Pontoon VS DPS/ARG/Praxis

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Vitamin I

For groomers/firm:

1. Choose bindings with high torsional rigidity to control those faraway edges on uberfat skis.

.

---

I've got look p12's on my spats and they've always felt floaty/disconnected. It's the only pair of looks I've ever skied. My guess has always been that the width underfoot combined with the elasticity of the pivot heel results in that floaty/disconnected feeling. Not noticeable in pow, but on groomer and hard pack it's kind of annoying.

If I spree from some praxis or 138's I'll be putting some more serious clamps on them, 916's or maybe some dukes.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Vitamin I

3. They can be fun on firm off-piste, but they can hurt. After skiing hard all day with rigid bindings and stiff boots on uberfat reverse camber skis, if the snow is too firm and bumpy, your ankles might start to get torqued in pain from the uberwide edges, and/or your knees might start to get pounded from all the base impact directly underfoot with such a short footprint on firm snow. Your pain might help you define for yourself what kind of days are "too firm" for your uberfat reverse camber skis.

.

---

Yeah, ouch. My skinny little ankles kill after a day of chopped up snow on the spats.

Is anybody else planning on mouting their PraXis w/ AT Bindings? I'm going w/ the NX21 and plan on using this 90% outtabounds. 10% when it's nice conditions (5"+) inbounds, but will likely bring a second pair for after everything really tracks out.

If I find that I want to ski these all the time inbounds, I'm thinking of going w/ the deadbolt 816.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by El Chupacabra

[RE: torsionally rigid bindings] Any suggestions? I had Salomon 997 Equipes on my Spatulas; they seemed okay...

---

All-metal Salomons (with a non-spherical AFD) should be great (your 997's are metal toe, right?). My S900 DIN16's give me rigid command over spatula edges. Of course, that means the mountain can punish me back with ankle torquing vibrations on firm crud/bumps.

Spats (the person, not the ski) has posted a lot about using torsionally rigid bindings on fat skis, and he ranks Look Pivots at the top. Do an advanced search for keyword=tors*, Username=Spats, ShowResultsAs=Posts and put the whole story together with results like:

http://tetongravity.com/forums/showt...;2A#post310925

http://tetongravity.com/forums/showt...%2A#post313785

http://tetongravity.com/forums/showt...%2A#post513794

http://tetongravity.com/forums/showt...%2A#post477224

http://tetongravity.com/forums/showt...%2A#post372912

dps knows fat, and he says:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dps

...We have been playing a bunch with the torsional stiffness of different bindings, and have found that Naxos will take a high performance ski and turn it into slop ;) Even the difference between a Marker toe and a Look/Salomon toe on the same ski makes it noticeably crisper and so much truer to its designed performance.

---

http://tetongravity.com/forums/showt...2A#post1133292
.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Poop*Ghost

Is anybody else planning on mouting their PraXis w/ AT Bindings?

---

Yes, there are several people planning to mount them on Dukes. There's a thread about it, in fact. (Obligatory "Search, JONG!") I asked why, since reverse camber and sidecut seems like it would be a pain for skinning. The response was that if these are your skis for the good stuff, and you hike to the good stuff, you want AT bindings on them.

I've seen those other posts... but I'll take a jonging nonetheless.

My feeling is that for an extra 100 bones (21's vs dukes) and the extra weight, considering how little I plan on using these inbounds... it's an easy choice.

Also, touring will likely be harder - but most of what I'm doing is 500' laps. Every blue moon I'll drive out to the boonies and have a 2000' climb, but it's rare. A little extra thrutching on the Rev-Rev will likely be the price I pay for hitting the 80's & 90's wall at Berthoud Pass and the grin on the way down will hopefully be worth it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by shasti

When a ski already has a reverse cambered line, this flexing is unnecessary as these things occur on their own.

