The Official Great Pacific Octopus Thread

[hoarhey]

I agree, the 182 GPO skis more than its length/width would lead one to believe.

I had a great afternoon at targhee yesterday as the sun finally softened the snow in the afternoon.

very versatile ski for sure

[stash]

Thinking really hard about a long-overdue update to my quiver. I'm pretty convinced the GPO is the way to go, but on the fence a a bit between the 182 and 187. Any input is greatly appreciated.

Me: 5'8" 165-170 before gear (depending on last night's dinner). I ski relatively fast and aggressively in absolute terms, but I don't charge as hard and I'm not as young as I used to be. Skis stay mostly on the ground -- I'll hit small drops at speed, but I'm not dropping cliffs.

I currently ski and love 180 Explosives (did I mention my quiver update was overdue?). I'm happy to continue to use these for variable to marginal conditions. I also have 175 Sumos, and they work fine in fresh snow, but after demoing some modern shapes it's clear these need to be put out to pasture.

I have skied Automatics in 186 and liked them, but thought I could have done with a little less ski in trees and a little more ski maching crud back to the lift.

I'd use the GPO for resort and hike-to sidecountry terrain, primarily in Tahoe. I'm leaning hard towards the 182, but looking for a little input/confirmation that this is the right way to go.

Finally, if anyone's got a Praxis code, my wallet and I would love that. Thanks.

[Muggydude]

PM'd ya.

IMO for your size and purpose the 187 carbon seams like a good compromise. Length for stability, carbon for quickness in the trees and lighter weight. Or if you get 182s go with the normal core.

[hoarhey]

Thinking really hard about a long-overdue update to my quiver. I'm pretty convinced the GPO is the way to go, but on the fence a a bit between the 182 and 187. Any input is greatly appreciated.

Me: 5'8" 165-170 before gear (depending on last night's dinner). I ski relatively fast and aggressively in absolute terms, but I don't charge as hard and I'm not as young as I used to be. Skis stay mostly on the ground -- I'll hit small drops at speed, but I'm not dropping cliffs.

I currently ski and love 180 Explosives (did I mention my quiver update was overdue?). I'm happy to continue to use these for variable to marginal conditions. I also have 175 Sumos, and they work fine in fresh snow, but after demoing some modern shapes it's clear these need to be put out to pasture.

I have skied Automatics in 186 and liked them, but thought I could have done with a little less ski in trees and a little more ski maching crud back to the lift.

I'd use the GPO for resort and hike-to sidecountry terrain, primarily in Tahoe. I'm leaning hard towards the 182, but looking for a little input/confirmation that this is the right way to go.

Finally, if anyone's got a Praxis code, my wallet and I would love that. Thanks.

Based on my experience, I'd say go with the 182. My carbon medium+ 182 GPO skies more stable than my 188 S7's did.
Don't know how automatics compare with older S7 (both soft I think).

Ask Keith about 2013/4 182 Glass GPO, as they were part of the 2014 clearance sale that was running a few week's back.

I'm sure you'd be fine on the 187 as well, but think that the GPO skis longer than its length.

EDIT; pm'ed you a code

[Dry]

I have 182s and 192 carbons. And other dbl sets in similar sizes. Ski them all. 192 is a fun ski. 182 is a mo fun ski.

6'1" 190#

[Shu Shu]

Me: 5'8" 165-170 before gear. I ski relatively fast and aggressively in absolute terms, but I don't charge as hard and I'm not as young as I used to be. Skis stay mostly on the ground -- I'll hit small drops at speed, but I'm not dropping cliffs.

.

I'm a couple inches taller and 10 pounds lighter, same style as you with maybe a little bit more time in the air but nothing big. After a full season on mine I''ll second the vote for a 187 carbon. The extra length is just that little bit nicer when things open up, but the carbon layup makes them super snappy and light. I never had a problem getting these around in even the tightest of EC trees.

[femurboy]

I don't post much at all, just lurk the forums, but wanted to put in my two cents on 182 vs 187. I'm 5'6" 145 lbs, aggresive skier but not quite as good as Tabke and went with the 182 this past season. While the ski is super fun it definitely skis pretty short. It will ski WAY shorter than a 180 explosiv. Love the ski but if I had it to do over I would have gone 187. Correct me if I'm wrong but these measure a bit short anyway, so it's probably closer to 180 vs 185.

[matt_ski]

I'm 5' 8" 160 similarly aggressive to what stash described and just ordered the 182s. I will use these along side my nordica enforcers 177 (trad camber). Keith seemed to think the 182s would be right for me. Hope I've made the right choice!

[Jtray406]

I'm 5'11"
170#
31 years old.
I just had a my first days on the 187 GPO mounted -1.5cm back.
Ripping ski! Killed it in pow and crud!
Like NO speed limit in crud/light chop.
Carved and Slarved well, not quite as loose as the 187 Concepts, that might be the fresh tune?
I LOVE my Concepts!

The mount felt a little far back when landing on hard pack or noodling through tight trees.
I might bump it up to like .5? Maybe 3/4cm...is that crazy? Haha!
I'm gonna ski it some more first, but wouldn't recommend going behind -1

I do like to ski switch but it's never been a priority and I have never liked the feeling of a forward mounted ski.

I also changed the edge bevel to 1*base 2* side.
I didn't do this on a pair of 184 Freerides and they just never felt right. I didn't really like that ski very much.

