Post script: Jan 21, 2026
For most of us in the NW US there has been little snow. I had all these skis by late spring last year but even then, snow left early in my normal late spring haunts. I was able to spend some time on the Movements and the DPS prior. But it surely wasn't the amount of time I wanted. But no time on the La Sportivas and the Black Crows until this Jan or '26. Even then I was able to get in 170K vertical feet last year by this time and only 94K vertical feet so far this year. Dismal at best. The Tempos from La Sportiva have been interesting skis on hard packed snow and ice. The previous years ski (orange) more fun than the super lwt, current (black) version in the terrible snow conditions I've had to date. All that was as expected frankly just by the skis weight. No snow or simply really hard now and ice simply doesn't allow a honest test or much to write about.
On the other hand, the same conditions have allowed both the Corvus and the Navis Freebird models from Black Crow to really shine. There are a bunch of reviews out there now on both skis. Nothing yet that I could find on the La Sportivas.
The Freebird Corvus is more akin to a pure downhill board than any ski I own. Very similar to and a fun ski I think in every way, comparing it directly to the DPS Kaizen 105. I don't think either will disappoint. You can add the same descriptors to the Navis Freebird if you like. Not as heavy overall. But it still has the feel of solid alpine ski performance. At the moment think the Corvus is the standout of the heavier 105/107 duo. The weights are very comparable. I'm out for a month now, headed for better snow hopefully. I'll have a much better impression of what the skis listed here are capable of on my return hopefully and I'll update my thoughts here as I process the experience.
another edit Mid Feb. '26:
After a few weeks of skiing almost every day I went back to take another look at some of the online comments/reviews made about this ski. Have to say, what some people were skiing (a male and female couple commenting in particular on you tube) is not the ski I am skiing on.
The Corvus is a solid downhill ski capable on everything for me but glare ice where I'd prefer a little less width. But other than glare ice I love this ski. I don't typically ski very fast. Low to mid 30s at most generally. But on the Corvus I have little problem running them up to 40mph on piste according to my Slopes phone program. Certainly, fast enough for me. And the skis are very stable there. If they weren't I wouldn't be writing this. I'm skiing them in a soft boot, no power straps and a Dynafit tech binding toe with a race heel.
Yes, they are a heavy touring ski. Compared to an old Dynafit Denali or a 106 Movement, any ski is going to be heavy. And almost anything is going to be more stable than either of those two super lwt skis. But the Corvus makes up for that weight in the pleasure and increased control on the down for me.
I like the Corvus a bit more than the Navis. But plenty of skiers much better than me that prefer the Navis. My take of all the skis I have skied on to date for pure down hill performance if you are using a midweight touring boot is, either ski will be exceptional. Just so there is no confusion for my rave here, I bought both pair of Black Crows online and paid the asking retail price. No deals here so I owe no one. So far on a terrible, no-snow winter here in the West, these two pair of Black Crows have been the one thing that hasn't been a disappointment. No joke. And the Corvus for me a real standout.
As A foot note, the build quality @ Black Crow isn't excelled by anyone making skis that I have seen. Adding DPS Skis' excellent no wax base treatment, PHANTOM, was well worth the investment to me.
This is a well written review that I do agree with.
I wish I had more info for you. But as most have noticed, we are still lacking snow. 60F here for Christmas. Time no to go find some!
My preferred touring and everyday ski width (touring and lifts) until this winter has been just under 100mm. 98mm and 95mm more often than not. But I also know the advantages of a wider ski (up to 138mm under foot) in the right snow conditions. The skis in this comparison are what I have been using in the 102 to 107 range to date and my thoughts on the manufactures and ski designs. As always YMMV (your mileage may vary).
I'll be adding my impressions here on each ski, as my ski season winds down and I get time over the next few weeks.
The short version? The most succinct differences in how this batch of skis performed for me was generally defined by turn radius, and the amount of rocker on each skis. Again, for me, the more rocker in the ski, the shorter the ski seems to ski. The less rocker the more a ski seems to ski to the length it measures. What does surprise me is weight didn't make a big impact on how much better or worse the ski performed. But weight was clearly noticeable to me as the conditions deteriorated. Swig weight on your feet does matter. Good snow conditions generally make any ski stellar. For me, bad snow conditions are sure to make an unruly ski more apparent and a stellar ski design easily noticeable.
