Blizzard Zero G 95 Ski Review


Gear Review: Blizzard Zero G 95 Skis

Price: $699.99
Weight Per Pair: 1250 grams | 2.75 lbs (Size 178cm)
Dimensions: 128-95-111.5 mm
Turn Radius: 21.0m (178 cm)
Lengths: 85, 85W, 95, 108
Summary: The Blizzard Zero G 95 is a great ski for ski mountaineering. It’s lightweight, stable, stiff, and responsive which allows it to handle any and all conditions that the mountains (or myself) can throw at it. Two thumbs up.

Buy Blizzard Zero G 95 Skis On

In 2015/2016 Blizzard Skis released a new free touring backcountry ski series called the Zero G. It’s one of the lightest ski options on the market, yet it can still handle all sorts of conditions – making it ideal for both the up and the down.

blizzard zero g 95
Blizzard Zero G 95

As I was in the market for a new ski mountaineering ski this season, I picked up a pair of the Blizzard Zero G 95 skis. Designed to be light on the uphill and responsive on the downhill, the Zero G 95 delivered in all conditions – corn, powder, crud, frozen salsa, chalk.

blizzard zero g 95
Skiing In The Sawtooths On Zero Gs

Blizzard utilizes a special “technology” called Carbon Drive to deliver stability, stiffness, and the confidence inspiring ride. The Carbon Drive is a 3D unidirectional carbon fiber frame that is combined with ultra lightweight paulownia wood core construction.

Let’s take a closer look at how the Blizzard Zero G skis is constructed:

  • Carbon Drive – Integration 3D unidirectional carbon fiber frame for optimal flexion and torsional rigidity that provides stability and control.
  • Sidewall – Sandwich compound construction improves transmission of movements to edge by allowing constant pressure along the length of ski. This results in control, stability, and carvability. The sidewall is thick underfoot and narrows towards the tails.
  • Rocker Camber Rocker – The ski has traditional camber underfoot that adds responsiveness and pop to the turns. Rocker on tip and tail increases both control and flotation. The tail rocker also allows you to back up easily when necessary.
blizzard zero g 95
Tip Rocker
blizzard zero g 95
Tail Rocker

Overall I’m very happy with the Blizzard Zero G 95 skis and am stoked to have them as my go-to ski mountaineering ski. They can handle anything I throw at them and when chasing bigger lines you get whatever comes your way. A few things I have noted about the skis:

  • Weight – The Blizzard Zero G 95 is lightweight. Super lightweight. It feels like feathers on my feet. This is fantastic for the uphill, but the skis still ski like a lightweight ski and can get deflected by things like sastrugi or frozen chicken heads. It takes a bit of getting used to after skiing on something stiffer and heavier (Liberty Variant 97s) for years. After that learning curve is over, I was able to tweak my skiing a bit. Now they ski great and I trust them in everything.
blizzard zero g 95
Couloir Laps
  • Width – I usually shoot for something between 90 and 100 for ski mountaineering. I’m pleased with the 95 width underfoot, but always wonder what the Zero G 108 would have skied like – still lightweight, but with a bit more float. Maybe I’ll have to pick a pair up!
  • Length – These skis feel short. I like a shorter ski (180ish) for ski mountaineering so that I can fit through tighter places. I was on a 179 for a long time and dropped down to the 178 – not a big change, yet the Zero G 95 in 178 feels way shorter to me. Maybe this is a combination of length and weight? Kind of wished I’d jumped up to the 185 length…

blizzard zero g 95

  • Primary Use – I would not pick this ski as my daily touring driver nor would I want to ski this ski in the resort or as a telemark ski (yes I still telemark sometimes), but for ski mountaineering missions this is currently my number one choice. It’s lightweight, stiff, responsive, and stable – ideal for big uphills and variable downhills.
blizzard zero g 95
A great set up
  • Durability – These things are bomber (so far). After spending a lot of time in the mountains, these things have held up exceptionally well. Despite a few knicks in the top sheet due to driver error, these things are still in mint condition. Usually with a ski I expect a core shot or two by this point in time, but nothing so for. Let’s see how long that will last.
  • Tail Clip – The tail features a small piece of rubber that has a nice groove to hold your skin tail clip in place. Didn’t think much about this feature, but it certainly does help to keep the skins on – something that’s often a problem on more rockered skis.
blizzard zero g 95
Tail Clip
  • I’m stoked to travel with the Blizzard Zero G 95’s. Ski mountaineering gear adds up and having the Zero G 95’s will definitely cut down on weight for my baggage allowance, Chile here we come!
blizzard zero g 95
Montana Laps

I’ve been using a pair of Black Diamond Ascension Nylon skins with the Zero G’s. I just found out that Blizzard has custom fit skins available for the Zero G series on their website. Those might be worth checking out if you’re updating your quiver.

