes mais avoir la possibilité d'un step-in. Je pense que j'ai trouvé ce qu'il me faut.

[@shannononeal7375]

Signing up for your Patreon to thank you for this review - bought this setup on your rec and I LOVE IT SO MUCH! 180 Gonzos+BMF/3 So snappy, so fun, real step in, great feel!

[@Absolutetelemark]

Awesome, thank you!

[@robcrowe]

Seems like a great ski, René! Great review here & on your blog. You've got me thinking about it. Cheers! 🍻

[@davidklein1565]

I've got the gonzo in 170 they didn't have the 180 in stock. I do wish I got the bigger set up. I'm 5'9.5 225lbs athletic build.. still a really fun ski

[@greggsaunders3246]

Great video. That snow looks amazing!

[@mohrusc]

I use head kore 93 for skimo, freeride, slope, park...very happy with it

[@redsledski]

Just bought a pair of 2024 Bishop Gonzos, mounted them with my Outlaw bindings (factory springs set to highest), took them for a spin at MJ in Colorado (conditions 1" of skied out on top of packed groom; a not uncommon condition), and some thoughts... My background... I cut my teeth telemarking resort in the early 1980's, developing my technique to an expert level on skinny Kazama skis and Asolo and then Merrill Super-comp boots (three pin). I evlvolved into mainly moguls, steeps and did some racing with success (there is a reason I'm mentioning this, concerning this ski, and what follows, which I will get to). I am also an expert alpine skier. Regardless, as technology evolved I shifted with it, but honestly I gave up on telemark skis long ago, favoring tele mounted alpine skis instead. The reason that is is exactly what Rene mentions, they just didn't seem to be playful enough, which I think is because tele ski MFGs focused too much on lite, energy-less, fat, generic BC gear, which IMO is crap for skiing expert runs and side country or even groom at a resort. And that, ironically, despite the KZbin videos and marketing, is where most tele skiers ski. Recently I broke the binding spot core out of my Atomic Vantage X 83 CTI's, my daily drivers, and was in need of another decent ski. So while doing some research, I stumbled on this vid, took a look at Bishop's marketing of the Gonzos as a all mountain, resort and decided to take the $850.00 hit. One of the things a rockered, early rise ski does poorly (IMO) for tele is turn initiation, meaning that split second at the lead change--the tip of the tele ski swims for a second before the edge is established. For alpine such tips great, but tele can't put tip pressure on the way an alpine setup can, and it just doesn't work ideally for tele. Old skis, even long skinny skis back in the 80's that had no rocker actually worked really well for this--unweight the skis for the transition and the tips had super control and would almost automatically come around on their own, especially on steeper terrain. I loved that. The other thing some old tele skis like Kazamas had that is missing today in the ski world is a lot of camber. That camber would pop you from turn to tun, especially in quick , tight turns. And I loved that. The downside is that those old skis and old leather boots were terrible in terrible conditions, and they were knee-busting work to ski well. Old skis with old gear required a lot more rear foot bias and knee muscle. And you can pretty much tell who learned on old gear by looking at how far back the hips and shoulders are when pushing hard down on the rear ski turns. And older style tele skiers tends to go a bit deeper into the drop knee, which is not to say splayed out--we ask for a lot of FWD lean from our front feet to keep it all tight. Rene, like myself, is an old-school technique tele skier. A lot of "expert" tele skiers today seem to ride pretty high with a faux tele, sadly only "expertly" skiing intermediate terrain for tele show at the resort. And like pow skiing, the requirement of a ski to accomplish