---

I disagree on this. If you make a reverse camber/sidecut ski really stiff, you won't be able load the skis as easily in really soft snow (speed and angulation are your friends here). The way I see it, R-C/S skis are meant to be playful. If I'm seriously hauling ass on denser snow, I'd much rather be on a normal sidecut ski, as you get much more stability in having a cambered shovel to pressure as much as you want. I don't really want to be pivoting at speed. Hauling ass on denser snow on the praxis gave me the "uh-oh" feeling more often than on regular skis as I'd get afraid of going over the 'bars.

As far as carving the groomers, try pressuring the tail with your inside ski, and pressuring the shovel with the outside ski. (Uhmm, I'm pretty sure that's it - or it's the other way around. I'm pretty dyslexic and it's been a while since I last saw snow.)

What I don't like about the praxis is that I'm lazy and weak, as I don't want to think about skiing after I get on the groomer runout. I'd rather stand on edge and relax, but you can't really do that as much on the praxis.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mojorisin

...If...really stiff, you won't be able load the skis as easily in really soft snow...The way I see it, R-C/S skis are meant to be playful. If I'm seriously hauling ass on denser snow, I'd much rather be on a normal sidecut ski...

---

So it sounds like your preferences are:

Playing in soft snow? Reverse-camber/sidecut.
Seriously hauling ass on denser snow? Normal sidecut ski.

But what about seriously hauling ass in soft snow? You wouldn't want to try a stiff R-C/S for open pow and windbuff? Sounds money to me...sounds like a Lotus 138 Flex=3.

.

I think the 138s are similar enough to the praxis, but I've never seen/touched a pair. I think I'd rather have more length than stiffness for what you mention. But then again anything feels awesome in the buff. Oh yea, and I'd love to try out the rockers.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Vitamin I

All-metal Salomons (with a non-spherical AFD) should be great (your 997's are metal toe, right?). My S900 DIN16's give me rigid command over spatula edges. Of course, that means the mountain can punish me back with ankle torquing vibrations on firm crud/bumps.

Spats (the person, not the ski) has posted a lot about using torsionally rigid bindings on fat skis, and he ranks Look Pivots at the top. Do an advanced search for keyword=tors*, Username=Spats, ShowResultsAs=Posts and put the whole story together with results like:

---

Good info. Thanks for doing the search work.

I don't remember if the 997s I have are metal toe. They're all flat AFD (no spheric; that came along with later S900s and 912/914 etc).

The advantage to going with a Salomon is that I can mount the binding myself (frankenjig setup). With Look or Tyrolia, I have to find a shop that'll mount the binding on the Praxis -- 135mm waists aren't that common. I'm guessing Bobo's in Reno can do it, but haven't checked with them.

Marshal,

I will grant your wishes to mount my praxis when I get them in a couple of weeks...:D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by marshalolson

i have only mounted toons, and was not impressed, but have seen several pairs that are beat to shit and have held up well... so i won;t comment further

buuut....

138's are basically a modified spatula for the ski to be a little more stable in open terrain, skin better, and be ALOT lighter.

praxxis are a true spat knockoff. though lighter and wider.

the ARGs are basically a 138 knockoff, just shorter.

the hellbents are a fatter maden'ak with a bunch of tip and tail rocker. and are very soft.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by El Chupacabra

I have to find a shop that'll mount the binding on the Praxis

---

I'm planning to have the Alpine shop do it, since they ground and finished all last year's Praxii, and mounted a fair number of pairs.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Vitamin I

All-metal Salomons (with a non-spherical AFD) should be great (your 997's are metal toe, right?). My S900 DIN16's give me rigid command over spatula edges. Of course, that means the mountain can punish me back with ankle torquing vibrations on firm crud/bumps.

Spats (the person, not the ski) has posted a lot about using torsionally rigid bindings on fat skis, and he ranks Look Pivots at the top. Do an advanced search for keyword=tors*, Username=Spats, ShowResultsAs=Posts and put the whole story together with results like:

http://tetongravity.com/forums/showt...%2A#post310925

http://tetongravity.com/forums/showt...%2A#post313785

http://tetongravity.com/forums/showt...%2A#post513794

http://tetongravity.com/forums/showt...%2A#post477224

http://tetongravity.com/forums/showt...%2A#post372912

dps knows fat, and he says:


http://tetongravity.com/forums/showt...2A#post1133292
.

