2018-19 Praxis Skis Info and Resource Thread

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HukuTa_KydecHuk

That's one of the reasons for changing JJs, something more versatile needed. We usually chase snowstorms in our trips so resort conditions are chopped pow/soft bumps. When resort gets tracked out we just go out and tour... After switching from JJs, did you feel GPOs were too locked? Are they easy to shut down in trees?

---

Given your storm chasing habits, honestly the GPO sounds pretty perfect. I find the Q better at resort chop, but the GPO is the overall more user friendly ski, and doesn't require nearly as much fall line speed to come alive. As Danny beautifully put, its very easy to shut down and thread tight tree lines. IMO the only wide praxis ski better at trees is the Concept, which pivots instantly.

JMARs, thanks for the initial thoughts review of the -10 protest. I've also struggled with the width of the Protest in mank

Jmars-Good stuff, thanks. look forward to hearing how it works out. I do find that I really stand up on Protests so I totally agree with you on part of her issue is being used to driving skis. This is a pretty fun experiment to follow, appreciate the updates.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HukuTa_KydecHuk

We usually chase snowstorms in our trips so resort conditions are chopped pow/soft bumps. When resort gets tracked out we just go out and tour.
... After switching from JJs, did you feel GPOs were too locked? Are they easy to shut down in trees?

---

GPOs are outrageously good in resort chop. I love my BC’s so much for touring though, I’m skeptical that I’d ever want to mount touring bindings on my GPO. Something about that shark nose on the GPO that doesn’t float as well as the BC unless it’s mounted like -2 behind the line, and it’s such a stiffer nose that doesn’t pull itself up like a softer BC nose.

The GPO does shut down and come around with ease if you de-tune it, I feel like the level of looseness vs how locked in is controlled by how much you detune the contact points. I like this ski best with a really aggressively de-tuned tail (softened well at the widest point of the tail and 1-2 cm into the sidecut) and a very mild detune up front (only on the reverse sidecut portion). This makes it engage edge and turn initiation really fast for a 116 waist ski, still hold the line, but release when you want even if still in the backseat or not perfectly unweighted.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jmars

"Wife-Test"....minus 10 Protest 177, ...

I'd watch her downhill ski not come around as she tried to drive.

---

Did you de tune the Protest before skiing it? I’m sure part of it is stance (the original BC’s had the dimple something like -12 cm from ski center before moving forward 2 cm) but I even disliked the first hour on my BC’s before softening the edges at the reverse sidecut areas, and I could not release the tails on the GPO to save my life until I went crazy with the file (45 degree angle and rounded the shit out of the reverse sidecut sections) ... now I love my GPO and can make mostly any shape turn I want.

The Protest has to be much stiffer at tip and tail rocker transition zones than the BC, which probably keeps those areas way more engaged when your wife is trying to release them. I only weigh 130 lbs so I know what it’s like trying to drive a bigger ski with a stiffer wide nose.
Oh yeah, remind us which flex you went with on the skinny Protest? I wonder how it compares to the Flex 3 BC.

I find Keith’s tunes sharp so a detune always happens first but you’re fully right in regards to the stiffer rocker zones. The minus 10 is flex 2

She doesn’t feel the width or length she claims...so that’s a positive.

Her BC is 2-3 seasons old, I’m forgetting right now. A possible remount back off the line maybe the move for her style and comfort on the protest...things to come.

Well I'll chime in for the Rx since I haven't skied a GPO, Q, or Protest (but yes to the Wootest). The Rx is a fantastic ski for powder and resort chop. It floats well, it's stable and damp, and surprisingly quick through turns. I have the 184, #4, enduro with carbon, and a veneer. I tour and ski inbounds it. Best ski in my quiver. I wouldn't hesitate to get a pair for my wife in 169, but she's not 1/10 the ski whore I am. I've known her for 15 years, and she skied Ross Bandits for too many years (incl before I knew her), G3 Zest for 5, and is now loving ON3P Jessie's and not sure if she'll switch in my lifetime.

i detuned the absolute piss out of my protests after skiing them for 2 days. This really made them a lot more manageable on hardpack as there's so much taper that if it engages it can be a bit like a baby version of the R/R leg anarchy.

