2017 Praxis Skis Info and Resource Thread
#5 flex(formerly known as stiff flex) is indeed stiff. When I was 170+ I found #4 flex nowhere close to a noodle. At 160 I find #4 stiff. No use for carbon unless I’ll be touring on them. Haven’t tried the Q(liked to) but still think the gpo is the best do it all ski I’ve tried(-1 ftw)
2017 Praxis Skis Info and Resource Thread
Quote:
Originally Posted by
auvgeek
Turn radius absolutely does not indicate how quickly it can be "flicked around." That's a function of rocker profile and sidecut profile (which includes mount point).
Unless you're quite sure that you like stiff and light skis, I suggest you consider either a #4 flex with enduro carbon or a #5 flex with the heavy core.
I think the Praxis flex scale is spot on. #5 is 100% stiff, or I mean as stiff as you’d want to go, without it being too planky for ideal (powder) conditions.. #4 feels noticeably softer, but not overly dramatic of a change. It is probably close to 80% of the #5, if someone could quantify that, which matches up with the 1-5 scale. The #3 Protests I have hand flexed, matched up with that scale as well, probably half or maybe 60% as stiff as the #5. In my opinion.
Idk how you could quantify that though..
I also believe the flex model carries through between the Enduro and Heavy cores. At least when comparing hand-flex’s of my heavy core #4 Quixotes to stock, enduro core Rx’s.
#5 flex, Maple/Ash is nice and stiff. Similar stiffness to my Aeverflex Supergoats, and stiffer than 191 Wrens. Wrens for some reason still more “locked in” though, I cant figure out why..
I quite like how maneuverable the Rx’s are though. I could daily drive them with no issues, but then the layup, and sidecut feeling, are super stable and confidence inspiring. It feel’s really modern, if you will, and can handle slow speeds or mach speeds. Another pair will be my future touring ski, just have to figure out which layup to go with..
Quote:
Originally Posted by
galibier_numero_un
Damn it! First I thought some minor surgery in October would delay my start of the season. Now, it's the weather's fault.
I'm giving in and taking my Q's (182, #4, Enduro/Carbon, Maple Veneer) out on the WROD tomorrow. I can wait no longer.
Oh yeah ... mounted at -1.5. My GPO's were initially mounted at -1.25 and faced with a choice of fore/or aft, they shifted to -1.75 when I re-purposed them with Vipecs. If anything, I preferred them at -1.75. Keith gave me the same advice - mount the Q's where you like the GPOs, so I split the difference.
... Thom
Don’t judge them by their low tide performance. I made that mistake. I would classify this shape in the same category as the Billy Goat or Steeple 112’s. Works fine on hard snow, but doesn’t excel in those sort of conditions. To me, this design seems like it really shines in softer snow. Even 2” or so..
I have had my skinny Q’s out for 2 days, about 8 hours of actually on-snow time. Most of it on pretty firm stuff. I did, however, use them for three laps of very short hiking, North Bowl at Squaw after the last storm. The snow was fairly soft and windblown. They came to life! Very maneuverable yet confidence inspiring in softer snow. No hang-ups. Similar to the feel I get from On3p RES, where you can break it free whenever you want, without too much input, but then also capable and confidence inspiring when you need.
Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums
2017 Praxis Skis Info and Resource Thread
2 days on them, but I’m giddy stoked on my stock, not carbon MVP 193s. We had a couple days that dropped 16-20’’ light powder at Wildcat (significantly more than forecasted) and they were the fattest pair I brought so they got all the use. Did well in pow (started to sink at lower angles in 2 ft piles), windbuff, chop and some developing crud. They feel about as frictionless in the soft and nearly as quick as my 184 Devastators did, with more spring and a higher top end while being lighter. Not 2 sheets of metal damp, but I thought they skied damp for their weight. Usable/ not terrifying on hard groomers, fun on soft ones. Sure, a little long in the tail for really rutted sections, but it’s a 193. Point and shoot, video game style skis. Ollie from feature to feature. Steer from your ankles to get them to turn very quick - looking forward to experimenting with other turn shapes and skiing styles. Got along with them immediately- fit in with my experience on 184 Devs, 196 Rens, 186 EHP, Park skis etc. 5’7’’ 195-200. I had all of those skis mounted -6 from center, not really on purpose, just noticed it came to be that way.
I think they’re the most durable ski I own- I’ve never been so horrible to a ski in 2 days use and they have minor scratches that will probably disappear with a little razor work and a grind. There was no base at all, just 18-24+ inches of powder on dirt and granite.
2017 Praxis Skis Info and Resource Thread
Quote:
Originally Posted by
auvgeek
That's great info. My main point was that, IME, skis can be too stiff for the weight. Certain skis from DPS come to mind. For me personally, the enduro + carbon is probably too light of a layup for the #5 flex. I have the #4 flex on an enduro sans carbon Piste Jibs, and they're pretty snappy. I wouldn't want to go any stiffer/lighter.
Been thinking about what happens when my Jeffreys need to be retired. Right now, I think a skinny RX, preferably with flat camber, in a heavy layup with 4+ flex might replace it, maybe mount them a little forward. The current Kartel 108 with the elliptical sidecut and 22 m turn radius isn't quite what I want. Might also get a pair in enduro+carbon for touring. I know it's nit-picky, but I wish the RX came in a 110 waist -- 116 seems a bit wide and 106 a bit skinny.
I agree, stiff AND light skis do not suit my riding style. I like all flexes, soft/medium/stiff, but gravitate towards heavier skis. That’s why I like K2 skis. Yes they are noodles, but most of their “pro” skis are heavy and damp.
The #5 praxis flex is not a plank, it still has some give to it. Same with aevergreene SG’s. Definitely stiff, but not outrageously so.. I have hand flexed some DPS skis that were on another level in terms of stiffness. Straight up 2x4s. They were even stiffer than my HEAD Monsters. The Praxis #5 is not like that.
I dont think the #4 flex of my skinny Q’s is the reason why they aren’t as stable for me as I’d like. The flex is exceptional feeling. It’s the weight. Being a heavier person myself, 200g/ski can make all the difference for me inbounds. I wish my Quixotes were just a tad heavier. If I was 175ish lbs, or less, I know I’d be able to charge harder with them. Some may think I am splitting hairs here, but I get extremely picky for daily drivers.
To be clear, the Q’s are not unstable, I just prefer to use my heavier skis as resort daily drivers. My 184cm K2 shreditor 92’s are the same weight as Skinny Q’s in 187cm.. 92mm jibby park ski vs 108mm Quixote, same weight.
My #5 Rx feel close to 2500g/ski, whereas the #4 skinny Q is close to 2100g/ski. The flex matches up with the scale perfectly, and I like the flex a lot..however I did not expect to lose 300-400 grams per ski, just by going 8mm thinner and one flex number off.
My next praxis will either be a Skinny Rx, Heavy core #5, or a standard enduro core Rx for touring. Honestly, I want both. I really like this shape, Keith friggen nailed it. It skis thinner than it’s true waist width would suggest, it’s the best 116mm ski I have ever skied on firm snow. Beating out the 114mm Blizzard Gunsmoke, for low tide skiing, and close to my HEAD Monster 108s when it comes to grip on ice. I like how sharp the edges are on the praxis, I could shave with them lol.
Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums
