2017 Praxis Skis Info and Resource Thread

I’m curious to see skinny Freeride results. 97mm can float fine in ripe corn or slush ... still might be a tad wider than ideal if skiing underripe firm puckering steep coolies.

But the overall idea reminds me of when Explosivs and B94s were considered hawt charger skis ... then you take off a couple pounds, add early rise tip and more tip taper/reverse sidecut, small touch of late tail rise, should be much easier to ski through variable 3D snow than those two OG chargers, while able to crush chickenheads and refreezing sastrugi better than the Yeti or BC - at least in concept.

That is my thinking. We'll see how it goes. gravitating towards -10 freeride 194(193) #4 flex. Debating between UL/veneer and Enduro/carbon/veneer.

I thought someone here had a BC builtup in a stiff construction.....any thoughts on this as a resort ski for soft days?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jmars

I thought someone here had a BC builtup in a stiff construction.....any thoughts on this as a resort ski for soft days?

---

Not “stiff/5 flex” but there is/was a sale on and I see the bc is now “medium/3flex”. I thought they were too soft at a “2flex” but i liked the shape. I’d like a 3/3+ for touring and a 4 for resort . A 108 with 2-3mm camber would be $

The original BC was developed before Keith had a UL core and carbon layup process ... they used to be heavier/stiffier than current stock flex, and Unfrozen Caveman Lawyer loved it as a resort ski setup.

That said, I think part of what makes the current BC so fun in soft snow is the soft flex in the tip and tails, if you overcompensate and make it *too* stiff I think you lose a lot of the magic in that shape. I think going to a Flex 4 for bigger riders should be right on though ... My 11-12' stock flex carbon layup 180 BCs (maybe a 2 or 2+ in current spec?) are right on the money for my tiny 135 lbs frame.

I just like the shape a ton...my wife has one and I thought maybe this would be “funner” for me in a stiff lay up, maybe a 4 would do it.

Just pondering builds and how to give Keith more money.

Now back to the RX and true baring bases

My 188 flex 3 Sancho Panza's are mounted at -1.5. I'll give a report once I put them through there paces in the San Juan's this weekend.

Freerides - I love my 184 flex 4 carbons. They are just a good all around ski area ski with untested spring BC potential. That said, these are a traditional ski. Think Explosive, Legend Pro etc. with a bit more sidecut. I don't care what the stats say, this ski has basically zero tip or tail rocker/early rise. Just one guy's opinion but I don't think for most people these are a "dominate shit fuck conditions" ski. And that is coming from someone old school racer with old school racer technique.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Foggy_Goggles

My 188 flex 3 Sancho Panza's are mounted at -1.5. I'll give a report once I put them through there paces in the San Juan's this weekend.

Freerides - I love my 184 flex 4 carbons. They are just a good all around ski area ski with untested spring BC potential. That said, these are a traditional ski. Think Explosive, Legend Pro etc. with a bit more sidecut. I don't care what the stats say, this ski has basically zero tip or tail rocker/early rise. Just one guy's opinion but I don't think for most people these are a "dominate shit fuck conditions" ski. And that is coming from someone old school racer with old school racer technique.

---

I love my Freerides, traditional for sure.
Rocker/profile pic for ref...
Attachment 225074

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Foggy_Goggles

Freerides - I love my 184 flex 4 carbons. They are just a good all around ski area ski with untested spring BC potential. That said, these are a traditional ski. Think Explosive, Legend Pro etc. with a bit more sidecut. I don't care what the stats say, this ski has basically zero tip or tail rocker/early rise. Just one guy's opinion but I don't think for most people these are a "dominate shit fuck conditions" ski. And that is coming from someone old school racer with old school racer technique.

---

Interesting feedback. Care to elaborate on them not "dominating shit fuck conditions"? What would you look to change or adjust, what would you be looking for in such a ski? I've found more trad skis to be favorable for such conditions. I'm not looking for it to plane up over pow at all as anytime it's deep enough to plane, I'll have the protest out.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nickel

Interesting feedback. Care to elaborate on them not "dominating shit fuck conditions"? What would you look to change or adjust, what would you be looking for in such a ski? I've found more trad skis to be favorable for such conditions. I'm not looking for it to plane up over pow at all as anytime it's deep enough to plane, I'll have the protest out.

---

I really don't have much to elaborate. Unlike others, I don't think I'm a ski designer. Possibly, I like a bit more tip rocker and less sidecut and maybe a bit softer? I super variable (crusts etc.) the tip tends to grab. I'm sure it is a style thing but I have skied a ton of gnar in my life and these skis are not 100% confidence inspiring in those situations [/dick head humble brag].

My 2c - I think skis like the Freeride dominate 2D shitfuck conditions, whereas funshaped skis like the Protest or Billygoat do much better for dominating 3D shitfuck conditions. Absolutely agree that the tip of the Freeride (and most traditional skis) tends to be grabby in breakable crusts.

I'm real interested to hear how you like the Qs, Foggy.

It's both fun and anxiety inducing to nerd out on skis...

At the end of the day, for a touring ski destined for breakable crusts, dust on crust, corn, melt-freeze and ice, it's basically between

192Yeti #4 flex UL/veneer
193 -10freeride #4 flex UL/veneer

Picking is hard. Thankfully I don't need to pick for a while.