After that, it took me another 2 days ish to get to the point of symbiosis. Now you can pry them out of my cold dead hands.

Thanks Nickel....may need to define further and especially underfoot. Lord knows a shape like this has a mental side for a skier use to driving a ski. Standing up taller and more centered is a foreign feeling for many...something that is broken through extended use of the tool.

Getting the minus 10 in 3D snow is needed

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HukuTa_KydecHuk

We usually chase snowstorms in our trips so resort conditions are chopped pow/soft bumps. When resort gets tracked out we just go out and tour.

---

FWIW I tour on my GPO’s and they are phenomenal for that, ski pretty much every bc condition really well. When it gets super wind blown/icy crust on the climb I feel like a little more camber and edge contact length would be nice (but hey that’s what crampons are for), but that’s literally my only complaint. I couldn’t ask for a better ski on the downhill. My sister has a pair of the 165’s for resort POW and loves them so much she pulls em out anytime it’s soft at all. I think they’re perfect for what you’re describing.

I'm thinkin' GPO or BC - the latter of which I haven't skied, so take that into account.

BTW, I've repurposed my GPOs for pow touring (Colorado snow) and absolutely LOVE them.


... Thom

Sent from my LM-G710VM using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HukuTa_KydecHuk

Not sure about the Protest though. Looks like no sidecut at all. I'm sure it is awesome pow ski, but just too much powder specific. That's one of the reasons for changing JJs, something more versatile needed. We usually chase snowstorms in our trips so resort conditions are chopped pow/soft bumps. When resort gets tracked out we just go out and tour.

---

163 Protest has more sidecut than the other lengths, at 25m radius. Which is exactly the same turn radius as the 169 RX. It's also 119 underfoot, essentially a -10 regular protest. So your girl could be really stoked on them, or they might actually ski too short with that much rocker and taper. My wife is about the size of your gf and skis a 17X length for everything except UL spring touring -- I know that the 163 Protest would be absurdly short for her...but obviously she's not your gf.

Also: I don't think the experience of dudes reviewing the longer models necessarily generalizes down to the shorter lengths. In the 165 length, the GPO has a pretty tight turn radius and lots of rocker/taper for the length -- the same things we guys typically bash the JJ for. I don't know anyone who's skied the 165 GPO and 165 VJJ, but I wouldn't be surprised if they were more similar than different. Unlike the big difference between the 187 GPO and 185 JJ.

So to me, the 169 RX seems like the best choice. Because it has the same rocker and taper as the big boy skis, it should be quite a bit more pow specific than the longer lengths while retaining most of the versatility the the RX is known for.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by auvgeek

Also: I don't think the experience of dudes reviewing the longer models necessarily generalizes down to the shorter lengths. In the 165 length, the GPO has a pretty tight turn radius and lots of rocker/taper for the length -- the same things we guys typically bash the JJ for. I don't know anyone who's skied the 165 GPO and 165 VJJ, but I wouldn't be surprised if they were more similar than different. Unlike the big difference between the 187 GPO and 185 JJ.

---

Good points.

Still think the GPO is worth considering. My impression from the OP was that Mrs liked the playfulness of the JJ just wanted to size down and increase stability. For me the biggest problem with the JJ was super abrupt hinge point just past the front binding. It would fold in any type of crud, and cause one to go over the bars and eat shit. The GPO would definately fix that, while retaining a lot of the playfulness of the JJ.

But as you point out its a bit of spreadsheet hypothesizing.

169 RX will ski longer than 165 GPO (duh) and maybe longer than 175 JJ?

That's my only caution to you.

GPO is a great ski, very versatile and intuitive.

I have it in a 182 for resort skiing with carbon layup, and a 175 UL for touring.

