REVIEW: 189cm Praxis Powder RX w/ ReCurve

[Daywalker]

(I'm trying to channel my inner PappaG with this review)

Ski: 189cm Praxis Powder RX with ReCurve, mounted with Dukes at bootcenter 102cm from the nose of the ski. This was measured according to Praxis instructions with a straight tape measure from tip.

Skier: 6', 170lb, boots = Krypton Cross w/ Booster Strap

Similar Skis I've been on: 185 Praxis Powder, 183cm Stiff Bro, 192 Bro, 190 Gotama, 186 Brocker Prototype

Locations/Conditions: Thigh deep powder, chopped up powder, heavier crud, day after bumps, groomers

Summary: Excellent soft snow/powder ski that is 100% manageable all over and even enjoyable on groomers. I am STOKED to have this as my powder/slackcountry set up.


I had an absolute blast skiing this ski around Vail yesterday through any and all soft conditions. To be honest, I don't think this ski gives much up to the Praxis Powders that I had as a go to soft snow ski in Utah. It pivots extremely well in trees and the tip rocker rides over varying soft snow very well. It doesn't have the knifing effect of the Brocker/Powder skinny nose to wider midbody (super techy, I know) but the rocker does a very good job of going with the terrain. It isn't overly soft, so it does not feel like the tip is folding back to you. However, when I was skiing it in harder snow today at Loveland, the tip did get a little unsettled/bouncy going over harder variable conditions. These are conditions where I would prefer to be on my 183 Bro, as it is stiffer and has the camber to motor over this stuff.

I am used to skiing my powder ski more centered, as the Praxis Powders really rewarded that. This ski likes to be skied with a centered stance as well, albeit a bit more forward than the Powders. I would not classify this as a 'charger' ski, but it does have enough beef to be driven. Due to the rocker, it does ski shorter than 189cm (even though it eyeball measures out to about that length). On groomers you can lay it over and carve it.

As a Colorado resort pow-ski, going to places like Vail, I would choose this ski any day over the 185 Powders or any reverse-reverse ski. I haven't tried the Praxis Protests/Hybrids or the ARGS or other similar skis that claim to have a smidge of sidecut. To be honest, I don't think I need to as this ski does it all just as well. It is a SMIDGEN less pivoty in trees than the Powders, but it's so much better hauling over groomers and traverses that I wouldn't take the trade off at a resort that has to traveled to get between good spots. I don't even mind the Powders on groomer/traverses, it's just that the trade off here makes sense.

I haven't toured with it yet but it does not seem to be too heavy for mid-length tours with soft snow likely. It seems lighter than my old setup (190 Gotamas w/ Naxos).

Mounting Note: I mounted these at the back of the recommended area (recommended is 99-102cm from tip, I went 102cm). I don't ski switch. As a powder ski, I wouldn't go any farther forward. If you're a heavier guy, you might even want to step it back a bit more.

Topsheet Note: I got the topo maps. These people LOVE to ask/talk about. They look sexy too... I did quick bit of research, looks like a bit of Sequoia National Park in Northern Cali, as to why this exact bit was chosen I know not.

[butterscotch]

Thanks for posting this. I am living vicariously through your review as my RXs as yet unmounted. Also, good beta on the mount point.

Since you have been on Brockers as well (protos, but still...), any thoughts on the rockered/tapered tail of the RX vs. the flat/pintail of the the Brocker/Lhasa?

[Daywalker]

Since you have been on Brockers as well (protos, but still...), any thoughts on the rockered/tapered tail of the RX vs. the flat/pintail of the the Brocker/Lhasa?

I'll be honest, I really can't speak to this. The skis were skied about a year apart and I only got half a day on the proto Brockers. I can say that I was ear-to-ear grinning on both. I would love to ski them both back to back in similar conditions and tell you. Who lives in CO and wants to do a comparo?

