2018-19 Praxis Skis Info and Resource Thread

[Long duc dong]

Grinch, Trees and Leo, thanks for the feedback!!

I have definitely considered a GPO, and obviously heard great things, I just have a couple of reservations, mostly in terms of its ability to make tight turns on a firm steep.

This actually comes from my experiences with the Quixote. I typically ski about 40 days a year, about 25-30 at Mammoth, maybe 10-12 at Baldy, and usually 2 or so at Snow Summit at the beginning of the year.

The Baldy days are usually on old, 185 Armada JJs, which are fun, and can get beat up without concern. As the saying goes, among those of us who regularly ski Baldy, 'there are rock skis and there are Baldy skis'. Skiing the JJ when I do has enforced just how used to a 115 or so waist I am. I should probably ski something narrower on lots of those days.

About 80% of my Mammoth days have been on a 4frnt EHP, from 2010 forward. I just like the feel of a 116 underfoot ski. I do have some 183 MVPs, which I love and should probably ski more, but in the end I just keep taking out the bigger ski.

In 2018, I thought I might try a Quixote, thinking it might replace the 186 EHP as my go to Mammoth ski. I love the Quixote, but it didn't end up being what I thought. The Q is great is soft snow, and on a storm day where the top isn't open it's lots of fun. It is also fun where the top is deep, and nothing has slid. But the issue I have with the Q is that there is no drive, no rebound, for steep, tight turns on something firm. Think Hangman's or Philippe's, where the top has slid on a pow day and you have to make a couple of firm, steep turns. I really don't like the Q for that, so I have ended up only skiing them on storm days, which they are great for.

With the Q, I think it may have to do with the lack of camber, the lack of edgehold and rebound in the steeps I'm mentioning above, but I don't know for sure. I do know that the EHP and the RX are great in firm steeps, and I can ski them as basically daily drivers at Mammoth. I keep thinking I'm going to ski my MVPs more, but the last two seasons I just keep grabbing the RX, or the EHP in years before that.

My fear with the GPO is that it would have that same feel of the Q, with the lack of camber and edgehold in a firm steep. With the EHP and the RX I don't worry about these situations, I know I can make those qiuck, tight turns on something firm and steep, I'm worried that those turns won't be as easy with the GPO, much like the experience I had with the Q.

Because this would be a ski that I would ski most of the time at Mammoth, the edging and confidence in those firm steeps is critical. If I was going to ski this one only on a pow day, or maybe a couple of days after, I would be less worried. But it needs to be my goto on a Mammoth windbuff day, where there has been no snow for maybe even a couple of weeks. I need to take it out on slushy days, where you get into a chute and realize, 'wow, that's firmer than I thought.' I need to be confident when I go into Hangman's and discover that the turns above the choke are much firmer than I anticipated, before getting to the windbuff velvet below.

My last Mammoth trip of this season was a perfect example. I went up on Sunday morning, CInco De Mayo, to ski a foot and a half of fresh. There was crust underneath, as there often is with May pow days, but it was still a blast. I did have to make some crusty turns in Hangers and Philippe's, not too bad but some of the pad had slid off. These are the conditions that this ski will have to excel at for me, which is why I like the Q as a quiver ski, not a goto.

I skied the next three days, and it was fun, but a mix of cutup snow, some windbuff on Tuesday in Paranoid 1, and slushy groomers down low. Hangman's was okay on Monday and Tuesday, but firmer and far less inviting. With these days, I didn't hesitiate as to which ski to take out, it was definitely the RX. The new ski I get will have to be the same in that regard.

If I was mostly going to ski these in pow, or a few days after the storm, I would probably be more inclined to buy a GPO, but this is more of a daily driver situation, which I really like the RX for, I just think the taper and rise could be slightly different, hence a +10 BC.

But you guys talking about the versatility of the GPO does have me thinking. My thoughts on the GPO are pure speculation, I have never skied one, and would really like to at some point. Keith came to Mammoth with some demos last spring, but unfortunately I wasn't able to make it. I would love to get a feel for the GPO.

Sorry for the long winded response, I just wanted to explain what I'm looing for, and the reasons I think a +10 BC would be great.

[skis_the_trees]

GPOs are my daily driver and rip groomers, several day old snow, and fresh snow. I've skied them with tech bindings and two buckle boots and also alpine bindings and Lange RX120s. My old beat up pair has 100s of days and lacks any camber now, but they seem to have just as much pop and life as my newer set that has a few mm of camber still. The new/cambered set isn't as surfy or maybe it's because they are still really sharp in comparison. With sharp edges they ski firm steeps very well, with really dull beat up rock ski edges they still ski firm steeps very acceptably! I have a set of 192cm Yetis also (this is basically a BC -10) and I rarely take them out because the GPO just works most of the time. If you get the chance you should try some and see if it correlates with your estimation. They are also a popular ski so you can probably find some 187 GPO used pretty easily.

