Printable View
Quote:
Originally Posted by auvgeek
Well, I had never been on a carbon ski before on the idea of a bit lighter weight, and maybe doing some touring on them, and talking with Keith, swayed me to take a shot. Now that my time for touring seems less then anticipated and I'll spend much more time at the resort, I might end up sellling them at some point and pick up another all glass pair.
But we'll see as there's still more days to get out there.
Attachment 151934
Attachment 151933
Attachment 151935
Spent my first 2 days on these boards this past Friday (Squaw) and Saturday (Kirkwood). Super fun. Extremely surfy - much more so than other skis I have skied in this category (Bibby Pros and Rocker 2 115's). Was still able to rail on them through crud as well and was pleased how versatile they were for a completely rockered ski. The only time I noticed the full rocker was skiing flat skis back to the lift on cat tracks. Got a little squirrely there. I haven't skied the regular GPO so I don't know how surfy they are but these are quick and can be thrown around on a dime. Cheers.
^^^ sexy time. Those look fun as hell
Separated at birth? Other than the camber on the Squads, these look really similar. Curious to see how the GPO compares. Need freezing levels to cooperate in the Cascades...Attachment 151959
The carbon does more than lighten the ski, it makes it more reactive and poppy, but has the side effect of often making them less damp, which some people don't like. I bought a pair of Concepts last year Medium Stiff in the carbon lay up and they are super strong, reactive, quick skis that are really great all mountain resort skis. I've been used all my life to skiing heavy, damp, metal/fibreglass skis and the lightness and response of carbon is a revelation and relief to my aging legs. I ski them just as hard and have more energy. They do take a little more focus at times, I admit, but I am definitely seeing the wisdom in lighter quicker skis, though I still love my heavy damp skis at times. The carbon layup in my Concepts influenced me to go with the same layup in my new for this season Ullr's which I was tempted to order in plain glass. I'm glad I went with the carbon. They are a dedicated resort ski with alpine bindings and are great. With such big skis, the weight savings and reduced swing weight is a blessing and the carbon gives them the character of a smaller, lighter ski without much if any sacrifice in their ability to blow through heavy crudded up snow.Quote:
Originally Posted by auvgeek
You can still have a damp ski that is reactive and poppy. Bamboo.Quote:
Originally Posted by Wetdog
I agree. Bamboo cores are a good example. A good apples to apples example of that are the DPS Hybrid skis which are bamboo and fibreglass with carbon stringers which are damper than the pure carbon skis but still light and poppy relative to many fibreglass skis. The pure skis with a poplar/carbon combo are lighter and more responsive than the bamboo glass hybrids with the price of less dampness. There is a certain quality to the pure carbon skis which can't be replicated simply by using bamboo as a core substitute for other woods. The quality of pure carbon skis is hard to explain if you haven't ridden them, but it is a lighter more powerful, responsive feel that does take some getting used to. Some people don't like it, and I totally get that it's a personal preference. It's kind of like a Subaru WRX compared to a WRX STI. There're both excellent performers and the STI is a notch above performance wise with a higher price tag and finer tune that some people don't want or need.Quote:
Originally Posted by PhiberAwptik
Prior skis, as another example, is a company that makes a powerful, damp, maple core skis that are heavy and stiff with quad glass that just blow through everything and in last few years they have offered the same core with full carbon replacing the glass in the interests of lightening up some of their models for backcountry applications. The result is a lighter, more responsive ski that takes less energy and has nearly the same dampness as the full fibreglass skis. They would have totally changed the character of their skis by using a bamboo core with glass instead of retaining the maple and using carbon fibre instead of glass.
