2018-19 Praxis Skis Info and Resource Thread

I put my Rx up for sale yesterday and just started really jonesing for a CCR Rx. I probably would want them flatter than the full CCR, from the few photos I’ve seen of it. Wondering if anyone’s gone with this build yet, and what their experience has been.


:::::@:::::

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lucknau

I put my Rx up for sale yesterday and just started really jonesing for a CCR Rx. I probably would want them flatter than the full CCR, from the few photos I’ve seen of it. Wondering if anyone’s gone with this build yet, and what their experience has been.


:::::@:::::

---

Here's a skinny RX w CCR sorry if the strap's in a bad place.

Haven't seen snow yet unfortunately but next season they will.https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/202...3cb0f0f564.jpghttps://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/202...36a44177a2.jpghttps://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/202...5d3e28b91e.jpghttps://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/202...9c1ae0cb5b.jpg

Sent from my Pixel 6 using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bry

Here's a skinny RX w CCR sorry if the strap's in a bad place.

Haven't seen snow yet unfortunately but next season they will.https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/202...3cb0f0f564.jpghttps://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/202...36a44177a2.jpghttps://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/202...5d3e28b91e.jpghttps://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/202...9c1ae0cb5b.jpg

Sent from my Pixel 6 using Tapatalk

---

Oh, that’s awesome. Exactly what I was thinking of. Did you have conversations about what you were looking for, to end up with that camber?


:::::@:::::

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lucknau

Oh, that’s awesome. Exactly what I was thinking of. Did you have conversations about what you were looking for, to end up with that camber?


:::::@:::::

---

Just a brief exchange w Keith about what build I was thinking, and he said it sounded great. I rolled the dice no doubt, but looks good.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bry

Just a brief exchange w Keith about what build I was thinking, and he said it sounded great. I rolled the dice no doubt, but looks good.

---

Those look so sweet! What’s the build and flex?

HH, 5 flex, no carbs, I like that layup don't think it's gonna be too stiff without camber. -1 build comes out 188cm/106uf

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SupreChicken

One of the taller dudes on here got some 190 BC in a heavy layup for inbounds duties and sold them.

---

One more data point - I have the 180 BCs in enduro with carbon in #3 (I'm 5'10" and 190 lb). Yes, it's awesome for touring (Lynx bindings) but I also use it most days through the winter with few complaints.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bry

HH, 5 flex, no carbs, I like that layup don't think it's gonna be too stiff without camber. -1 build comes out 188cm/106uf

---

Those sound perfect, stiff is good for reverse camber too.
Not going to mount them up for some spring summer shredding?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dschane

One more data point - I have the 180 BCs in enduro with carbon in #3 (I'm 5'10" and 190 lb). Yes, it's awesome for touring (Lynx bindings) but I also use it most days through the winter with few complaints.

---

Well that does it! I just emailed Keith for his recommendation, as I see a BC in my future. I seem to be following in your tracks ;-)

... Thom

Is the powder board still fully spooned? Or did he do away with the hulled base?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SupreChicken

Is the powder board still fully spooned? Or did he do away with the hulled base?

---

I think it reverted to the original flat base. I ordered a pair for next year: had them years ago, sold them and I miss them.

I do have a pair that are fully spooned. They are incredible in pow, mank/slush and soft bumps..
Attachment 455244
A downside is I find them tiring because I feel as if always working my legs since there’s no edge hold . Could be operator or weakness .

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mr_pretzel

I’ll say it everytime, dont add carbon to the HH, makes it heavy and demanding without the plush. Might aswell stick with the enduro then as the ski will actually be lively.

---

Updated this order with Keith. Enduro MVP 108 with maple veneer, no carbon. Stoked!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bry

Here's a skinny RX w CCR sorry if the strap's in a bad place.

Haven't seen snow yet unfortunately but next season they will.

Sent from my Pixel 6 using Tapatalk

---

i wanna know have they ever seen the rain?

Toying with a reverse camber touring setup, what custom shape and core would best approximate a meridian tour/wndr intention rc? looking for something 100-110, ccr (i think), and like 1700-1800g in a 185.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Westcoaster

Toying with a reverse camber touring setup, what custom shape and core would best approximate a meridian tour/wndr intention rc? looking for something 100-110, ccr (i think), and like 1700-1800g in a 185.

---

Sounds like an mvp / ultralight / veneer. I think that'd be a cool ski.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mr_pretzel

Not going to mount them up for some spring summer shredding?

---

The way the season is going there's plenty of time for me to change my mind!

Sent from my Pixel 6 using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dschane

One more data point - I have the 180 BCs in enduro with carbon in #3 (I'm 5'10" and 190 lb). Yes, it's awesome for touring (Lynx bindings) but I also use it most days through the winter with few complaints.