I would also consider the Dynastart MFree 108 for your uses, although it's not a Praxis ski

[SchralphMacchio]

LDD, I agree with the others, try to find a used pair of GPOs in your size and then go from there.

GPOs are surprisingly good in firm snow. As versatile as the BC is, the flex profile was optimized around soft snow. The GPO was Tabke’s big mountain comp ski based on the BC design, but with the changes you’ve noted, especially including the tapered shark nose that makes the GPO more stable at high speeds ripping through variable snow (sastrugi disappears, an important criteria for Mammoth) and other people’s tracks, but less nose float than the BC as a result. I actually preferred the BC in deeper snow to the GPO due to the better float. GPO is also looser than the BC and quicker to pivot, where the BC likes to be laid over a little more, I’m guessing that’s a function of both the camber and mount point differences … GPO had a slightly more forward mount point than BC back in the day, but I’m not sure if that’s still the case.

Best of luck.

[waxoff]

Grinch, Trees and Leo, thanks for the feedback!!

I have definitely considered a GPO, and obviously heard great things, I just have a couple of reservations, mostly in terms of its ability to make tight turns on a firm steep.

This actually comes from my experiences with the Quixote. I typically ski about 40 days a year, about 25-30 at Mammoth, maybe 10-12 at Baldy, and usually 2 or so at Snow Summit at the beginning of the year.

The Baldy days are usually on old, 185 Armada JJs, which are fun, and can get beat up without concern. As the saying goes, among those of us who regularly ski Baldy, 'there are rock skis and there are Baldy skis'. Skiing the JJ when I do has enforced just how used to a 115 or so waist I am. I should probably ski something narrower on lots of those days.

About 80% of my Mammoth days have been on a 4frnt EHP, from 2010 forward. I just like the feel of a 116 underfoot ski. I do have some 183 MVPs, which I love and should probably ski more, but in the end I just keep taking out the bigger ski.

In 2018, I thought I might try a Quixote, thinking it might replace the 186 EHP as my go to Mammoth ski. I love the Quixote, but it didn't end up being what I thought. The Q is great is soft snow, and on a storm day where the top isn't open it's lots of fun. It is also fun where the top is deep, and nothing has slid. But the issue I have with the Q is that there is no drive, no rebound, for steep, tight turns on something firm. Think Hangman's or Philippe's, where the top has slid on a pow day and you have to make a couple of firm, steep turns. I really don't like the Q for that, so I have ended up only skiing them on storm days, which they are great for.

With the Q, I think it may have to do with the lack of camber, the lack of edgehold and rebound in the steeps I'm mentioning above, but I don't know for sure. I do know that the EHP and the RX are great in firm steeps, and I can ski them as basically daily drivers at Mammoth. I keep thinking I'm going to ski my MVPs more, but the last two seasons I just keep grabbing the RX, or the EHP in years before that.

My fear with the GPO is that it would have that same feel of the Q, with the lack of camber and edgehold in a firm steep. With the EHP and the RX I don't worry about these situations, I know I can make those qiuck, tight turns on something firm and steep, I'm worried that those turns won't be as easy with the GPO, much like the experience I had with the Q.

Because this would be a ski that I would ski most of the time at Mammoth, the edging and confidence in those firm steeps is critical. If I was going to ski this one only on a pow day, or maybe a couple of days after, I would be less worried. But it needs to be my goto on a Mammoth windbuff day, where there has been no snow for maybe even a couple of weeks. I need to take it out on slushy days, where you get into a chute and realize, 'wow, that's firmer than I thought.' I need to be confident when I go into Hangman's and discover that the turns above the choke are much firmer than I anticipated, before getting to the windbuff velvet below.

My last Mammoth trip of this season was a perfect example. I went up on Sunday morning, CInco De Mayo, to ski a foot and a half of fresh. There was crust underneath, as there often is with May pow days, but it was still a blast. I did have to make some crusty turns in Hangers and Philippe's, not too bad but some of the pad had slid off. These are the conditions that this ski will have to excel at for me, which is why I like the Q as a quiver ski, not a goto.

I skied the next three days, and it was fun, but a mix of cutup snow, some windbuff on Tuesday in Paranoid 1, and slushy groomers down low. Hangman's was okay on Monday and Tuesday, but firmer and far less inviting. With these days, I didn't hesitiate as to which ski to take out, it was definitely the RX. The new ski I get will have to be the same in that regard.

