Page 4 of 6 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 6 LastLast
Results 76 to 100 of 132
  1. #76
    Join Date
    Nov 2017
    Posts
    43
    Quote Originally Posted by eskido View Post
    Not gonna lie, I am really diggin the vibe I'm getting here, seems like there's an ongoing theme coming from these cats.... rhymes with "let's go skee"


    Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums
    let's go skiing!

  2. #77
    Join Date
    Nov 2017
    Posts
    43
    Thanks for the sticker...leavenworth skier walked a full 30 feet to our shop for his shop to drop it off. Weíll display it proudly after weíve attend this yearís BBI so we wonít feel like imitators.


    Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

  3. #78
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Location
    The High 12 Hill
    Posts
    3,390
    Quote Originally Posted by peshastin_proud View Post
    Thanks for the sticker...leavenworth skier walked a full 30 feet to our shop for his shop to drop it off. Weíll display it proudly after weíve attend this yearís BBI so we wonít feel like imitators.


    Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums
    You guys will be welcomed with open arms. It's a blast to ski with so many rippers.

  4. #79
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Beer:30
    Posts
    5,228
    OK, as a long time Praxis and ON3P fanboi, you have my attention...

    A few specs I'd like to see on the skis (all skis, in general).
    -mount point
    -sidecut length/taper points
    -rocker lengths

    I know that's a lot of information to be putting out there publicly, but given that someone like me in CO has to buy sight unseen, that stuff is really helpful to help me determine if it's likely that I'll enjoy the shape or not.

    In particular I'd be real interested on weights and recommended mount points of the 187cm Ramblin' Jack 108 and 190cm Hill 120 with the backcountry core, as well as actual pics of the rocker/camber profile if possible.

    Thanks!

  5. #80
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Gaperville, CO
    Posts
    1,689
    Quote Originally Posted by adrenalated View Post
    OK, as a long time Praxis and ON3P fanboi, you have my attention...

    A few specs I'd like to see on the skis (all skis, in general).
    -mount point
    -sidecut length/taper points
    -rocker lengths

    I know that's a lot of information to be putting out there publicly, but given that someone like me in CO has to buy sight unseen, that stuff is really helpful to help me determine if it's likely that I'll enjoy the shape or not.

    In particular I'd be real interested on weights and recommended mount points of the 187cm Ramblin' Jack 108 and 190cm Hill 120 with the backcountry core, as well as actual pics of the rocker/camber profile if possible.

    Thanks!
    +1. I can rarely hold a Praxis in my hand before ordering it. But their spec sheets are the best in the industry (taper, camber heights, mount points, running length, rocker lines) for helping an informed consumer understand how the ski is likely to behave.

  6. #81
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    1,523
    Quote Originally Posted by doebedoe View Post
    +1. I can rarely hold a Praxis in my hand before ordering it. But their spec sheets are the best in the industry (taper, camber heights, mount points, running length, rocker lines) for helping an informed consumer understand how the ski is likely to behave.
    +2

  7. #82
    Join Date
    Feb 2016
    Posts
    153
    Quote Originally Posted by adrenalated View Post
    OK, as a long time Praxis and ON3P fanboi, you have my attention...

    A few specs I'd like to see on the skis (all skis, in general).
    -mount point
    -sidecut length/taper points
    -rocker lengths

    I know that's a lot of information to be putting out there publicly, but given that someone like me in CO has to buy sight unseen, that stuff is really helpful to help me determine if it's likely that I'll enjoy the shape or not.

    In particular I'd be real interested on weights and recommended mount points of the 187cm Ramblin' Jack 108 and 190cm Hill 120 with the backcountry core, as well as actual pics of the rocker/camber profile if possible.

    Thanks!
    +3 Most of us can look at all these specs and purchase sight unseen and be comfortable.

  8. #83
    Join Date
    Nov 2017
    Posts
    43
    Quote Originally Posted by adrenalated View Post
    OK, as a long time Praxis and ON3P fanboi, you have my attention...

    A few specs I'd like to see on the skis (all skis, in general).
    -mount point
    -sidecut length/taper points
    -rocker lengths

    I know that's a lot of information to be putting out there publicly, but given that someone like me in CO has to buy sight unseen, that stuff is really helpful to help me determine if it's likely that I'll enjoy the shape or not.

    In particular I'd be real interested on weights and recommended mount points of the 187cm Ramblin' Jack 108 and 190cm Hill 120 with the backcountry core, as well as actual pics of the rocker/camber profile if possible.

    Thanks!
    This is all great feedback, thanks. As we begin making many of the iterations of our different models we'll do our best to compile spec data and post it on the site. However, because of our current business model, we haven't made every single ski in every single length simply because they haven't been ordered, which makes hyper-detailed data collection somewhat difficult.

    We probably won't use actual photos on the site until we can get a handle on how it'll actually look, aesthetically and thematically, with how our site works now. I will however, try to post some examples here for you all to look at.

    As for the profile image on our site, those are taken directly from our CAD-drawn molds and are incredibly accurate so if it speaks to you then, well, it speaks to you. As far as mount points, we go center of sidecut and we dimple our sidewalls to make it easy on you. I will compile those numbers when I get a chance to put them on the site to be more helpful.

  9. #84
    Join Date
    Nov 2017
    Posts
    43
    Quote Originally Posted by doebedoe View Post
    +1. I can rarely hold a Praxis in my hand before ordering it. But their spec sheets are the best in the industry (taper, camber heights, mount points, running length, rocker lines) for helping an informed consumer understand how the ski is likely to behave.
    I'm fairly certain we won't ever go the direction of having an enormous spreadsheet next to our products; mostly because the general public would get confused by all those numbers whereas an accurate profile image of our molds tends to be a more universal way of conveying how the ski will perform and what it's meant for. We're currently taking the approach of addressing individual requests for details and specs. In the end, however, we're a new company and there will be early adopters and there will be those for whom it'll take time to gain their trust. We're okay with both of those; we're young, have time and aren't trying to blow this company up because that'll certainly get in the way of our ski days.

  10. #85
    Join Date
    Jul 2016
    Location
    Peaking in Chads Window
    Posts
    635
    Quote Originally Posted by Betelgeuse View Post
    I just don't want you to forget about all the clydesdale skiers from the get go..Looking forward to buying your beefiest, baddest ski in the future!


    Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums


    I don't know your metrics Betelgeuse but I'm 6' 6" and 250 with just my skibbies on.
    Since I'm right next door to them I'll probably end up on a pair soon and let you know. But I Imagine they have a ski that will work for us. Especially me a non-pro goof ball that likes to chase LVS.

  11. #86
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Beer:30
    Posts
    5,228
    Quote Originally Posted by peshastin_proud View Post
    As for the profile image on our site, those are taken directly from our CAD-drawn molds and are incredibly accurate so if it speaks to you then, well, it speaks to you. As far as mount points, we go center of sidecut and we dimple our sidewalls to make it easy on you. I will compile those numbers when I get a chance to put them on the site to be more helpful.
    Good to know your profile images are direct from the CAD files. They looked a bit... exaggerated, which is why actual photos often help.

    As for mount point - center of sidecut is great, but what I want to know is where the center of sidecut/mount point is relative to the true center of the ski. That can tell you a lot about what sort of stance a ski rewards the most (centered, forward driving, etc.) There's no substitute for actually skiing something, but absent the ability to do that, this info helps.

    I've skied a lot of skis and know pretty well what I like and don't like. I'm 100% sure that at some point a ski will come along that's outside those specs that will surprise me, but I'm not going to plunk down a grand on a depreciating asset as an experiment.

    Now all that said, I'm psyched to see more US made indie manufacturers that are interested in putting out a very high quality product and I wish you the greatest success regardless of if I ever buy skis from you or not.

    One last question - what thicknesses are you using on bases and edges?

  12. #87
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    New Mexico
    Posts
    743
    Quote Originally Posted by peshastin_proud View Post
    we're young, have time and aren't trying to blow this company up because that'll certainly get in the way of our ski days.
    Seriously, I F N dig the consistent theme here
    Fear, Doubt, Disbelief, you have to let it all go. Free your mind!

  13. #88
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Seattle, WA
    Posts
    2,353
    Thanks for all the productive responses. I'm super interested to see more info/customer feedback on the BC skis as it comes out. It sounds like it isn't your primary focus, but I'd love to see more quality, domestically made, backcountry skis on the market and hope you both give that segment the attention it deserves.

  14. #89
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    1,523
    Quote Originally Posted by adrenalated View Post
    Good to know your profile images are direct from the CAD files. They looked a bit... exaggerated, which is why actual photos often help.