For anybody looking for a wider, kinda neutral, carveable, driveable resort ski, I'd just wanna give a hint towards the fat (+10 mm) BC's. I've gotten my MAA 191's on snow now, but not yet in enough conditions to support a full review. But fwiw, mounted at -1 from dimple they're pretty much plug and play in resort low tide conditions. Enough tail to end a carved turn with some energy. Carve and slip into slarve is easy peasy. Short skidded turns were a breeze without any detuning. Pretty straightforward skis I'd say, no surprises.

MAA+nylon is not titanal and rubber damp, but still quiet enough to haul a$$ on. This far they match my ideas of the lightly tail rockered Sevun III that Black Crows never built. To be continued...

Nice! I figured the +10 BC would be one of the easiest skis to drive in any kind of pow conditions!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by auvgeek

... Also: I don't think the experience of dudes reviewing the longer models necessarily generalizes down to the shorter lengths. In the 165 length, the GPO has a pretty tight turn radius and lots of rocker/taper for the length -- the same things we guys typically bash the JJ for. I don't know anyone who's skied the 165 GPO and 165 VJJ, but I wouldn't be surprised if they were more similar than different. Unlike the big difference between the 187 GPO and 185 JJ.

---

Excellent point about downward scalability.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by auvgeek

163 Protest has more sidecut than the other lengths, at 25m radius. Which is exactly the same turn radius as the 169 RX. It's also 119 underfoot, essentially a -10 regular protest. So your girl could be really stoked on them, or they might actually ski too short with that much rocker and taper. My wife is about the size of your gf and skis a 17X length for everything except UL spring touring -- I know that the 163 Protest would be absurdly short for her...but obviously she's not your gf.

Also: I don't think the experience of dudes reviewing the longer models necessarily generalizes down to the shorter lengths. In the 165 length, the GPO has a pretty tight turn radius and lots of rocker/taper for the length -- the same things we guys typically bash the JJ for. I don't know anyone who's skied the 165 GPO and 165 VJJ, but I wouldn't be surprised if they were more similar than different. Unlike the big difference between the 187 GPO and 185 JJ.

So to me, the 169 RX seems like the best choice. Because it has the same rocker and taper as the big boy skis, it should be quite a bit more pow specific than the longer lengths while retaining most of the versatility the the RX is known for.

---

What could actually ski shorter than JJs, huh... Unfortunately or luckily, she's not into ski shapes, designs and all that stuff. All the input I have is what I see while we ski and what she's complaining about. I see that she's struggling with the lenght while we ski in trees, tight couloirs, other technical terrain. Thing I'm not sure with Rx is how long will it ski at 169. She ain't an ex-racer and from RX shape, reviews and my understanding, it looks like it's a demanding ski. Last thing I want is her totally drained after couple hours of skiing. So ideally it should be a little stiffer, little more supportive, not very locked in, still capable of being playful. If she were little taller that would be Bibby/Wildcat 174 for sure.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shu Shu

Good points.

My impression from the OP was that Mrs liked the playfulness of the JJ just wanted to size down and increase stability.

---

Exactly.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by eskido

FWIW I tour on my GPO’s and they are phenomenal for that, ski pretty much every bc condition really well. When it gets super wind blown/icy crust on the climb I feel like a little more camber and edge contact length would be nice (but hey that’s what crampons are for), but that’s literally my only complaint. I couldn’t ask for a better ski on the downhill. My sister has a pair of the 165’s for resort POW and loves them so much she pulls em out anytime it’s soft at all. I think they’re perfect for what you’re describing.

---

Sounds awesome. What's her height/weight?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HukuTa_KydecHuk

Guys, what do you think about RX 169 vs GPO 165 for a girl?
Looking for a resort pow/pow touring ski for a GF, she is 5'3, 130, currently skis Armada JJs 175. Despite huge rockers they are just too long for her. Now we also ski more trees, than open terrain, so that extra lenght is just odd. She likes the width on armadas and she also has a 106 waist ski, so that's why 111 or 116. She also wants skis to be a little stiffer and stable but yet playful as she's not a charger - flex 2 maybe?
I know what flowing alpy answer will be.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 2FUNKY

There just happens to be a pair her size in GS.