I’ve skied about 75000 vertical feet on these skis. I’m 6’1″ and weight 190. My Blizzard Zero G 95 skis are size 178. They are paired with a Dynafit Radical 2 Binding and the Dynafit TLT6 Performance boots. The Blizzard Zero G 95 skis combined with the Dynafit Radical 2 binding weighs 3868 grams/ 8.8 lbs for both skis and bindings.

blizzard zero g 95
Cramponed up

Ultimately I give the Blizzard Zero G two thumbs up. It’s the lightest weight ski that I’ve ever owned and it’s perfect for what I use it for – long missions deep in the mountains. Buy a pair.

Blizzard Zero G 95 Specs

  • Lengths: 164, 171, 178, 185cm
  • Sidecut: 128-95-111.5 mm
  • Radius: 21.0m (178 cm)
  • Construction: Sandwich Compound Sidewall; Carbon Drive Technology
  • Weight: 1070g (164); 1150g (171); 1250g (178); 1330g (185)
  • Binding: Flat
  • Manufacturer Warranty: 1 Year
blizzard zero g 95

Buy your Blizzard Zero G Skis at these online retailers:

See additional photos of the Blizzard Zero G 95 Ski:

#blizzardskis #zerog

  • GillesCiselet

    Hello Derek,
    Thanks a lot for this review. I’m interested to know a bit more why you don’t consider this ski as a telemarking ski. I only telemark, my main skis being Cochises with HH. I’m looking for a lighter pair to expand my uphill range. It would be for use in the Alps, probably more for the spring touring rather than for the big pow-pow. Those Zero seem to have interesting things for a telemark ski: edge grip, rebound/liveliness, front and back rocker (which I like on the cochise). I understood from other reviews that they are not the easisest, but the Cochise aren’t either. If you could expand…. Thanks a lot, Gilles

    • @GillesCiselet Hi Gilles, Good question. First I think that ski preference is a lot of personal choice based on what you plan to do with the ski, your skiing style, and ability level. I picked up the Zero G95 for big ski mountaineering days. For that, I want a 90-100mm ski that’s lightweight and great on the uphill, but will still perform on the downhill too. When I tele in the backcountry I prefer a stiffer and fatter ski because I’ll likely be skiing lower angle powder – not technical, no fall skiing because when I’m in that terrain I want my heel locked down, right? That being said, if you’re looking for a lightweight ski for longer uphill/ski tours on firmer spring snow, it might be a good option. It’s certainly lightweight and can handle firm snow due to it’s waist width. Although I’d considering stepping up to the Zero G 108 for more versatility in the Rockies. My current tele setup is the SuperCharger with 22Designs Outlaw and it’s freaking sweet. Hope that helps.

  • Martin

    Hey derek
    Thanks for the review, sounds good. I’m looking around for a new ski now, and the new modell seems to be really nice.
    Why would you not like them as telemarkskis? I’m thinking about getting them with the meidjo-binding, which would make them a relly light touring-setup.
    Thanks for inputs,

    • A Mountain Journey

      Hi Martin,

      The Zero G and the Meidjo would be a super fun setup and most certainly a light set up too. My tele days are typically resort days where I prefer a beefier ski that drives through all snow conditions and the Zero G can get a bit squarely sometimes. As for the backcountry, I think it would be a fun ski for lower angle terrain or open bowls, but I picked the Zero G for a ski mountaineering ski for big days and technical lines. These are situations where I prefer to keep my feel locked down. If you’re a balanced tele skier who constantly drives the front of the ski, I imagine this would be a good tele ski too. Hope that helps.


  • Ross Giegler

    Hi derek

    Would u old elaborate on “nor would I want to ski this ski … as a telemark ski”

    Was/am considering just that so V interested in your reasoning.



    • A Mountain Journey

      Hi Ross, I think it comes down to personal preference. Many people think the Zero G would be an ideal telemark ski. I picked up the Zero G for a lightweight ski mountaineering ski to use in places where I want my heel locked down. If I’m looking for a tele ski, I want something a bit more burly that will handle resort conditions and the Zero G can get squirrelly sometimes. That being said, it would probably make a good telemark option if you’re balanced and drive the ski at all times, or if you’re looking for a ski for low angle pow and open bowls. Hope that helps.