all that is pretty low. So it was with some excitement that I bought the Bishop Gonzo, which is marketed as a legit, non-rockered ski with a lot of camber, especially designed for "All Mountain" resort. It seems like someone there at Bishop is either old-school or listening. How does it ski for me? The downside first... Even though the ski is only 90mm at its waist and doesn't sport big 120+ tips or tails, it seems to ski really fat, meaning it takes a lot to get it over on edge. And this is a problem with turns that don't necessarily require high edge angle from the transition--the inside ski wants to stay flattened out. Interestingly, the higher you ride it, the less you ak of it, the better it finds it edge. But ... IMO where it really matters, when skiing skied-out, variable conditions on blues it is kinda disconcerting to not be able to dive deep through turns with a defined and stable but low edge, plowing crap but also dealing with ice. But this isn't just a variable snow condition issue, it happens on plain old groom as well. As to what I am I referring to watch Rene's video from 00:50 thru 1:00; here he actually deepens his turns/knee and actually pushes the skis on a relatively flat run (pay attention to the inside ski to see what I'm saying). You will see it looks like it is chattering--it isn't; its catching and releasing, trying to establish edge on a very moderate run. I've never had that happen on any alpine ski mounted tele I've used. My guess, per my technique--this ski is just too wide underfoot for a daily driver, resort ski. But I'm not a ski engineer. I can't say exactly why this happens other than that's what it feels like to me profoundly. The upside... The afore-mentioned bit about the downsides of rockered tips for tele proves spot on. These skis have no rocker, and the tips come around extremely well. Again... Extremely well. And any comments that say these skis don't alpine turn well are full of crap; I suspect that commentary comes from people reading what these skis are designed to do without actually trying them out--i.e. the ski was designed to "tele flex" without rocker. Personally I was really surprised at how well they parallel turn, achieving a surprising amount of early edge angle easily. Now I'm not saying I could put my ass to snow arching them, but I couldn't on any tele setup turning alpine. I'm just saying that there is no penalty alpining these things in most resort conditions, and I say that with a mindset of not using them on that rare-bear, deep pow day, I have other skis for that, but on typical resort day, that 90% of the time day, they do that turn pretty damn well, meaning alpine. I wasn't expecting that. Lastly, if the run has enough steepness to really push the edge angles, the tips, coupled with the camber, make for a very good, very lively tele-turn ski. And the ski feels slower than it actually skis, which took me by surprise and I chalk up to the way the edges feel in the snow as it is turning. But this is no race/carving ski. Bottom line, I just feel like the ski is a bit confused in its engineering. It seems to me it is trying to too many things, including too much trendy homage to the rare deep pow by going 90 underfoot. it just seems like too much to wrench over than necessary (by a long shot) for a good all-mountain but albeit "most day" resort ski. And honestly, I normally ski on a .5 base-beveled ski; these are tuned to de-tuned .75 + from Bishop, which might be a contributing factor. Regardless, to me it feels like the design could basically be much better at 85 or 83mm underfoot. I do however love what the tips and old-school camber can do otherwise-the skis have K-Pop pop. Ultimately the ski is IMO on its way to being great, but if I could I'd buy another pair of Atomic Vantage X 83 CTI's until then. And that is my honest, un-sponsored review of the 2024 Gonzos.