    As for mount point - center of sidecut is great, but what I want to know is where the center of sidecut/mount point is relative to the true center of the ski. That can tell you a lot about what sort of stance a ski rewards the most (centered, forward driving, etc.) There's no substitute for actually skiing something, but absent the ability to do that, this info helps.

    I've skied a lot of skis and know pretty well what I like and don't like. I'm 100% sure that at some point a ski will come along that's outside those specs that will surprise me, but I'm not going to plunk down a grand on a depreciating asset as an experiment.

    Now all that said, I'm psyched to see more US made indie manufacturers that are interested in putting out a very high quality product and I wish you the greatest success regardless of if I ever buy skis from you or not.

    One last question - what thicknesses are you using on bases and edges?
    Yup.
    Exactly.
    All of it.

  15. #90
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    No longer somewhere in Idaho
    Posts
    530

    Whats up with Lithic Skis?

    Ok you guys, hereís my perspective on the Ramblin Jack 108. Iíve been skiing with the Lithic guys off and on for a couple of seasons, and as an enthusiastic/slightly neurotic gear fiddler Iíve been looking over their shoulder at the shop as well. I had the opportunity to work with them on designing the Jack, as I tend to spend most of my time touring these days. Iíve skied a number of lightweight and moderately heavy touring rigs over the years, and after getting to WA four years ago I found myself wanting a steady, predictable ski that would be fun in most conditions. We went after this design with the 3-6k powder seeking day tour in mind. Thereís lots of good stuff out there in the ski industry, of course- but Iíve broken several pairs of lightweight skis in a single season, so Iíve gravitated (like many of us) to the smaller independent brands that focus tons of attention on durability. The high points we went for on the Jack:
    User friendly but nimble shape- tip and tail taper for releasability, and forgiveness on breakable crust and other hooky junk.
    Moderate tip and low, fairly flat tail rocker- good float up front for deep days, but a functional, businesslike tail for skinning and less than ideal conditions. Thereís a few mm of camber underfoot. Iím really stoked with how it skis.
    Fairly long radius, 27m. Not as large as some, but a good blend of steady and predictable in variable snow, combined with the ability to lay them over and rail on firmer stuff. Not hooky and jittery in odd snow like a small radius.
    They kept an eye on weight, but not to sacrifice durability. Thereís the option to go with the inbounds or backcountry core. Inbounds core in the 181 is just over 8.5 pounds, and backcountry core is roughly a pound lighter, and these numbers are still settling in to place. There are lighter skis in this category, but I like the toughness and stability. Worth it in my world.
    The Hill 120 is a similar shape, rocker, and overall concept, but sized up to 120 underfoot. Both the Hill and Jack are definitely directional shapes, if you want more tail rocker/rise, the Cash or Cohen would be worth a look, and the full on five point shapes are great also! The Backcountry core is an option on all of them.
    What youíre gathering about the Rambliní Jack is likely not earth shattering- Itís a stable, predictable, durable, modern shape thatís meant to handle well in lots of conditions and still party in pow. Build quality is high, and like a few of other forum favorite builders, you can call or email the guys who will be building your ski. Iíve skied with these guys, and watched them at the shop, and they really care about the final product and the experience that goes with it. Attention to detail is really high.
    Iím 5í11Ē, 200 pounds + gear. For my personal rig I went with the inbounds core/181, to be mounted with Kingpins. I was on the prototypes last winter with a prototype core, and absolutely canít wait to get these on snow this year.
    Let's go skiing.
    Last edited by riff; 11-21-2017 at 04:25 PM.
    Gravity always wins...

  16. #91
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Gaperville, CO
    Posts
    1,689
    Quote Originally Posted by eskido View Post
    Seriously, I F N dig the consistent theme here
    Seems like they like skiing. This is typically a good thing in a ski manufacturer.

