Page 89 of 91 FirstFirst ... 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 LastLast
Results 2,201 to 2,225 of 2252
  1. #2201
    Join Date
    Oct 2016
    Location
    tahoe de chingao
    Posts
    760
    Quote Originally Posted by AEV View Post
    I want to try regular Quixotes
    if you're at the wood or rose next year hmu. you'd like em they're better at skiing fast than a bibby and break loose just as easier if not easier. not as playful tho

    Quote Originally Posted by flyingskiguy View Post
    Order is in for the second iteration of the compound camber Quixote. Longer ski, heavier core, more tip rocker, shorter more aggressive camber sections, and maple veneer beneath the "watershed" graphic. Keith is the man and I'm stoked to see how the ski turns out.
    how long are you going on these??

  2. #2202
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Middle of Norway.
    Posts
    2,080
    Quote Originally Posted by I've seen black diamonds! View Post
    Nothing yet. I sent Keith some image files for the text and the guitar silhouette. I also sent him some images of waveforms from the opening lines of Sharon Jones' cover of "This Land is Your Land" that I may put on the tails if it looks good in a mock up. The waveforms are about 40cm long, but won't cover too much of the wood.

    Keith is going to put the graphics together and send it my way before pressing the skis, but that won't be for over a month. I'll attach the images to this post. The waveforms have a transparent background so they may not display properly on the TGR blue background. Just click them.

    If anyone wants to use this graphic or contribute to its improvement that's fine by me. The guitar image could be better for sure. I'm looking for something. Apparently Woody mostly played on a predecessor to the Gibson J-45, so I may try to create something based around that.



    Attachment 374390

    Attachment 374391

    Attachment 374392

    Attachment 374393
    If Keith brings out this graphic, its going on my custom Praxis, whenever it comes to fruition:

    https://r.tapatalk.com/shareLink/top...ink_source=app

    Sent fra min LYA-L29 via Tapatalk

  3. #2203
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Oregon
    Posts
    22
    Quote Originally Posted by sruffian View Post
    how long are you going on these??
    188cm. First build was 182cm, flex 3, UL+C core, no veneer. This build is 188cm, still flex 3, but with enduro core and veneer, as well as the mentioned tweaks to camber/rocker profile.

  4. #2204
    Join Date
    Oct 2016
    Location
    tahoe de chingao
    Posts
    760
    Quote Originally Posted by flyingskiguy View Post
    188cm. First build was 182cm, flex 3, UL+C core, no veneer. This build is 188cm, still flex 3, but with enduro core and veneer, as well as the mentioned tweaks to camber/rocker profile.
    very very interested in how that turns out

  5. #2205
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    The Dirty E
    Posts
    898
    Quote Originally Posted by flyingskiguy View Post
    188cm. First build was 182cm, flex 3, UL+C core, no veneer. This build is 188cm, still flex 3, but with enduro core and veneer, as well as the mentioned tweaks to camber/rocker profile.
    I'm talking to Keith about maybe doing the same thing but in a -10mm build and 182. Curious about the mount, though. I have 182 GPOs that I like at a -1.5, and a Protest at a -2...so I'd normally be thinking I'd like these at a similar setback, but wondering if that'll be screwy with the camber pockets. How were your originals mounted?

  6. #2206
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    CA
    Posts
    2,402
    Anybody ski the BC in recent years?

    I had a couple pairs of BCs back in the day (6+ years ago), and wondering how the current construction stacks up now that other companies finally make good touring skis.

    Specifically, I'd be comparing them against Moment Wildcat Tour 108s. I've also been on Backland 107 and 4FRNT Ravens recently. But I seem to recall having the most fun on my BCs! The newest reviews I'm finding are from 2013/2014 time frame...so whatcha got?
    sproing!

  7. #2207
    Join Date
    Nov 2015
    Location
    Reno, NV
    Posts
    481
    Quote Originally Posted by meter-man View Post
    Anybody ski the BC in recent years?

    I had a couple pairs of BCs back in the day (6+ years ago), and wondering how the current construction stacks up now that other companies finally make good touring skis.

    Specifically, I'd be comparing them against Moment Wildcat Tour 108s. I've also been on Backland 107 and 4FRNT Ravens recently. But I seem to recall having the most fun on my BCs! The newest reviews I'm finding are from 2013/2014 time frame...so whatcha got?
    I had the BC from 3 seasons ago and sold them for the WCT 108s. I can't compare to the previous construction of the BC's but can compare them to the WCT 108s. I wanted a ski with a little more backbone in less than perfect snow and the WCTs definitely hit the mark compared to the BCs. They're a little bit heavier and slightly stiffer underfoot and just in front of your boot so they perform a bit better in mixed conditions. In perfect pow I didn't really notice much difference between the two.