[@Absolutetelemark]

Thanks for the input. Great review and story

[@fedegoeswoods3142]

Great video! It's so nice to see you so happy! How does the gonzo compare to the g3 findr? I'm thinking of going that direction because of that super cool magnetic lock :p

[@Absolutetelemark]

Telemark is very personal and this is my experience for my style and where I ski. I haven’t try the findr 94 but it’s exactly the ski I would be worried about. They do have the flex version that looks a lot more suitable for moguls, tight tree skiing. The carbon version is light, has a shallow rise tip, and is tapered. Please read the blog post. In the end the Findr could be a great telemark ski for you. It’s just not what I would choose to patrol in eastern Canada. Cheers

[@redsledski]

An update... Took my Gonzos out for a second day and had the same experience that I mentioned in my previous reply. And I crashed twice on a groomer, which is something that I haven't done in over 30 years. I'm a solidly expert skier. I was pretty bummed that I had made a costly mistake and was thinking of how to sell the skis. I was thinking that for some reason the skis just didn't work for me, which pretty much baffled me--I can ski almost anything decently. Before calling it a day, and remembering how I once had some skis base ground and trusted the shop to do my preferred base bevel, and after picking up the skis and heading up the hill, the skis about ripped my legs off (alpine skis); I checked the bevels and they had zero base bevel (the shop had not beveled after the grind), which for those who don't know about beveling, that is a dangerous ski to try and ride; it locks in hard at the slightest hint of input. Most if not all factory skis, with maybe the exception of FIS skis (where tuners prefer do their own beveling to match their typical conditions) are beveled from the factory. After doing my own beveling the skis were back to normal (I prefer a slalom grind). That didn't seem the case with the Gonzos because they parallel skied so well, but the main issue I was having I could narrow down to one ski--the problem was significant enough I was actually so scared of them I was missing that it was mainly an issue with right-turn teles, and I only did 2 runs before calling it a day. Although the skis aren't "left or right" I was skiing them with the graphics matching and it was in this order that my right ski when in telemark (meaning that ski's outside edge) was the what was giving me the most problems. Just for trouble-shooting reasons I switched skis, AND... PROBLEM SOLVED! The skis worked as advertised, they worked as Rene states, which means they skied very well. That also tells me it has a base bevel issue on that one ski, on that one particular edge, and it is not a "length of ski" edge problem. I say that because again, they parallel very well, which would also explain why they tele fine when switched. When I got home I took my base bevel tool to the edges, but after checking a small section (having painted the edge with marker) I found that section to be beyond the 0.5 degrees I would normal bevel to. I contacted Bishop, asking what bevel they set on their skis. I received a quick reply (Bishop is very good about replying to questions), telling me they leave their bevels at 90 (which is also referred to as a 0 degree edge). Maybe the person who was replying was just a sales person, and didn't know the shop process, but as I said above, a ski with a 90 degree edge (no bevel) is a dangerous thing, it is not used as a tune for any reason, not even DH, and it is unlikely they would be sent out like that without a note warning the buyer that they needed an edge tune before use. From what I tested, in the small area I checked, the edge was well over .5 degrees (the file immediately started cutting base material rather than edge). The Bishop response I had received also suggested a base bevel of .75 to 1 degree, which seems excessive to me (1 degree is a rental/beginner bevel IMO, which is intended to give the ski a very skiddy, safe performance until a high edge angle is achieved). With the way the problematic ski was behaving, my guess is that the bevel in some area of that ski is inconsistent and approaching 90 degrees whereas the other parts of the edge are over .75 +, which would explain why the ski was trying to flatten out and was hooking and releasing with any strong input, but I haven't had time yet to figure out exactly where the edge is off, and I don't have a true bar. The problem I have is that on the section of ski I did test is beveled beyond my edge tool, I would have to buy a new edge tool or tools (.75 and 1) to get a consistent edge along the length of the ski no matter what. Or I could do a significant base grind to zero out the edges and start from scratch. Kinda a sucky conundrum either way. I sent another message to Bishop, but it was Good Friday and now the weekend (I'm sure they are out enjoying some skiing) and haven't heard back yet. I'll update on Monday. That all said, with the ski feet swapped, I just wanted to get the note out, stating that the skis ski very well just as Rene states, and my experience is likely an usual mishap in the ski's factory finishing process. And I didn't mean to Hijack this KZbin post, but it is the only review on the Gonzo I could find, and I believe having reviews is the only way we telemarkers can guesstimate our crazy expensive new gear options.

[@jgurtz]

Nice stoke!

[@Trulsagarden]

What are those bindings?

[@Absolutetelemark]

Bishop BMF 3 in NTN. I have done a review on them.

[@dominikzinke4493]

Unfortunately the Gonzo's are not available here in Europe. In one of your articles you also mentioned the Salomon QST as one of your favoured all mountain skis. Do you still recommend these? If yes, which model? QST 92? These have Ti reinforcement, is that an issue?

[@Absolutetelemark]

Qst is a great example of a ski that in a previous version was great. This year’s version, which I haven’t tried, has got a stiffer flex tip so I’d look for a 20-21 or prior version. Hope this helps.

[@markantony3875]

So how does the Gonzo work when we get real eastern hard pack (aka ice to the rest of the ski world), which is the typical surface in the northeast? I love the idea of a ski designed specifically for a tele setup, but I have found that skis with out metal layers seem to give out on our typical conditions.

[@Absolutetelemark]

Honnstly, really good. It's not a pure carver ski per say, but it's the best all mountain carver I've seen since the Black Diamond Aspect (2013 version). To compare a true carver ski is usually around 65mm underfoot, this is 90mm.

[@CBBnCO]

A telemarker on a budget here. I'd love to sign up for a 2023 set of Bishop skis and bindings; BUT, the price... So, wondering if there is a good hack for some more mass produced skis that are more likely to be end-of-season clearanced or slightly used for much less money? How about the Rossignol Black Ops series (Escaper or Sender)? Any others you would recommend that have simiar construction traits to the Gonzo or Chedi? I think compiling a list of these might be very helpful for all. **For reference I've been skiing on a pair of Rossignol S3's with Hammerhead bindings for the past 10+ years with no real complaints.

