Results 2,051 to 2,075 of 3008
-
04-11-2021, 11:09 AM #2051Banned
- Join Date
- Oct 2003
- Location
- In Your Wife
- Posts
- 8,291
Now that I look at it, a skinny Ullr with a HH core seems like it might be an awesome resort powder ski...
-
04-11-2021, 11:16 AM #2052
BC's, with their softer flex, float just as well as a stock GPO. But my flex 3 UL GPO's float better. That's a great winter touring ski for CO. At my weight anyway (170) that change in flex turns the GPO into more of a powder ski, as opposed to a fatter do-it-all ski. They behave quite differently.
I'll also put this here even if it won't be popular:
Everyone considering a GPO should also consider a Rustler 11. They've got a lot in common, but I think the Rustler is just more dialed. I prefer them in almost all conditions especially firmer snow and bumps. I owned some beautiful 187 veneer GPO's (either MAP or Enduro) and after skiing the 11's I sold them without a second thought or an ounce of remorse.
I won't sell my UL GPO's though. I skied them less this year as I did about half my winter touring on Protests, but I think I paid $225 for them and I hope to get them down to a cost of about $1 a day. I don't count my days, but I'd estimate that I've got 125-150 days on them so far. They don't look half their age.
-
04-11-2021, 11:17 AM #2053
[Edit] Sorry ... I missed the "fatter" part of your comment. Ignore the following ...[/edit]
You sound like a possible candidate for Freerides. One thing about them however (Keith agrees), is that they get hung up in tight moguls.
I ordered a pair without checkimg my ego at the door (heavy/veneer/#4) and regretted it. I've always wondered if a flex #3 would have suited my creaky knees. Then again, when it's low tide, I tend not ride lifts, so this is more a curiosity for me than anything.
... ThomGalibier Designcrafting technology in service of music
-
04-11-2021, 11:26 AM #2054
Next Winter (assuming I ride lifts), comparing my CD114s with your Rustler 11s would be an interesting experiment.
Back to our regularly scheduled programming.
I think it works the other way. Maybe I shouldn't order ;-)
... ThomGalibier Designcrafting technology in service of music
-
04-11-2021, 12:10 PM #2055Registered User
- Join Date
- Mar 2020
- Posts
- 192
Actual Keith suggested as an alternative a modded fatter version of the FRD as a possibility. I have the 9D8 in HH #4. I like that ski a lot. While I never asked Keith this question, studying the schematics and specs of the RX, I seems to me that if you were going to design a fat 9D8 you'd end up pretty close to the RX. Consequently I think I'll like it. If I don't I can always pull the bindings and hang 'em on the wall as art work!
-
04-11-2021, 01:07 PM #2056
-
04-11-2021, 01:16 PM #2057
-
04-11-2021, 01:50 PM #2058Registered User
- Join Date
- Mar 2021
- Posts
- 304
Everything Keith is saying is exactly how I felt with my HH#5 Rx. I loved mine on the ice we get in Tahoe, some of my favorite wide skis on firm snow. They like long radius turns, but they do rail and the tails do come around fairly easily. Idk how carvey they are, but they do extremely well on firm
-
04-11-2021, 04:25 PM #2059Galibier Designcrafting technology in service of music
-
04-11-2021, 04:27 PM #2060
-
04-11-2021, 04:29 PM #2061
Ah! That makes more sense (much as it would have been cool to drop that much weight by going from #4 to #3).
... ThomLast edited by galibier_numero_un; 04-11-2021 at 05:19 PM.
Galibier Designcrafting technology in service of music
-
04-11-2021, 08:25 PM #2062
just for comparison, 175 UL GPO flex 3 with nylon topsheets are 1600 g. (width reduction as well as length).
Aggressive in my own mind
-
04-11-2021, 09:08 PM #2063Registered User
- Join Date
- Jan 2012
- Location
- Juneau
- Posts
- 1,101
I have the BCs in 180cm, #3, enduro with carbon, maple veneer. I'm 5'9", 185ish lb.
Absolutely love these skis. Just the right amount of rocker for skin track up and then same for the down on Juneau's enjoyable snowpack = anything from hero powder to skiable, not-quite mashed potatoes. They're nimble through trees and definitely respectable in crud, cut up powder, and chunder. They don't crush crud like my skinny Rx's did, but they also don't get tossed around.
I may be getting old, but I don't need anything fatter. OK, maybe 1-5 days per year I do.
I am not a fan of the UL core, but if weight were a higher priority for my winter ski, I'd go with that. For spring skis, I'm happy with a lighter core.
-
04-11-2021, 09:38 PM #2064Registered User
- Join Date
- Jul 2014
- Posts
- 154
Jeez, took my eyes off this thread for a couple of days and there's a lot to catch up on all of a sudden.