[locknload]

This is a great review..thx, Daywalker. Mine are, as of yet, unmounted but will be ready to go after the first of the year. I particularly like your comments about the peformance tradeoffs between them and the Praxis POWs. Your rationale was exactly why I chose them over the POW boards...to have slightly more versatility with perhaps a small tradeoff in float. I think I'm going to be very happy with them. I am wondering if I do need a charger ski like Legend XXL or Line mothership to complement them as a 2 ski quiver....

[moose pit]

I am waiting for the rockered version I am hoping my choice to forgo the tail rocker will provide a little more stability on firmer snow, but only time will tell...

Good review, thanks.

[strode420]

so when are we going to silverton so i can steal these from you?

[BigLineSeeker]

Rather than starting a new thread I figured I would bump this one with my experiences.

Ski: 189cm Praxis Powder RX with ReCurve, mounted with Barons at bootcenter 102cm from the nose of the ski. This was measured according to Praxis instructions with a straight tape measure from tip.

Skier: 5'11", 160lb, former racer who skis on edge 90% of the time.

Boots = 326mm Lange WC120 w/ Booster Strap

Similar Skis I've been on: 185 Nordica Blower, 186 Line Prophet 100, 185 Nordica Jah Love

Locations/Conditions: Groomers, blower pow, crud from blower pow, day old hard crud.

Summary: Excellent crud ski, good powder ski, workable groomer ski.

I have 5 days on these skis now and am very impressed. Things started out slow here in Fernie, but are really picking up now. We have had 41 inches in the last 7 days so I have had plenty of time in the deep with the RXs.

Blower Pow: The skis float well, but not as well as I was hoping. I was expecting a more drastic tip rocker which I expect would really help in these conditions. Having said that, these skis are by far the best powder skis I have been on. They are extreemly easy to pivot and on the steep pow runs they kill it. I found that on low-angle runs they feel very similar to my old Blowers, but they are much better when the runs get steeper and the speeds get higher.

Chopped up crud: I could not imagine a better ski for the crud. I prefer to carve through crud, not slide around in it. The early tip rise on the RXs is ideal for doing this. Making ~30m carved turns through crud is easier to do on these skis than any ski I have ever been on.

Groomed: The performance on groomers is better than I expected for this ski, but it is not exciting. The skis hold an edge and are quite stable, but they do not exactly explode with energy out of the turn like a carving ski. They feel very similar to my Blowers in these conditions.

Mounting Note: I also mounted these at 102cm from the tip. I would not mount the skis any farther forward if you are planning to use the skis as a pow/crud ski. The overall length measures to 187cm and the tip/tail rocker makes them feel shorter than they are.

Topsheet Note: I got the Snowflake topsheet and it turned out great. It has held up quite well so far with only minor knicks showing through. I did see what looks like it might end up being a chip after skiing this morning, but only time will tell.

Overall I love these skis. They will be my go-to ski for anything looking like powder. The RXs ski similar to my old Blowers with better float and better crud handling without any performance loss anywhere else. At my weight these feel like a solid charger ski. I have never felt like I was skiing beyond the ski's limit and I am currently skiing faster than I ever have (for anyone that knows Fernie I made 3 carved turns down the Bear from top to bottom today in the 10am crud we had and they felt solid).

[Sullywhacker]

Any insight into similarities/differences?

[locknload]

BigLineSeeker,

Nice review. I got on these for the first time last week in about 6" of fresh on top of hardpack and crud. Tried them all over and in a variety of terrain.

Me: 6 foot 3, 185 lbs., Level 8 skiier.

Boots: Lange Freeride 110

Other skis liked: Gotama 183 (too short for me), Armada ARV, P-90.

I too, was also suprised at the relatively small tip rocker. You almost don't notice it unless you put the skis together. I also felt the mount point seemed slightly too far forward and I also mounted at a 102 straight line from the tip. Maybe it seems far forward b/c the Gotama always seems far back to me.

Anyhow, the ski still destroyed steeper terrain. I took it straight down the face of Jupiter bowl at PCMR and it really came alive at high speed...seems like it took 3 or 4 turns to get down. It was very stable as I encountered some chop and crud below the softer snow. It was also a bit stiffer than I expected but that did result in it obliterating crud. I sought out lots of crud and chopped up snow and found the ski to be completely unbothered by it. In fact, it was fun to feel invincible going Mach Schnell through that kind of snow.

