Page 81 of 90 FirstFirst ... 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 ... LastLast
Results 2,001 to 2,025 of 2249
  1. #2001
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Park City
    Posts
    4,015
    192 GPO heavy hitter


    Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums
    I rip the groomed on tele gear

  2. #2002
    Join Date
    Nov 2015
    Location
    Reno, NV
    Posts
    481
    Alright, meter-man convinced me to go with a Protest. FRS on the right is up for grabs without binders. Can get recent photos up soon, some surface scratches otherwise in great shape. Thinking $300 plus shipping or pickup in Tahoe/Reno?Click image for larger version. 

Name:	88EB4BD7-1A6F-405C-A707-B85646498364.jpeg 
Views:	85 
Size:	270.2 KB 
ID:	371019Click image for larger version. 

Name:	EDD6F7CE-6023-4E70-BAF5-F764F5F211A7.jpeg 
Views:	76 
Size:	243.4 KB 
ID:	371020

  3. #2003
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Location
    Colorado Front Range
    Posts
    4,349
    Well, with help from @grinch, and everyone here, my geekng out kept to a minimum. Keith wrote back to me and agreed about my short list of a +10 GPO and an Ullr. He did muse for a moment about a +10 Ullr ).

    He verified what we discussed here, that an Ullr is very GPO Fat-like. The Ullr was however, designed for inbounds skiing - keeping the tail rocker a bit lower for riding the groomers back to the lift. If I were to go with an Ullr, he recommended a bit more tail rocker for a dedicated touring ski.

    He's built a few +10 GPOs and really liked the look of them. If anyone else said this, I'd say "yeah, but did you ski them?". Coming from Keith, I take this as the equivalent of a master luthier selecting wood and "tap tuning" it while shaving the bracing.

    This makes the decision for this GPO fanboi easy. I'll sit on it for a couple of days, but it's all but a done deal.

    The only thing that had me a bit hesitant about a +10 GPO (until getting Keith's approval), was that I didn't want to get into ski designer mode. I ain't that smart, and had memories of the misfire on the Wootest 1.0 ... that sizing wider/narrower doesn't necessarily translate into the same characteristics.

    Another thing he mentioned is that Tabke hasn't competed on softer than flex #3. I trust Keith's memory over Drew's on ski building parameters.

    ... Thom

    Quote Originally Posted by galibier_numero_un View Post
    Yeah, I suppose I'm worse ;-)

    CCR ... dang. Do I take the red pill?

    The Ullr seems to be the closest to a fat GPO and the slight bump to 23m radius is real close to what I've found my sweet spot to be (24). Slight variances in camber contact and effective edge.

    I might as well re-post the composite chart I compiled again ... for convenience (redundancy?) sake ... I corrected the +10 lenghs. I had erroneously added 2cm instead of 1cm.



    ... Thom
    Last edited by galibier_numero_un; 04-09-2021 at 08:05 PM.
    Galibier Design
    crafting technology in service of music

  4. #2004
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    in the trench
    Posts
    13,059
    Stoked for you Thom. It sounds great. Comforting to hear Keith give it his stamp of approval. His descriptions always make sense.

    Sent from my SM-G950W using TGR Forums mobile app

  5. #2005
    Join Date
    Jan 2018
    Posts
    229
    193 MVP 108, HH, 5fl, no carbs, no veneer

    See you on the other side.



    Sent from my SM-N981U using Tapatalk

  6. #2006
    Join Date
    Sep 2019
    Location
    CA
    Posts
    308
    Quote Originally Posted by bry View Post
    193 MVP 108, HH, 5fl, no carbs, no veneer

    See you on the other side.



    Sent from my SM-N981U using Tapatalk
    Theres a lot of rage in that build, congrats. Hope you make it.

  7. #2007
    Join Date
    May 2018
    Location
    NorCal
    Posts
    343
    What would the collective recommend for a ~105 waist ski to be used a few days after a storm in Tahoe. Think, dump on Thursday but I can't ski until Sat. So everything is tracked out, some aspects are sun affected but some have soft snow still. Bumps most places. Unfortunately I'm a weekend warrior so find myself skiing this a lot. I'm an ex racer so not really jibby/poppy. More going through things then off them...

