Praxis WooTest review

**kidwoo** · 05-03-2012, 08:04 PM

My thoughts on what we ended up with.

http://blistergearreview.com/gear-re...praxis-wootest

If you're one of the folks that got a pair, chime in.

**fat yeti** · 05-04-2012, 01:11 PM

Great review, and now I have to keep telling my self I don't need these. Thanks glad this happened, love the original protest and remember thinking a narrower version would be cool

**DeathVan** · 05-04-2012, 01:54 PM

Excellent review, I appreciate your candor.

As a Protest owner (and lover) these skis have intrigued me from their inception.
-good on you for making them happen

I look forward to what comes out of Praxis in the future, knowing that my current bc skis have at least another year of trashing left.

**xtrmjoe** · 05-05-2012, 03:55 PM

I really wish we had a better winter to get more days on them. I agree with every thing in the review. The plates add versatility for in and out of bounds. Detune the shit out of them and seek out the untracked. I detuned in 3 stages and wish I would have just hit them hard the first time. Multiple passes with the panzer at 45* from contact points is the way to go. The edges come way to sharp to start.
I think part of the weirdness in the afternoon has to do with just how easy they are to ski. They are just so easy to pivot and turn that when the tip gets engaged on chunder it can toss you around faster than you can react to it. Big straight fast turns were the best at avoiding the weirdness. Slower, shorter turns were where I found myself lacking some confidence.
I found committing to them 100% and staying forward decreased the weirdness as did keeping the speed up. The couple roundhouse days we skied showed me this. Once I got them up to speed they were much less reactive to the chunder. They can't hook if you don't turn!

**neck beard** · 05-05-2012, 05:13 PM

Thanks for the proper review, k-woo. Sorry to hear they didn't kill zipper crust. How about phonebook wind funk?

Talking tail rocker/splay. Are you talking they need more of a flipped up tail, or more splay starting further back near the heel piece?

**kidwoo** · 05-05-2012, 05:17 PM

Originally Posted by Hohes

Thanks for the proper review, k-woo. Sorry to hear they didn't kill zipper crust. How about phonebook wind funk?

Talking tail rocker/splay. Are you talking they need more of a flipped up tail, or more splay starting further back near the heel piece?

Just to be clear, that wasn't 'zipper crust' really. More like bank vault deadbolt crust. They ski your average breakable zipper crust like a champ. This shit was something no ski works in....including a full reverse/reverse ski. You had just had to jump up to move your skis in the air to redirect them.

As far as the tail goes, not so much higher just starting closer to the foot. They'll probably end up being a little higher but not much. Just one part of a pretty noticeable 'all tail' feeling on firmer snow.

**neck beard** · 05-05-2012, 05:28 PM

Got it, thanks man. Sound good. More splay is ok with me, more twin-tip flipped tail at the end of the splay is not.

**kidwoo** · 05-05-2012, 05:44 PM

Nah, definitely just a deeper splay. The intent is still a bc 'skiing forward' tool. I'm looking for a little versatility as far some resort capacity but switch pow landings isn't really part of that.

**neck beard** · 05-05-2012, 06:00 PM

Any more details on the limits of 'performance' on surfaces like unbreakable re-frozen rained on snow, and hard frozen crust that has been scoured clear in the alpine?

Obviously I do not need it to perform on that, just get by, say up to 30 degrees.

Oh yeah, and this one got a laugh:

Tweaking the flatter tail would help beginners like Jonathan really see the potential of the design

BAM.

**kidwoo** · 05-05-2012, 06:58 PM

Originally Posted by Hohes

Any more details on the limits of 'performance' on surfaces like unbreakable re-frozen rained on snow, and hard frozen crust that has been scoured clear in the alpine?

Obviously I do not need it to perform on that, just get by, say up to 30 degrees.

They're fine on that crap. Like first day out, you'll ski it well without even thinking about it fine. The fact that they do have such a rockered tip gives them kind of that 'really mounted forward' feel so they're super easy to throw sideways. Hockey panic stops are cake too.

**JFE24** · 05-06-2012, 01:22 PM

Originally Posted by Hohes

Oh yeah, and this one got a laugh: (...) BAM.

It's okay, Kid had a tough winter. He barely skied any pow AND he kinda bungled up the tail of his dream ski....I think it's great to see him trying to move on and cracking jokes. I mean, I probably would have lost the will to live if I were him.

**kidwoo** · 05-06-2012, 08:18 PM

That's why jesus invented mountain bikes.

**Arty50** · 05-07-2012, 11:08 AM

Originally Posted by kidwoo

That's why jesus invented mountain bikes.

Thank you, Jebus!!!

As for the article, this comment blew my mind:

"the typical Tahoe snow that falls in meters and skis like feet"

Must be from frequent travels to the PNW.

**Unfrozen Caveman Lawyer** · 05-07-2012, 11:15 AM

Cool review - good to hear the project worked out!

**Ted Striker** · 05-07-2012, 02:17 PM

Maybe I missed it, but did you ever play with the mounting point? (a while back, you mentioned that you might do some swiss cheese experimenting)

**kidwoo** · 05-07-2012, 03:06 PM

Had mine mounted at 101.5 and 99.5 from the tip.

Definitely preferred the 99.5.

Sorry I forgot to mention that.

**spaztwelve** · 05-11-2012, 11:01 AM

From the picture posted in the blog, your mount looks way too far forward on the sidecut. If you have a a lot of tail on the snow and big rocker tip, they're going to ski like shit, right?

**auvgeek** · 05-11-2012, 11:58 AM

Did you miss the part where kidwoo said he remounted 2 cm forward and prefers it to the original mount?

**kidwoo** · 05-11-2012, 05:07 PM

Originally Posted by spaztwelve

From the picture posted in the blog, your mount looks way too far forward on the sidecut. If you have a a lot of tail on the snow and big rocker tip, they're going to ski like shit, right?

1) those aren't my skis, they're the pair that belongs to the site owner (but are mounted similarly regardless)

2) They aren't mounted too far forward on the sidecut

3) they don't ski like shit at all, they just don't ski hardpack like a ski designed to ski hardpack

**spaztwelve** · 05-14-2012, 03:01 PM

Originally Posted by kidwoo

1) those aren't my skis, they're the pair that belongs to the site owner (but are mounted similarly regardless)

2) They aren't mounted too far forward on the sidecut

3) they don't ski like shit at all, they just don't ski hardpack like a ski designed to ski hardpack

Fair enough. I just became skeptical of the whole review when you, after trying them, called for everyone to detune. I don't think there is an early rise ski out there that shouldn't be detuned. That led me to print out that pic and measure it. It appeared that he bindings are centered on the ski, but the ski is not symetrical, so I was confounded. It just looks like they're way forward on the sidecut, which would certainly make them ski like crap on hardpack.

**spaztwelve** · 05-14-2012, 03:03 PM

Originally Posted by auvgeek

Did you miss the part where kidwoo said he remounted 2 cm forward and prefers it to the original mount?

I read it.

**kidwoo** · 05-15-2012, 12:18 AM

Originally Posted by spaztwelve

Fair enough. I just became skeptical of the whole review when you, after trying them, called for everyone to detune. I don't think there is an early rise ski out there that shouldn't be detuned. That led me to print out that pic and measure it. It appeared that he bindings are centered on the ski, but the ski is not symetrical, so I was confounded. It just looks like they're way forward on the sidecut, which would certainly make them ski like crap on hardpack.

Nah the ski is 187. Mount point is about 99-101 FROM THE TIP. Do the math.

Everyone I know who has a pair of these has skied plenty of rockered skis brand new out of the plastic. I can't stress enough just HOW sharp these things were tuned. It's my own dumb fault because I've gotten some skis like this from Praxis in the past but still........these ain't your normal production tune. Really. All of us can ski those just fine, no matter how rockered.

**spaztwelve** · 05-15-2012, 01:19 PM

Originally Posted by kidwoo

Nah the ski is 187. Mount point is about 99-101 FROM THE TIP. Do the math.

Everyone I know who has a pair of these has skied plenty of rockered skis brand new out of the plastic. I can't stress enough just HOW sharp these things were tuned. It's my own dumb fault because I've gotten some skis like this from Praxis in the past but still........these ain't your normal production tune. Really. All of us can ski those just fine, no matter how rockered.

It usually has less to do with rocker, and more to do with sidecut meeting rise. Snowboarders have been detuning for decades now. Since skis are starting to resemble snowboards more and more, it only makes sense to detune.

**JeffreyJim** · 05-15-2012, 02:14 PM

FWIW, the ski is great. Only problem is the flat tail. Yes, the ski is sharp but I'm used to detuning the shit out of my skis anyway. Nothing new for me.

I'll likely add some rocker to the tail and call it a day. Problem is the skis mount may be close to the center of the sidecut (way close enough anyway) but is not centered in the rocker. more rocker in front than behind makes for some funny catchy feelings at unexpected times. I expect this will be changed for next year.