Page 6 of 33 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 ... LastLast
Results 126 to 150 of 819
  1. #126
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    New Mexico
    Posts
    1,108
    Quote Originally Posted by aragon View Post
    I've requested a picture of their actual veneer before confirming, but based on what Google tells me, I like it:

    Yup, that's gonna be dope, brilliant!
    Fear, Doubt, Disbelief, you have to let it all go. Free your mind!

  2. #127
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Juneau
    Posts
    818
    Quote Originally Posted by Joebornstein View Post
    I pulled the trigger on a -1 Q. Heavy layup w/ambrosia veneer. #4 flex.
    Nicely done.

  3. #128
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Location
    Colorado Front Range
    Posts
    3,010
    Quote Originally Posted by Muggydude View Post
    Am I crazy to be thinking about the 182 Q? About me 5'9 170 lbs. consider myself advanced-expert skier (Grew up skiing in CO, past 3-4 seasons had about 35 days or so). Ski A basin, Vail, Breck, Keystone the most.

    I had 187 MAP GPOs before this, right length in most situations, occasionally length felt a little long in bumps and very tight trees when their wasn't much snow.

    These will be complimenting 180 Brahmas, 186 Jeffrey 114s and 192 Protests.

    Sometimes I just feel like I may be able to ski a little better on a shorter ski and not beat myself up occasionally. Really be completely in control of the ski and everything it's doing, even if I'm not 100% on my game.

    Might just be crazy. I've skied and really liked my 187 GPOs, 186 Lhasa Pow Fats, and 186 Billygoats (goats felt a little heavy at times).

    I also really like my 180 Brahmas in hardpack, had them out in deeper chop and felt I didn't have enough ski at all. Also still in some 176 ON3P Jeronimos, which were a really fun ski and so park duty now mostly. Didn't usually feel like I overpowered those even though they were definitely too short.


    I'm still leaning towards 188 just because it probably fills a spot in my quiver between Jeffrey's and Protests better, Jeffrey's will come out in anything up to 6-8 inches most likely. Maybe go 3 or 3.5 flex over stock 4?
    This sounds exactly like me (including height/weight). My 184 Billy Goats are about as heavy as I want to go, and for the Quixotes, I'm thinking something ever so slightly more nimble, as a replacement for my 182 MAP/Carbon GPOs.

    I'm resisting the temptation to go 188 and sticking with 182, based on positive experiences with 182 MAP/Carbon GPOs. The way I look at it, I'd be fine with a 188 at the beginning of the day, but at the end of the day, or when I wander into tight trees at A-basin, or frozen bumps on Pali, I'd no doubt be thrashing.

    Just out of curiosity, what's your BSL? My 182 GPOs are mounted at -1 for 302 BSL (Wardens). Edit: now re-mounted with Vipecs for 297 at -1.8.

    ... Thom
    Last edited by galibier_numero_un; 08-23-2017 at 10:27 AM.
    Galibier Design
    crafting technology in service of music

  4. #129
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    in the trench
    Posts
    9,166
    Isn't the effective edge longer on the q than gpo? I thought about a 187 gpo but put that to rest. My 187 protest is no problem but that's an anomaly. Glad Keith made a 182 Q. Have to plan how to get a pair

  5. #130
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Philly, PA
    Posts
    703
    Quote Originally Posted by Joebornstein View Post
    I pulled the trigger on a -1 Q. Heavy layup w/ambrosia veneer. #4 flex.
    Damn that's tempting. Even though it's only an incremental difference I really have no desire to go wider than then GPO ls 116 (Q is 118 right?) and based on the rocker profile that looks like a sweet ride with better heft than my lightweight GPO for crudbusting. I'm a pussy though and afraid to beta test something like this right now.

    Was someone saying the -1 layup shortens the ski too?

  6. #131
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    girdwood
    Posts
    373
    Quote Originally Posted by Duffman View Post
    Damn that's tempting. Even though it's only an incremental difference I really have no desire to go wider than then GPO ls 116 (Q is 118 right?) and based on the rocker profile that looks like a sweet ride with better heft than my lightweight GPO for crudbusting. I'm a pussy though and afraid to beta test something like this right now.

    Was someone saying the -1 layup shortens the ski too?
    I asked Keith about going -1 and the heavy layup. Here's his response:

    The heavy core with the veneer should be a good weight and feeling ski, and I think damper than the stock MVP from a few years ago. I think the offset taper tip and tails of the Quixote still has plenty of benefit in the -1cm width. Still a fat ski, I suppose the asymmetrical design makes sense in powder and fatter skis, but even on hard snow and groomers you notice the difference. I'm not sure the design is limited to only fat skis. I think the 188 length will be good. I feel the Quixote skis pretty big, or long with the longer inside sidecut. It likes to go fast and feels stable at speed.

  7. #132
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Location
    Colorado Front Range
    Posts
    3,010
    Quote Originally Posted by grinch View Post
    Isn't the effective edge longer on the q than gpo? I thought about a 187 gpo but put that to rest. My 187 protest is no problem but that's an anomaly. Glad Keith made a 182 Q. Have to plan how to get a pair
    Yes, a 187 GPO has an edge length of 133 & the Quixote in 188 is 136/152.

    Sitting in my cart (waiting for loyalty points to apply to total): 182, #4, Enduro Carbon, Ambriosia Maple, Ibex, black bases.

    Edit: it's a done deal.

    ... Thom
    Last edited by galibier_numero_un; 03-31-2017 at 03:47 PM.
    Galibier Design
    crafting technology in service of music

  8. #133
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    PNW
    Posts
    3,150
    Quote Originally Posted by grinch View Post
    Have to plan how to get a pair
    Let me help. Go here and start clicking

  9. #134
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    in the trench
    Posts
    9,166
    Quote Originally Posted by galibier_numero_un View Post
    Yes, a 187 GPO has an edge length of 133 & the Quixote in 188 is 136/152.

    Sitting in my cart (waiting for loyalty points to apply to total): 182, #4, Enduro Carbon, Ambriosia Maple, Ibex, black bases.

    ... Thom
    Sick! I could empathize with your struggle. That sounds like the ski I want. Can't wait to here more real world feedback on the lengths and skinnies

    QUOTE=spindrift;4983967]Let me help. Go here and start clicking [/QUOTE]

    Haaaa well played. 2 pair already this year(narrower exp and wider skinny rx) to replace my much loved yeti(still hope I didn't fack up). Fingers crossed for fall sale q addition. All despite a tanking can$

  10. #135
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    The Chicken Coop, Seattle
    Posts
    2,538
    Quote Originally Posted by Joebornstein View Post
    I pulled the trigger on a -1 Q. Heavy layup w/ambrosia veneer. #4 flex.
    I want that review. Ideally head to head with a 108 Kartel and/or Wren
    wait!!!! waitwaitwaitwaitwaitwaitwaitwait...Wait!
    Zoolander wasn't a documentary?

  11. #136
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    the ham
    Posts
    6,296
    Quote Originally Posted by Muggydude View Post
    Am I crazy to be thinking about the 182 Q?
    Same question except it would be 182 GPO.

    Same basic reasons as Muggy and Thom... a little more playful / versatile for late day groomer zoomer, mess around in the bumps, etc.

    But in gaining some (small amount of?) versatility, would I giving up too much of what this ski is meant for?

    ETA: I have no problem driving the 191 BG or 186 Lhasa, and find the 180 Brahma skis short... so did I just answer my own question? prolly over thinking as usual, lol.

  12. #137
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Philly, PA
    Posts
    703
    Quote Originally Posted by pisteoff View Post
    Same question except it would be 182 GPO.

    Same basic reasons as Muggy and Thom... a little more playful / versatile for late day groomer zoomer, mess around in the bumps, etc.

    But in gaining some (small amount of?) versatility, would I giving up too much of what this ski is meant for?
    I find the 187 GPO to be really easy to ski and wouldn't want to go down to 182, but im 6'1 205 so ymmv

  13. #138
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    the ham
    Posts
    6,296
    6'1 as well, but only a 170 lb weakling.

    But I think you answered my question. I'm just having some pre-buyer's indecision

  14. #139
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    girdwood
    Posts
    373
    Quote Originally Posted by SupreChicken View Post
    I want that review. Ideally head to head with a 108 Kartel and/or Wren
    I'll be in the Seattle area for a couple of weeks early feb next year. Be nice to try the stock Q if you're willing to swap for a few runs and our BSLs are close.

  15. #140
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Posts
    1,513
    Quote Originally Posted by pisteoff View Post
    6'1 as well, but only a 170 lb weakling.

    But I think you answered my question. I'm just having some pre-buyer's indecision
    5'10" currently 200lbs. I ski the 192 and it's a stoopid easy ski. At 6'1, 170, I think that you'd be happier with a 187. You'd probably find the 182 too short.

  16. #141
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    in the trench
    Posts
    9,166
    Quote Originally Posted by pisteoff View Post
    Same question except it would be 182 GPO.

    Same basic reasons as Muggy and Thom... a little more playful / versatile for late day groomer zoomer, mess around in the bumps, etc.

    But in gaining some (small amount of?) versatility, would I giving up too much of what this ski is meant for?

    ETA: I have no problem driving the 191 BG or 186 Lhasa, and find the 180 Brahma skis short... so did I just answer my own question? prolly over thinking as usual, lol.
    I agree with the others on length. Definitely 187. What stands out to me is the "playful" and "mess around in bumps". That makes me think MVP . Sorry. It's a versatile ski and fun ripping soft groomers and it'll get through moguls pretty good but it only gets close to playful if it's pushed. Tail has some jam and can kick back in moguls at the same time the tip taper and sidecut keeps it nimble. I find it demands to be pushed. Great ski maybe I'm over focusing on your playful, mess around in moguls thing

  17. #142
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    the ham
    Posts
    6,296
    ^^^ good point. Yeah, I know it's a comp ski... I guess I mean playful within that genre.

    I've looked at the MVP, but the mount is too far forward for my taste.

  18. #143
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    in the trench
    Posts
    9,166

    Praxis Quixote - Jumped the Shark or Legit?

    Quote Originally Posted by pisteoff View Post
    ^^^ good point. Yeah, I know it's a comp ski... I guess I mean playful within that genre.

    I've looked at the MVP, but the mount is too far forward for my taste.
    10-4.I haven't tried the MVP but I mounted my piste jibs @-1 and I really like that ski(basically a skinny MVP). More tail rocker than the gpo so it's a touch more forgiving in the tail with a more centered mount. I can move around on top of that ski(moguls or just screwing around). I get back on my gpo tails and I get my ass handed to me

    Sorry , hogging the air waves here. Rest day after another 8 straight and the free veneer frenzy. I'm out

  19. #144
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    1,862
    People who have had time on these and Billygoats in similar sizes- which would you say is more demanding?

  20. #145
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Philly, PA
    Posts
    703
    Quote Originally Posted by grinch View Post
    10-4.I haven't tried the MVP but I mounted my piste jibs @-1 and I really like that ski(basically a skinny MVP). More tail rocker than the gpo so it's a touch more forgiving in the tail with a more centered mount. I can move around on top of that ski(moguls or just screwing around). I get back on my gpo tails and I get my ass handed to me

    Sorry , hogging the air waves here. Rest day after another 8 straight and the free veneer frenzy. I'm out
    The GPO tail can kick your ass in moguls, even at my size. I also mounted back -1 after having them on the line. Much better pow float , but the slight trade off is that I definitely need to stay forward more in junky or demanding snow. I actually didn't notice the tail in bumps as much when it was mounted on the line.

  21. #146
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    2,338
    2nd day on the Q and I am a fan of the tip and tail... Skied all types of snow and a lot of mank and the tails released when asked and the tips never got hung up... The ski can make any turn shape and the effective edge is long... I will say this even though the ski is a breeze to ski, it does ski long/big... If you are on the fence on size I would say the 188 skis closer to a 190 and the 194 skis like my 196 Rens... I did a lot of fam skiing and my wife was having a hard time with the snow so spent half the day on zoomer groomers on the Q and never once was the ski demanding... For 118 underfoot it did what I asked and never felt tired...

    I love my GPOs, but the Q is def more of a charger and kills POW and crud... The GPO is more playful and more versatile (master of nothing but great at everything)...

  22. #147
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    1,862

    Praxis Quixote - Jumped the Shark or Legit?

    Talked to Keith again, he said he was excited about the 182 length. Thought either 182 of 188 would work for me, but reiterated he thought it skied long.

    Going to go 182, Heavy+Carbon, Birds Eye maple Veneer, #4 Flex, American flag bases.

    Trying so see if I can do the wall topsheet printed on the veneer without any of the brown/tan sections printed. We'll see.

    If anyone needs a referral code for 15% off hit me up, could still use one more

  23. #148
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Philly, PA
    Posts
    703
    Quote Originally Posted by Undertow View Post
    2nd day on the Q and I am a fan of the tip and tail... Skied all types of snow and a lot of mank and the tails released when asked and the tips never got hung up... The ski can make any turn shape and the effective edge is long... I will say this even though the ski is a breeze to ski, it does ski long/big... If you are on the fence on size I would say the 188 skis closer to a 190 and the 194 skis like my 196 Rens... I did a lot of fam skiing and my wife was having a hard time with the snow so spent half the day on zoomer groomers on the Q and never once was the ski demanding... For 118 underfoot it did what I asked and never felt tired...

    I love my GPOs, but the Q is def more of a charger and kills POW and crud... The GPO is more playful and more versatile (master of nothing but great at everything)...
    Nice review, exactly the comparison I was looking for. When you were in powder and soft chop, how did the Q slarve and pivot in comparison to the GPO?

  24. #149
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    2,338
    Duff, for POW and crud and with the new tips and tails I preferred the Q... The ski was an absolute blast and loved it... Easy to break free in a turn and truly made any turn I wanted... That is one thing that shocked me about.the ski - it skis big, but did anything you asked it to... Def a fan...

    It is for sure more of a big mountain charger than the GPO...

  25. #150
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Location
    Colorado Front Range
    Posts
    3,010
    Quote Originally Posted by Muggydude View Post
    Talked to Keith again, he said he was excited about the 182 length. Thought either 182 of 188 would work for me, but reiterated he thought it skied long.

    Going to go 182, Heavy+Carbon, Birds Eye maple Veneer, #4 Flex, American flag bases.

    Trying so see if I can do the wall topsheet printed on the veneer without any of the brown/tan sections printed. We'll see.

    If anyone needs a referral code for 15% off hit me up, could still use one more
    This makes me more comfortable with the 182 selection as well. About the only thing I want to verify with Keith is flex (currently a #4, like my GPOs). I think I got it "right" however.

    ... Thom
    Galibier Design
    crafting technology in service of music

Posting Permissions

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