Starting to skid out a bit on the trailing ski. A bit more with through the back foot perhaps, and starting the bring the trailing ski forward a fraction earlier also. Just because you didn’t ask 😀

thanks for that advice, especially the summation about it being only a guide relative to conditions. I have found it useful to think of the rear leg ((with emphasis on pulling the 2nd smallest toe under) as the braking leg. After all, skiing is essentially determining the fastest speed one can slide down a very slippery surface, thus slowing/braking from simply straight lining it. So if nervous (like me on any decent gradient at my age) I'm braking more with more weight onto the rear; if carving so enviously like you a lot less is needed.

These or meidjo 3.0?

So I hate the Lynx binding compared to the Outlaw because the pressure is put on the ski immediately. I feel the bindings are always trying to pull me back. This is especially true when making turns on steep technical terrain. My question: do the Meidjos have the same sensation? Thanks

Me too. I prefer my Alico leather touring powder. I have voile mntr. cable on old Blizzards. G3 Targas with brand new bc kit & 2 new unused front cables for my kootenay powdersticks. I baby this set-up. For special tours in powder only.

So it's literally Harald Harb's PMTS with a twist, eh?

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 KZfaq 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.

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 KZfaq 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.

Yeah buddy you’ve got to have some quads to do that.

Любимый телемарк!

It's the other winter moment

Do you recommend any leather boots on the market right now?

So you have extra to give away? 😂 jkjk

What kind of boots and bindings do you have?

O1 bindings are awesome!

Friends, everyone has preferences for different skis and different bindings. We used this ok tool on steep slopes. kzfaq.info/get/bejne/hK2Jea6kz67acok.html&feature=shared. And tomorrow I will try Stõckli Stormrider for example. It will probably be very similar.

How does the alpine set perform? Is it stable enough for riding the whole day on groomers?

I have a pair of telemark skis, Fishers. I’m 5’2 and I’m looking for a 140 or 150 length. I have the older type of bindings and boots. Can you give me a referral to where I could get a shorter size. I live in Sacramento California. Thanks

Merci Rene 👍🏼

Next step is doing the same with narrow back country skis and BC NNN bindings. That is what I am practicing and it is a real challenge.

*promosm* 🌷

They’re literally jewelry for you feet. A shame that most boot makers removed their tech heel inserts

Would you prefer these if you only skied resort?

nice!

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.

Good stuff! Just got back on Tele's today for the first time in many years Don't have a lot experience maybe a dozen outings many years ago. My takeaway today, being on modern equipment (modern ski, stiffer boot, setp in binding) is I can ski it more like Alpine Dominant pressure on the outside ski gives you grip and carve, and the balance to dial in what you want on the inside ski Outside ski felt like alpine. Carving on softer snow was easier than I expected. I tended on this quite easy snow to not retract the inside ski very far whether that is ideal or not.

I have some old cobras or some old black diamond 02s if you had to mount 1 on new skiis which would you pick?

You're good at it I love telemark moguls too

I still can’t figure out how to fight the feeling that my tips are going to dive. So I find myself in the backseat.

❤Super gut erklärt. Für carving, was für ski Länge zu Körpergröße kannst du bitte empfehlen? Gruß Michael

Nicely done video, thanks for posting. Jealous of your beautiful snow! All breakable crust here in Vermont right now.

I've never done telemark skiing before but this semester I'll get to try it with a school program, hopefully I can remember your advice when I go, this seems really helpful.

Soooo common !

Wow! Way to rip!

very nicely done... plus BISHOP BINDINGS

Do you have another video discussing recommendations for 100% backcountry skiing? I saw it labeled in your telemark chart, and I definitely fall closer to the category of touring-backcountry. Seems that weight becomes a greater concern at that point and I am wondering if there is a better boot-binding combo to shave a little weight. Thanks!

Thanks for the review, Rene. How’s the pivot on the BMF 3 for touring?

Nice review, thanks Rene! How would you compare the bishop BMF binding vs 22 designs outlaw x? I’m switching to NTN, just bought the Impulse 104 and going to mount with one of those bindings? Will be skiing mostly resort at Mt hood meadows!

The advantage of leather boots is you can recover if you get on the backfoot. If you have plastic boots and lean back, you "trip" on your own boot and go down fast. Like the 60's schoolyard bully kneeling behind you to make you fall harder.

Try counter rotating!

Intense quebec accent

What can someone recommend for a step in tele-binding?

Witam. Znam to.

Best tele tips of all time! My opinions: Tip 2 recap is the most important of all, and the position shown at :54. It's the foundation of good tele skiing. Lot's of ways to do it but without this position tele skiing cannot be done well. Most of the errors I see on the hill stem from this, including my own skiing. If you can't get your uphill hand forward it's a telltale sign. Drive the uphill had forward to get the correct upper body position, that's how I think of it when I ski.

Full disclosure: are you sponsored by Meidjo? I got the M3.0 (with alpine heel) last winter and have had nothing but problems - for the high price, the build quality is shocking, and I'd never trust them for multi-day backcountry touring. I'm only 60kg, and not harsh on my gear, so very disappointed with these - my Market AT bindings are so much more reliable...

so this binding is not compatible with an AT boot like in your review with the Lynx Binding?

Thank you so much. This was very helpful!

Just have to say, in the late 90’s spent quite a few years in central Oregon. Back then it was a struggle but doable,skied my brains out. Worked at local ski area small but challenging when on tele and homed my skills. Started on leather boots,cayenne pepper in socks, and having to float my feet above water when hot water was available.

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

🎉