---

I was just going to say this. She’ll think she’sa Charger than play the next turn. -1.5 from the dimple, especially for touring. I’ve had bc’s(on the dimple mount), gpo’s(-1) as touring skis and still top picks. Protest is just another level. If you climb up anything in any condition you’re assured of at least a few good turns. It makes funky conditions easily skiable. It’s like a Jf in some respects with the long rocker and tapers. It just ditches the bad aspects. It doesn’t have that tight hooky side cut of the jj and the flex is dialed tip to tail on the protest. Protest base and edges are waaay more durable. Smaller riders are more apt to move their mounts rearward(as per Hoji interview). Just recently heard that as I had mine a -1.5 and I can push on them through crud eat a sammich and send a text all at the same time. In a flash they’ll still pivot and dump speed intuitively. I had both a 177 and a 187. I think a 182(no such thing) would probably be perfection for me but I didn’t have any real issues with longer or shorter. The same with the 3 flex. Sometimes I thought the 4 might be better for me but the 3 did everything at any speed. Occasionally in super heavy piles of chop at speed it may flex and deflect as the flex returns but that was only in extreme cases. I think it’s the huge sweet spot that gives the ski more leeway in size and flex. Tried the 187 on the dimple than went back to -1.5. Length didn’t matter as much as the for/aft .

FWIW, my wife digs her 175 GPO's. 170 BC's she likes, but they are the ultralight/ carbon build and just a tad chattery & jumpy. I think the veneer top sheet may have been a good add to this build if we did it again. I picked her up a pair of left over 177 cm Protest Keith had. She skied them 1/2 a day in 10" heavy mashed potato and made me switch the bindings to her GPO's for lunch time. She felt they were to much ski, width and length. I think it was the snow. I wasn't the happiest either on my protest. Haven't got her back on them since.

I have the same suite of 3 skis and will 2nd Jmars comments on skiing style. If she's a racer background the protest may take a bit of adjustment. The GPO is an awesome all arounder, not as floaty as JJ's, but more backbone. If I could do it over again I would love to try both my GPO and Protest at -1. If you are touring on them ,especially consider this! For the up as much as the down

Protest has the tip and side cut radius of an rx and the taper, rocker and camber of the gpo in a 3mm wider waist @163

fully agree with breomonkey on the UL comments (I wouldn’t recommend it at all, but I do kinda dig the Carbon in my pow skis), and also going back -1 on the GPO for what you’re looking for would be $$$. Not for sure on height/weight but I’d guess, 5’5 - 150ish???

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by eskido

FWIW I tour on my GPO’s and they are phenomenal for that, ski pretty much every bc condition really well. When it gets super wind blown/icy crust on the climb I feel like a little more camber and edge contact length would be nice (but hey that’s what crampons are for), but that’s literally my only complaint. I couldn’t ask for a better ski on the downhill. My sister has a pair of the 165’s for resort POW and loves them so much she pulls em out anytime it’s soft at all. I think they’re perfect for what you’re describing.

---

Also a big fan of the GPO for out of bounds work. Predictable in any snow type.

Having now tried both enduro+C/V and UL+V I don't get what all the fuss is about. Tgr made it sound like UL would be akin to driving a car with square wheels but it's really not that crazy at all. Anything that will spend 51% or more of its time in the backcountry i would be more than happy in the future. I regret getting my yetis in enduro at this point but we'll see how I feel after harvesting corn in the spring. YMMV of course but my UL protests skied just fine in the resort the couple times i brought them and the weight savings on a ski that size is significant.

Do you know much weight you end up saving with the UL core plus veneer with the Protests? GF and I are considering a honeymoon to Japan next year and I'm on the hunt for a new ski.