In regards to Praxis skis, I own several models in with both glass and carbon construction and they are all great. Keith's cores are mainly aspen with maple and ash stringers. This allows a lightish ski that is still damp. Adding carbon to the glass layup lightens the ski and makes it a bit popper and more responsive and a bit less damp, but only subtly so. Going with a bamboo core would change the character of the ski much more significantly than a layer or two of carbon. I personally like the Praxis carbon layups for most of my applications, though in conversations with Keith about which construction to go with, he has admitted that he prefers the feel of the fibreglass in deep powder. I'm kind of the other way. It's personal preference. Having tried a number of bamboo skis, I would have to agree with you that they do have a nice pop to them in a different kind of way than carbon layup skis that is neither better or worse in my mind. I think Keith likes to keep his cores consistent and uses the carbon to tweak the feel of the ski rather than significantly altering it using different core materials. There are so many variables and personal preferences and none of them are right or wrong. It's good we have the choice.
To address auvgeek's comments above, I don't think for most people buying Praxis skis with the carbon option is perceived as being better because it is more expensive, but rather that people are becoming more receptive to the use of carbon to create certain properties in a ski that that they like. I certainly wouldn't be paying an extra 120 bucks just to say I had a layer of carbon in my skis, especially if it made my skis less enjoyable to ski. It's not for everyone, but it the case of the Praxis layups it is a matter of subtle degree rather than a whole different feel. It is not just about making skis light for the backcountry. Carbon has a place on the frontside too.
Carbon isn't magic. Done right carbon in skis, liike bikes and cars, means stiff and a weight loss .
Some of the DPS and Praxis skis have no cosmetic hint that they actually are carbon. So your investment is hidden. The weight on your feet or back more obvious.
Ok I'm going to ask one last time before putting drill to top sheet of these new 187 MAP core beauties, those of you who have some time on these now in differing conditions, do I mount on the dimple or -1. 6ft 1. 207, no intentional switch skiing, using as a jack of all trades powder / big mtn travel ski to be more versitile than my Protests. Mounting w dukes. Keith suggested -1 but I want be OCD and hear any other opinions.
As noted before, I like 'em on the dimple (std rocker/camber - not the CCR). I'm sure -1 is fine too. I use the ski in much the context you intend to. I am in your ht/wt zone. I don't think you'll go wrong either way. Glad to be of assistance ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by Duffman
Dimple. I ski them a smidge ahead of the dimpleQuote:
Originally Posted by Duffman
Quote:
Originally Posted by Duffman
I'm 5'9" 155 so shorter and lighter then you. I'm skiing a 182 GPO. I usually like to drive my skis, really pressuring the tongue of the boot and getting the tip of the ski to engage, at least on hardpack. I mounted my GPOs -1. I like that mount a lot. I find I can drive them when I want but also easily shift to a more playful somewhat centered stance when condiitons call for it. The "only" issue I had with the skis and the mount was mental, in that I constantly thought I was going to go over the handlebars with so much tail and so little tip in front of me. But once I relaxed and trusted the skis everything took care of itself.
Skiing Praxis Ullrs, essentially a wider GPO, which I have mounted with Schizos and have skied from -2 to +1, I have noticed only subtle differences. There is that big a sweet spot. On the dimple or slightly ahead, there is slightly easier turn initiation on firmer snow, a bit better maneuverability in bumps and tight spots and good soft snow performance. -1 and -2 gives better soft snow, powder performance for me, with a slight decrease in response in bumps and on firmer or variable snow, but nothing extreme. Keep in mind that the Ullr dimple is -1 relative to where it would be on the same length GPO according to Keith. Keith recommended I try -2 on the Ullr which would be -3 on the GPO. I would say -2 for a mostly powder chores or -1 for an all around ski with a preference for powder but good variable performance and on the dimple for all mountain performance. Really, there is not a huge difference between +1 and -2. It is that well balanced and has that big a sweet spot. It's not worth losing sleep over. -1 would be quite safe I should think.
