Praxis Lhasa Pows?

**Muggydude** · 07-26-2018, 10:54 PM

Is there going to be a waiting list Splat? I think I'm going to jump on a pair... Did you decide on doing any mods to the rocker profile or tail? Hoping veneer will be an option too.

I'm in NorCal for the next five months, might just have to go up to Tahoe and pick up my pair in person...

Since I hurt my back 18 months again I've just been collecting dope skis to pass the time. Finally gone about a month no meds, working out 6 days a week with my herniated discs. If it keeps up I should be good to go for some (careful) turns this winter on all my new sticks.

**detrusor** · 07-27-2018, 03:29 PM

Oh man. Wonder how much overlap between my GPO’s and these.

Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

**2FUNKY** · 07-27-2018, 03:36 PM

Originally Posted by detrusor

Oh man. Wonder how much overlap between my GPO’s and these.

Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

None.

**skifishbum** · 07-27-2018, 06:26 PM

if the custom option includes me and the furkid coming to visit and getting to go hands on in a safe manner for a pair
im in

**pfluffenmeister** · 07-27-2018, 07:35 PM

Return of the Fat!

**Banh Mi** · 07-27-2018, 08:02 PM

https://youtu.be/C-5nist-qeQ

Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

**I've seen black diamonds!** · 07-27-2018, 08:06 PM

Originally Posted by detrusor

Oh man. Wonder how much overlap between my GPO’s and these.

Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

Lhasas are significantly better powder skis, especially if you like to drive your tips. GPO's will pivot more predictably in funky snow and are more balanced billy goating. Both carve well for fat skis, but the Lhasas have more learning curve.

**detrusor** · 07-27-2018, 09:22 PM

Well that sounds good since regular Lhasa were my daily driver for 4+ seasons.

Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

**2FUNKY** · 08-03-2018, 04:23 PM

Originally Posted by splat

We're going forward with the 191 Lhasa Fat. Keith and I met today and will be pulling it together over the next few weeks. Limited run of 30 pair. $799 each with some custom options available. There's considerable design mods that will be required to replicate the ski because every single aspect of our construction and manufacturing processes were totally different. Once we pull it all together and make the first few pair, Keith will put up a page on the Praxis website end of August/early September, production in last half of September, delivery in October.

Can you elaborate on “design mods”? Can we see a cad drawing of what this looks like? What are his thoughts on the amount of proper tail rocker? Length and height of tail rocker?
I’m in for a pair once we get some build and mod logistics ironed out.

**splat** · 08-04-2018, 12:02 PM

Keith's thoughts on the tail rocker? Having never skied the 191 Fat, he relies upon me for input since I designed the ski. He's always admired the Lhasas and has wanted to build them since pm gear shut down.

I don't know if you caught it, but I mentioned somewhere here that I used to grind the last last six inches of the tail edge down 3/4 of a mm on each side of my pairs as I constantly modified the design, tapering it over that distance, to get the tail release you think should be achieved by rockering. And it worked. This taper was never incorporated in the design before we shut down but I noticed that it needed that. So we discussed the same taper and will adjust the base width, tapering it in 1.5 mm and put a slightly increased rocker on it for those who think it needs rocker. What you think rocker will achieve can be achieved with what I know works because it did on my own pairs. But we're happy to also raise the tail that little skosh that will allow it to come around easily without sacrificing the grip that serves the ski so well on the hard.

**Spyderjon** · 08-04-2018, 12:19 PM

Would love to get a pair but unfortunately the $ to £ rate plus shipping to the UK kills it.

**auvgeek** · 08-04-2018, 12:29 PM

Originally Posted by splat

I don't know if you caught it, but I mentioned somewhere here that I used to grind the last last six inches of the tail edge down 3/4 of a mm on each side of my pairs as I constantly modified the design, tapering it over that distance, to get the tail release you think should be achieved by rockering. And it worked. So we discussed the same taper and will adjust the base width, tapering it in 1.5 mm and put a slightly increased rocker on it for those who think it needs rocker. What you think rocker will achieve can be achieved with what I know works because it did on my own pairs. But we're happy to also raise the tail that little skosh that will allow it to come around easily without sacrificing the grip that serves the ski so well on the hard.

