Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 45
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    At the beach
    Posts
    14,073

    Review Praxis Back Country

    Skier Info:
    5'10" & ~190#

    Similar Skis I've Owned:
    191cm Movement Goliaths; 195 Praxis Powders.

    Ski Info:
    190cm
    130-105-121
    26m radius
    Tip Rocker
    Flat camber
    Quasi twin-tip
    9 lbs. 4 oz.

    Set Up:
    Marker Griffons mounted 105cm from the tip.

    Testing Conditions:
    Two days at Mammoth after a 24"-36" dump in early season and two days at the end of April after a foot of snow.

    Flex:
    These are listed as a 5 on the Praxis website. Mine however, are a touch stiffer (similar to my Movement Thunders) as Keith made a few proto pairs last summer with some carbon fiber in them. Mine are 6/7 stiff in the mid section but progressively soften up going out to the tail with a softer tip.

    Mounting point:
    As AK Bruin mentioned in his review, 105 seems to be the money spot for our weight.

    Soft Snow:
    In early season deep pow, I had such a good time on these, I put my Praxis Pows on gear swap As a powder skiing jong, if these work for me, I can safely state anyone of decent abilities would love this ski. For a normal side cut shape, I had no issue doing a variety of turn sizes in deep snow with no hookiness. These skis absolutely killed my Goliath's for being easy to ski, especially for making tighter radius turns to control my speed. You still get the slarve feeling off the tail, just not to the same degree as with the Powders.
    Over the last two days skiing in 4"-12" of fresh Thursday and 2"-8" of wind buff Friday, I absolutely fell in love with these skis. The conditions allowed me to ski at faster speeds than in the previous deep snow (ya, I am a puss). With a little more speed there was minimal if any tip dive. The tips went through or over the cut up piles of snow as the day progressed with 0 deflection, likely due to the soft conditions. Soft moguls were actually fun, as the raised tips made it very easy for me to turn through the runs.

    Hard Snow:
    Hard snow performance is really very good and surpassed my expectations. It is easy to get the ski up on an edge and then you can rail them back to the lift. Sure the tips flap a tad when the tip isn't fully engaged on edge but BFD. When skiing dust on crust conditions, the edge grip is really good when you hit the hard stuff and is very manageable, but your not buying this ski to be on hard/icy snow all day.

    PROS:
    + Turnability
    + Stability
    + Bomber build
    + light weight IMO
    + Nice graphics (I have the Sunrise)

    CONS:
    -
    I honestly can't think of any, other than I would not ride them every day, as I like them in soft snow and have other skis for those firm days.

    Overall/Conclusion:
    I love these skis. Frankly, I wish I could let you demo them, as I am sure if you needed this size ski in your quiver, you would buy them after a day on them. The ability of these skis to make any size turn that I asked them to do without hooking and dumping me, really gave me the confidence to try a few runs off the top I have never done before. They are an absolute blast and I will ride them whenever I am expecting 4"+ of soft snow. Lastly, I want to mention how much I like the tail of these skis. It isn't a true twin tip, with just a little flip at the end. There were a few times the firmness of the tail saved me when I got in the back seat?? I don't know, but unlike an S7 that has a more pronounced tail rocker, the Back Country tail is there for you, more like a flat tail feels.
    If your in Mammoth with a 315 bsl, send me a pm to try them.

    Last edited by liv2ski; 05-11-2010 at 06:54 AM.
    Quote Originally Posted by leroy jenkins View Post
    I think you'd have an easier time understanding people if you remembered that 80% of them are fucking morons.
    That is why I like dogs, more than most people.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    1,070
    I am still most impressed with how light his skis feel on your feet, even my 185 Praxis pows.
    The 177 Freerides are super light and are plenty stiff; they also kill it in powder. I logged almost +50% of my days on them this year. I think I may get the BC for a tele set up next year.

    edit: when you say tip dive do you mean feeling that flipping over feeling or like the tips go under the snow? Cause sometimes in the really deep the tips would be under the snow but I would never get that "front flip" feeling or feel the need to go backseat.
    Quote Originally Posted by leroy jenkins View Post
    Do you have one of those gay ass stickers on your car? If so, I'll bet money youre an uptight passive aggressive fucktard that hates anyone different than them, yet loves to pay lip service to 'tolerance'.