---

I read through each of those threads and due to personal experience I don't agree with spats. He did 'unscientific' tests of torsional rigidity by how much he could move the toe piece with his fingers. I have skied salomons for years, nothing but 912tis and 914s, no all metals. My gripe with look pivots, which I've only skied on spats, is the heel piece. I just never feel locked down. It doesn't snap down like solly's do. I love the feeling of clicking into solly's, you're in. I think this was part of looks motivation to change their heel piece, the pivot heel would fail Spats torsional rigidity test horribly, you can wiggle that thing all over the place.

I don't want to start a binding debate, frankly I don't know that much, and nobody is going to dynamic binding testing. I say it's a matter of personal preference. I've never had a problem with solly's, the only time I can remember losing a ski when I thought I shouldn't have was when I left a wing poorly adjusted.

hmmmmm, what would I choose?

I agree with Vitamin-I. A stiff R-C/S (I like it) ski is going to kill on pow and tracked pow. And inbounds thats the deal. I know soft skis are more "playful" but the cool thing about pow is that you can ski gnarlier terrain much faster with less risk. Fuck playing. At any rate, IMO skiing fast is best/easiest with a stiff ski. Floppity flops just suck. I dont really think loading has a purpose in powder.......except to get your ski to bend (making it R-C) and thus pop up better/sink less. There is no need to use the flexon of the ski if it is already R-C. It will pop up on its own and be plenty fun. Then again, I could be wrong - maybe mojo and I can swap sticks for a run and we can resolve this. I will be @ squaw mojo. Come fly with me

Also, just FYI, I would strongly recommend against putting naxos on a ski that you want to ski very hard on. Marshal's review of the duke sums it up, the naxos and fritchis just dont lock you down to the degree that alpine binders do. I feel like with a R-C/S ski, you might want that feel. If you are cool with slight play in your ski-binding connection (and I do mean slight, its not huge but it sure bugs the crap outta me), go for it.

That said, I think might go duke. I just am so suspicious of them locking you in still. I do not like play. I want my shit to be stuck in there GOOD

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PowTron

Marshal,

I will grant your wishes to mount my praxis when I get them in a couple of weeks...:D

---

of course homie. no problem.

and i live in denvetr now, so its alot easier for ya.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by marshalolson

of course homie. no problem.

and i live in denvetr now, so its alot easier for ya.

---

Hell yeah...

Shoot me a PM with your Tele # again, I destroyed my old phone and lost all of my numbers.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by shasti

Also, just FYI, I would strongly recommend against putting naxos on a ski that you want to ski very hard on. Marshal's review of the duke sums it up, the naxos and fritchis just dont lock you down to the degree that alpine binders do.

---

According to this big haus (235 pounds): http://www.wildsnow.com/?p=240 and Lou Dawson's expirement: http://www.wildsnow.com/?p=379

"I skied these bindings with my Lange Comp 120 alpine boots and could feel no difference flex-wise between the NX21 and my Marker Comp 1400’s. This is a solid clamp."

and

... "Due to inherent error in any mechanical testing system, I’m confident in saying the Marker alpine (Marker M1100 Titanium), Freeride and Naxo Nx21 bindings are all essentially equal in lateral twisting stiffness, while the Pure and Naxo NXO1 are clearly much looser. Marker and Dynafit are the clear winners overall — stiffer than the alpine binding and the Freeride"

I'm not planning on running these on groomers, bumps and park... I'm looking for nice snow in the backcountry. I hope that Naxos don't get thrown out w/ the duke revolution bath-water.

I think I'm going with NX21s on my praxis, after Lemon Boy recommended putting touring bindings on fun shapes. I'm pretty sure I'm not a good enough skier to notice any extra slop :) Can't see that skinning reverse camber/reverse sidecut skis will be any problem. Sure icy traverses aren't going to happen but thats not what these will be for, and a little reverse camber might actually help settle the underfoot part of the ski better.
I'd kinda like to put some turntables on but the brake bending looks like a PITA.