  8. #2208
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    CA
    Posts
    2,402
    Quote Originally Posted by GoSlowGoFar View Post
    I had the BC from 3 seasons ago and sold them for the WCT 108s. I can't compare to the previous construction of the BC's but can compare them to the WCT 108s. I wanted a ski with a little more backbone in less than perfect snow and the WCTs definitely hit the mark compared to the BCs. They're a little bit heavier and slightly stiffer underfoot and just in front of your boot so they perform a bit better in mixed conditions. In perfect pow I didn't really notice much difference between the two.
    Hello from 20 miles away! Thanks - that's great, and spot on - even for our Sierra snow. Much appreciated. Guess we should have a WCT108 party out on Rose next wintah.
    sproing!

  9. #2209
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    CO
    Posts
    2,220
    Curious about opinions on the MVP 108. I've heard mixed things about the MVP and a lot of reviews seem to be dependent on the edge tune so it's hard to get a consistent read on them. I'm interested in a daily inbounds ski to go between a pair of PB&J's and Bibbys, both of which I love. It's definitely not a quiver gap that needs to be filled and would be a completely unnecessary purchase but I've always wanted to get on a pair of Praxis and this sale is hard to pass up. The MVP seems like it could be a nice middle ground that floats a bit better than the PBJ but is quicker in bumps and firmer conditions than the Bibby while still retaining that playful charger feel, but this is mostly based on speculation. If the MVP doesn't make sense I might just say fuck it and get a pair of Protests
    Quote Originally Posted by other grskier View Post
    well, in the three years i've been skiing i bet i can ski most anything those 'pro's' i listed can, probably

  10. #2210
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Vinyl Valley
    Posts
    1,452
    Quote Originally Posted by Wes Mantooth View Post
    Curious about opinions on the MVP 108. I've heard mixed things about the MVP and a lot of reviews seem to be dependent on the edge tune so it's hard to get a consistent read on them. I'm interested in a daily inbounds ski to go between a pair of PB&J's and Bibbys, both of which I love. It's definitely not a quiver gap that needs to be filled and would be a completely unnecessary purchase but I've always wanted to get on a pair of Praxis and this sale is hard to pass up. The MVP seems like it could be a nice middle ground that floats a bit better than the PBJ but is quicker in bumps and firmer conditions than the Bibby while still retaining that playful charger feel, but this is mostly based on speculation. If the MVP doesn't make sense I might just say fuck it and get a pair of Protests
    The MVP is my middle ski of a 3 ski quiver. Been using a 186 Dynastar LP for frozen/hard snow, 190 Bibby for deeper snow and a 187 MVP for everything in-between. Had a couple of pairs of 193 MVP but am trying the shorter length this time.

    The MVP is such a versatile ski. I'm a resort rat, inbounds only, and the MVP handles the chopped up, rutted out, junky trash snow so well. I need to travel to ski in the mountains and if I'm taking 1 ski, it's the MVP.

  11. #2211
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Juneau
    Posts
    941
    Quote Originally Posted by meter-man View Post
    Anybody ski the BC in recent years?

    I had a couple pairs of BCs back in the day (6+ years ago), and wondering how the current construction stacks up now that other companies finally make good touring skis.

    Specifically, I'd be comparing them against Moment Wildcat Tour 108s. I've also been on Backland 107 and 4FRNT Ravens recently. But I seem to recall having the most fun on my BCs! The newest reviews I'm finding are from 2013/2014 time frame...so whatcha got?
    BCs were my every day touring ski this winter and I absolutely loved them (veneer, enduro with carbon, #3). I can't compare them to those you've listed but they are very fun in most conditions and super responsive in trees and tight spaces.

  12. #2212
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    CO
    Posts
    2,220
    Quote Originally Posted by skuff View Post
    The MVP is my middle ski of a 3 ski quiver. Been using a 186 Dynastar LP for frozen/hard snow, 190 Bibby for deeper snow and a 187 MVP for everything in-between. Had a couple of pairs of 193 MVP but am trying the shorter length this time.