Charlie Bosco ripping Black Crow Atris, on the Valley Noire.
Black Crow
Nevis Freebird, 173.4cm, 102mm, 19m, 3# 10.3oz / 3# 9.4oz
Corvis Freebird, 176.2cm, 107mm, 21m, 4# 2.4oz / 4# 2.80oz
La Sportiva
'23 Tempo, 179cm, 103mm, 18m, 3# 14oz / 4#
'25 Tempo, 179cm, 103mm, 18m, 3# 3oz / 3# 4oz
Skinning on the '23 version of the Alps Tracks 106.
Movement
'23 Alps Tracks, 177cm, 106mm, 19m, 3# / 3# .02oz.
'25 Alps Tracks, 178cm, 106mm, 21.5m, 2# 14.5oz / 2# 14.oz
I bought both the older model and the newer model Alps Tracks late last season. And it was an internet comment that really got me wondering just how much different the new version might be from last year's version.
But frankly what I was really looking for was the widest ski I could find that was @ or under 3# per ski. The Dynafit Denali's had simply spoiled me @ 98mm under foot and 2# 12oz per ski at 176cm. The Denali will ski literally any snow condition I can ski. Even as It is not an easy one to replace no matter what anyone wants to say about the latest and greatest.
Gear reviews | Dynafit Denali | PowderGuide
The big indication they were different is the turn radius. The '23 version is @ 19m. The newer version is at 21.5m. Less rocker on the '23 106 and more rocker on the '25 106 than the original Denalis. And that is pretty indicated how each Alps Tracks would ski. The '23 holds an edge better, and is more stable everywhere. The '25 is more playful and even with a 21.5 radius still quick under foot. Both are very light weight and a pleasure on the ski track or on your back.
"Who prefers a more precise ski?" That would be me, thanks ;) And without a doubt '23 106 is a very precise ski. I was able to ski some of my best runs of the year (technically most difficult for snow and terrain) on the '23 version of the 106. I really like the ski. Being mounted online which is pretty far forward helps that ski IMO. No question the older ski, even in a 106 width, is scalpel in bad snow and on steep terrain. I can't say enough good things about the ski. Either version is way more solid than it should for the weight at speed. The newer version is surfier, and releases a lot easier. The older version, because it has an almost flat tail and little rocker reacts better at some speed. You need to be on top of that ski. If you are, the ski will pay dividends for sure. This year's model? It is mounted 2+ cm back from the previous ski. Which had me concerned when I was mounting. But, in for a penny in for a pound on Movement's skis. A bit more rocker was added to tip and tail on the '25 version. A hand flex test tells me the tail is a bit softer as well. Overall, I'd say the new ski is a little softer over all as well. Not a noddle but softer than the previous year. Frankly none of those changes were giving me high expectations over last year's Model. Turns out there really are times a ski company improves a ski, instead of just changing the top sheet. Almost but not quite dramatic in the 106's comparison. I've skied slush, powder, some nasty mank, both wet and dry in both. Loved the newest 106 everywhere I have skied it. May be a bit more than the earlier version. I simply love the newest version. Really a fun ski to skin with and even better to carry. I've skied some glare, spring ice and some hard freeze-thaw, in bounds, spring ice. None of that was any fun but the skis managed well enough. This is a very, very forgiving ski. Much more forgiving than the previous version of the 106. I like them both. But the new version just takes less effort and is simply more fun for me to ski. In the world of lwt 100+ touring ski, both are outstanding pieces of engineering. I was wondering if I would ever find a ski as light as, or lighter than, the Dynafit Denali-Dhaulagiri series? I have no doubt in my mind that I found, better skis than either, which is saying a lot for width, weight and versatility. And that is saying something in my book. I grew up on old school Rossi GS skis from the 80s. Boards you could rip around on at 35 or 40 mph with not too much effort. My Slopes phone app says the 106 is good for 35mph, no issues, and big smiles ;) Pretty much 40mph being my max on any ski on a typical day of lift skiing. I typically like making lots of turns these days. But really fun to have a ski that seems capable of doing both without having to tightly crimp your toes in either venue. This makes a really fun ski for me!