---

I have that same build/flex/length but with veneer for touring and like it a lot for that purpose. Recently moved and have a pass next year to my old ski hill with a lot of frontside and backcountry in the same day next season so glad to hear it has performed well for lift served.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 3PinGrin

I have that same build/flex/length but with veneer for touring and like it a lot for that purpose. Recently moved and have a pass next year to my old ski hill with a lot of frontside and backcountry in the same day next season so glad to hear it has performed well for lift served.

---

Does the collective remember the weight difference between enduro and UL in a ski this width? I seem to recall it being in the 200g per ski range, but it's been a while since I've thought about this.

So, in a 180, that would be about 1650 vs. 1850g? The quoted weight for a 180 (std. UL) without veneer is 7.4 Lbs / 1680 g.)

... Thom

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by galibier_numero_un

Does the collective remember the weight difference between enduro and UL in a ski this width? I seem to recall it being in the 200g per ski range, but it's been a while since I've thought about this.

So, in a 180, that would be about 1650 vs. 1850g? The quoted weight for a 180 (std. UL) without veneer is 7.4 Lbs / 1680 g.)

... Thom

---

I don’t know what the UL comes in at, but I have weights on my setup sans bindings. Will need to find those tomorrow and can post them.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by galibier_numero_un

Does the collective remember the weight difference between enduro and UL in a ski this width? I seem to recall it being in the 200g per ski range, but it's been a while since I've thought about this.

So, in a 180, that would be about 1650 vs. 1850g? The quoted weight for a 180 (std. UL) without veneer is 7.4 Lbs / 1680 g.)

... Thom

---

Thom, here is weight info for my touring skis sans bindings.

BC, 180, enduro+carbon, flex 3, maple veneer = 1787g per ski

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 3PinGrin

Thom, here is weight info for my touring skis sans bindings.

BC, 180, enduro+carbon, flex 3, maple veneer = 1787g per ski

---

Thanks for doing that !!!

Tough call for me ... not much weight penalty for enduro, and this would surely help when encountering refrozen crud. Gotta think hard about use cases ;-)

... Thom

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by galibier_numero_un

Thanks for doing that !!!

Tough call for me ... not much weight penalty for enduro, and this would surely help when encountering refrozen crud. Gotta think hard about use cases ;-)

... Thom

---

The ridge I hike when I take my dog with me often has refrozen snowmobile tracks that I have to cross or follow a ways at speed in the runout. These skis handle that quite well even though they feel light for the task. It is a very short section to negotiate, but I’ve been impressed.

So I emailed Keith, and he had to the following to say below, with the 3 flex recommendation relating to my question, and the fact that I'm down to 155 Lbs. Hopefully, this will save Keith having to write more emails on the topic ;-)

I can attest to people creating an entire quiver based on GPO variants.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Keith said ...

I think the GPO is a great ski and its one of our best sellers still. So really great to hear that you like the quiver of them, and thanks for getting them!

Well I've had the conversation a few times about the BC being a good option if you like the GPO, but I've also lost the argument a few times as well with people that instead go with a -10 GPO over the BC when they love the GPO.

They are close but if you really detail the specs they are different. That -10 option on the GPO is one our most popular -10 options, partly because a couple of the team riders love it and have convinced others to get it. But also people that like the GPO tend to want to make a touring set and go with the -10 GPO for that.

The GPO seems to be the ski that people get multiple pairs of in different build variations. My argument is always that the BC is a better price point and close enough and a great ski.

The GPO -10 built out to be light with a veneer and UL core is really just too expensive of a ski especially with all the costs up these days.
3 flex and veneer option seems ideal.

---

Looking at the specs, I see what he's saying. It appears as if Keith felt (and still feels) that the BC needs to be just a slight bit more directional than the GPO (longer contact surface & effective edge, shorter taper, etc.) ... just a touch.

I left the Exp in the chart below, only because I have it in a UL/Carbon/#3 (thanks, @grinch) and I was curious how the three skis compare (even though the Exp is a different concept).
https://galibierdesign.com/images/ot..._BC-vs-GPO.jpg

... Thom

^^^ I wonder what it'd cost to press a BC with the GPO mold. Seems like it wouldn't add much to the price. So you'd get a BC that was just a little less directional / more smeary due to less camber and longer / taller rocker lines.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by toast2266

^^^ I wonder what it'd cost to press a BC with the GPO mold. Seems like it wouldn't add much to the price. So you'd get a BC that was just a little less directional / more smeary due to less camber and longer / taller rocker lines.

---

So you're talking about a camber adjustment to a BC? I've wondered about a more smear-y option in this category as well (tight trees, etc.).

In the drop-down, he has a range of $200 to $500 for camber adjustments. I have to wonder how the change would affect the rest of the ski, however (where the running surface ends, the effective edge and such).

I think the safer option would be going with -10 GPO, but WTF do I know? Still, I'm still sorely tempted by this option, but that takes a GPO into a lofty price of $1,149 (for my choice of: UL/Carbon/Veneer, flex #3 and -10) - this, vs. the "equivalent" in a BC at $799.

So, in two years, will I appreciate the -10 GPO more than the pain I feel of spending the extra $350 on it?

... Thom