I’ve been skiing my GPO’s a bit lately. Stock flex in a 192 but w the carbon enduro core. It’s a great all around ski.

Floats and carries great speed in the pow, able to ski fast crud busting gs turns in the chop, fun long radius carves on the groomed.

Seems to make all turn shapes, playful yet damp.

I’ve hit a reasonable amount of stuff and no damage.

I’m very pleased.


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

We are probably saying the right think. 2D does not equal "SFC". That is just called, windpack, firm-bird, ice, refreeze etc.

What is the appropriate dosage of edibles for a first day on the Qs?

^if you have to ask... [emoji41]

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SchralphMacchio

The original BC was developed before Keith had a UL core and carbon layup process ... they used to be heavier/stiffier than current stock flex, and Unfrozen Caveman Lawyer loved it as a resort ski setup.

---

I liked that ski much more than the softer tip/tail version.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nickel

It's both fun and anxiety inducing to nerd out on skis...

At the end of the day, for a touring ski destined for breakable crusts, dust on crust, corn, melt-freeze and ice, it's basically between

192Yeti #4 flex UL/veneer
193 -10freeride #4 flex UL/veneer

Picking is hard. Thankfully I don't need to pick for a while.

---

Someone mentioned this, but I wouldn't get the UL core for anything but breezy spring corn or 6" of hero powder. Maybe it's mental, but the 0.5 lb savings comes with much greater sacrifices, esp. if you're talking about breakable crusts and melt-freeze scrape and crunch.

Otherwise, for those conditions, I'd go with Freeride.

Anyone with 189 RXs who can comment on their stability (6.5' 200lbs)? Seems like a pretty short effective edge, wondering if a custom 194 is in order. For the record, I never got along with the 196 Protest (too center mounted?), but like my 192 Yetis.

My 189 Rx with Heavy core and #5 flex haul the friggen mail. I’m 6’2” 210lbs.


Sent from my iPad using TGR Forums

That ski sounds so freakin dialed, have you noticed no one sells them?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nevada29er

Anyone with 189 RXs who can comment on their stability (6.5' 200lbs)? Seems like a pretty short effective edge, wondering if a custom 194 is in order. For the record, I never got along with the 196 Protest (too center mounted?), but like my 192 Yetis.

---

For a ski of that size, I wouldn't say it's effective edge is pretty short. It has modest tip rocker and very little tail rocker. It definitely has more effective edge than the Protests and a hair more than the Yetis (comparing 189 to the 192).

I don't think a 194 is an option, but I could be wrong.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Betelgeuse

My 189 Rx with Heavy core and #5 flex haul the friggen mail. I’m 6’2” 210lbs.


Sent from my iPad using TGR Forums

---

Cool, I don't need a super stiff flex, just nice and progressive. A little extra length helps with the suspension. I actually thought the 196 protests (#4 flex) were on the stiff side, but the shovel length felt short. I'm a fan of more traditional ski mounts.

Thinking of picking up some Rx with the 20% off Presidents code.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nevada29er

Cool, I don't need a super stiff flex, just nice and progressive. A little extra length helps with the suspension. I actually thought the 196 protests (#4 flex) were on the stiff side, but the shovel length felt short. I'm a fan of more traditional ski mounts.

Thinking of picking up some Rx with the 20% off Presidents code.

---

I am surprised at how easy the Praxis heavy core and stiffer flexes ski. They still have plenty of backbone, all you’d ever need really, but I find them to be “lighter on my feet” than any of my On3ps. My Rx are so nimble when I need them to be. Might be the length, they tape measure like 187.5cm or something like that, which is on the shorter side for me. Burly AF, but easy to ski and easy to throw around. They are almost as nimble as the old 186 on3p viciks. Super balanced design, I dont know if it has any flaws at all.. Keith absolutely nailed this shape.

I started out today on Cease & Desists, then switched to Rx. Jeez, the Rx still float very well for the heavy core and stiff flex. I thought they would feel like submarines after coming off C&Ds...The Rx are almost as good in choppy powder bumps as Billy Goats are. It must be that long turn radius, they just blast through anything. However they still pivot exactly when you need them to. BGs are more “fun” though, the RES shape is looser, and the standard flex On3p has more pop. Rx feel more like all mtn skis than the 189 Billy Goats, but still have enough width to do very well in 3D stuff. Today there was about 6-8 inches on top of crust, and the Rx truly shined.

There’s no way around it, Rx are my favorite skis. I am going to buy the standard version for touring, since they do everything so well and instill so much confidence. I bet the enduro core and #4 flex float better, and still handle crud and wind/temp affected snow well enough for me. 9lbs with carbon and veneer, which was my max weight.. I am pretty much a beginner at skinning and tech bindings, I hope thats not too heavy.

I am as confident on steep ice, windpack, coral reef, etc, on my heavy 189 Rx, as I am on 191 Monsters. The monsters obviously have a higher top end, metal-feel, and are a little more predictable on edge, but I rarely need THAT much speed. The Rx handle 3D so much better.


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

Great, now the 20% code isn't working... Not that I need another 116 underfoot ski with BGs, and Governors.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nevada29er

Great, now the 20% code isn't working... Not that I need another 116 underfoot ski with BGs, and Governors.

---

Govs and BGs are also very good skis. Rx feel more like all mtn skis though.


Sent from my iPad using TGR Forums