DPS
'25 Kaizen, 179, 105mm, 18m, 4# 2.7oz / 4# 2.3oz
This is an interesting ski that I had high hopes for. They cost a pretty penny and then some, so I was expecting something rather magical.
The first weekend I took these out it was 10F at the base of my local mountain. Cold and clear enough that my feet would eventually get cold (seldom happens to me during lift skiing), Eventually my entire body got chilled in the subzero temps. And that took me several days to recover from. So it really was cold.
Typically, I would have stopped skiing in those conditions. But the one reason I kept skiing was how much I was enjoying the Kaizen105s.
The conditions were cold and hard snow, more wind packed chalk that hard packed groomed conditions. Not yet ice but within a few days of the typical freeze, thaw cycles we get, it would be. But this day, on this particular kind of snow these skis were pretty incredible. No speed limit for me, at the end of the day my computer said 46mph. As fast as I likely ever ski. 35 is closer to typical if not 30mph. During all that the skis felt solid and really easy to turn. I like to make turns. But these were easy enough to simply let them rip in a bit in GS style skiing.
I was impressed with the ski, and not just by the money I spent on them. It is sometimes hard to convince oneself that the dollars invested really are worth the end result. I suspect I am not the only one who has had second thoughts after a rather opulent purchase that has one questioning their own choices.
So after one day of skiing and around 40' vert feet I was pretty sure I liked the Kaizen 105.
The question was how much? I had a planned 6 week trip to Europe. I really didn't want to bring a huge quiver of skis this time around. I just wanted to ski with the least about of luggage and the most amount of fun. My first pack was 3 pair of skis. I decided that was too much weight, so which two pair would I bring?
I don't remember now if I had another day on the Kaizens or not. Probably not if I can't remember it. But somehow, I decided that the Kaizen, and a pair of 98mm underfoot lwt touring skis would suffice for this trip.
Literally the first run in France that season was a run down the Petit Envers in heavily wind effected, bottomless snow. Not perfect conditions for me, while unacclimatised and not particularly fit for skiing at 3,500 meters.
Frankly I am still not sure if the skis helped me that day or were a hinderance. Either way the skiing was pretty incredible.
To be fair, being unacclimatised and not particularly fit, is a terrible way to get honest feedback on any ski no matter the conditions.
As the trip progressed, I got better at both. And skiing where I like the most out of Chamonix, I skied on the Italian and French side of the glaciers about twice a week if not more.
That would include some of the worst snow conditions I have encountered in my lifetime, literally. The kind of snow that has your partner, the better skier between you, crying. And may be just a little bit, me wanting too. It was bad at times. Really bad.
For may be half of those runs, looking for skiable snow I was on the Kaisen. The other half the lwt 98cm under foot. There are advantages to both skis in terrible conditions. You just have to be able to take advantage of the ski. For the kind of skiing, I really like? I think, but don't actually know, that the touring version of the Kaizen might have been the best of both worlds, the Pagoda Tour CFL 105. I am not sure I will get to test that theory but may be. After all the Tour version is made for just the sort of nonsense, I really like to ski in Europe but seldom get a chance here to get that kind of milage in similar conditions.
That said, as I type this, at the end of August '25, I am not disappointed in my Kaizen purchase. I had some incredible days skiing the Kaizen on velvet corn, spring snow, powder and chopped up powder in France and Italy at the resorts. Really fun days where the Kaizen made me a better skier than I actually am. I am hoping my choice of the Kaizen will prove itself here at home this season and impress me even more than it did on that first day out last Feb.
I did get to ski enough actual ice on this ski to know I'd rather have a narrower ski. "Duhhh"....he says. For really hard snow there are any number of more user-friendly skis. The Pagoda 90 comes to mind from DPS easily enough. But most decent skis in the 90mm under foot will make a 105 seem unpleasant, I think. There are limits at least for me as to just how "one quiver" a ski might be at 105 under foot.
Posts