I have mine mounted on the line. I love them there for resort skiing and everything up to about 6-10" of pow. I have other powder skis, so I'm happy where the GPO's are mounted, but I dont think they are great in deep powder, if they were my only big ski, then I would mount them at -1. I'm 5'11" 165, but usually ski with a 15lb pack.Quote:
Originally Posted by Duffman
Went with the dot. I compared them to some of my existing rockered skis and to the line for the 188 super 7s since they are a similar shape /dim but much stiffer obviously. The super mounted at -1 where I liked them was actually pretty close to the dot for the GPO. So I guess I don't find it to be that far forward so I gave it a shot. Will try these out tomorrow prob at alta
still loving my 187s at -2, they do everything well and make it easy. Skied some seriously deep days a couple weeks back, could've been on a full R/R ski but was enjoying the GPOs too much. If I had to do it again I'd get the fiberglass layup for a bit less deflection in chop.
anybody have some 192's they might want to trade for 187's? I probably need more days on mine... but just throwing it out there.
glass layup?Quote:
Originally Posted by sierraskier
You've bought a pair of skis from me, maybe it's my turn. :D
MAP with Concept topsheet. They are pretty light.
Due to some strangeness with the last mount, which was at the dimple, now skiing my 187 carbons at -3. (Didn't have a choice, third mount now.)
After reading this thread I was skeptical being so far back but have gotten a few good pow days on em an couldn't be happier. I am a directional skier and feel like this mount suits my skiing really well. Not one obsess over mount points, just wanted to share my thoughts.
I finally got 10 days on my 192, medium/stiff, all glass, GPO's which is enough to give my impressions of this ski. Im 6'1", 170 and ski mostly Alpine Meadows with BC days thown in as conditions allow and in the spring. We have not had a great season out in Tahoe but I have been able to ski man made to 6" of heavier fresh(even by our standards) and everything in between.
Fist off very impressed with there versatility and changeability. I got them and put them base to base and marked the contact points on the sidewall with a sharpie. I detuned the tips and tails from contact points out pretty heavily with a panzer file at 45*. I did not want them to catch/hook and wanted a looser feeling ski. After agonizing about mount point I look at my other skis and decided on a -2 mount which is very close to the middle of the contact points. I mounted with sollyfit plates but have not got to skin on them yet. I do like to rest on my shins a little forward but they still ski great more centered as well.
I was surprised how light and agile they skied as they are a good bit heavier than my DPS 112RP's. The stability of them in heavy pow and chopped up stuff has impressed me and allowed me to dial the speed and confidence up a couple notches in those conditions. I have not had any over the handlebar feelings even in very wet snow. They have been excellent on early season man made and groomer days with the lady as well.
Overall great ski, great build quality, and just what I was looking for a a new daily driver in the quiver. Thanks to Keith/Kevin and the praxis crew. My next pair will be some protests to complement the wootest 1.0's and round out the quiver. What to sell is a harder question than what to buy for next year.
first day on my 'off the shelf' (literally) 187 GPO's. here's what happens when a mother fucking gaper locks into a pair of no bullshit charger skis:
https://vimeo.com/88558238
And 'off the shelf' means midstiff flex and all fiberglass layup, acquired from The Sports Exchange in Truckee. Mounted on the dot with no edge detuning and experienced no hookiness. Despite preconceived notions of 'playfulness', these skis are way more 'charger' than my 191 lhasas: although shorter, with a tighter turning radius, more forward mount, and more tip and tail splay, the GPO's want to straightline down the mountain and are more damp and stable than the lhasa's. and i find the lhasa's to be damp and stable enough to slice through crud quite admirably, with impressive aplomb. being a fucktard gaper, i haven't found a speed limit on either ski, but i was def skiing faster on the GPO's and they still had that rock solid brick shithouse feel to 'em. the lhasa's are like that little angel on your shoulder, watching over you and saving your ass when you do stupid things. the GPO's are like that little devil on your shoulder, daring you to man up and stop skiing like a fucking pussy. when you lock into a pair of GPO's, be prepared, or get pwned. although in retrospect, the snow conditions were pretty challenging and skiing the lhasa's might have been a handful as well. i do think the GPO's are a more 'charger' ski tho, but still very manageable and a kick ass super fun ski for dipshit gapers like me. i originally planned to install inserts for AXL's on the GPO's, but i'll prolly mount 'em to the lhasa's instead and pop my FKS's on the GPO's. hella!
Quote:
Originally Posted by parkmeister
You know they're called GPOs right? ;)
that was.. pretty sweet
Quote:
Originally Posted by kidwoo
d'oh!!! i told you i was a fucktard. there you go.