It like seems grinding 0.75 mm of edge off would have two separate effects: a significant detune and a slight taper. Both of these things would significantly effect how easily the tail releases, right? Or did you re-tune the edges?

**splat** · 08-04-2018, 12:34 PM

Not so much a detune, though, because I ground it on the side angle beveler, leaving the angle intact.

**pfluffenmeister** · 08-04-2018, 08:43 PM

I love the Fat's tail as is
I would be interested in skiing the slightly trimmed tail version but I thought the 186 had too much pintail.
I don't think that rockering the tail is such a hot idea, but that could be my impending crotchetiness.

For me The Fat, is pretty much the ski.
After picking up the Fat, my wandering eye became still.

Pat, what dims are you looking @?
I have the 144-117-125.5, but I thought I remember slightly fatter dims posted on your website prior to closing.

**splat** · 08-04-2018, 10:13 PM

Originally Posted by pfluffenmeister

I love the Fat's tail as is
I would be interested in skiing the slightly trimmed tail version but I thought the 186 had too much pintail.
I don't think that rockering the tail is such a hot idea, but that could be my impending crotchetiness.

Or mine.
What I was really kind of hinting at in my post above is that I shaved that 1.5 off the tail and it was sweet as fuck. It took that hook out of the tail to easily release. In comparison, it is nothing like a 186, whatsoever.

**2FUNKY** · 08-04-2018, 11:02 PM

Originally Posted by pfluffenmeister

I love the Fat's tail as is
I would be interested in skiing the slightly trimmed tail version but I thought the 186 had too much pintail.
I don't think that rockering the tail is such a hot idea, but that could be my impending crotchetiness.

For me The Fat, is pretty much the ski.
After picking up the Fat, my wandering eye became still.

Pat, what dims are you looking @?
I have the 144-117-125.5, but I thought I remember slightly fatter dims posted on your website prior to closing.

Have you skied the Billy Goat or the Super Goat? If so you would understand. Maybe I’m looking for a unicorn. After skiing the Super Goat, owning the 191 Billy Goat and the 191FAT. I just feel as the FAT has more potential. It’s a dated design that still kicks ass but needs refined. Both the SG and the BG have taper and rocker in the tail and kickass. Pivot in trees at slower speeds waaay better than the FAT as well as in heavy snow. The SG kills the FAT at speed and chop, not that they’re horrible, but that is due to the fact the one I skied was extra stiff and they are HEAVY and damp.
Like I have said before. Once up to speed, faster than possible in real tight trees where I ski, some entrances are crazy tight before opening up, the ski breaks free nicely and very predictably and controlled. It doesn’t want to do anything you don’t tell it to. Maybe that’s not possible with this shape. I personally like that it’s not super pintaily which helps it stay balanced when you get the ski loose at high speed, the tail never wants to wash out on you and also lets it carve a trench and finish the turn.
After staring at the Billy Goat and skiing them back to back for several runs/days, I just think the FAT could use some of those attributes to make it the “Goat Killa”. Maybe I’m wrong, not to proud to say that. Maybe it’s exactly what it needs, seems as others who skied it think so. Maybe I just need to buy the SG in extra stiff. But god damn the FAT in a heavy core praxis build veneer top sheet with some tweaks sounds sick.

