Thread: Praxis Freeride vs. ON3P Vicik

Same dimensions, same price. Resort use only. Zero opportunity to demo either. Crud busting and speed stability are most important. Which one?

Vicik will work just fine, and does suprisingly well in powder for it's width.

call the companies and ask and see what they say!

dynamike - i'm strongly considering the freerides and don't see the Vicik as a perfect substitute. The shape and flex concept seems more "directional" on the freeride and the tail is different. Also, size and flex options are very different. My vote without yet having ski'ed either is freeride on your chosen parameters of crud busting / stability. This is based on shape, flex, and size (both length and slightly more underfoot).

Originally Posted by Driver

dynamike - i'm strongly considering the freerides and don't see the Vicik as a perfect substitute. The shape and flex concept seems more "directional" on the freeride and the tail is different. Also, size and flex options are very different. My vote without yet having ski'ed either is freeride on your chosen parameters of crud busting / stability. This is based on shape, flex, and size (both length and slightly more underfoot).

Kind of scratching my head trying to make sense of most of what you said. Don't see how you come to any of those conclusions. I would say it's pretty much a wash in the mid 180 department and would boil down to what you are looking for in construction materials, and who you want to give your money to. Both are rad companies.

Going with Praxis, primarily because of the core material. I just have no experience with bamboo.
Talked to Keith, and Rowen at ON3P, both great to deal with. Their pricing is fantastic, top notch construction and it's nice talking to the guy(s) that own the company.
Support your independent ski builder!

Haven't skied the Vicik but can vouch that the performance and build of the Freeride are first class.

Originally Posted by PhiberAwptik

would boil down to what you are looking for in construction materials

This.

I think that Praxis skis and ON3P skis have a distinctly different feel. Personally, I like the dampness and heft of ON3P for crud-busting and speed stability. Both are bomber skis with excellent construction, but I just really like the heft and stiffness of the ON3P skis I've been on. But now that Praxis is offering all skis in a "stiff" version, I'm really curious to try that option (particularly in the 196 Protest).

Originally Posted by PhiberAwptik

Kind of scratching my head trying to make sense of most of what you said. Don't see how you come to any of those conclusions.

Let's review those conclusions. My first conclusion is on the shape of the ski. All you have to do is look at the ski to realize the freeride is more directionally shaped. Add to that camber and tip rocker shape and height. If you can't see it, I can't help you. My second conclusions is that the tail is different between the two skis, which they are, although the difference may be small. My third conclusions is that the size and flex options are different... and, again, they are. One more to add that others already have is that construction materials (including carbon option) and build are different. I'm not saying which one is better, just making objective observations which should not be controversial.

Bottome line, these skis to me are not simple substitutes as has been suggested. Just because two skis have relatively similar waist, sidecut, tip, tail width stats doesn't mean they are the same. My guess is these two skis end up riding quite differently.

Originally Posted by Driver

Let's review those conclusions. My first conclusion is on the shape of the ski. All you have to do is look at the ski to realize the freeride is more directionally shaped. Add to that camber and tip rocker shape and height. If you can't see it, I can't help you. My second conclusions is that the tail is different between the two skis, which they are, although the difference may be small. My third conclusions is that the size and flex options are different... and, again, they are. One more to add that others already have is that construction materials (including carbon option) and build are different. I'm not saying which one is better, just making objective observations which should not be controversial.

Bottome line, these skis to me are not simple substitutes as has been suggested. Just because two skis have relatively similar waist, sidecut, tip, tail width stats doesn't mean they are the same. My guess is these two skis end up riding quite differently.

Clearly, but obviously you have not looked at the numbers as it relates to tip and tail splay for these ski's. Saying one is more directional than the other makes you look dumb.

I will conceded that both are fairly directional, though one has a sidecut shape that looks more so- aka the boot center looks farther aft and less twin shaped with more of a square tail. My original point stands based on all of the above even if you think they are on equal ends of the twin / directional spectrum. The thread is based on these being the same ski but I don't quite see it that way, though clearly in the same wheelhouse if you are OK on the mid 180 length and a softer flex.