Tried my new Pontoons for the first time yesterday, just on groomers (barely any natural snow yet) to find out what I was in for. Figured they'd be hell and I'd need to practice before skiing with anyone else, but was pleasantly surprised - maybe because I expected them to be almost unskiable on harder snow.

Conditions were spring-like: sun-softened to a few inches depth. The clown shoes actually CARVED and weren't that spooky at all. They seem to like really short radius turns, maybe the edge of the ski underfoot was sinking enough that the tip and tail edge could touch the snow and wham - they'd load up and snap out a turn. Can't imagine how well they must turn in deep pow, gotta be incredible. They don't inspire hauling ass on groomers or hitting park stunts, but they get down to the lift perfectly fine. They do begin to hurt the inside of your legs at the boot tops after working on carving for awhile, the wide waists transfer a lot of pressure. Had enough after two hours and went back to regular mid-fats -cruising speed quadrupled.

On a side note, you know Mt High, CA is 99% snowboarders when NOBODY notices a pair of Pontoons in the lift line, on a zero-powder day no less. Just another "dork skier" I guess.

^^^^^Pontoons at Mt Dry! Love it! (Spent the better part of my life in Whittier...with a Mt. Dry Season Pass, now spending the best part in WA)

Pontoons are surprising easy to ski on groomers and in the fluff they are magical. It's the in between that I'm not sure about. Curious how useful you'll find them at a place like Mammoth, were more often then not it is skied out crud. I'm not that big of a fan of the Toons here in WA when it gets tracked out...

185 Praxis on the other hand...they seem to ski it all (rip in the tracked out), but groomers are more or less survival skiing.

Yesterday AKBruin and I swapped skis for a few runs: my 189 Pontoons and his 195 Praxis.
IMHO both ski more similar than different. "Rocker" is the key here. I think we both had concurring thoughts, in ascending order of importance:

Pontoons

• goes over the crud
• perhaps better for straightlining
• easier to handle on groomers and runouts to the lifts
• larger tip and forebody provides greater surface area on the top sheet allowing more room for stickers

Praxis

• goes through the crud rather than smearing over it
• easier to turn on the dime
• prettier graphics

Pontoons
I've had mine for about 1-1/2 seasons and I beat the crap out of them. I've skied over and down rock chutes, across rock windblown runouts, etc. They are durable.
Perfect in pow; decent in groomers and soft bumps. All you need is soft.
In cut up pow they are work (isn't any ski?) and the tips ride up and bounce around. But once you get used to it, it's like water skiing over choppy water but not as bad I would have feared. A bit unorthodox but very tolerable. However, the chopped up pow is where I think the Praxis may outshine the Pontoon providing a smoother ride

I have not skied the DP Lotus; Armada ARG does not appeal to me because it's too short. I am interested in the Solly Rocker.

FYI: 6'2" 190 lbs

Spats since 05
DP138 since 07
Got some EHP186 this season too
I've also skied DP120s, Toon179, and El Jefes

I've examed the Praxis and ARG really close up.

Spat is an incredible crud buster because of its weight. I love my spats still.

I imagine the ARG and Praxis ski very similar... and inbetween the 138 and Spat.

Toon179 was weak in anything except open and uncut... it didn't like cutup or trees as much as spats or 138s. I was not impressed with the toons. I also rode 189s at one point.. more stable but still not impressed. The tips are retardedly wide anthis amplifies all kimpacts.

138 is the ultimate ski in the race.

We'll have to see how next year is since every ski company out there will have a reverse reverse or at least a rockered ski

I scored some pro model toons a few weeks ago, and they are noticeably stiffer than the consumer version a friend of mine has (but still soft). So far so sweet, I love them in trees and being able to bounce out of the snow whenever :D

I looked a the DP Skis website. To make matters more confusing, they offer two different Rockers for the Lotus and different flexes. Gah!

Jim S - if you look up the 200 120s/202 138s proposal thread Stephan goes through a lengthy discussion of all that.