    Currently have:
    on3p Woodsman 96: I love this ski. Use it low tide, spring, or dry periods. Almost might just want to get a 102 or 108 for this use but that would be a lot of overlap.
    Praxis Concept Custom HH, #3: Also love this ski anytime it's soft. I intentionally sized up a bit for this build so it struggles a bit in bumps in conditions described above.
    Praxis MVP 108 Stock: Use this for touring with tech bindings, I think it's not quite chargey enough for what I want inbounds. Maybe my solution is putting some alpine bindings on these but I am not convinced yet.

  8. #2008
    Join Date
    Mar 2020
    Posts
    150
    Personally I like my 185 9D8s with HH #4 in those conditions.

  9. #2009
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    F'n Midwest again
    Posts
    2,324
    Quote Originally Posted by davjr96 View Post
    What would the collective recommend for a ~105 waist ski to be used a few days after a storm in Tahoe. Think, dump on Thursday but I can't ski until Sat. So everything is tracked out, some aspects are sun affected but some have soft snow still. Bumps most places. Unfortunately I'm a weekend warrior so find myself skiing this a lot. I'm an ex racer so not really jibby/poppy. More going through things then off them...

    Currently have:
    on3p Woodsman 96: I love this ski. Use it low tide, spring, or dry periods. Almost might just want to get a 102 or 108 for this use but that would be a lot of overlap.
    Praxis Concept Custom HH, #3: Also love this ski anytime it's soft. I intentionally sized up a bit for this build so it struggles a bit in bumps in conditions described above.
    Praxis MVP 108 Stock: Use this for touring with tech bindings, I think it's not quite chargey enough for what I want inbounds. Maybe my solution is putting some alpine bindings on these but I am not convinced yet.
    FRD (Freeride) might be a good one here - 106 mm underfoot
    more directional ski
    stock is HH with carbon in flex 4 which I have in my Slugger (102 mm) underfoot.

    I'd consider going HH with no carbon (More Difficult Build) for what you want.
    Aggressive in my own mind

  10. #2010
    Join Date
    Sep 2019
    Location
    CA
    Posts
    308
    Quote Originally Posted by davjr96 View Post
    What would the collective recommend for a ~105 waist ski to be used a few days after a storm in Tahoe. Think, dump on Thursday but I can't ski until Sat. So everything is tracked out, some aspects are sun affected but some have soft snow still. Bumps most places. Unfortunately I'm a weekend warrior so find myself skiing this a lot. I'm an ex racer so not really jibby/poppy. More going through things then off them...

    Currently have:
    on3p Woodsman 96: I love this ski. Use it low tide, spring, or dry periods. Almost might just want to get a 102 or 108 for this use but that would be a lot of overlap.
    Praxis Concept Custom HH, #3: Also love this ski anytime it's soft. I intentionally sized up a bit for this build so it struggles a bit in bumps in conditions described above.
    Praxis MVP 108 Stock: Use this for touring with tech bindings, I think it's not quite chargey enough for what I want inbounds. Maybe my solution is putting some alpine bindings on these but I am not convinced yet.
    For not being Jibby/poppy you have 3 skis with relatively progressive mounts that reward a more neutral style. Id say remount the MVP and give it a solid go inbounds.

  11. #2011
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    500
    Quote Originally Posted by davjr96 View Post
    What would the collective recommend for a ~105 waist ski to be used a few days after a storm in Tahoe. Think, dump on Thursday but I can't ski until Sat. So everything is tracked out, some aspects are sun affected but some have soft snow still. Bumps most places. Unfortunately I'm a weekend warrior so find myself skiing this a lot. I'm an ex racer so not really jibby/poppy. More going through things then off them...

    Currently have:
    on3p Woodsman 96: I love this ski. Use it low tide, spring, or dry periods. Almost might just want to get a 102 or 108 for this use but that would be a lot of overlap.
    Praxis Concept Custom HH, #3: Also love this ski anytime it's soft. I intentionally sized up a bit for this build so it struggles a bit in bumps in conditions described above.
    Praxis MVP 108 Stock: Use this for touring with tech bindings, I think it's not quite chargey enough for what I want inbounds. Maybe my solution is putting some alpine bindings on these but I am not convinced yet.
    HH core BC!

  12. #2012
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    New Mexico
    Posts
    1,353
    Quote Originally Posted by hoarhey View Post
    FRD (Freeride) might be a good one here - 106 mm underfoot
    more directional ski
    stock is HH with carbon in flex 4 which I have in my Slugger (102 mm) underfoot.