    The MVP is such a versatile ski. I'm a resort rat, inbounds only, and the MVP handles the chopped up, rutted out, junky trash snow so well. I need to travel to ski in the mountains and if I'm taking 1 ski, it's the MVP.
    Good info thanks! How do you find the stock flex to be? Iím toying with getting them stiffer since I usually like pretty stiff skis but donít want to sacrifice their playfulness. Iíd say I prioritize being able to go fast and straight but like jibbing around on side hits
    Quote Originally Posted by other grskier View Post
    well, in the three years i've been skiing i bet i can ski most anything those 'pro's' i listed can, probably

  13. #2213
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Vinyl Valley
    Posts
    1,452
    Quote Originally Posted by Wes Mantooth View Post
    Good info thanks! How do you find the stock flex to be? Iím toying with getting them stiffer since I usually like pretty stiff skis but donít want to sacrifice their playfulness. Iíd say I prioritize being able to go fast and straight but like jibbing around on side hits
    I've had 3 pairs of MVP, 2 at 193cm and 1 at 187cm. The first pair of 193 was a 4 flex and was too stiff for me, so I got another MVP at 3.5 flex that felt much better. I could bend the ski more easily but tight trees were still lots of work. Now I have a 187 3.5 flex MVP that feels good but I've used them only about 2500' vertical for the entire past season... so grain of salt and all that.

    6' 1" 175lbs, ancient

    edit: The new 187s I bought and used this past season are the 109mm version with heavy hitter, carbon, veneer. The first pair I bought were 13/14 193cm 4flex 110mm enduro, nylon topsheet. 2nd pair were 13/14 193cm 3.5flex 110 enduro nylon topsheet
    Last edited by skuff; 06-17-2021 at 10:28 PM.

  14. #2214
    Join Date
    Mar 2020
    Posts
    150
    Quote Originally Posted by Wes Mantooth View Post
    Good info thanks! How do you find the stock flex to be? Iím toying with getting them stiffer since I usually like pretty stiff skis but donít want to sacrifice their playfulness. Iíd say I prioritize being able to go fast and straight but like jibbing around on side hits
    Keep in mind that the ski stiffness levels are relative within the Praxis line. Kieth says the ratings are consistent from model to model so a #4 9D8 is the same stiffness as a #4 MVP, #4 RX etc. I have not hand flexed the PBJs or the Bibby's so I can't compare the Praxis #4 to those. I can tell you though that my #4 flex 9D8s are softer than my ON3P Billy Goats and Woodsmans. The #4 flex is very similar, maybe ever so slightly softer, to my Mindbender 108s. Hope this helps.

    I have a #4 RX coming this summer, it will be interesting to see how the flex on those compare to the 9D8s.

  15. #2215
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Not Brooklyn
    Posts
    7,360
    Quote Originally Posted by Quandary View Post
    Keep in mind that the ski stiffness levels are relative within the Praxis line. Kieth says the ratings are consistent from model to model so a #4 9D8 is the same stiffness as a #4 MVP, #4 RX etc. I have not hand flexed the PBJs or the Bibby's so I can't compare the Praxis #4 to those. I can tell you though that my #4 flex 9D8s are softer than my ON3P Billy Goats and Woodsmans. The #4 flex is very similar, maybe ever so slightly softer, to my Mindbender 108s. Hope this helps.

    I have a #4 RX coming this summer, it will be interesting to see how the flex on those compare to the 9D8s.
    ^^^^^ my flex 4 GPOs we're stiffer than my Billy Goats.

    Sent from my Pixel 3a using Tapatalk

  16. #2216
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Posts
    768
    Quote Originally Posted by Wes Mantooth View Post
    Curious about opinions on the MVP 108. I've heard mixed things about the MVP and a lot of reviews seem to be dependent on the edge tune so it's hard to get a consistent read on them. I'm interested in a daily inbounds ski to go between a pair of PB&J's and Bibbys, both of which I love. It's definitely not a quiver gap that needs to be filled and would be a completely unnecessary purchase but I've always wanted to get on a pair of Praxis and this sale is hard to pass up. The MVP seems like it could be a nice middle ground that floats a bit better than the PBJ but is quicker in bumps and firmer conditions than the Bibby while still retaining that playful charger feel, but this is mostly based on speculation. If the MVP doesn't make sense I might just say fuck it and get a pair of Protests
    In the minority here, but I didn't like the MVP (slightly older 109 version). Dulling the edges helped significantly but I thought the ski felt dead and a lot of work in tight trees. Ended up going with the jeffery 108 to fill this slot and love it. Most people really like the MVP though and at that price its probably worth a shot or for a lighter version buy my veneer MVPs this fall

  17. #2217
    Join Date
    Mar 2020
    Posts
    150
    Quote Originally Posted by I've seen black diamonds! View Post
    ^^^^^ my flex 4 GPOs we're stiffer than my Billy Goats.

    Sent from my Pixel 3a using Tapatalk
    What years were they? Flex them side by side? If both newish and you flexed side by side so that you are not working from memory then one of the manufacturers have a consistency problem or a #4 flex is in fact not necessarily consistent model to model. I won't be able to judge that until i have my RXs in hand.

  18. #2218
    Join Date
    Oct 2016
    Location
    tahoe de chingao
    Posts
    760
    Quote Originally Posted by Quandary View Post
    Keep in mind that the ski stiffness levels are relative within the Praxis line. Kieth says the ratings are consistent from model to model so a #4 9D8 is the same stiffness as a #4 MVP, #4 RX etc. I have not hand flexed the PBJs or the Bibby's so I can't compare the Praxis #4 to those. I can tell you though that my #4 flex 9D8s are softer than my ON3P Billy Goats and Woodsmans. The #4 flex is very similar, maybe ever so slightly softer, to my Mindbender 108s. Hope this helps.

    I have a #4 RX coming this summer, it will be interesting to see how the flex on those compare to the 9D8s.
    Concur on the #4 being less stiff than 12-13 billy goats.

    For a moment comparison - I would say a #4 flex is right in line with a pair of 2013 bibby's I had, close to meridians and mayyyybe a hair stiffer than a pbj. #3 flex is softer than all of those moments in my experience. The praxis standard layup is pretty dialed for maritime snowpacks for me at weights between 175lbs and 190lbs

  19. #2219
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Oregon
    Posts
    22
    Quote Originally Posted by cstefanic View Post
    I'm talking to Keith about maybe doing the same thing but in a -10mm build and 182. Curious about the mount, though. I have 182 GPOs that I like at a -1.5, and a Protest at a -2...so I'd normally be thinking I'd like these at a similar setback, but wondering if that'll be screwy with the camber pockets. How were your originals mounted?
    Nice! I think the compound camber will be so awesome on a skinny Q too. Perhaps even more suited to it! I think that wherever you mount them, you'll want that underfoot rocker section to be, well, underfoot. My 182 Qs with the compound camber were mounted on the line and skied wonderfully. My advice is start at the recommended point and see how it feels.

  20. #2220
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    CO
    Posts
    2,220
    Quote Originally Posted by sruffian View Post
    Concur on the #4 being less stiff than 12-13 billy goats.

    For a moment comparison - I would say a #4 flex is right in line with a pair of 2013 bibby's I had, close to meridians and mayyyybe a hair stiffer than a pbj. #3 flex is softer than all of those moments in my experience. The praxis standard layup is pretty dialed for maritime snowpacks for me at weights between 175lbs and 190lbs
    Cool good to know. I'm really happy with the PB&J flex it holds up at speed in variable conditions but also plays and butters around nicely so sounds like stock #4 flex is the way to go. I'm thinking the standard layup will work fine too. I'm not in a maritime snowpack but should be just as good here in CO. Plus I can save some money that way. Now I just need to figure out which graphic to choose which I feel like is the hardest part of Praxis custom orders. I'm into the black snek
    Quote Originally Posted by other grskier View Post
    well, in the three years i've been skiing i bet i can ski most anything those 'pro's' i listed can, probably

  21. #2221
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Not Brooklyn
    Posts
    7,360
    Quote Originally Posted by Quandary View Post
    What years were they? Flex them side by side? If both newish and you flexed side by side so that you are not working from memory then one of the manufacturers have a consistency problem or a #4 flex is in fact not necessarily consistent model to model. I won't be able to judge that until i have my RXs in hand.
    Not flexed side by side. Billy Goats are older (last year of the 186 length?) and more used. IIRC they are softer than most years. But I'm sure the GPOs (which I sold) were stiffer. The BG's flex more like my flex 3 Protests (BG's are a stiffer underfoot, but similar overall).

    Consistency of flex across models can only go so far, unless you want every model to have the same flex pattern. Some skis are stiff underfoot and softer at the ends. Some are more even from tip to tail. The flex has to match the other elements of the skis design. My flex 3 BC's were a good bit softer at the tips than my flex 3 Protests. I have flex 3 UL GPO's that are softer than the Protests underfoot, but similar at the tip and tail. I think the tips on my flex 4 GPO's were stiffer than the tips of the Freerides I briefly owned too.

  22. #2222
    Join Date
    Mar 2020
    Posts
    150
    Quote Originally Posted by I've seen black diamonds! View Post
    Not flexed side by side. Billy Goats are older (last year of the 186 length?) and more used. IIRC they are softer than most years. But I'm sure the GPOs (which I sold) were stiffer. The BG's flex more like my flex 3 Protests (BG's are a stiffer underfoot, but similar overall).