In terms of groomer performance...I found it manageable as long as there was still some loose, granular snow around. They will get up on edge but definitely takes some work. This is the widest ski I've ever owned so I wasn't sure completely what to expect but I didn't expect it to carve as well as the Gots do and it didn't. It did not feel too long at 189 and I actually wished that it was a few cm longer (maybe 192 or 193)...the rocker does make it seem short. I took the Gots out the day after (no new snow) and was glad I was on the narrower ski to grab the last bit of pow around and to hit soft, big bumps. I think it would have been a ton of work without any fresh snow.

Overall, I'm quite pleased with the skis...some of you that have ridden many more fat skis than I need to compare to some other sticks to understand the difference. Part of me is wondering if I should have committed to something super fat (like Toons, Kuros or Hellbents) and completely accepted a tradeoff for zero groomer performance. Still chewing on this one. I am now, however, disappointed in my purchase. At the pre-sale price of $550..it was a steal.

Cheers

[h2d]

Nice review, take it you mean not and not now???

[locknload]

Yes...sorry, H2d. I am NOT disappointed in the purchase. Thanks for that catch. I also mashed up that first sentence in that graph about not having ridden as many fat skis as others on this board. I need to compare some more with some other sticks to truly understand all the performance tradeoffs.

[adrenalated]

Biglineseeker - would you say the RX is similar in stiffness to the Blowers? A bit stiffer maybe?

[BigLineSeeker]

The tip is definitely stiffer than the blower, but the rest of the ski feels pretty similar. It has the same smooth underfoot feel when carving through crud but the shorter running length acts much differently when trying to smear turns.

[butterscotch]

Not sure we need another review, but I've always wanted to write one....

The ski: Praxis RX with recurve mounted at 102.25 cm with Salomon STH 14s.

The Boots: Kryptons

The Skier: 5' 11", 170-175 lbs., non-racer, ex-ice coaster

Other similar skis in the quiver: 183 Gotama, 186 Prophet 100

Some technical notes: Construction is very solid except for the dimple in my topsheet (), I already talked to Keith about it and he's hooking me up. The flex is overall stiffer than the Gotamas and the Prophets. The taper and the rocker are both very subtle. The widest point seems to be set back about 18 cm from the tip and tail. Mounted at 102.25 cm, they have the same amount of tip as my 183 Gotamas which are mounted at +1.

The review:
In soft snow - any kind of soft snow, powder, crud, even soft groomers, these skis kill it. It took me a bit to adjust to the forward mount and also to having sharp edges, but after that it was on. Once I figured them out, I was able to lay down a solid carve with these as long as it was soft. In powder, they are very good but they don't come close to my Praxis Powders. I like the combination of a more centered mount and a longer radius, stiffer ski. Turn initiation is excellent but the ski is still stable at speed.

On hard snow and ice, they're manageable. Carving becomes less viable on the harder snow. Skiing them on wind-scoured ice while hungover was a little scary.

[locknload]

Good review, Butterscotch. Interesting that they have the same amount of tip as the 183 Gots (which I also have)...but obviously they have much more tail no? You really have me thinking based on your statement that they're still nothing close to the Praxis Powders....maybe that's the right direction to go. Also agree that they things get a little sketchy on harder snow and almost terrifying on ice. Do you or anyone know how they would compare to the Katanas, for instance? As I look at the dims...they're pretty similar no? I think Katanas are 111 at the waist but have a 140ish shovel? Is it fair to say that anything after about 110 mm wide simply not going to carve that well?