I never put them on a scale because I'm dumb but the yeti and protest are both 192 and both mounted with tecton, yeti is #4 while protest is a 4+

A completely unscientific hand analysis of weight says they're very similar. I'd guess around or less than 1lb difference per ski. Skins on the other hand...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SupreChicken

Also a big fan of the GPO for out of bounds work. Predictable in any snow type.

---

Awesome, does that include mank? I haven’t gotten them in true bottomless Sierra slop or Cascade molten marshmallow garbage yet, especially the type with a refreezing creme brûlée crust - that was really my only concern for that GPO front end, but I guess the tail is also pretty narrow relative to the tip and rockered well enough. That’s the problem with warm climates - bulletproof windjack at the top of your line, hero snow in the middle, and molten mank on the bottom third. I like having a ski that relieves some of the misery on long manky exits :)

Well, it doesn't have RES, and if you've skied a Goat or fat Steeple, I'm guessing you'd prefer that when skiing in a hot mess.

... Thom

Sent from my LM-G710VM using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by galibier_numero_un

Well, it doesn't have RES, and if you've skied a Goat or fat Steeple, I'm guessing you'd prefer that when skiing in a hot mess.

... Thom

Sent from my LM-G710VM using Tapatalk

---

RES is the real deal . Amazed at what my steeple102 is capable of in any condition. Heavy ski though. Probably 1- 1.5 pounds heavier than equivalent size praxis maa veneer

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SchralphMacchio

Awesome, does that include mank? I haven’t gotten them in true bottomless Sierra slop or Cascade molten marshmallow garbage yet, especially the type with a refreezing creme brûlée crust - that was really my only concern for that GPO front end, but I guess the tail is also pretty narrow relative to the tip and rockered well enough. That’s the problem with warm climates - bulletproof windjack at the top of your line, hero snow in the middle, and molten mank on the bottom third. I like having a ski that relieves some of the misery on long manky exits :)

---

Yeah it does. Not as effortless as the RES tip, but the shark nose moves through terrible snow pretty well.

Edit - if you’re in that kind of snow on your exits often, I would stay away from the UL core. Enduro/veneer will also help you navigate that stuff.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by John_B

Do you know much weight you end up saving with the UL core plus veneer with the Protests? GF and I are considering a honeymoon to Japan next year and I'm on the hunt for a new ski.

---

According to Keith, they built a 192 cm Protest with Veneer in the summer and it weighed 9 lbs 5 oz for the pair.

Further customization options with the UL too. My build incorporated a little more maple and ash to beef up the UL. But it is a little heavier than 9 lbs 5 oz. I’m ok with a few more ounces for a little more dampness in the UL Core.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by galibier_numero_un

Well, it doesn't have RES, and if you've skied a Goat or fat Steeple, I'm guessing you'd prefer that when skiing in a hot mess.

... Thom

Sent from my LM-G710VM using Tapatalk

---

That’s ProTest snow, bro.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Best Mexican Skier from Da South

According to Keith, they built a 192 Protest 192 with Veneer in the summer and it weighed 9 lbs 5 oz for the pair.

---

That seems heavy for a UL build.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 2FUNKY

That’s ProTest snow, bro.

---

There you and @grinch go ... gaslighting me :biggrin:

Haaa. I think you’ll do ok without a pair, with your line up

Anybody skied an enforcer 100 and PJ and can compare their carving ability? Know its apples to oranges but i got on the enforcer 104 free the other day and was pretty blown away. I've been planning on picking up some PJs in the spring sale for a while but im second guessing that now... unless someone can assure me a PJ with heavy core (4 flex im thinking) can carve and smooth out rough snow as well

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Best Mexican Skier from Da South

According to Keith, they built a 192 cm Protest with Veneer in the summer and it weighed 9 lbs 5 oz for the pair.

Further customization options with the UL too. My build incorporated a little more maple and ash to beef up the UL. But it is a little heavier than 9 lbs 5 oz. I’m ok with a few more ounces for a little more dampness in the UL Core.