**Kopi_Red** · 08-04-2018, 11:50 PM

Originally Posted by 2FUNKY

Have you skied the Billy Goat or the Super Goat? If so you would understand. Maybe I’m looking for a unicorn. After skiing the Super Goat, owning the 191 Billy Goat and the 191FAT. I just feel as the FAT has more potential. It’s a dated design that still kicks ass but needs refined. Both the SG and the BG have taper and rocker in the tail and kickass. Pivot in trees at slower speeds waaay better than the FAT as well as in heavy snow. The SG kills the FAT at speed and chop, not that they’re horrible, but that is due to the fact the one I skied was extra stiff and they are HEAVY and damp.
Like I have said before. Once up to speed, faster than possible in real tight trees where I ski, some entrances are crazy tight before opening up, the ski breaks free nicely and very predictably and controlled. It doesn’t want to do anything you don’t tell it to. Maybe that’s not possible with this shape. I personally like that it’s not super pintaily which helps it stay balanced when you get the ski loose at high speed, the tail never wants to wash out on you and also lets it carve a trench and finish the turn.
After staring at the Billy Goat and skiing them back to back for several runs/days, I just think the FAT could use some of those attributes to make it the “Goat Killa”. Maybe I’m wrong, not to proud to say that. Maybe it’s exactly what it needs, seems as others who skied it think so. Maybe I just need to buy the SG in extra stiff. But god damn the FAT in a heavy core praxis build veneer top sheet with some tweaks sounds sick.

SG kills EVERYTHING in chop performance. The ski is ridiculous.

**splat** · 08-05-2018, 08:41 AM

I think if you let us build the ski in the next iteration of it's evolution, you'll be really happy, 2FUNKY. It's not like I haven't noticed the performance characteristics you've mentioned. Your input echoes what I already was wanting to do five years ago. I just ran out of time and money to perfect the shape. Now it gets to come back to fulfill it's potential and fucking slay.

**pfluffenmeister** · 08-05-2018, 09:26 AM

@ 2FUNKY BG and SG are skis that I definitely want to ski.

Originally Posted by splat

I think if you let us build the ski in the next iteration of it's evolution, you'll be really happy, 2FUNKY. It's not like I haven't noticed the performance characteristics you've mentioned. Your input echoes what I already was wanting to do five years ago. I just ran out of time and money to perfect the shape. Now it gets to come back to fulfill it's potential and fucking slay.

I'm excited!
May have to gear purge to fund.

**whyturn** · 08-06-2018, 08:47 AM

Having skied 196 lhasa, 191, 186 fat and kusalas they all excel. But my favorite is 186 fat with kusala reverse camber. It’s an all Mountain slayer and is so quick in the trees. It’s a hair quicker than my 186 BG and I think it’s just due to weight. Glad to see PM gear V 2.

**JRainey** · 08-06-2018, 11:11 PM

I found this development version of the site I built for Pat a few years ago. It's got all the old skis and specs for reference.

It won't look good on your phone:
http://paintbrushsolutions.com/ski/

**splat** · 08-06-2018, 11:31 PM

Thanks, J. I see the tail dims at 128, which is wrong. Keith has the cad files as well as the last 191 Fat that was made. I asked him to check the ski dims against the dims in the file. He wants to do something with the Lhasa graphics, which I love, so that's cool. In the process of chiseling that tail width down, it went from 128 to 125.5. Just checking to see if the extra grind is in the number. Someone around here has my old 191 Fats. Love to get a tail width on those.

**Kopi_Red** · 08-07-2018, 06:44 AM

Originally Posted by splat

Thanks, J. I see the tail dims at 128, which is wrong. Keith has the cad files as well as the last 191 Fat that was made. I asked him to check the ski dims against the dims in the file. He wants to do something with the Lhasa graphics, which I love, so that's cool. In the process of chiseling that tail width down, it went from 128 to 125.5. Just checking to see if the extra grind is in the number. Someone around here has my old 191 Fats. Love to get a tail width on those.

Pretty sure 2funky bought your old 191 Fats.

**splat** · 08-07-2018, 07:09 AM

I thought MiCol did.

**2FUNKY** · 08-07-2018, 07:29 AM

Originally Posted by splat

Thanks, J. I see the tail dims at 128, which is wrong. Keith has the cad files as well as the last 191 Fat that was made. I asked him to check the ski dims against the dims in the file. He wants to do something with the Lhasa graphics, which I love, so that's cool. In the process of chiseling that tail width down, it went from 128 to 125.5. Just checking to see if the extra grind is in the number. Someone around here has my old 191 Fats. Love to get a tail width on those.

I own them. 125.5, just checked them.