    People with coexist stickers are ALMOST as bad as tele skiers, although there is some overlap.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    At the beach
    Posts
    14,073
    Zepskier, my deep powder prowess is likely somewhat suspect to the normal TGR Gnar ripper. That said, I never felt the need to get in the backseat on the BCs. If there was tip dive (I did a few good cartwheels on a deep day) I think it was more due to operator error, than the ski. When used during the last storm cycle in about 12" of snow, there was nothing but a very smooth glide, as I had the confidence to keep my speed up and just slarve really nice turns in the creamy Sierra cream cheese. In blower, I could see them kind of cruising a bit under the surface at times, but how fucking fun would that be I am an in bound jong to this point, but there is no doubt in my mind this would be a great ski for side country or to tour with. Compared to my other skis, it is pretty light and snappy.
    Quote Originally Posted by leroy jenkins View Post
    I think you'd have an easier time understanding people if you remembered that 80% of them are fucking morons.
    That is why I like dogs, more than most people.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    take a guess
    Posts
    2,188
    Nice review. Everyone I have spoken to about them absolutely loves them, and says that ski kills it (as does every praxis ski I've ever skied). I might have missed it in the review, but I assume you are on the 190 cm model.

    On paper it seems like they have quite a bit of rocker, not drastic in terms of shape, but that it extends pretty deep into the ski. Did you find them to ski short?

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    SLC
    Posts
    2,517
    I still wish I would not have sold my pair, Ive kicked myself all winter for that one.
    If ski companies didn't make new skis every year I wouldn't have to get new skis every year.

    www.levelninesports.com
    http://skiingyeti.blogspot.com/

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    At the beach
    Posts
    14,073
    Quote Originally Posted by njfreeskier View Post
    Nice review. Everyone I have spoken to about them absolutely loves them, and says that ski kills it (as does every praxis ski I've ever skied). I might have missed it in the review, but I assume you are on the 190 cm model.

    On paper it seems like they have quite a bit of rocker, not drastic in terms of shape, but that it extends pretty deep into the ski. Did you find them to ski short?
    The rise in the ski does start quit a bit down from the tip (I am guessing 2 ft+) so on firm snow they ski very short for a 190 ski. On hard pack, I can turn as easily as on my 18m 178 Nitrous. In a bit of soft snow, the gradual rise makes it very easy to turn the ski. They are night and day different from my Goliath's that had a much larger radius.
    Last edited by liv2ski; 05-11-2010 at 06:56 AM.
    Quote Originally Posted by leroy jenkins View Post
    I think you'd have an easier time understanding people if you remembered that 80% of them are fucking morons.
    That is why I like dogs, more than most people.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Truckee, CA
    Posts
    6,552
    L2S:

    What size of the BC did you get?

    I'm 5'11" and 160lbs and have the 180 cm on my short-list of skis for a BC set-up.

    I want a ski with a 105-110 waist, rockered tip, and a low 20's radius, also leaning more toward a softer tip and tail, but want something that has pop/snap, as well.

    Sadly, I haven't been able to demo anything on my short list (Icelantic Nomad, Prior Husume, Praxis BC--bummed that the Freeride was discontinued--Movement Baggy, Fatypuys D-Sender...)
    "Man, we killin' elephants in the back yard..."

    http://www.blizzardsportusa.com/

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    At the beach
    Posts
    14,073
    Dookey67, mine are 190's. As I mentioned in the Praxis thread, if your in the 155lbs range, then a 180 should work for you IMO. I was going to the Mammoth Mini until my wife reminded me my daughter graduates that Friday. I would have let you try them if your bsl was in the 315 range. Maybe you can try them down the road.
    Quote Originally Posted by leroy jenkins View Post
    I think you'd have an easier time understanding people if you remembered that 80% of them are fucking morons.
    That is why I like dogs, more than most people.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Juxtaposition
    Posts
    5,787
    Nice review. I like the sound of them, but don't want any twin tip in my bc skis. 1cm is plenty to shuffle backwards, and even that is a hassle at times when you are jamming the tails whilst booting up something short and steep (with bases together).
    Life is not lift served.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    At the beach
    Posts
    14,073
    Quote Originally Posted by Hohes View Post
    Nice review. I like the sound of them, but don't want any twin tip in my bc skis. 1cm is plenty to shuffle backwards, and even that is a hassle at times when you are jamming the tails whilst booting up something short and steep (with bases together).
    Hohes, I am a knob and have reread your comment a few times trying to understand your point. Just to be clear about the tails, they are not a twin tip. There is a small amount of rise in the last 6" that is very low angle. Less of a rise angle than on the tails of my Mythic Rider's and Thunders, but just a little longer in the raised tail portion. It would be very easy to stick the tails in the snow, in the steeps, to step into your bindings IMO, if that is what you were getting at.
    Quote Originally Posted by leroy jenkins View Post
    I think you'd have an easier time understanding people if you remembered that 80% of them are fucking morons.
    That is why I like dogs, more than most people.