I see a lot of chat about the BC, and I can weigh in on that ski for those of you that are on the fence (TLDR get a pair). I bought mine at the beginning of the 2018-2019 season for my touring rig. At 6'4 and 220, and on Keith's recommendation, I went with the 190, UL core + veneer and bumped up the flex to 4. I wasn't too worried about weight (and much more concerned about the bindings releasing when they needed to) so I slapped some shifts on them.
I've ended up skiing them inbounds a lot, and they are a ton of fun (probably 20+ days inbounds over the past couple of seasons). They're great on groomers (a big plus in my book), good in icier conditions, and very fun as soon as there's a bit of soft snow. I guess that's my main point, they're a fun ski to be on; you can slarve them on mounds of fresher snow and quickly lock them in once you hit that patch of harder snow. Just had another awesome day with them today with a suprise 5-6 inches at Crystal Mountain (and a bit more in sheltered areas), with a bit of a crust underneath. The only place where they're not quite as good is super slushy conditions, which is understandable given their lighter weight.
I bought the enduro 192 GPO with veneer at the beginning of this season and just haven't reached for them quite as much. Definitely more of a ski that will kick your ass if you're not on top of them. Pretty confident I won't ever find their speed limit though. Funnily enough, I wonder if I should have dropped the flex down to a 3. This is my first pair with the enduro core, and I think that it's plenty damp (for me), so that a #3 flex would probably be easier to bend and be a bit more "fun" in the softer conditions that I bought them for. Anyone experimented with a softer GPO?
-
04-12-2021, 06:25 AM #2065
I would say that it prefers more of a centered stance than forward/driving. Occasionally I would find myself skiing forward more than I normally do and as soon as I actively skied more centered I was back in the sweet spot and things felt much better. Any turn shape, any speed, etc just felt much more intuitive centered than with alot of forward pressure.
Common sense. So rare today in America it's almost like having a superpower.
-
04-12-2021, 09:27 AM #2066
-
04-12-2021, 05:48 PM #2067Aggressive in my own mind
-
04-12-2021, 10:32 PM #2068
So, back to my own personal, meadow-skipping journey, it's been 3 days where it's +10 GPO, with nary a waver to the Ullr. Two or 3 more days, and I'm set to pull the trigger.
Keith wrote the following about the two skis, in response to my passing comment about one being the predecessor for the other (Ullr --> GPO I think, in terms of time sequence).
As for the evolution of the designs, the GPO and the Ullr didn't really come together as a result of each other or in sequence. If I remember correctly and I might not... but I think I do.. we had the Ullr and then Tabke and I started working on the GPO.
Could be a chicken or an egg thing as I'm not really sure how it all progressed or if they had really anything to do with each other from the start.
The Ullr I originally made to be a powder ski for resorts with a lot of vert, like Jackson, or snowbird. Powder and bowls up top and then run some groomers to the bottom, hop on a tram and do it again.
So the Ullr was set up to carve as a modified shape powder ski. The GPO was made to slarve as a "mid fat" powder ski. If that makes sense, and really I'm not sure it does.
But in a way they developed independently and ended up being similar almost cousins in the lineup kind of by chance. I don't think Drew ever even tried the Ullr.Galibier Designcrafting technology in service of music
-
04-12-2021, 10:43 PM #2069
I think the veneers need 15ish days to break in. I bet the stiffness grows on you too. Or maybe -1 is the spot
Sent from my SM-G950W using TGR Forums mobile app
-
04-13-2021, 01:01 AM #2070
I had a 192 GPO heavy hitter carbon veneer all queued up and decided to search for chatter about it before pulling the trigger.
Lots of chatter over the past 7 years, but has anyone here done it? It’s gonna be a beastly ski, I think, probably a bit above my preferred daily driver weight, but still really appealing.
I forgot how much I can’t get enough of the spring custom sale tech talk frenzy.
::::::::::::@::::::::::::
-
04-13-2021, 08:17 AM #2071
Is there a estimation on the increase in weight for going Heavy Hitter core?
I'm more interested for the wider skis, like GPO, as mentioned in the previous post.Aggressive in my own mind
-
04-13-2021, 12:23 PM #2072
2018-19 Praxis Skis Info and Resource Thread
HH = 1.05*Enduro
More or less. Correct me if I’m wrong. I’m working off a sample size of 2.
If you use a veneer on the heavy hitter ski it reduces the weight by 4-8oz (113-227g), which should bring it down to around the factory stated weight of a nylon topsheet enduro.
... and carbon would reduce it a bit more.
::::::::::::@::::::::::::
-
04-13-2021, 02:10 PM #2073
Thanks.
Is the 5% from Keith?Aggressive in my own mind
-
04-13-2021, 02:27 PM #2074
No, it's based on the two skis I've had that are the same model but different core types. The 4-8oz weight reduction for veneer is from the praxis website.
-
04-13-2021, 02:31 PM #2075
right. bad reading comprehension on my part.
You did say sample size of two.Aggressive in my own mind
Bookmarks