[butterscotch]

Good review, Butterscotch. Interesting that they have the same amount of tip as the 183 Gots (which I also have)...but obviously they have much more tail no? You really have me thinking based on your statement that they're still nothing close to the Praxis Powders....maybe that's the right direction to go. Also agree that they things get a little sketchy on harder snow and almost terrifying on ice. Do you or anyone know how they would compare to the Katanas, for instance? As I look at the dims...they're pretty similar no? I think Katanas are 111 at the waist but have a 140ish shovel? Is it fair to say that anything after about 110 mm wide simply not going to carve that well?

Thanks. Yes, the extra length is in the tail. And yes, I would say that they don't measure up to a reverse/reverse ski in powder and even say that, if you live out west and have the means, such a ski is a must-have. But that's just my $0.02.

Regarding Katanas, I can't say anything more than what I've read. My understanding is that, while the dimensions are similar, they're essentially a non-rockered, zero-camber ski and that they don't have any taper in the tips and tails. So those are two key differences. As for their groomer performance, you'll have to check the reviews of that ski. I'm not going to make a blanket statement about carving on >110 mm skis, just because the Praxis Rx are the only ones I've been on (at least, that have traditional sidecut).

[sandflea]

I've had about 10 days on mine... I was a little disappointed with how much reverse camber was in the tips when I first received them.

My stats are: 6'1" 180lbs.
Boots: Salomon Falcon 10's with intuition liners, 315bsl.
Bindings: Marker Dukes mounted at 103 from the tip.

I first had these mounted at 102mm from the tip and moved them back to 103mm, for me they are now money. I echo everything that was said above about these skis. I had no trouble keeping them afloat in deep powder and they turned well in trees. After 10 days, they now have the amount of reverse camber that I originally wanted(about twice as much)... I'm very happy.

[locknload]

Hmm.....thanks for that input, Sandflea. Methinks I might remount at 103 instead of the current 102 that they're at. I hate to second-guess Keith but they do feel a bit forward. I cringe at the thought of re-drilling but generally should not be a problem right? I agree that reverse camber seemed fairly mild and am glad to hear that you have found it to work itself after 10 days of riding.

Butterscotch, thanks for pointing on the technical differences between Katana and the POW RX. This is also the widest traditional ski I have ever ridden and so I can make no assumptions about how well similar skis might carve. I may just hop on the Katana just for comparison purposes or something similar but nothing comes immediately to mind. Obviously, I did not buy this particular ski to carve groomers so its not a big issue...just satisfying my own curiousity to understand the performance envelope of skis in this class.

[nomadpat]

How long is the cambered section underfoot? I'm trying to put the carving comments into perspective.

[locknload]

Nomadpat,

I will try to measure for you and report back. My skis are out west so it will be a week or two until I can do that.

[sandflea]

I had my Rx's out to the black forest at Solitude for some deep powder tree runs... these things floataliciously rocked! Turned on a dime in the trees, didn't have as much of a surfy feeling that a Hellbent has, but didn't make you feel that you were cheating either. An update on the camber underneath, there is none now. The rocker tips and tails now look more similar to the pics of the ON3P skis, the flex has also softened up a bit.

[lax]

prev skis: atomic pow +, hellbents, msps, praxis pow

this is the most bomber, charging ski i've ever ridden, and yet it manages to be fun and poppy and slarvy. they ride similar to the metal-enforced pow + when i want them to, but can still be thrown around quickly due to the rocker. These skis are pretty stiff, but still manage to have a ton of pop, which makes them super fun to jib with, the my first day on them i did more nollies than i ever had before. these skis rip so hard that every time i try to ski them i have either jumped off something stupid or convinced myself that a really dumb line was agood idea and scare the shit out of myself. me likey.

[Duffman]

Lax, since you have both, how do these compare to the Praxis Pows? Especially in now pow condition. Also does anyone have a pic of the amount of rocker?

[Jim S]

Anybody know: What's the running length on these compared to a 189cm rockered Obsethed or nonrockered older 189 Seth Vicious/Seth? How much shorter compared to the older Seth Vicious/Pistol/Seth?
.
.

[SkivenHuckings]

Thank you lax for the review! You make me want to get these skis. Has anyone compared these to the 4FRNT EHP? Are the flexes similar? Stability? Ect...