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    F'n Midwest again
    Posts
    2,229
    while I haven't used the technique that hohes references for steep booting.

    I think what he is saying is that any rise in the tail makes it tough for him to plunge the skis, tail-first, bases together (sounds tiring) into the snow as an anchor while booting.

    Maybe that's required for booting in that deep Japow he's often skiing??
    Aggressive in my own mind

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    At the beach
    Posts
    14,073
    Quote Originally Posted by whorehey View Post
    while I haven't used the technique that hohes references for steep booting.

    I think what he is saying is that any rise in the tail makes it tough for him to plunge the skis, tail-first, bases together (sounds tiring) into the snow as an anchor while booting.

    Maybe that's required for booting in that deep Japow he's often skiing??
    Got ya. I would think something like an ice axe would be way lighter and easier to use for that purpose than what you described above. The above sounds no beuno.
    Quote Originally Posted by leroy jenkins View Post
    I think you'd have an easier time understanding people if you remembered that 80% of them are fucking morons.
    That is why I like dogs, more than most people.

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    F'n Midwest again
    Posts
    2,229
    In Hohe's defense, he does say SHORT and steep
    Aggressive in my own mind

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    not close enough
    Posts
    2,494
    Quote Originally Posted by fat yeti View Post
    I still wish I would not have sold my pair, Ive kicked myself all winter for that one.
    I'm sure as shit happy you did Seriously

    liv2ski, they are an awesome touring ski (not that I have a lot to compare it to), but mine are very light considering they are a super solid 190 w/ FF+s on them, But the camber underfoot and minimal sidecut provide excellent edge hold one icy, sketchy sidehills. they also handle spring conditions very well. It sounds like i have the same proto's you do.

    I do think they perform pretty well on hardpack though. I've rallied them through icy trees, down steep icy/windbuffed volcano faces, and pretty much everything and they've held there edge very well. The long running length into the tip rocker is probably why. I get a little tip dive in low angle blower, but I ski forward and am mounted at 104.


    Question: how do you like the feel engaging/disengaging the ski?

    Quote Originally Posted by njfreeskier View Post
    On paper it seems like they have quite a bit of rocker, not drastic in terms of shape, but that it extends pretty deep into the ski. Did you find them to ski short?
    The rocker is pretty minimal, though set back a bit into the ski, but in soft snow, it really seems like the effective edge/running length extends past the break of the camber into the rocker when the you've got the ski engaged. This is what i love about the ski, is that you have a ton of responsiveness and it really puts you up in front, feathering the ski's camber fulcrum like a gas pedal. It's awesome. just fackin awesome.

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    At the beach
    Posts
    14,073
    Quote Originally Posted by QuikR12 View Post
    Question: how do you like the feel engaging/disengaging the ski?

    What i love about the ski, is that you have a ton of responsiveness and it really puts you up in front, feathering the ski's camber fulcrum like a gas pedal. It's awesome. just fackin awesome.
    I could not have replied better than your above response. I still need more time on them, only 4 days this/last season, but I am sure with more practice on them, I will be skiing in pow, like I can a groomer at some point
    Quote Originally Posted by leroy jenkins View Post
    I think you'd have an easier time understanding people if you remembered that 80% of them are fucking morons.
    That is why I like dogs, more than most people.

  16. #16
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Juxtaposition
    Posts
    5,787
    Yes, SHORT and steep, like 50m vert. Or any other number of times when I need to stick my tails in the snow when stationary.

    But my error, I misunderstood your description when you said "Quasi twin-tip". I assumed much more twin than there evidently is. Eitherway, any pic of the tails?
    Life is not lift served.

  17. #17
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Dystopia
    Posts
    11,499
    I dig my pair. 190 long.

    Its a great do anything ski. I did de-tune them slightly, and I dont usually do that with skis. I think its the tight radius (for my taste) that made me do that. They were a bit hooky on the engage and chattered a bit and would not release and skid smoothly prior to detuning

    they carve hardpack tightly and they also float and slide nicely in pow.
    no tip dive for me.


