Results 1,976 to 2,000 of 3008
-
04-07-2021, 10:13 PM #1976
I'm naturally a bit more upright / centered (shitty ankle dorsiflexion so stiff, slightly more upright boots) but not so much as to rock the park skiier pencil Steele stance , and they work great for me. I've never noticed any issues when really getting low and forward to drive through set up crud and such, but like I said, I'm not in an ex-racer stance most of the time. I find them to be really easy and playful when wanted ,but can easily switch gears (188 4+ flex , veneer, enduro) I spent a morning farting around w my 7 year old on blue groomers and luge track like low angle kid trees, then took them to some steeper spring condition bigger faces in the afternoon and let them run through the softening crud and slush. Can do both.
-
04-08-2021, 06:27 AM #1977
This, all day. Such a fun spring ski, smearing the tails around in mashed potatoes bumps is so fun. Also I can't nose butter, but I've almost done it accidently on the Qs in spring snow just goofing around. I was thinking the 108 version (-1) would be amazing as a travel ski, where things are soft, with potential for smaller accumulations.
-
04-08-2021, 06:51 AM #1978Banned
- Join Date
- Oct 2003
- Location
- In Your Wife
- Posts
- 8,291
I own a pair of normal width Quixotes and a pair of skinny Quixotes. Both flex 3, both set up as touring skis with tech bindings.
The camber/rocker profile of the Q is dialed, don't fuck with it.
I'm debating between adding another Q or a GPO with a heavy hitter core for soft days in bounds, but I also never felt the need for anything wider than 102mm underfoot this entire season, so perhaps I'm over the idea of "lift served powder skis."
-
04-08-2021, 10:28 AM #1979
-
04-08-2021, 11:35 AM #1980Registered User
- Join Date
- Nov 2016
- Posts
- 1,384
Hmm, I'm wondering if the Q might be the answer to a more playful BG. Jeffery108 is my under 6" of new snow ski. I was thinking BG or Jeff116 for storm days. Jeff116 doesn't seem to have the crud busting ability of the BG and BG doesn't have the playfulness of the Jeff (from what I've read). I wonder if a heavy hitter Q would be a compromise between the two.
Are those enduro or UL layup? Have weights on them? Looks like the got rid of stock Qs on the website so no weights to be found. Wondering if I'll over power an UL layup at 6'3 205lbs, I've never skied a touring ski but I am looking for a touring specific setup for next season.
-
04-08-2021, 02:43 PM #1981Banned
- Join Date
- Oct 2003
- Location
- In Your Wife
- Posts
- 8,291
My skinny Q's have the heavy core with carbon, and a cherry veneer topsheet, flex 3.
My regular Q's have the enduro core with carbon, an oak veneer and are also flex 3.
I posted weights for them both somewhere on here, but I don't recall off the top of my head. The two skis are relatively close in weight though.
I think the skinny Q skis deep snow just fine. The motivation behind the regular width pair was to get a ski that performed a bit better in upside down snow, where having a ski plane out a bit higher in the snowpack is beneficial. I also got them thinking that the added surface area would be nice for skiing lower angle terrain.
Keep in mind I'm 5'7" and weigh around 150 pounds, so my experience with the ski is basically irrelevant to what yours will be.
-
04-08-2021, 02:48 PM #1982Registered User
- Join Date
- Feb 2010
- Location
- Oregon
- Posts
- 51
Heads up that CCR is the Praxis acronym for Continuous Curve Rocker, which is not the molding done on my Qs. CCR is full reverse camber from tip to tail, think pontoons or spatulas. My pair had a "compound camber" design, referring to two separate "pods" of camber fore and aft of boot center.
Unfortunately I no longer have those skis after I snapped one in a crash. Keith requested I send them back so he could inspect them, and he sent me some stock 182cm FRSs as a replacement. Hopefully resurrecting the compound camber Qs in "gen 2" variation for next season.
-
04-08-2021, 04:11 PM #1983
The Quixotes are a really compelling design. Very happy with my FRS but I think the Qs are gonna be my next buy from Praxis
aerospace eng with a gravity fetish
ig
-
04-08-2021, 06:13 PM #1984Registered User
- Join Date
- Nov 2016
- Posts
- 1,384
-
04-08-2021, 07:29 PM #1985
I don’t think they’re really phasing it out so much as it is a more complex shape. He only offers it on the “more difficult” and “most difficult” custom models.
Not certain about that however.
Tabke has won on both the Q and FRS, most recently on FRS however. They probably ski pretty similarly.aerospace eng with a gravity fetish
ig
-
04-08-2021, 07:35 PM #1986Registered User
- Join Date
- Nov 2015
- Location
- SLC
- Posts
- 954
Anyone been on both the FRS and Protest? Thinking about an early post grad school present to myself w/an UL Protest build. But currently have a custom FRS (UL, flat underfoot). Would probably part ways with it if I went with the Protest build.