---

Whoa. Did that cost more? Do you like they way they ski?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by white_wolf

Anybody skied an enforcer 100 and PJ and can compare their carving ability? Know its apples to oranges but i got on the enforcer 104 free the other day and was pretty blown away. I've been planning on picking up some PJs in the spring sale for a while but im second guessing that now... unless someone can assure me a PJ with heavy core (4 flex im thinking) can carve and smooth out rough snow as well

---

Never skied the enforcer. PJs leave trenches and in that build will be nice and damp in rough snow, but the running length feels just a little short on corduroy.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by white_wolf

... unless someone can assure me a PJ with heavy core (4 flex im thinking) can carve and smooth out rough snow

---

Yes, I can assure you of that. The heavy core is incredibly smooth and stable through all types of rough snow. My build is Heavy 3 flex veneer carbon. At around 170 I find the combination of 3 flex and the heavy core to be perfect for the ski. Its easy enough to flex and ollie when you want fuck around, and it just slays bumps. This season I changed the edge bevel to 2 degrees and it will lock into a nice carve on some pretty serious EC hardpack/ice. Its no square tailed racer but I've never found a speed limit on it in the 3 flex YMMV.

It's a great ski for small accumulations, because it will get nice and loose in 1-2" of snow, but also a really fun pow ski in 6-10" if you're the type of person who likes to feel a little more "in the snow"

Enforcer looks nice too, and you have the advantage of a demo, but the PJ is a hard ski not to like.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shu Shu

Yes, I can assure you of that. The heavy core is incredibly smooth and stable through all types of rough snow. My build is Heavy 3 flex veneer carbon. At around 170 I find the combination of 3 flex and the heavy core to be perfect for the ski. Its easy enough to flex and ollie when you want fuck around, and it just slays bumps. This season I changed the edge bevel to 2 degrees and it will lock into a nice carve on some pretty serious EC hardpack/ice. Its no square tailed racer but I've never found a speed limit on it in the 3 flex YMMV.

It's a great ski for small accumulations, because it will get nice and loose in 1-2" of snow, but also a really fun pow ski in 6-10" if you're the type of person who likes to feel a little more "in the snow"

Enforcer looks nice too, and you have the advantage of a demo, but the PJ is a hard ski not to like.

---

I totally agree with the review of the PJ.
I have the same build as you and and I’m very close to your weight . Killington at Bear Saturday had big and soft bumps. The fiddle under the rope has a wind crust with soft consolidated pow after you busted though ,and a fair amount of rocks so quick to edge and throw them sideways to stop.
The other side had all the new snow blown a mile away with the high winds that persisted all day. They do hold an edge. No metal but they are heavy and damp. My only gripe was they were so edge hi when I brought them and hooked terribly on firm snow. A base grind did the trick but I do think that hand made custom skis should come with flat bases.
Great ski so much fun.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SupreChicken

Whoa. Did that cost more? Do you like they way they ski?

---

That was my pair. Enduro veneer 4 flex. Yes it adds to the cost for veneer. They ski amazing inbounds.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by white_wolf

Anybody skied an enforcer 100 and PJ and can compare their carving ability? Know its apples to oranges but i got on the enforcer 104 free the other day and was pretty blown away. I've been planning on picking up some PJs in the spring sale for a while but im second guessing that now... unless someone can assure me a PJ with heavy core (4 flex im thinking) can carve and smooth out rough snow as well

---

184 PJ, MAP (I think?) core with veneer 3 flex is my daily driver back east. Do I have skis that carve better? Sure, Parlor Cardinal 100s, but I barely use them — I have too much fun with the PJs most of the time. In anything resembling softer snow they hook into a carve and break free fairly effortlessly for me.

Sweet, thanks guys. I'm a little concerned about the 184 being short at my size (6'2" 185), but I'll keep thinking about it. Gonna talk to our nordica rep soon to see if i can get a major steal. That 104 Free is a rad ski