2018-19 Praxis Skis Info and Resource Thread
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Foggy_Goggles
I want something between 195 PBs and 188 Skinny Qs … Basically, I want something with more suspension that the PBs for when the pow days start to get bumped out … Can you guys comment on the difference between
GPO
Q
FRS
Concepts
I only have firsthand experience with the GPO, but I can comment on the shapes of the other skis and the comments I’ve seen in the Praxis Superthread.
GPOs were developed as a big mountain comp ski for Tabke and Chickering Ayers based on the BC. BC plus 10mm, less camber, more stout, more sidecut/turny, moved mount point up to -7 cm (BC is -8 now but back in the day I think it was -10), pointy shark nose to not get hooked up when edging on variable snow at haul ass speeds. The shark nose is not as good in powder as the 116 waist would suggest, so for more suspension and float I think most people have enjoyed mounting from -1 to -2 cm, as the ski has a pretty big sweet spot and I’ve seen people say -3 worked for them (probably at higher boot lean angles). Like the BCs these skis seem to have a huge mount point sweet spot. Where I’ve been really impressed with the GPOs was how they handled wind effect like sastrugi and sudden density changes, you can just rail turns at speed and that stuff disappears. They ski snow that is firm but in process of softening really well too.
Q came after the GPO and was Tabke’s next comp ski evolution I think. Less sidecut, more waist, offset taper for inside and outside edges, ever so slightly less tip and camber height and ever so slightly more tail rocker … same mount point as GPO. I think most feedback was that stock Qs skied a little bigger than stock GPOs despite having more tail rocker, if you are considering the GPO.
FRS came next as Tabke’s powder comp ski experiment for Japan, it was a +10mm MVP 109 that had some rocker tweaks. More tip and tail rocker than GPO and Q and slightly more forward mount of -6. I don’t remember much feedback about suspension or how these handle chop and bumps compared to the GPOs or Qs, which seem to have rave feedback for that kind of stuff.
I don’t see Concepts anywhere now … they were a mustache camber (tip rocker, then camber in front of the boot, then rocker below the boot, then camber behind, then tail rocker) profile with a slightly reverse sidecut underfoot and then regular sidecut in front and behind the boot. A lot of comments I seem to remember that they were loose, floaty and could still bite on hard pack.
2018-19 Praxis Skis Info and Resource Thread
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Hoss Worthington
Does anyone have any input on the 3 vs 4 flex for a BC 180? I'm going to pull the trigger on the sale pretty soon here. Definitely going to go with the veneers & the UL core with carbon.
I'm looking to drop some weight in my touring rig (currently old 4Frnt turbos). However, I'm a larger guy at about 6 ft & 210 lbs. so I'm a little worried that 180 in a 3 flex will feel like "too little" ski. Any input from the collective would be welcome.
For reference, my daily driver is a MVP 108 at 188 cm in 4 flex.
180 Flex 3 will be too little ski.
Is the 190 out of the picture for you?
I’m 5’ 8” 140 lbs on 180 BCs … MAP/C core from ‘11-12 production that I think is Flex 2, which is straight silly fun for soft snow - corn, porn, pow, so fun in anything that’s at least 2 cm edgeable. At *my* size I could go Flex 3 for more versatility and less silly factor (I used to have Flex 3 182 GPOs and I currently ski 182 ON3Ps). ex-powerbroker is nearly my same size (5’ 9” 145?) and he says that his Flex 3 180 BCs are too soft for him.
Given my experience I’m not sure I can imagine even a Flex 4 180 being enough ski for your weight because the camber contact length and effective edge are both pretty short on that ski - it has a decent amount of tip and tail taper. It might feel like being on jib sticks. It is definitely stout underfoot, so I don’t think that Flex 4s would fold up, but the 180s would just not feel like they have a lot of edge.
If you are touring in open terrain I might say go up to the 190s and go softer (3?) to have them be super fun and then shave some weight through flex. And do some yoga for those kick turns.
Good luck. There has been angst and chatter about trying to get a 185 maggot build BC for years but I don’t think anyone ever organized enough demand to make it worth Kieth’s time.