If I was mostly going to ski these in pow, or a few days after the storm, I would probably be more inclined to buy a GPO, but this is more of a daily driver situation, which I really like the RX for, I just think the taper and rise could be slightly different, hence a +10 BC.

But you guys talking about the versatility of the GPO does have me thinking. My thoughts on the GPO are pure speculation, I have never skied one, and would really like to at some point. Keith came to Mammoth with some demos last spring, but unfortunately I wasn't able to make it. I would love to get a feel for the GPO.

Sorry for the long winded response, I just wanted to explain what I'm looing for, and the reasons I think a +10 BC would be great.

I had a pair of 191 +10 BC's built a few years ago. Scroll back in this thread to Sep 13 2018 and you'll find some postings, also in the MYOFS thread about the same time. Then later in this thread in maybe Feb 2020 (just before the pandemic) there should be some more writings about them.

In general, they behave pretty much like expected, like a wide all mountain ski, def not a pow ski per se. Not a bad experience at all! I can't remember from the back of my head about mount point. And I haven't skied them since early 2020 because of the pandemic and then too many (new for me) skis found their way into my stable. But I have since skiing them moved the bindings back a tad, but never got them on snow since then.

However, during last summer's sale I picked up a pair of stock 192 GPO, and I agree to everything that has been said about them in this thread recently. Mine are mounted half an inch behind the dimple. (I have obviously not skied the back to back with the Fat BC's) But to generalize, GPO for me is the most intuitive soft snow ski I've been on. The way the tips slice their way through soft snow, and how easy the tails are to control really have to be experienced. Back in the day I liked to feel the presence of the tails a bit more, and on the Fat BC they were maybe a bit too present for my likings, hence the binding move. The GPO's just feel so dialled. Upthread I commented on the different tip shapes without having skied the GPO's, but I still stand by that statement!

Also, just an observation partly regarding your comment of tight turns in firm steeps. In my mind, less sidecut is favorable there, not that the GPO or longer BC have a ton of it, but have you considered a Heritage Labs FL113? That's also a remarkable ski in its own, albeit a couple of mm's narrower than the GPO/Fat BC.

[tang]

I'll chime in... considering I still ski old hoarded pairs of EHPs the most out of my quiver, and bought a pair of GPOs for this last season.
I still use and love the EHP for its amazing versatility - heavy but quick, long straight edge can still grip when needed, long low rocker can bang through alot. It's only real shortcoming is trying to carve a turn on true hardpack/ice (no sidecut , no camber), and I can tip dive it in deep snow given forward mount and low front rocker.
The GPO though has taken over daily driver duties. While it's not quite as pivoty, it is still quick enough and gets down steeps, tight trees, moguls, etc very very well. And its a much better carver and a better pure deep pow ski. It quickly earned the spot as my resort travel ski when I flew and could only fit one resort and one BC ski in the bag. For me, it's a pretty optimal western DD - and my go-to terrain is tight trees, bumps, and steeps.
In fact, I've learned from these skis that I highly value heavy, all-wood skis.

[Long duc dong]

Thanks for the input guys!!

This has really given me a ton to think about.

Truth be told, my hesitance in regard to the GPO really has to do with my experience with the Quixote. I found that I simply couldn't bang out a succession of quick, tight turns on a firm steep, there was no rebound, so to speak. At first I thought this might be due to me just not knowing how to ski it, won't be the first time for that, but most on the Quixote thread seemed to know what I was talking about regarding rebound, and said that probably won't change. I eventually decided that it was probably the lack of camber which contributed to the feel. I have found the rebound I need in the RX, and obviously the EHP.

Borrowing terms from waxoff, I'm really looking for a wide all mountain ski, not a powder ski. I would certainly classify an EHP or an RX as a wide, all mountain ski. I would classify the Q as more of a pow ski, as I love it on a storm day.

The funny thing is, I can actually ski the Q on a groomer better than I ski it in a firm, tight chute. I find that while it doesn't have rebound, I can roll it (sort of) from edge to edge and do what I need to do.

I honestly don't know if the issue with the Q was camber. I'm just guessing at this point. I know what I feel when I ski it, but I don't know exactly what the root cause is. I love the Q, but it's definitely a quiver ski for me.

The term tang used, travel ski, is what I'm looking for. For many years that was the EHP for me, if I'm going to travel somewhere and can only bring one ski, that's the one. It's the ski I just take out almost every Mammoth day, only deviating occasionally. The RX has certainly become that for me, there really is no need to replace it, I'm just curious.

