I was somewhat surprised to see Faction change what felt like such a winning formula to me.
Shape/Flex/Construction:
The new Prodigy 3.0 is quite significantly different from its predecessor.
The old ski was basically shaped like a powder ski that had been put on a diet.
Long rocker lines, minimal camber, and plenty of taper.
The ski now has much more camber and significantly less rocker at both ends.
In short, it is shaped more traditionally for all-mountain performance.
The core of the ski has also changed.
It remains a solid ski in the cambered section.
It also has beefed up edges.
On Snow:
On groomed snow, the new model of the Prodigy 3.0 definitely outperforms the previous model.
With its 20m radius, the ski feels comfortable making both shorter and longer turns on edge.
Its still a fairly damp ski in the grand scheme of things, but its predecessor was ridiculously so.
Personally, I found the dampness of the previous model more conducive to shitty conditions though.
A note on mounting:
I skied these mounted 2cm back from true center.
Recommended is 8.4cm back, so I was way forward of the mark.
Powder/Big Mountain:
The old Prodigy 3.0 was an exceptional performer in deep snow for its width.
In the shorter 178, Id expect this to be even more true than on the 184.
I would say they are roughly equivalent to the pre-2021 Armada ARV in that regard.
The same has been true of some ON3Ps Ive tried.
The new ski had plenty of support for landing a bit off (even in the 178).
Backslap definitely my fault not the skis.
Thats partly why I think they still felt good when charging, despite being softer/poppier than the previous model.
And although they are softer, they definitely arent soft.
Park/Jibbing:
I found the 184 Prodigy 3.0 to be too big for me to ski in the park.
I actually found them a bit planky in that size.
As soon as I clicked into the 178s, I felt way more at home.
But it was at lower speeds where I really noticed the flex difference between new and old.
The Lib Tech UFO 105 would be up there too, but that feels more directional.
They have chunky edges now and Ive had good experiences with the durability of the Prodigy line.
However, they do feel like very solid skis.
And, as it turns out, I was probably skiing the new skis in the wrong size.
The old ski was better in deep snow and was a stiffer, damper proposition overall.
That had its advantages, and it was possibly a more unique ski as a result.
I loved it, and I know@patagonialukewas a fan too.
The new ski corrects that, and its a much more accessible day to day tool as a result.
The softer flex and shorter radius definitely make it easier to ski.
Its a resounding yes for that.
In fact, the Prodigy 3.0 would be my first choice in that situation.
In its new iteration, its a real jack of all trades and even a master of some.
Other Comparisons:
vs ARV 106
The new ARV 106 is much stiffer than the new Prodigy 3.0.
The Prodigy 3.0 excels for me because it never feels out of place for anything.