    I'd consider going HH with no carbon (More Difficult Build) for what you want.
    This would be a good idea. Personally Id really consider a skny RX, HH sans carbon? Just a thought
    Fear, Doubt, Disbelief, you have to let it all go. Free your mind!

  13. #2013
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    The Shed of Incorruptible Veracity
    Posts
    8,145
    Think I'm going to give some GPO's a whirl. I was tempted by an in-bounds specific pair of Quixotes, but since I already own two pairs of them, I figure I'll try out a different shape this time.

    They'll end up with Pivots for resort powder days.

    Going with a 182 GPO, 3+ flex, Heavy Hitter core, cherry veneer. Should work well for me at 5'7" 150-155 pounds.
    Relentlessly pursuing beauty in an irredeemably ugly world.

  14. #2014
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    2,929
    Quote Originally Posted by glademaster View Post
    Think I'm going to give some GPO's a whirl. I was tempted by an in-bounds specific pair of Quixotes, but since I already own two pairs of them, I figure I'll try out a different shape this time.

    They'll end up with Pivots for resort powder days.

    Going with a 182 GPO, 3+ flex, Heavy Hitter core, cherry veneer. Should work well for me at 5'7" 150-155 pounds.
    Glade, I am sure as you already know you just cant go wrong with the GPO... I have both the Q in a 194 and 192 GPO and love them both but if I had to give one up it would be the Q... The GPO is a Swiss Army knife and a ski that is you would have to pry them from my dead hands ski... They just do so many things well... The only thing I wish was they were heavy hitter... This was not an option when I ordered mine and would just be that much better in Fd up snow...

    And congrats...!


    Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

  15. #2015
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    F'n Midwest again
    Posts
    2,324
    Quote Originally Posted by glademaster View Post
    Think I'm going to give some GPO's a whirl. I was tempted by an in-bounds specific pair of Quixotes, but since I already own two pairs of them, I figure I'll try out a different shape this time.

    They'll end up with Pivots for resort powder days.

    Going with a 182 GPO, 3+ flex, Heavy Hitter core, cherry veneer. Should work well for me at 5'7" 150-155 pounds.
    Excellent choice!

    If I bought another 182 GPO for inbounds use, it would be heavy hitter core, I think, or at least Enduro, but no carbon.
    Aggressive in my own mind

  16. #2016
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Valley
    Posts
    376
    Quote Originally Posted by glademaster View Post
    Think I'm going to give some GPO's a whirl. I was tempted by an in-bounds specific pair of Quixotes, but since I already own two pairs of them, I figure I'll try out a different shape this time.

    They'll end up with Pivots for resort powder days.

    Going with a 182 GPO, 3+ flex, Heavy Hitter core, cherry veneer. Should work well for me at 5'7" 150-155 pounds.
    Not sure what your normal ski size range is but...I will say that I bought a standard edition 182 GPO this year and wish so bad that I went with the 187. I'm 5'8" (barely) and 190# semi-beater skier. I commented to Keith that they seemed to ski short and maybe they were just that easy to ski. He agreed and recommended that I try a 187 (probably ordering one now). Something to think about.

  17. #2017
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Location
    Colorado Front Range
    Posts
    4,349
    Quote Originally Posted by CovertM View Post
    Not sure what your normal ski size range is but...I will say that I bought a standard edition 182 GPO this year and wish so bad that I went with the 187. I'm 5'8" (barely) and 190# semi-beater skier. I commented to Keith that they seemed to ski short and maybe they were just that easy to ski. He agreed and recommended that I try a 187 (probably ordering one now). Something to think about.
    The 187 GPOs skied like my 182 Qs, and my 182 CD 114s.

    That was a key reason for my swapping the 187s for 182s - for a bit of variety. The Qs are gone, and the Downs and 182 GPOs compliment each other.

    For me, it's more about where I ski. I appreciate the shorter GPOs in tight trees.

    I'm not sure if I'm up to heavy hitter (5'9", 165#), but I'm 100% sold on veneer's ability to damp without making a ski feel dead.