  17. #92
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    NCW
    Posts
    947
    Quote Originally Posted by riff View Post
    Ok you guys, here’s my perspective on the Ramblin Jack 108. I’ve been skiing with the Lithic guys off and on for a couple of seasons, and as an enthusiastic/slightly neurotic gear fiddler I’ve been looking over their shoulder at the shop as well. I had the opportunity to work with them on designing the Jack, as I tend to spend most of my time touring these days. I’ve skied a number of lightweight and moderately heavy touring rigs over the years, and after getting to WA four years ago I found myself wanting a steady, predictable ski that would be fun in most conditions. We went after this design with the 3-6k powder seeking day tour in mind. There’s lots of good stuff out there in the ski industry, of course- but I’ve broken several pairs of lightweight skis in a single season, so I’ve gravitated (like many of us) to the smaller independent brands that focus tons of attention on durability. The high points we went for on the Jack:
    User friendly but nimble shape- tip and tail taper for releasability, and forgiveness on breakable crust and other hooky junk.
    Moderate tip and low, fairly flat tail rocker- good float up front for deep days, but a functional, businesslike tail for skinning and less than ideal conditions. There’s a few mm of camber underfoot. I’m really stoked with how it skis.
    Fairly long radius, 27m. Not as large as some, but a good blend of steady and predictable in variable snow, combined with the ability to lay them over and rail on firmer stuff. Not hooky and jittery in odd snow like a small radius.
    They kept an eye on weight, but not to sacrifice durability. There’s the option to go with the inbounds or backcountry core. Inbounds core in the 181 is just over 8.5 pounds, and backcountry core is roughly a pound lighter, and these numbers are still settling in to place. There are lighter skis in this category, but I like the toughness and stability. Worth it in my world.
    The Hill 120 is a similar shape, rocker, and overall concept, but sized up to 120 underfoot. Both the Hill and Jack are definitely directional shapes, if you want more tail rocker/rise, the Cash or Cohen would be worth a look, and the full on five point shapes are great also! The Backcountry core is an option on all of them.
    What you’re gathering about the Ramblin’ Jack is likely not earth shattering- It’s a stable, predictable, durable, modern shape that’s meant to handle well in lots of conditions and still party in pow. Build quality is high, and like a few of other forum favorite builders, you can call or email the guys who will be building your ski. I’ve skied with these guys, and watched them at the shop, and they really care about the final product and the experience that goes with it. Attention to detail is really high.
    I’m 5’11”, 200 pounds + gear. For my personal rig I went with the inbounds core/181, to be mounted with Kingpins. I was on the prototypes last winter with a prototype core, and absolutely can’t wait to get these on snow this year.
    Let's go skiing.
    You pretty much just hit all my buttons for a touring ski. Thanks for the detailed description. What's your bsl, maybe we can hook up sometime? I've got 326mm xt130 or 316mm Vulcans.

    See you Lithic guys at the Banff showing in town tonight!

  18. #93
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    The Chicken Coop, Seattle
    Posts
    1,927
    Riff, I gotta take a spin next time we're both at Stevens. BSL is 306mm these days. I know those kingpins will adjust up enough.
    wait!!!! waitwaitwaitwaitwaitwaitwaitwait...Wait!
    Zoolander wasn't a documentary?

  19. #94
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    No longer somewhere in Idaho
    Posts
    530

    Whats up with Lithic Skis?

    Yeah guys! 296 vulcans here. I'll be at Stevens a bunch until the backcountry fills in properly, and then still at Stevens on big days. Let's make it happen.
    I'm bummed to miss the banff show, at work until Thursday...


    Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums
    Gravity always wins...

  20. #95
    Join Date
    Nov 2017
    Posts
    43
    Quote Originally Posted by adrenalated View Post
    Good to know your profile images are direct from the CAD files. They looked a bit... exaggerated, which is why actual photos often help.

    As for mount point - center of sidecut is great, but what I want to know is where the center of sidecut/mount point is relative to the true center of the ski. That can tell you a lot about what sort of stance a ski rewards the most (centered, forward driving, etc.) There's no substitute for actually skiing something, but absent the ability to do that, this info helps.

    I've skied a lot of skis and know pretty well what I like and don't like. I'm 100% sure that at some point a ski will come along that's outside those specs that will surprise me, but I'm not going to plunk down a grand on a depreciating asset as an experiment.

    Now all that said, I'm psyched to see more US made indie manufacturers that are interested in putting out a very high quality product and I wish you the greatest success regardless of if I ever buy skis from you or not.

    One last question - what thicknesses are you using on bases and edges?
    We use the same materials, base and edge-wise, that we learned to build skis with; 1.4mm thick base and the correlated edges. You can go thicker, as I think ON3P does, but we've not had any issues using our current dimensioned material and don't really see a need to change it up.

    We recommend a -9 back mount point on both the RJ and Hill in those particular lengths. That's a couple cm back from where most of our other skis get dimpled which is typically closer to -7 back, which I then move up one or two cm for my personal skis depending on how I'm feeling, which is completely a skier style preference. For my inbounds setup I prefer a longer tail while I prefer a shorter tail for my bc setup allowing easier kick turns in sporty terrain.

    I've included a few pics of the tip, mid, and tail of our Hills and the RJs are the same.

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	IMG_0265.jpg 
Views:	76 
Size:	766.6 KB 
ID:	216865Click image for larger version. 

Name:	IMG_0266.jpg 
Views:	78 
Size:	873.8 KB 
ID:	216866Click image for larger version. 

Name:	IMG_0267.jpg 
Views:	77 
Size:	1.03 MB 
ID:	216867

  21. #96
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    Big Sky
    Posts
    1,985

    Whats up with Lithic Skis?

    Quote Originally Posted by Neil Fiedler View Post
    I don't know your metrics Betelgeuse but I'm 6' 6" and 250 with just my skibbies on.
    Since I'm right next door to them I'll probably end up on a pair soon and let you know. But I Imagine they have a ski that will work for us. Especially me a non-pro goof ball that likes to chase LVS.
    You are quite a bit larger than me. I am 6í3Ē 205lbs nekkid. I lost 20 lbs over the course of the fall, and finally have gotten back into decent shape (for me). I am on that non-pro, goof ball level as well, but I like to ski fast and jump off things.

    Quote Originally Posted by peshastin_proud View Post
    We use the same materials, base and edge-wise, that we learned to build skis with; 1.4mm thick base and the correlated edges. You can go thicker, as I think ON3P does, but we've not had any issues using our current dimensioned material and don't really see a need to change it up.

    We recommend a -9 back mount point on both the RJ and Hill in those particular lengths. That's a couple cm back from where most of our other skis get dimpled which is typically closer to -7 back, which I then move up one or two cm for my personal skis depending on how I'm feeling, which is completely a skier style preference. For my inbounds setup I prefer a longer tail while I prefer a shorter tail for my bc setup allowing easier kick turns in sporty terrain.

    I've included a few pics of the tip, mid, and tail of our Hills and the RJs are the same.

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	IMG_0265.jpg 
Views:	76 
Size:	766.6 KB 
ID:	216865Click image for larger version. 

Name:	IMG_0266.jpg 
Views:	78 
Size:	873.8 KB 
ID:	216866Click image for larger version. 

Name:	IMG_0267.jpg 
Views:	77 
Size:	1.03 MB 
ID:	216867
    Definitely interested in the RJ!!


    Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

  22. #97
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Beer:30
    Posts
    5,228
    Quote Originally Posted by peshastin_proud View Post
    We use the same materials, base and edge-wise, that we learned to build skis with; 1.4mm thick base and the correlated edges. You can go thicker, as I think ON3P does, but we've not had any issues using our current dimensioned material and don't really see a need to change it up.

    We recommend a -9 back mount point on both the RJ and Hill in those particular lengths. That's a couple cm back from where most of our other skis get dimpled which is typically closer to -7 back, which I then move up one or two cm for my personal skis depending on how I'm feeling, which is completely a skier style preference. For my inbounds setup I prefer a longer tail while I prefer a shorter tail for my bc setup allowing easier kick turns in sporty terrain.

    I've included a few pics of the tip, mid, and tail of our Hills and the RJs are the same.
    That profile looks awesome and much more subtle than what the graphic on the website looked like.

    I know I said last question, but one more. How do you measure ski length? Material length before it goes in the press (like most manufacturers) or actual length of the finished ski (like ON3P)?

    Really appreciate you making the effort to answer all these questions.

  23. #98
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    Big Sky
    Posts
    1,985
    The RJ/Hill tail rocker has me very intrigued!


    Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

  24. #99
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    San Diego
    Posts
    175
    Subscribed..

    Sent from my SM-G955U using TGR Forums mobile app

  25. #100
    Join Date
    Nov 2017
    Posts
    43
    Quote Originally Posted by adrenalated View Post
    That profile looks awesome and much more subtle than what the graphic on the website looked like.

    I know I said last question, but one more. How do you measure ski length? Material length before it goes in the press (like most manufacturers) or actual length of the finished ski (like ON3P)?

    Really appreciate you making the effort to answer all these questions.
    No worries about all the questions, it's raining here so we're not skiing and we're waiting on some material to begin our next big build. Anyhow, our measurements are our base length before we press them, when it's flat.

Posting Permissions

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