Fat touring ski stiffness check

Did this a while ago and forgot all about it, but maybe it'll help people make some decisions. Did some comparisons of flexes of the 186 Dynafit Huscaran, 188 BD Carbon Megawatt and 191 Voile Charger. Also flexed my 11/12 ON3P 191 Wrenegade as well, which is similar in design to these skis. For reference, my Wrens are stiffer than the 12/13 and 13/14 versions, and about the same as next year's 14/15 version - the tip is similarly stiff to the 191 12/13 Billygoats, but the tail on the Billygoats is noticably softer (and obviously rockered). Based on my experience with PM Gear skis, my guess is that the Lhasa would be similar to the ON3P Wrenegade, but a little less stiff in the tip. A custom stiff flex in the Lhases would likely be a tad bit stiffer than the Wrenegade. No real strong knowledge about where a Praxis ski would lie, but their stiff flex is likely slightly softer than the Wrenegade and similar to the Lhasa in a stock flex. Note that I have NOT skied any of these, except for my Wrenegades - this is just a hand flex profile for those that find meaning in such a measurement.

10 = stiff, 1 = soft

End of Tail
Wrenegade/Charger 8
Huscaran/Megawatt 6

Tail
Wrenegade/Charger 9
Huscaran 8
Megawatt 6

Underfoot
Wrenegade/Charger/Huscaran 9
Megawatt 7

Tip
Wrenegade 8
Charger/Huscaran 7
Megawatt 6

End of Tip
Wrenegade/Charger/Huscaran 7
Megawatt 6

The Megawatt tends to have a rounder flex than the other skis, but is MUCH softer overall. The Charger has a noticably unbalanced flex towards the rear of the ski. The Wrenegade a little less-so. The Huscaran is a little more balanced with being quite a bit softer at the very very end of the tail. It's hard to get a proper tail flex on the Huscaran because of this. The Wrenegade with its stiffer tip will probably charge a bit better in snow that provides more resistance and density. This stiffer tip profile compared to other skis is pretty common across the entire line of ON3P skis, and is probably what gives it better charging capability in PNW and other similarly-dense snow.

Again, no skiing was done on these except for my Wrenegades, but maybe this is still useful for someone. I was surprised by how stupid-soft the carbon Megawatts are. For the carbon that is supposedly in them, they really feel like a noodle. The carbon must be very minimal (cheap). Was pretty bummed, because I like the idea of that ski. I was also surprised by the stiffness of the Huscaran. I didn't expect that at all - seems like it would be good ski, especially considering that I liked the camber profile so much (see below). Not sure about durability though.

EDIT: Oh, I also forgot to add in a description of the camber/rocker profile:

Tip:
The Charger and Megawatt had similar tip rocker height. The tip rocker in the Megawatt ran noticably deeper towards the center of the ski, probably by about 25%. The Huscaran and Charger had similar depth to their rocker. The Huscaran had noticably less tip rocker height - much much less, about 50% less than the Charger/Megawatt.

Underfoot:
The Charger had the most camber. The Megawatt had about 75% as much camber as the Charger underfoot. The Huscaran had very little camber. Maybe 10% of what the Charger had.

Tail:
All three skis had very limited rocker in the tail. The Megawatt had the most by maybe 50%, the Charger and the Huscaran were similar. I'd call all of them almost flat in the tail, with a little bit of a mellow, longer twin kick.