    Consistency of flex across models can only go so far, unless you want every model to have the same flex pattern. Some skis are stiff underfoot and softer at the ends. Some are more even from tip to tail. The flex has to match the other elements of the skis design. My flex 3 BC's were a good bit softer at the tips than my flex 3 Protests. I have flex 3 UL GPO's that are softer than the Protests underfoot, but similar at the tip and tail. I think the tips on my flex 4 GPO's were stiffer than the tips of the Freerides I briefly owned too.
    Absolutely agree with comments. Of course skis will have to be different relative flexes depending on the skis' design and purpose. Perhaps i am taking keith's comments too literally. Maybe it is more if you really like the #4 flex in the 9D8, ie a ski on the stiffer side for praxis, you will want the #4 flex in our other models, on a "relative scale" that will give you a ski you like. (of course depending on whether you are going for say a mellow ski vs a chargy ski) Not that a #4 flex is the SAME across the line.

    However that said, as for the skis i have in my house the BGs (184s) and Woodsman 116s (182s) are definitely a fair bit stiffer than my HH #4 core 9D8s (185s).

  23. #2223
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Location
    Colorado Front Range
    Posts
    4,349
    Quote Originally Posted by Quandary View Post
    Absolutely agree with comments. Of course skis will have to be different relative flexes depending on the skis' design and purpose. Perhaps i am taking keith's comments too literally. Maybe it is more if you really like the #4 flex in the 9D8, ie a ski on the stiffer side for praxis, you will want the #4 flex in our other models, on a "relative scale" that will give you a ski you like. (of course depending on whether you are going for say a mellow ski vs a chargy ski) Not that a #4 flex is the SAME across the line.

    However that said, as for the skis i have in my house the BGs (184s) and Woodsman 116s (182s) are definitely a fair bit stiffer than my HH #4 core 9D8s (185s).
    @ISBD's 2014 BGs (the last year of the 186 length) are a softer ski than the next gen. (184) which I also owned. How much of this has to do with use (I bought 'em from @lucknau and passed them along to @ISBD), I can't say. @lucknau is a pretty big boy so he might have punished them ;-)

    ... Thom
    Galibier Design
    crafting technology in service of music

  24. #2224
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Posts
    125
    Quote Originally Posted by meter-man View Post
    Anybody ski the BC in recent years?

    I had a couple pairs of BCs back in the day (6+ years ago), and wondering how the current construction stacks up now that other companies finally make good touring skis.

    Specifically, I'd be comparing them against Moment Wildcat Tour 108s. I've also been on Backland 107 and 4FRNT Ravens recently. But I seem to recall having the most fun on my BCs! The newest reviews I'm finding are from 2013/2014 time frame...so whatcha got?

    I have a BC 190 flex #4 with veneer from last year, mounted with shifts, and I love them. I've ended up skiing them inbounds more than out of bounds, and they handle everything super well, at least in the PNW. A real no-nonsense, easy ski. I'm 6'4, 220, which is why I upped the flex to 4 on Keith's recommendation (and I was mounting them with shifts anyway so not crazy concerned about weight).

    For comparison, I've skied the ravens a couple of days inbounds (also with shifts), and it was low tide so didn't get them in their element, but the BCs are more fun in firmer conditions, as you'd expect. Can't make a comparison in powder, though I'm sure the reverse camber would make the raven an easier ski to pivot.

    I've also skied the 4FRNT Hoji extensively (older, heavier version in a 195, has a similar construction to the Raven) and absolutely love that ski. The BC obviously has a better edge hold in firmer conditions, but once you're in softer conditions, I feel like the Hoji and the BC can be skied in a surprisingly similar way (both skis are mounted on the line), i.e. very centered. And they both crush.

  25. #2225
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Posts
    125
    Quote Originally Posted by Quandary View Post
    Absolutely agree with comments. Of course skis will have to be different relative flexes depending on the skis' design and purpose. Perhaps i am taking keith's comments too literally. Maybe it is more if you really like the #4 flex in the 9D8, ie a ski on the stiffer side for praxis, you will want the #4 flex in our other models, on a "relative scale" that will give you a ski you like. (of course depending on whether you are going for say a mellow ski vs a chargy ski) Not that a #4 flex is the SAME across the line.

    However that said, as for the skis i have in my house the BGs (184s) and Woodsman 116s (182s) are definitely a fair bit stiffer than my HH #4 core 9D8s (185s).
    I remember Keith telling me that the flex of his skis are consistent across models, in that he uses a machine to measure the flex of his skis. But I agree that the flex profile is going to be different for each model, so I'm not sure how his machine works exactly. Also, why does Keith never come on the forum to answer his fanboys' questions?

Posting Permissions

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