[Muggydude]

I ended up putting inserts in for the line with pivot 18s, and 1.5cm back for sth2 on my glass gpos. Never going to tour with these and plan on keeping them for a while so I said what the heck. Really looking forward to skiing these, died a little last week when it snowed 16+inches at copper tuesday/Tuesday night and I was out of town for Wednesday morning. Hopefully will get some good snow in the next few weeks. Will post my impressions at both positions. Get to compare to 186 lhasa pow fats too

[whyturn]

Helly Hansen ad in powder magazine issue has GPO. Mainstream or still indie cool?

[LightRanger]

Helly Hansen ad in powder magazine issue has GPO. Mainstream or still indie cool?

Noticed that too. Praxii have to be less common in Euroland as well.

Good for Keith.

[Muggydude]

Finally got up on my GPOs today at copper. 5-6 inches overnight and another 2-3 today. 187 length, med/stiff, glass layup.

All I can say is amazing. Super glad I decided to go with them. Handled everything I threw at them. Basically the phrase nimble charger is spot on. Felt like they have a somewhat slashy/scalpel like turning manner. Had no problems in the tightest of trees. Crud busting was great as well, could truck over everything if I wanted to. There was a time or two I felt like they got away from me, but I'll attribute that to being very out of shape. (Ha). Mounted on the line seems pretty good, very pivoty. Felt myself get a little front seat a couple of times, but they pushed me back. I can see though how some might prefer -1.5 or so- which is where I have inserts for my sth2 16s as well so I will try them there and report back.

As far as detuning went I Ronde the edges past the taper points towards the tips. Then feathered into a diamond stone from there to the rocker contacts- and feathered a little past with a soft gummy. Might be more than some people like but I'm quite glad I did. Never felt any of the "praxis hookiness"- the skis released when I wanted them too, and if I wanted to carve they did just fine. Especially for a ski this wide I don't really see the need to have a super sharp edge at the tips. Of course I do like a surfy feeling on my skis so it's personal preference.

[SupreChicken]

Mine still destroy shit. Good to get my balance back today. 192 carbon. Stable and nimble. Bombing tree runs and variable tracked out like whatever. Even with just radicals on them.

[frorider]

192 UL gpo's got a good workout at kwood on Sat. Super wet pow. They reward an angulated technique, come around with a nice rebound. G3 ions, -0.8 cm, maestrale RS...probably my main pow BC or sidecountry setup. Great skis. Slightly lighter than weight posted by Keith.

[neck beard]

182 UL GP CCR got a workout in ok powder today, plus lots of chopped soft fun stuff. Dimple mount with IONs. Absurdly playful and nimble. And so slarvy, like a PowBoard, but feeling faster "edge-to-edge" so to speak in powder... more responsive due to narrower waist. They don't like too much shin pressure at this mount point. They augured a few times which I did not like. Rapid deceleration and grabby when you hit denser snow at a lower speed and try to drive through with shins. I've found this with a few center mounted skis. Found myself riding my heels sometimes.

[N1CK.]

187 carbons, mounted with Solly Wardens @ 101.5 from tip. (pretty much -1cm) Didn't de-tune at all.

Great snow day at Mary Jane, all conditions through the day except hard or not-deep.

Wow. Float is excellent, turns in MJ trees were quick and precise. Skied way too fast for my hack-self. Zero deflection later in the day skiing chopped up snow, just plowed. Inspiring; I even managed a small drop and doubled a few bumps. Only one day so far but I'm very stoked.

edit to add: mounted my own fucking skis, again.

[SupreChicken]

Wow, N1ck, that'll be a sweet sweet setup when the cast plates to fit the warden drop. What boots are you running?

[N1CK.]

Wow, N1ck, that'll be a sweet sweet setup when the cast plates to fit the warden drop. What boots are you running?

I have Cochise 110 boots.
I hope to get a few more days on these skis later this week. (we've got a lot of snow over the past few days) Like I said before, so far they're pretty kick ass.

[Duffman]

Quick skin width question.... 187 GPO, 130 or 140 mm skin width? Normally I'd say 130 would be fine since the widest point is pretty rocketed and this would still cover the entire tail, but since the taper makes the widest point pretty far back would it be better to get the 140 and trim wall to wall or would this just add weight and be a waste

[adrenalated]

Probably doesn't matter. I'm using some old skins that were trimmed a bit narrower than the ski, and since I mostly tour on the GPOs in soft conditions, it's never been an issue.

But my skis aren't rocketed

[Duffman]

Probably doesn't matter. I'm using some old skins that were trimmed a bit narrower than the ski, and since I mostly tour on the GPOs in soft conditions, it's never been an issue.

But my skis aren't rocketed

Damn autocorrect..... I mean, uh, you pussy, all real men ski on rocketed skis

Seriously though I didn't think it matters either but I can get both for essentially the same price hence the question

[adrenalated]

If you can get both for the same price I'd just go with the wider ones and then you know you'll have the best grip possible. I mean, how much weight do you really save with 10mm of skin for ~30cm of length in the tip of the ski? Just make sure you take a dump before you go touring and you've more than made up the difference.

[SupreChicken]

Agree. If there's no price difference, get full coverage of the ski.

[kidwoo]

They augured a few times which I did not like. Rapid deceleration and grabby when you hit denser snow at a lower speed and try to drive through with shins. I've found this with a few center mounted skis. Found myself riding my heels sometimes.

Quit buying skis that are too short for you.


Move 'em back. I drilled my 187s in Keith's presence and he made fun of me for going back 1cm, saying I wouldn't be able to tell the difference. But I've ridden too many of his skis already.

And FWIW, I did borrow a pair from him last year with demo binders and knew for a fact that it's worth doing because I tried both. Give'er 2cm and I think you'll be happy. But I know exactly what you're talking about, even on the 187s.