-
04-08-2021, 07:54 PM #1987Registered User
- Join Date
- Mar 2021
- Posts
- 304
I put a lot of time on some 189, Heavy Hitter, #5 flex Rx a few years ago. I loved them. One of my favorite skis of all time. In fact, I'm thinking about having another one made. The only things that stand in the way are some 186cm Bodacious.
I'm wondering how it would feel with CCR, but would probably stick to the original camber profile if I went that road again. I loved it on anything firm or soft, one of the best 110-120mm skis I have used as a daily driver out west.
Compared to the BG I loved it just as much, just in a different way. The BG is better in funky or chunky snow, although the Rx is very good in that too with it's long radius and almost pin tail. Rx is a better on firm, it feels more like a 110mm ski. Again Rx a much better daily driver.
I can't believe it's such a love or hate ski.
-
04-08-2021, 08:02 PM #1988Registered User
- Join Date
- Nov 2016
- Posts
- 1,384
-
04-08-2021, 08:26 PM #1989
-
04-08-2021, 08:29 PM #1990Registered User
- Join Date
- Mar 2021
- Posts
- 304
-
04-08-2021, 08:46 PM #1991
-
04-08-2021, 09:09 PM #1992
I got the impression from Keith that after all the presale builds were done last year he just built out a grip of stock skis to sale with the large majority of his remaining materials as he wasn’t selling a lot of customs. So he wasn’t really building more stock as skis sold out. Don’t think the Q’s are going anywhere, he just sold his inventory. Seems to me that most folks around here dig em, I certainly do.
Fear, Doubt, Disbelief, you have to let it all go. Free your mind!
-
04-08-2021, 09:11 PM #1993Registered User
- Join Date
- Mar 2021
- Posts
- 304
I loved everything about my Skinny Q's except the Asym. I should have went with the normal Q width I think, asym makes more sense on wider skis.
-
04-08-2021, 11:22 PM #1994
I own 188 FRS in enduro/stock flex (4) and layup, and 187 Protest in MAP/carbon. Don't know the Protest flex but guessing a 3.
I don't love the FRS - it's a great freeride/comp/pow ski, but I didn't love it in resort chop after the first couple laps. I much preferred the Rustler 11s I skied the same day. But, take that with a grain of salt, as I did not like my 187 MVPs either, so maybe I just don't get along with that shape too well. Dunno. Both were flex 4. Longer thoughts from several on the FRS: https://www.tetongravity.com/forums/...duro?p=6274550
On the other hand, my Protests are cold dead hands skis. I LOVE touring in them. I just got some 196 enduro/flex 4 off gear swap for a resort pair to complement the 187s for touring. I've already skied about the scariest stuff of my non-scary-skiing-life on the 187s when they had alpine binders (Chimney Sweep and Middle Finger at Squaw if you're familiar), so they handle the technical stuff damn well. Need I mention how they ski pow, mank, crust, hot mush, evening funk, even refreeze?? They ski that shit awesome.sproing!
-
04-08-2021, 11:29 PM #1995Registered User
- Join Date
- Mar 2021
- Posts
- 304
-
04-09-2021, 05:09 AM #1996Banned
- Join Date
- Oct 2003
- Location
- In Your Wife
- Posts
- 8,291
Skiing is such a personal sport. As someone who owns both skinny and regular with Quixotes, I prefer the skinny ones in most conditions.
From the first turn I took on my Q's, I haven't given a single thought to the sidecut/asym. The only time it seemed odd was when I first took them out of the box.
-
04-09-2021, 06:14 AM #1997
-
04-09-2021, 07:56 AM #1998Registered User
- Join Date
- Mar 2020
- Posts
- 192
-
04-09-2021, 09:22 AM #1999Registered User
- Join Date
- Nov 2015
- Location
- SLC
- Posts
- 954
Thanks for the input man. I’m actually enjoying the FRS and had an old stock MVP at one point. I feel the FRS is an improvement in the MVP shape, feels a little more playful than the previous shape but still has the stability in chop. I just think for my pow touring ski that the Protest shape might be the ticket.
-
04-09-2021, 10:27 AM #2000Registered User
- Join Date
- Jan 2014
- Posts
- 865
What would people recommend as a "first praxis ski?" Im 6'1" 190, ski 90% in tahoe and have a 190 wct and a 184 dwt for touring along with a smattering of skinnier touring skis, and a 188 r11/ 191 ranger 102fr in bounds. Looking for something chargery for IB skiing in tahoe mank and deeper days, and dont really know if a protest fills that niche. I like the idea of supporting praxis and have always wanted a pair of em, where to start?
Bookmarks