186cm Vicik vs. 184cm Freeride
Base Length - 188cm vs 184cm
Sidecut - 136/106/126 vs 135/107/125
Effective Edge - 155cm vs 150cm
Radius - 26m vs 24m
Tip Splay - 29.5cm vs 30cm
Tip Height - 7cm vs 6.5cm
Tail Splay - 20.5 cm vs 15cm
Tail Height - 2.2cm vs 2cm
Tip Taper - 20cm vs 22cm
Tail Taper - 13cm vs 12cm
Boot Center - 9.5cm vs 9cm

Skis look pretty similar to me. If anything, the Vicik might be a bit more directional - slightly further back mount, slightly larger radius, slightly longer length & effective edge. But really splitting hairs. I bet if you liked one you would like the other.

Both of said skis are definitely on my to try list...

Originally Posted by D(C)

Both of said skis are definitely on my to try list...

Indeed - I like this geometry for the mid-quiver driver though its a bit skinnier than what a lot of people seem to be riding as their everyday ski now. Both Praxis and ON3P making bad ass boards.

I have skied both, and felt that the Freeride is slightly less turny, less hooky, and felt like it has a further back mounting point, regardless of what the numbers say. They are both excellent skis and blow most every other ski in this class out of the water in every way. My comments about the slightly more hooky, turny feel of the Vicik could very easily just be the tune on the demo pair that I tried. The Freeride I skied is my pair that I tune myself.

I have the 186 2010/2011 Viciks. They have bomber construction, bust through crud like a champ, and I have yet to find their speed limit. They also perform damn well for a narrower ski in powder conditions. I would say you will be hardpressed to find anyone who says differently, regarding their stability at speed and crud busting qualities. My 2 cents

Originally Posted by adrenalated

I have skied both, and felt that the Freeride is slightly less turny, less hooky, and felt like it has a further back mounting point, regardless of what the numbers say. They are both excellent skis and blow most every other ski in this class out of the water in every way. My comments about the slightly more hooky, turny feel of the Vicik could very easily just be the tune on the demo pair that I tried. The Freeride I skied is my pair that I tune myself.

Scott just gave me a heads up that they actually moved the mount point (and the sidecut and core profile) back 2cm from the demo pair that I skied. So, with that change, I would say that the Praxis Freeride and ON3P Vicik ski EXTREMELY similarly. I don't think anyone looking for a ski in this category could go wrong with either.

I think you can't lose, If I get another pair of skis this season it will be the Freeride, or the Vick

Do you remember where your bindings were mounted? (How many cm off the dead center of the skis?)

Originally Posted by adrenalated

I have skied both, and felt that the Freeride is slightly less turny, less hooky, and felt like it has a further back mounting point, regardless of what the numbers say. They are both excellent skis and blow most every other ski in this class out of the water in every way. My comments about the slightly more hooky, turny feel of the Vicik could very easily just be the tune on the demo pair that I tried. The Freeride I skied is my pair that I tune myself.

To chime in, I mounted my Freerides on the line. I can't say enough about this ski.

Since this thread got bumped...

Can anyone compare either of these skis (freeride or vicik) to a Dynastar XXL? I've got a pretty good handle on how the differences in sidecut and rocker profiles will play out on snow, but do either of these have that supreme dampness of the XXL's? Are they stiffer or less stiff (assuming stock med/stiff flex on the freerides)? I'm still leery of an inbounds ski in this category that doesn't have metal in it.

Viciks are very damp for their weight, but there is no way a Vicik is as damp as the XXLs which are probably 400-500g heavier PER SKI. I can say from experience that the regular LP (09/10, 100mm waist) is about the same dampness as a Vicik, but the Vicik has a greater speed limit due to the rockered tip and tail, and is a heck of a lot more fun to ski because the bamboo cores are very lively.

Although they are slightly wider, Wrenegades might compare better to XXLs in terms of dampness and crud-busting ability; that is what they were designed for.

It's been a while since I was on my XXLs, but with 186 10/11 Viciks, I don't miss them much. I'd say equally as damp, Vicik floats much better in any softer snow, but lacks the 'tip-glued-to-the-snow' feel of the XXL in chopped up snow.

If the XXL has been your ski of choice, I'd look at the Wrenegade over the Vicik.

cool, good info guys. It's that "tip glued to the snow" that I both love and hate about the XXL's. Sooo good through chop, but turns into "tips glued to the bottom" in deep snow.

Toast, the ski you want is a Rossi RC 112 if you can find a pair in decent shape. They're the closest ski I've tried to a rockered XXL. The flex is a bit stiffer but the tip rocker compensates to make them maneuverable.