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

  18. #2018
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Posts
    86
    Quote Originally Posted by davjr96 View Post
    What would the collective recommend for a ~105 waist ski to be used a few days after a storm in Tahoe. Think, dump on Thursday but I can't ski until Sat. So everything is tracked out, some aspects are sun affected but some have soft snow still. Bumps most places. Unfortunately I'm a weekend warrior so find myself skiing this a lot. I'm an ex racer so not really jibby/poppy. More going through things then off them...

    Currently have:
    on3p Woodsman 96: I love this ski. Use it low tide, spring, or dry periods. Almost might just want to get a 102 or 108 for this use but that would be a lot of overlap.
    Praxis Concept Custom HH, #3: Also love this ski anytime it's soft. I intentionally sized up a bit for this build so it struggles a bit in bumps in conditions described above.
    Praxis MVP 108 Stock: Use this for touring with tech bindings, I think it's not quite chargey enough for what I want inbounds. Maybe my solution is putting some alpine bindings on these but I am not convinced yet.
    Id also rec the FRD but keep it Easy Build amd add veneer to smooth it out even more. If you want a resort charger, thats an excellent ski across conditions and great value with HH + carbon at the Easy price.

    Would slot nicely in your quiver. Only question would be the size? I had 174 which was surprisingly stable at that length but just a little squirrelly when it got over 50. Tried a 184 which felt long. If youre between sizes a HH backcountry in 180 would also rip. Fantastic shape if you want something looser than FRD

  19. #2019
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Posts
    86
    Quote Originally Posted by Westcoaster View Post
    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?
    I have 184 Wildcat 116 (19-20) and FR102s along with 182 GPOs and 182 Quixote and love all those skis for charge-y, slashy Tahoe skiing.

    Had OG 188 Protests and selling them was a terrible decision. They absolutely rip in heavy Tahoe dumps and skipped over chop and mank like nothing.

    At your size a HH or enduro core + veneer would be a machine for deep and cut up resort days and would sit nicely at the top of your resort quiver. They are stupid fun and I need to get a new pair

  20. #2020
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    2,929
    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	IMG_1204.JPG 
Views:	83 
Size:	232.5 KB 
ID:	371123

    Must resist... I think it was already asked but when does the sale date end...


    Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

  21. #2021
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    in the trench
    Posts
    13,059
    Love the hh core. No veneer? Veneer is awesome. Sale went quite long last year

    Sent from my SM-G950W using TGR Forums mobile app

  22. #2022
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    2,929
    Quote Originally Posted by grinch View Post
    Love the hh core. No veneer? Veneer is awesome. Sale went quite long last year

    Sent from my SM-G950W using TGR Forums mobile app
    I have the veneer on my custom Qs and honestly did not hold up well for me... Now I went cherry top sheet but it scratched like crazy and side walls were a pain... I travel a lot for work so in my bag they get Fd up... My nylon top sheets are low maintenance... The heavy hitter core is key for me...


    Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

  23. #2023
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Golden, CO
    Posts
    2,282
    I did the HH + carbonz on one build and love it. I'd bet the stock HH core is teh tittays as well.

  24. #2024
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    New Mexico
    Posts
    1,353

    2018-19 Praxis Skis Info and Resource Thread

    HH for inbounds for me no question
    Fear, Doubt, Disbelief, you have to let it all go. Free your mind!

  25. #2025
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    in the trench
    Posts
    13,059
    Quote Originally Posted by Undertow View Post
    I have the veneer on my custom Qs and honestly did not hold up well for me... Now I went cherry top sheet but it scratched like crazy and side walls were a pain... I travel a lot for work so in my bag they get Fd up... My nylon top sheets are low maintenance... The heavy hitter core is key for me...


    Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums
    Oh ok. I had good luck with the veers i had. No top sheet chips like my nylon top gpo. I think they were maple ambrosia. Another one too i cant remember. That was a bonus but they ski so well. Added dampness but i could still pop and they save pretty much the same weight as carbon. Thom got a recommendation, from Iggy? or Scott?, on a stain/laquer that makes them super brilliant and much more durable. Veneer looks great but that coating was crazy good looking. Hopefully he'll add/correct some of my memory on this.
    My gpo's are still going from the original pressing year. My other skis havent chipped as much so maybe there an anomaly. My veneers did seem to fair better than all the nylons though. Not sure if it was the particular veneers i picked or luck. Thought that stain would just remove any worries for my next pair though

    Sent from my SM-G950W using TGR Forums mobile app

Posting Permissions

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