Praxis Quixote - Jumped the Shark or Legit?

[Self Jupiter]

My -10s on the line absolutely yank around with substantial shin pressure. Progressive side cut in action I assume?

[Banh Mi]

My -10s on the line absolutely yank around with substantial shin pressure. Progressive side cut in action I assume?

Read Cy’s review of the K2 Marksman on Blistergear. He talks about that feeling.


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

[Duffman]

Agreed with the forward stance issue (as I've stated before), but IME these prefer to be driven much more from the shin than the more upright stance skis I prefer like the Concept and Protest. As someone who enjoys driving a ski through the shin, I much more enjoy the control and feathering that these fresher ski designs lend to, but with the Q's I feel like I can ski them upright and get all the latter attributes while being able to push through the shin and it feels like I just romped on the gas pedal of a muscle car. But that's just my experience, YMMV.

This is pretty accurate. I like to pressure the shin fairly hard on crud and dust on crust ,but otherwise am more centered .

[JayPowHound]

After reading everything I can find I think I understand what the asym design does when "carving" "feathering" and varying turn shapes in fresh/chop/dust on crust..

What I'm still unsure of is how it affects pivoting / quick turns in fresh or chopped up 3d snow through tight trees..

Anyone able to directly compare the GPO, Q and maybe BG for this type of skiing?

[Shu Shu]

I am the king of inappropriate use, like probably 15 or so hardpack days, but I find there are so many fun ways to mess around on the Qs even on the shittiest of hard pack.

Here's a little comparo of my 182 Heavy Carbon veneer Q with my 187 enduro carbon GPOs, with the caveat that its really hard for me to know what to attribute to the design of the ski versus the layup.

Hard Snow
On hard snow the GPO is a fun, lively and quick ski with a great feeling medium-long turn radius . The Q feels way more substantial with more ski on snow (despite the shorter length) and the turn radius feels kind of infinite. The feathering comment is bang on. At the same time the Q is super easy to transition from edge to edge, so both skis are extremely agile. The Q makes me go faster.

Crud and Chop
I found this to be the biggest weakness of my GPO which I feel really needed to be layed over to do well, and even then... I was never very good on them here. I feel like I can run the Qs in a more bases flat surfy style, which makes me feel awesome at skiing and super fast through chopped up pow verging on that transition to moguls. The heavy core and veneer I think really amplify the design properties here, and I have never felt I've come close to the speed limit of the ski.

Pow
Again the GPO is a beautiful, drifty, mid fat pow ski. Is it a Protest? of course not, but it's fun and super easy to ski in untracked pow. The Q feels like it has a little more float and little less friction changing direction, a bit more of the Protest deep snow magic.

Layup
The Qs are my second pair of Heavy Veneer Carbon, and man is it beautiful feeling in the resort, just smooth and unflappable from ice to deep chop.

Not sure what the fate of my GPOs will be as I still really enjoy skiing them, but the Qs have solidly taken over as my favorite ski.

Here is a picture of the Qs with the rest of the family, and one second cousin by marriage. (I apparently suck at pictures too..fixed it)

[Jim S]

Had my Qs in heavy Elmer's glue 5" new pow today at Mt Rose /Tahoe.

Skis slayed it: great float, no hooking, more predictable than I had hoped any ski could be in these conditions.

[steveski]

I am the king of inappropriate use, like probably 15 or so hardpack days, but I find there are so many fun ways to mess around on the Qs even on the shittiest of hard pack.

Here's a little comparo of my 182 Heavy Carbon veneer Q with my 187 enduro carbon GPOs, with the caveat that its really hard for me to know what to attribute to the design of the ski versus the layup.

Hard Snow
On hard the snow the GPO is a fun, lively and quick ski with a great feeling medium-long turn radius . The Q feels way more substantial with more ski on snow (despite the shorter length) and the turn radius feels kind of infinite. The feathering comment is bang on. At the same time the Q is super easy to transition from edge to edge, so both skis are extremely agile. The Q makes me go faster.

Crud and Chop
I found this to be the biggest weakness of my GPO which I feel really needed to be layed over to do well, and even then... I was never very good on them here. I feel like I can run the Qs in a more bases flat surfy style, which makes me feel awesome at skiing and super fast through chopped up pow verging on that transition to moguls. The heavy core and veneer I think really amplify the design properties here, and I have never felt I've come close to the speed limit of the ski.

Pow
Again the GPO is a beautiful, drifty, mid fat pow ski. Is it a Protest? of course not, but it's fun and super easy to ski in untracked pow. The Q feels like it has a little more float and little less friction changing direction, a bit more of the Protest deep snow magic.

Layup
The Qs are my second pair of Heavy Veneer Carbon, and man is it beautiful feeling in the resort, just smooth and unflappable from ice to deep chop.

Not sure what the fate of my GPOs will be as I still really enjoy skiing them, but the Qs have solidly taken over as my favorite ski.

Here is a picture of the Qs with the rest of the family, and one second cousin by marriage. (I apparently suck at pictures too..fixed it)

Screaming bear is one of my favorite top sheets. So awesome.

For the custom sale, I wish there was a way to get a standard nylon graphic, but with veneer for its weight saving and damp properties.

[eskido]

Oh dem Q's! Sexy AF!!!

[nickel]

wow. another graphic i hadn't considered but looks amazing. shortlisted.

[SupreChicken]

Oh dem Q's! Sexy AF!!!

Yeah...that is the exact combo I had in mind...

[Foggy_Goggles]

I'm guessing Keith checks this thread and books another vacation.

You guys are addicts.

[nickel]

I'm guessing Keith checks this thread and books another vacation.

You guys are addicts.

I haven't bought a new pair of skis in almost 7 years. This year I'm buying 2. I think that's reasonable behavior for a 100+ day a year addict.

[galibier_numero_un]

So I put my money where my mouth is, and put my Billy Goats up for sale yesterday. They sold in record time (literally 1 minute after posting). Perhaps the slightest bit of seller's remorse, but there's just so many similar skis a fella can justify owning.

I'm 100% with you (@Shu Shu) as far as my Q's vs. GPOs. Both skis have inserts for Vipecs as well as Alpine binders.

I originally visualized the GPOs for touring and side country, with Pivots on the Q's for strictly inbounds.

The GPOs quickness in bumps, and the Q's better chop performance make me think that I'll reverse the mounts.

What a good problem to have ;-)

... Thom

I am the king of inappropriate use, like probably 15 or so hardpack days, but I find there are so many fun ways to mess around on the Qs even on the shittiest of hard pack.

Here's a little comparo of my 182 Heavy Carbon veneer Q with my 187 enduro carbon GPOs, with the caveat that its really hard for me to know what to attribute to the design of the ski versus the layup.

Hard Snow
On hard snow the GPO is a fun, lively and quick ski with a great feeling medium-long turn radius . The Q feels way more substantial with more ski on snow (despite the shorter length) and the turn radius feels kind of infinite. The feathering comment is bang on. At the same time the Q is super easy to transition from edge to edge, so both skis are extremely agile. The Q makes me go faster.

Crud and Chop
I found this to be the biggest weakness of my GPO which I feel really needed to be layed over to do well, and even then... I was never very good on them here. I feel like I can run the Qs in a more bases flat surfy style, which makes me feel awesome at skiing and super fast through chopped up pow verging on that transition to moguls. The heavy core and veneer I think really amplify the design properties here, and I have never felt I've come close to the speed limit of the ski.

Pow
Again the GPO is a beautiful, drifty, mid fat pow ski. Is it a Protest? of course not, but it's fun and super easy to ski in untracked pow. The Q feels like it has a little more float and little less friction changing direction, a bit more of the Protest deep snow magic.

Layup
The Qs are my second pair of Heavy Veneer Carbon, and man is it beautiful feeling in the resort, just smooth and unflappable from ice to deep chop.

Not sure what the fate of my GPOs will be as I still really enjoy skiing them, but the Qs have solidly taken over as my favorite ski.

Here is a picture of the Qs with the rest of the family, and one second cousin by marriage. (I apparently suck at pictures too..fixed it)

[Jim S]

I finally got my Q's out into their intended habitat - or at least close. It's been a miserable year, compounded by traveling to sea level during the February storm cycles.

So today I found some soft stuff at A-basin - not a lot, but some boot top pockets in the trees and gulleys.

Getting to know the Qs earlier in the year on anything from frozen reef to chalky snow was helpful however, much as I wish I got into more soft snow.

For those who haven't followed this entire thread, I was initially bitching about how unpredictable they are in hard pack. Centering my stance resolved that, and it now feels natural (182s mounted at -1.5). I'm seeing advantages to a slighty new school stance (that's "slightly").

I brought my 15/16 Billy Goats along. The short story is that there's a lot of overlap, and if I skied them on different days (in soft snow) I'd be hard pressed to describe the difference.

Faster skiers than me might say that the BGs have a higher speed limit. I'll never know.

In this not too deep snow, I can move them in tight spaces slightly more quickly than my 184 BGs. It's been mentioned that the Qs change edges quickly, which I find to be true. I can also pivot them quickly (faster than the Goats) and I find them easier to shut down than the Goats.

They're better on dust over crust than the 15/16 Goats due to their hard snow performance. Current Goats are purported to be better in this regard, so take this into account as you read this.

Hopefully, March/April will bring some big dumps, and I'll get to explore conditions where the BG excels (chop).

If the Q's are close to the Goats in chop, I might seriously consider selling the Goats. This isn't like golf, where you can pull out different clubs as you work your way down the mountain, and moving in tight spaces (trees) is more important to me than a slight advantage in chop.

We'll see how this plays out ...

ETA: 5'9", 165 Lbs

The 182 Q's (standard width): Enduro/Carbon/Veneer, Flex #4 (inserts for both Pivots & Vipecs - both @-1.5) Yesterday was Vipecs.

The 15/16, 184 Billy Goats: standard build (Wardens - on the line).

... Thom

Thank you for this comparison with the BG.


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

[Shu Shu]

Got 2-3 hours in perfect corn snow yesterday . To use a bit of a silly metaphor it felt like spreading frosting on a cake. So smeary fast and fun.

[pembyguy]

Any thoughts on UL Q for touring?... how much weight savings? Haven’t heard much positive feedback on UL!


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

[Foggy_Goggles]

After half a dozen more days on the Qs, I'm just about at the point of "best ski ever" (for me).

Pow, cut up pow, corn, slush, groomers, bumps, trees. They just work for me.

With so many layup options, I think it is really hard to make those decisions. For most, I'd suggest 3-4 flex, Enduro, no carbon (I just don't think it makes much difference), and I have never skied a veneer but it sounds good. Basically, don't fuck with it. Get it "standard".

[galibier_numero_un]

I don't get the "Q's are slower to pivot than Billy Goat" thing.

The reason i sold my Goats is that I found that I'm quicker in the trees with my Q's. I don't have much opportunity or inclination to charge in wide open spaces, so I value quickness at a premium.

It's a slightly different technique with the Q's: a quick edge transition followed by a slarve, but I get the skis around faster than I can with the Goats. I can also shut the Q's down faster than I was able to with my 15/16 Goats.

This is in a Colorado snowpack.

... Thom

[Banh Mi]

Skinny Q’s were great for trees. That’s were they excelled. Right up there with Steeples. If Squaw had tons trees, I probably would have kept Q’s. My one mistake was never trying Q’s at Alpine Meadows, where the terrain is a little tighter.


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

[SupreChicken]

Any thoughts on UL Q for touring?... how much weight savings? Haven’t heard much positive feedback on UL!


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

fair question. Just say no to the UL layup.

[riff]

I’m actually a big fan of the ul layup- for touring. Any ski a pound lighter will behave differently. I’ve got chickens old ul veneer flex 4 gpo’s, and for medium to truly deep days I wouldn’t change anything. They have a speed limit in chop, but if you are mainly flogging chopped up snow on a tour you might be doing it wrong. The UL is great in decent snow, or at low to medium speeds. Still plenty stiff if you spec it that way, just not so damp.


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

[grinch]

Ya I had no problem strictly touring with the ul’s. Nice not dragging the weight. Trouble I ran into was trying to use them for hill laps when it was a sidecountry day. Interior bc snow. Wish I still had my ul gpo’s. Great touring ski

[Self Jupiter]

Skinny Q’s were great for trees. That’s were they excelled. Right up there with Steeples. If Squaw had tons trees, I probably would have kept Q’s. My one mistake was never trying Q’s at Alpine Meadows, where the terrain is a little tighter.


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

I still think you’d prefer a 193 MVP type ski for that. The skinny Qs are great for the really dense tree twig bush skiing we do on the east. See EC roll call twig stoke. They also make 3-4” feel a lot deeper because they’re that loose / floaty / slarvy. I’ve got frame bindings on them for the tree tours.

If you got the 194... then you probably would have kept them, haha. The 188 -10s are craaaaazay turny. They make me wish I was better at spins.

[markcjr]

Hey guys I've used the search function three times on this thread to find profile/ rocker pics. Could one of you post some up with the middle compressed so I can see tip and tail rocker in real life verse the line drawing on the Praxis site?
Many thanks,
Mark

Sent from my VS987 using TGR Forums mobile app

[STLHD]

I still think you’d prefer a 193 MVP type ski for that. The skinny Qs are great for the really dense tree twig bush skiing we do on the east. See EC roll call twig stoke. They also make 3-4” feel a lot deeper because they’re that loose / floaty / slarvy. I’ve got frame bindings on them for the tree tours.

If you got the 194... then you probably would have kept them, haha. The 188 -10s are craaaaazay turny. They make me wish I was better at spins.

Funny because i don’t find them to be turny at all. Easy to pivot and quick when you want them to be, but for me, they like the fall line. But, I also wasn’t a big fan of the MVP (I think I sold you mine, iirc) so we must have different styles.