I am going to try to ski the GPO, I might even look for some used. It's very possible that it's what I'm looking for, and I don't know it. Skiing it would give me more insight. It's very possible I'll order a +10 BC someday, or I might get a GPO with a bit more camber, if that ends up being necessary, but I do want to try a standard GPO first.

I agree with waxoff about firm steeps, I tend to like a ski without much sidecut. For me, the sidecut of the RX is fine, but I wouldn't want any more. That is actually one thing that worries me about the BC, I would prefer the slightly narrower tail of an RX to a +10 BC, although it's not like the +10 BC tail would be THAT wide.

However, waxoff's comment about the +10 BC tails being a bit too 'there' does concern me. I like a tail that doesn't lock me into a turn, I like to initiate the turn and then slash the tails in steeps sometimes, if that makes sense. I don't want a tail that locks me in.

When they discontinued the EHP I bought another pair, in a 186. My first EHPs were purchased in January 2008, and they are pretty beat to pieces. Even though I ski 40 days a year, not 100 like in my ski bum period, 25-30 days a year on a ski for 10 years will do some damage. I bought my second pair of EHPs in the spring of 2012, or maybe 2011, as I loved the ski so much. I didn't mount them for 5 or 6 years, as I didn't think I could get another pair. Eventually I thought I could handle something different. I still love the EHP though, a truly great ski that got me to love 116 underfoot.

My last couple of ski bum years I skied a 190 volkl explosiv (CMH topsheet, thanks Mt. Lion!!!) almost exclusively. I think that's part of what I liked so much about the EHP, the straight sidcut, similar to the Explosiv.

I didn't end up pulling the trigger, honestly my wife getting a pow ski was WAAAY more important. But I need to find a way to ski the GPO, preferably on a day at Mammoth where I can take it in Hangman's when it's a bit firm or perhaps the end choke on Sign Line (Climax) when it's firm but edgable, or maybe the area under Top of The World. I know it's going to crush soft snow, it's those firm steeps I'm worried about, if it's going to be my 'one trip ski' it needs to be able to do that.

Thanks for the replies, lots of interesting stuff here to ponder!!

Part of me is actually glad the sale ended, as I'm pretty busy right now and need to got quite a bit done today, rather than think about buying skis that are definitely a 'want' rather than a 'need' at this point

[Muggydude]

So one of my Main questions to you is what layup are the RX and Quixote you’ve been skiing? Layup makes a big difference in the feel of the ski, and with Praxis, there are so many variations that you can have. Two skis of any particular model can feel very different based on layup choices.

Veneer makes a noticeable and positive impact giving a ski more energy and liveliness in my experience, while also keeping things damp/smooth. Carbon can give you more energy return too, but also adds some harshness. My two favorite layups for resort are enduro veneer for wider skis like the GPO, and Heavy/Carbon/Veneer for narrower skis like the piste jib.


If you need an excuse to try the GPO, I have a super cheap pair of enduro veneer 187s in GS:

https://www.tetongravity.com/forums/...d.php?t=356904

I love the GPOs (have owned a couple pairs over the years), I think it’s one of the best hard snow and groomer skis in the 116mm waist category. Fits what you’re looking for pretty perfectly imo.

If I had a 1-3 ski western quiver, the GPO would be a permanent part of it. However, I have 8 pairs of skis currently [emoji28] so each one tends to be a little more specialized haha

[tang]

One quick follow up to your follow up above, re the EHP... I wouldn't say it has much "rebound". After all, it's flat cambered. But the combo of its flat camber, 40m sidecut, and quite tapered tips (and tails) makes it so quick to turn. Plus its weight and straight edge gives it plenty of bite, more than you'd expect from an RC ski.
Whats the sidecut, taper profile and camber height on the Quixote?
If you like the RX, in comparison the GPO is more tapered, less cambered (only 3mm) and has just a bit more sidecut (24 in a 187).
Trying out a used GPO is prob worth it, especially if you can avoid adding holes to it. If it doesn't jive, you could flip it for close to breakeven I'm sure. People are always wanting to give em a try.

[Long duc dong]

Tang,

I think my tenuous command of the English language is part of the problem here, as 'rebound' was a very poor word for the characteristic I'm trying to describe.

With the RX and the EHP, I think it is the solid edge grip, and the lack of excessive sidecut, which allows the ski to be driven in the quick, tight, hoppy turns. With the Q, I don't really feel like I have that drive, they swivel nicely, but you can't drive them through those tight, quick turns, and the edge hold doesn't feel great, at least to me.

To be clear, I love the Q for what I use it for, namely storm day pow in the trees. I love the swively, two-footed feel, as long as I don't have to drive a turn on something steep and firm. The Q is 118 underfoot, with 2mm of camber. I actually think it punches above it's waist size, it is truly a blast in deep snow, and in trees. It's also great when the top pops and you get a bluebird day....as long as nothing slides. I usually only ski them on storm days, but they are really fun for what they do. I just don't find them to be versatile, they are not the 'one travel ski' in comparison to the EHP or the RX.

I don't know if more camber would change the Q, honestly.

Muggy, PM sent.

[tang]

Gotcha, yeah go try some GPOs!

[Island Bay]

I see that the venerable RX has had a slight facelift: longer tail rocker; smoother tip. Looks good to me. Any reviews yet?

https://www.praxisskis.com/custom-skis/rx-custom-ski/

[grinch]

I see that the venerable RX has had a slight facelift: longer tail rocker; smoother tip. Looks good to me. Any reviews yet?

https://www.praxisskis.com/custom-skis/rx-custom-ski/

Damn, that sounds really nice. I liked the rx i had and thought the tip and tail would be nicer if it didnt rise so abrupt. My only, relatively minor, complaint with it. Little more tail rocker should be fun too. Do want!

Sent from my SM-S711W using TGR Forums mobile app

[Hoss Worthington]

This years custom skis are shipping it seems. Carnon UL BCs with the oak veneer.

Sent from my Pixel 8 using Tapatalk

[scmartin69]

Any idea what model these are?
I don't have them in hand yet, but still curious.

Sent from my SM-S906U using Tapatalk

[N1CK.]

Any idea what model these are?
I don't have them in hand yet, but still curious.

Sent from my SM-S906U using Tapatalk

What are the measurements?
(kinda looks like a Protest to me)

[grinch]

I think theyre protests as well. Custom build with that topsheet so who knows what the lay up is. Alpine clamps id guess enduro or heavyhitter core. Probably not the ul core. Looks to be veneer topsheet as well

Sent from my SM-S711W using TGR Forums mobile app

[PlayItLeo]

I’m going with 3D base powderboards. I think that was the standard graphic the first year they made them.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[The Iron Horse]

I’m going with 3D base powderboards. I think that was the standard graphic the first year they made them.

I agree that they look like Powderboards. I don't see any of the Protest taper or sidecut, at least not that my pair have. No idea about the topsheet, however.

[grinch]

Thats quite possible. I may have mistaken the reverse sidecut of pow boards for the super long taper of the protests.
Id like to have them if theyre pow boards but id love to have them if they were protests, in my size , flex 4 , enduro veneer

Sent from my SM-S711W using TGR Forums mobile app

[east or bust]

^Will get some for ya at some point today. Mine are from 2015 I believe.


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

[grinch]

Thank you.


New profile below, shape looks unchanged.

Attachment 502127

Same splay heights but tip and tail splay looks more smooth thru the radius. Not as abrupt. Maybe im imagining it?

Sent from my SM-S711W using TGR Forums mobile app

[grinch]

Haaa, i sold mine thinning the heard but that new smooth splay addresses the only small quibble i had. Still have the gpo and a bg 116. Mvp 108 and protest are next in line before that new rx but tomorrow is another day

Sent from my SM-S711W using TGR Forums mobile app

[scmartin69]

Thats quite possible. I may have mistaken the reverse sidecut of pow boards for the super long taper of the protests.
Id like to have them if theyre pow boards but id love to have them if they were protests, in my size , flex 4 , enduro veneer

Sent from my SM-S711W using TGR Forums mobile app

Finally have them in hand. They appear to be powder boards as they are reverse sidecut and fully rockered. 180cm no markings except a little dot for boot center. BSL on the mount is about 305mm.

Sent from my SM-S906U using Tapatalk

[grinch]

Finally have them in hand. They appear to be powder boards as they are reverse sidecut and fully rockered. 180cm no markings except a little dot for boot center. BSL on the mount is about 305mm.

Sent from my SM-S906U using Tapatalk

Youre going to have some fun on those. In any snow over 8-10" or soft corn you'll feel invincible. Nothing like them. A heavy wet pow slayer.
Theyre a handful on flatish cattracks though
I regret selling mine. Theyre great to have at the ready

Sent from my SM-S711W using TGR Forums mobile app

[eskido]

Finally have them in hand. They appear to be powder boards as they are reverse sidecut and fully rockered. 180cm no markings except a little dot for boot center. BSL on the mount is about 305mm.

Sent from my SM-S906U using Tapatalk

3D base? That’s a score, love to know how those treat ya