[@Absolutetelemark]

Sure, those options are possible. Check my blog post for more details. absolutetelemark.com/best-all-mountain-telemark-ski/

[@ecphotographer]

Bonjour Remi! Great videos as always. I hope this is not to old of a topic, but to echo CNNmCO feeling, did you have any tips about buying the Gonzo and bindings? That is to say, have you seen any gear go on sale at specific times or did you ever wait to long and it sold out?

[@thierrybriand2413]

Salut René, Excellent tes vidéos ! Que penses-tu des Salomon QST 92 176 avec outlaw X, pour un skieur expert en Alpin, mais débutant (5 journées dont 2 cours à Sutton et St-Donat) en Telemark. Je n'ai jamais skié le Massif, mais St-Anne et Massif du Sud, sinon Laurentides et Cantons de l'Est + Vermont. Merci.

[@Absolutetelemark]

Excellent Set up. Go for it

[@thierrybriand2413]

Merci, finalement j'avais choisi des Declivity Ti 66@@Absolutetelemark

[@MrBrammerca]

What kind of boots and bindings do you have?

[@Absolutetelemark]

Crispi Evo WC are my most used boots. I also have a Crispi XR for the 75mm nostalgia. For binding, I have kept the BMF and Gonzo setup that you see in the video. It's now been two years since that video. And I am still super happy about the bindings. Also, I have the Meidjo on all my fat skis. This is what I use in the backcountry exclusively.

[@MrBrammerca]

Thanks for the help. I got a pair of Bishop, BMF and Gonzos after this video.

[@wolfkarl7598]

What length did you pick and what is your height? Thanks!

[@Absolutetelemark]

180cm. I'm 200lbs or 90kg

[@markantony3875]

Hi Rene-Martin, just asking again how you think this ski would work on true eastern hardpack? Would I be better off with a ski in a similar width with metal layers such as the Blizzard Brahma 82? I like the idea how this ski is designed for telemark, however, I have skied the Atomic Mavrick 86c (no metal layers) tele on hardpack and did not like its lack of edge grip even when tuned 3 side and 0.75 base.

[@Absolutetelemark]

Short answer is NO. The Gonzo is an all mountain ski and will perform well in all conditions. If you want a true carver, get a Rossignol Hero SL or something like that. The narrow width underfoot will serve you better than a Brahma that is just not as good for carving, not a good all mountain ski. Too stiff in my mind. The Brahma familly 2019-20 and prior were a lot better in my mind. I've tried the Mavrick 86c.version. It is good. A lot better than the Brahma. Between the Mavrick and the Gonzo, I really liked the gonzo better in bumps. Not even close.

[@markantony3875]

@@Absolutetelemark Thanks. Where I ski in New England, it is either ice or ground up ice most of the time. I have a number of alpine race skis and carving skis mounted tele. I guess I will just stick to then considering the conditions.

[@shanemilehi]

Hey Renee. Still feeling the same about these skis? I’m in the market

[@Absolutetelemark]

Yes, I still ski this exact ski. I will try new ones this season. But so far so good. And the ski core have plenty of life left and last longer than other skis I've use.

[@shanemilehi]

@@Absolutetelemark thanks Rene. Love your content. Do you think the Chedi would maybe be a good choice for the west. Colorado and utah?

[@trudelrene-martin8176]

@@shanemilehi Yes absolutely. But I feel that there are more sutable skis in this range. Chedi is great but many others would work as well. For the Chedi, it's really great for everything, charging down, powder, tree skiing. All except hard snow short turns. (which is the case for most of the skis in this range)

[@shanemilehi]

@@trudelrene-martin8176 I am in market for a new ski. I am skiing the "freeheel Life" 95 and I have a pair of the DPS 112 for powder. For some reason, I have it in my head that a nimble 105 is something Id like. I had heard the the Voile mantra was a great choice fpr a tree mogul ski. Im in my mid 50s so I thought a 105 would give me a bit more underfoot. In the end, its boots, bindings and fitness.. but I do like getting new boards :). If you got any recommendations id appreciate it . Thanks. "your never too old to ski, but ya get old when you quit"

[@Absolutetelemark]

@@shanemilehi Absolutely. Chedi is a great ski too. I liked the ski a lot when I tried it. It's a bit boring on groomers, but it excell in all other areas.