    On stabbing the tails into the snow for belay, I think you could cut 2 or 3cm off the tail to make them better for that.

    Its a nice ski. I hope Keith sticks around to produce a few more of them next year.
    ďLife has become immeasurably better since I have been forced to stop taking it seriously.Ē
    Hunter S. Thompson

  18. #18
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    At the beach
    Posts
    14,073
    Quote Originally Posted by Hohes View Post
    Yes, SHORT and steep, like 50m vert. Or any other number of times when I need to stick my tails in the snow when stationary.

    But my error, I misunderstood your description when you said "Quasi twin-tip". I assumed much more twin than there evidently is. Eitherway, any pic of the tails?
    Here is a pic. The rise starts 8" in on about a 2 degree angle. That leaves you about 2.5" apart at the tip of the tails. For your purposes Hohes, I would put the tails closer together to jam the skis in the snow.

    Quote Originally Posted by leroy jenkins View Post
    I think you'd have an easier time understanding people if you remembered that 80% of them are fucking morons.
    That is why I like dogs, more than most people.

  19. #19
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Juxtaposition
    Posts
    5,787
    Hey, thanks for making the effort to photo and post the tails like that. Looking at them, they would splay too much when paired, and not stab into the snow straight when single. Bummer.

    Thanks again for posting the picture though.
    Life is not lift served.

  20. #20
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Incline Village, NV (Tahoe)
    Posts
    5,487

    ...
    .
    .
    Every man dies. Not every man lives.
    You donít stop playing because you grow old; you grow old because you stop playing.

  21. #21
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    At the beach
    Posts
    14,073
    Quote Originally Posted by Jim S View Post

    ...
    .
    .
    Did UPS Santa drop you off something pretty?
    Quote Originally Posted by leroy jenkins View Post
    I think you'd have an easier time understanding people if you remembered that 80% of them are fucking morons.
    That is why I like dogs, more than most people.

  22. #22
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Incline Village, NV (Tahoe)
    Posts
    5,487
    Not quite but I think I'm going to swing by Keith's place tomorrow and pick up a pair of BC 190s.

    I fantasize about deviating from lift-served and venturing out more fro some b/c this winter. I'm not getting younger and time is flying by.
    Every man dies. Not every man lives.
    You donít stop playing because you grow old; you grow old because you stop playing.

  23. #23
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    At the beach
    Posts
    14,073
    Quote Originally Posted by Jim S View Post
    Not quite but I think I'm going to swing by Keith's place tomorrow and pick up a pair of BC 190s.

    I fantasize about deviating from lift-served and venturing out more fro some b/c this winter. I'm not getting younger and time is flying by.
    I hear ya, as I am in the same spot. Thinking about picking up some new Dynafit boots, bindings and some skins this season. The BC's would be awesome out of the resort and very fun inbounds too.
    Quote Originally Posted by leroy jenkins View Post
    I think you'd have an easier time understanding people if you remembered that 80% of them are fucking morons.
    That is why I like dogs, more than most people.

  24. #24
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    5

    K2 Sidestash vs. Praxis Backcountry

    I have K2 Sidestash 188. I love them for wide open pow / crud with few tight turns. They are fun and handle speed very well but I'd like something that can more easily handle more technical lines with tighter turns, couloirs, trees, etc. I'm looking to use a ski in Eastside (High Sierra) variable conditions and Tahoe sidecountry. I've narrowed down my choices to a K2 sidestash 181 or a Praxis Backcountry 180 / 190.

    2 Questions -
    1) If I don't mind carrying the weight of the sidestash, will I be sacrificing anything significant on the descent by going with the backcountry ? i.e. stiffness, stability at speed, edge stability on ice, etc.

    2) If I do go with the backcountry, which size makes sense? I would like stability at speeds but I also want to be able to throw the skis around a bit if I have to do hop turns or ski tight technical lines through couloirs / trees. I'm 6'2" and ~185 lbs. The extra weight of the 190 is not a concern but I don't want a ski that's too long for tight situations.

    Thanks !

  25. #25
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    SF, CA
    Posts
    167
    I'm watching this same thread as i'm in the same boat. 6'0 220. Also, how much do the 190 BCs weigh? I can't find it on google, the praxis site, or tgr.

    edit: 9lbs 15oz? for the 2010 at least
    Last edited by turboLT; 02-02-2011 at 01:05 PM.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •