2017 Praxis Skis Info and Resource Thread

[abraham]

That's a good review. I'm interested in the rx and variations. Have you posted a review of your 106 versions? I Renner thinking I should watch for it

[neck beard]

No proper review. Not sure it would be worthwhile as my 106s are short, 2cm shorter than me, so somewhere between eyebrow and hairline. That makes any review heavily skewed away from a normally proportioned freeride ski. And of no physical or egotestical value to the typical TGR reader

I'd say they ski somewhere like a Volkl Mantra with camber, but less metal-solid feel. Or somewhere like an old Atomic Sugar Daddy, but minus that horrible foam core feel they had.

For 3d upside down snow, grabby hooky windboard, punchy solar mank etc... I'd prefer they were a little wider and a little less cambered. But I'd say that about pretty much any 106mm ski with trad tip shape and camber.

On firmer surfaces that take an edge, like corn (and groomers I suppose): you can really stack your body onto the outside leg and they feel great. Steady and strong on the "big" radius. No funky business from a tip that is a little too wide for that snow surface (Freerides). Or from a tip that is designed for soft snow, like the BC. Actually, on reflection now I've thought about this, I'd say having the outside ski stacked and bent made them feel better in snow that wasn't feeling so good underfoot. Some really variable spring solar mank comes to mind one afternoon. But that might be because they are short and I can't fall back onto ski length to offset poor snow consistency. Nor can you fall back on reverse camber and pivot to solve shit snow. If you pussy foot around in unfreindly snow, the ski is unremarkable. If you make the ski ski, they perform better. This observation will vary a lot based on length+flex+camber v.s. skier weight+speed+turnshape+slope angle.

They ski dust on crust pretty well. But then I hate wider skis (116) on very hard surfaces.

The print on the veneer isn't so durable. And the tail topsheet edges get worn quickly from ski touring.

[Shu Shu]

I considered GPOs but I don't fully like how tail profile looks - small rocker plus low tail height. I feel like that will be too much of a ski for what I want. Looking for more surfy, funny ski rather than serious FWT competitor

In Pow the GPO (@116) is a surf machine. Its a very very easy ski. Actually scratch that, in nearly any snow, the GPO is a very very easy ski.
But yeah, the Piste Jib in the 100 class is likely the most jibby playful ski in the line and it has no problem skiing the shit out of 6-8" of fresh. The MVP shares a lot of the same design characteristics with some tweaks to make it a more a little more "off piste jib"....still those skinny GPOs... drool. Good luck with choosing your first pair...don't overthink it, cause it won't likely be your last

[SupreChicken]

I considered GPOs but I don't fully like how tail profile looks - small rocker plus low tail height. I feel like that will be too much of a ski for what I want. Looking for more surfy, funny ski rather than serious FWT competitor

They are super easy and predictable to ski.

[HukuTa_KydecHuk]

SupreChicken, Shu Shu thanks for the answers!
Leaning towards MVP. But what's about UL layup? I realize it's less dampening. Any other drawbacks? Ideally I wish the weight to be under 8.5lbs

[neck beard]

I considered GPOs but I don't fully like how tail profile looks - small rocker plus low tail height. I feel like that will be too much of a ski for what I want. Looking for more surfy, funny ski rather than serious FWT competitor

I've skied the GPO with continuous curve rocker for the last 3 seasons in a lot of powder. It is fucking playful. You have to get a custom ski made to have the rockered profile. Ask Praxis about it.

GPO camber v.s. GPO CCR





Got other comparison photos if you are interested.

[Shu Shu]

Neck Beard forgot about those...the regular camber profile is floaty and super drifty in quality light pow, I can only imagine the CCRs. HukuTa if you haven't already you should definitely touch base with Keith. As far the UL build is concerned I think Praxis has really two touring builds... 1. UL and 2. Enduro+Carbon. One prioritizes the up, the other the down. When I was "touring" it was on frame bindings and never more than a couple hours on the up, and everyone in my group sucked at it. I loved it, but two kids really put a hamper on my free time so I mostly ride lifts now. If you have long approaches and ski with a bunch of cross fit psychos who sprint the skin track, ok maybe the ultralight. I have easily 100 days on my GPOs in Enduro+Carbon and I feel like it's the perfect weight to charge ratio for good quality consistent snow. In heavier mank, crust, set up, cut up, sometimes I wish they had more heft, hence why I would never be tempted by the UL build.

If I was going to get a touring ski it would it would be 182 GPO 106 waist Enduro Carbon Veneer or a skinny Concept in the same build (if only Keith would make Goldilocks length). Given the stock 116 is 8.9lbs in a 182 I'm sure the 106 waist with carbon and veneer would put you way south of 8.5 lbs, and the 187 in the same build would put you pretty close to 8.5. But enough of all this skinny light GPO talk, I still have regular Qs on the way with a fkn heavy core!!! Long story short talk to Keith...after he finishes with my skis!

[SupreChicken]

SupreChicken, Shu Shu thanks for the answers!
Leaning towards MVP. But what's about UL layup? I realize it's less dampening. Any other drawbacks? Ideally I wish the weight to be under 8.5lbs

Entirely my own opinion, but...

The skiing/descent on my now sold to Riff UL GPO in any remotely variable snow sucked. If the snow was consistent, the ride was great.

Enduro/Carbon is usually within a half pound per pair of the UL and the ride quality is monumentally better in variable snow. For touring in the PNW, consistent snow is somewhat rare IME.

[galibier_numero_un]

SupreChicken, Shu Shu thanks for the answers!
Leaning towards MVP. But what's about UL layup? I realize it's less dampening. Any other drawbacks? Ideally I wish the weight to be under 8.5lbs

My 182 Enduro/Carbon GPOs come in at 8.9 Lbs. I'd expect a skinny version (106) to hit the mark you're after.

The skis are a dream to ski. This Spring, I converted them to touring duty (Vipecs) and did an inbounds day to test the mount. It was a remount testing day and I also took out my 179 Nanuqs (also mounted with Vipecs).

Conditions were late Spring, varying from morning scratchy snow to heavy slush.The GPOs are much quicker in tight places. They come around much quicker and the tail doesn't hang up in comparison with the Nanuqs. Obviously, they're much, much more stable in every way (that didn't surprise me, of course), and they hold an edge better. I'm not sure what bugs you about the tail.

I don't know if the above data point is relevant to you. I didn't have any other skis mounted with touring bindings in my quiver last spring, so this was the only ski I could compare for you using my touring boots (mango Maestrales). I was quite surprised that the only advantage the Nanuqs had was weight.

I suspect that you read the Blister review. Let's just say that I strongly disagree with their assessment. If you plowed through the massive GPO thread, believe the comments of SupreChicken, Shu Shu, Dane1 and others. They haven't steered me wrong and they're not steering you wrong.

... Thom

[eskido]

Yup, I agree totally with just about everything said here, Enduro carbon's are pretty f n light and worth every oz of weight penalty for every reason shu said. Like Thom says NO ONE agrees with Blisters unbelievably horrid review of the GPO, they're stoopid easy and a grip of fun. And like chx says, MVP is very worthy of a solid look considering your reqs. And finally (not quite sure why I'm even taking the time repeat all this... prolly the gin?), I will always wish I had a pair of neckbeard's ridiculously sexy CCR GPO's, everything about that design screams good times! Good luck, and FWIW Concepts and Q's are probably the two most versatile and fun sticks on the planet.


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

[tharmor]

I’ve been following this thread but haven’t read anyone’s take on the protest (-10)’s. I am very curious to hear about how this ski shreds.


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

[eskido]

There has been a lot of speculation since chx took up the issue yrs ago and obviously the woo design, but like chx says the q pretty much improved that design in theory whereas the woo (depending on who you ask), didn't quite deliver. My take is it would most likely be a quiver ski for the right user in the right setting, maybe not quite such a universally loved stick. My personal opinion is Praxis makes several better options but it is still a very appropriate discussion here. I am also very jazzed to hear some real life feedback on this but I'd be hard pressed to believe it would be better than a gpo, concept, q pow touring option, esp when you consider the UL protest and ccr gpo options.


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

[neck beard]

Protest-10 would probably be the closest Praxis ski to that other ski we can't mention.

[eskido]

Protest-10 would probably be the closest Praxis ski to that other ski we can't mention.

Not only can we, but we certainly should, and in the realm of this discussion why would we not??? I understand your reasoning and fondness of said unmentionable but also noticed you never pulled that trigger and were quite anti the javelin, que no? Not talking shit here, hold most everything you say in the upmost regard but really why not mention the obvious comparison and over dissect? Isn't that what we do?

[skibrd]

Other ski we can't mention? Is that ski Alpys favorite?

The Protest is perfect as it is, don't fuck with it by trying to make it into something it's not. Accept it for what it is and don't try to make it into something it's not.

[SupreChicken]

My 182 Enduro/Carbon GPOs come in at 8.9 Lbs. I'd expect a skinny version (106) to hit the mark you're after.

I suspect that you read the Blister review. Let's just say that I strongly disagree with their assessment. If you plowed through the massive GPO thread, believe the comments of SupreChicken, Shu Shu, Dane1 and others. They haven't steered me wrong and they're not steering you wrong.

... Thom

The blister review seems to be about the tune.

105 seems to be the consensus best size for touring. Around the PNW, there are multiple ways to equip oneself for touring. Some of the people here have a volcano ski (85-100mm), a daily tourer (101-110mm) and a pow touring kit ( > 112mm).

I currently have the standard bamboo enduro/carbon 188 Quixote set up for pow touring and it is sweet. Could probably save weight with a 184 bibby tour (interested) or the solly mtn lab (less interested).

I think my move is to get a 106mm GPO enduro/Carbon 182 and tour mostly with that. Use the quixotes on deeper days or shorter tours.

Could also do a 180 BC, but it doesn't get reviewed as being as stable and versatile as the GPO. Could do a fat yeti (104mm) or a fat exp (98mm) to allow for slight changes in weights or to opt for a less rockered ski.

I'm not racing enduro, I don't obsess over weight (though I do obsess over just about everything else). I've always liked the GPO immensely.

Any need for a smaller ski than 106mm?

[galibier_numero_un]

The blister review seems to be about the tune.

105 seems to be the consensus best size for touring. Around the PNW, there are multiple ways to equip oneself for touring. Some of the people here have a volcano ski (85-100mm), a daily tourer (101-110mm) and a pow touring kit ( > 112mm).

I currently have the standard bamboo enduro/carbon 188 Quixote set up for pow touring and it is sweet. Could probably save weight with a 184 bibby tour (interested) or the solly mtn lab (less interested).

I think my move is to get a 106mm GPO enduro/Carbon 182 and tour mostly with that. Use the quixotes on deeper days or shorter tours.

Could also do a 180 BC, but it doesn't get reviewed as being as stable and versatile as the GPO. Could do a fat yeti (104mm) or a fat exp (98mm) to allow for slight changes in weights or to opt for a less rockered ski.

I'm not racing enduro, I don't obsess over weight (though I do obsess over just about everything else). I've always liked the GPO immensely.

Any need for a smaller ski than 106mm?

After converting the GPOs for touring, the idea of a skinny GPO (106) has really caught my attention - that, or a skinny-Q. Some of this may well be a case of "better the devil you know than the devil you don't", but I'm also far more attracted to the idea of a skinny GPO or Q than I am to a BC, for the exact reasons you stated.

I'm really surprised how badly the Blister guys dropped the ball on this one. [Edit] this isn't about them liking or not liking the skis, but rather the process they follow in order to reach their conclusions. At the end of the day, you try to read between the lines for information that's relevant to you.[/Edit]

When I first wrote up my GPO experiences, I used the phrase "skis sharp". I meant that the skis hold an edge really well for their width category, and furthermore, that they benefit from/require fairly heavy de-tuning. This is from someone with an East Coast background who's used to a sharp tune. Upon handling my GPOs after unwrapping them, I wondered why everyone was making a big fuss over how sharp they were. I'm used to sharp.

Well, after my first couple of runs I was really scratching my head because the skis were grabby (the snow that day was chalky) and I wasn't having much fun. I went down and gave them a heavy de-tune - down to the taper points on the tip and tail. When I say heavy, I mean I rounded them off (file at 45 degree angle). The transformation was a revelation.

... Thom

[neck beard]

but also noticed you never pulled that trigger

Pulled the trigger I did. And have skied them a lot in two seasons

One thing I notice and think is important about the unmentionable ski is that it is thicker, especially underfoot. And flatter, but still has camber.

[eskido]

Was referring to the -10, I get a bit rambly and confusing after a few cocktails, was already aware of your "other" skis. Actually, after reading that I'm not even quite sure what I was trying to say... my bad


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

[skibrd]

Well I caved and emailed Keith, my skis are done and will be shipped this week. Hopefully they get to my house just in time for me to get home for the winter! I'm really excited. I'll definitely post pictures and an initial review of the +10 Freerides

[neck beard]

Was referring to the -10, I get a bit rambly and confusing after a few cocktails, was already aware of your "other" skis. Actually, after reading that I'm not even quite sure what I was trying to say... my bad


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

'sokay

[skibrd]

Santa Keith has his FedEx sleight drop something off today. They are massive, and feel massive, next to my 196 Protests, they almost make the Protests normal sized? Flex feels about what I like in a ski. Weight is a little more then I thought it would be, but I think it's for the better. Need to mount them up now, question is where...

[N1CK.]

^^^ whoa ....

can you post a profile/rocker picture??

[Banh Mi]

Those would be uber-beastly with a Maple/Ash layup..

If the sale happens again next year, I'll probably be going with some 194 Freerides

[skibrd]

^^^ whoa ....

can you post a profile/rocker picture??

Underfoot there is maybe 1-2mm of camber, that is a good old fashion American nickel for reference

And the tip and tail.

I was slightly nervous they would have too much camber, but now I'm pretty happy.