2018-19 Praxis Skis Info and Resource Thread

Why I haven't bought Praxis:
Graphics mostly suck unless you layer veneer or something, which gets expensive. (Ie the Praxilhasa Norse & 2funky have)
A lot of the designs/shapes are meh and still the original design. Not the continual improvement/refinement that has been happening with brands like ON3P.
Too many choices. Rx? Or Freeride? Or GPO?
No clear collections of skis to differentiate models by use/deisgn. (freeride, freestyle, touring, dad skis, etc.)
Too many choices within the choices (+10 -10, flex, layup, weight core) It's confusing.
Mount points sketch me out as they seem to be engineered too far forward... thread after thread of multiple remounts, complaints of tip dive. Multiple mags I know have had quietly had skiabilty issues with Praxis skis and have chosen to stay quiet about it... but I haven't been that impressed by feedback.
The ridiculously sharp tunes. I should not need to detune/retune a ski out of wrapper designed for freeride skiing.
Complaints of tip dive on skis that line up with similar skis in the category that don't have any issue with tip dive. Heck, how many killer FWT runs has Tabke blown because of tip dive?

Just my .02 cents

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Artist Formerly Known as Leavenworth Skier

Why I haven't bought Praxis:
Graphics mostly suck unless you layer veneer or something, which gets expensive. (Ie the Praxilhasa Norse & 2funky have)
A lot of the designs/shapes are meh and still the original design. Not the continual improvement/refinement that has been happening with brands like ON3P.
Too many choices. Rx? Or Freeride? Or GPO?
No clear collections of skis to differentiate models by use/deisgn. (freeride, freestyle, touring, dad skis, etc.)
Too many choices within the choices (+10 -10, flex, layup, weight core) It's confusing.
Mount points sketch me out as they seem to be engineered too far forward... thread after thread of multiple remounts, complaints of tip dive. Multiple mags I know have had quietly had skiabilty issues with Praxis skis and have chosen to stay quiet about it... but I haven't been that impressed by feedback.
The ridiculously sharp tunes. I should not need to detune/retune a ski out of wrapper designed for freeride skiing.
Complaints of tip dive on skis that line up with similar skis in the category that don't have any issue with tip dive. Heck, how many killer FWT runs has Tabke blown because of tip dive?

Just my .02 cents

---

What? I have protest and it rules the roost in deep pow. No dive or issues


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by whyturn

What? I have protest and it rules the roost in deep pow. No dive or issues

---

Nor should they. Otherwise what is the point of having a 128mm ski?

I’ve heard of other people having issues with tip dives in some of their other skis though. I’ve only skied protests so cant comment on it first hand.


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

I've run into it on my protests but it may be a product of mounting on the line and needing to up-size (6'2 200# on 187)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Artist Formerly Known as Leavenworth Skier

Why I haven't bought Praxis:
Graphics mostly suck unless you layer veneer or something, which gets expensive. (Ie the Praxilhasa Norse & 2funky have)
A lot of the designs/shapes are meh and still the original design. Not the continual improvement/refinement that has been happening with brands like ON3P.
Too many choices. Rx? Or Freeride? Or GPO?
No clear collections of skis to differentiate models by use/deisgn. (freeride, freestyle, touring, dad skis, etc.)
Too many choices within the choices (+10 -10, flex, layup, weight core) It's confusing.
Mount points sketch me out as they seem to be engineered too far forward... thread after thread of multiple remounts, complaints of tip dive. Multiple mags I know have had quietly had skiabilty issues with Praxis skis and have chosen to stay quiet about it... but I haven't been that impressed by feedback.
The ridiculously sharp tunes. I should not need to detune/retune a ski out of wrapper designed for freeride skiing.
Complaints of tip dive on skis that line up with similar skis in the category that don't have any issue with tip dive. Heck, how many killer FWT runs has Tabke blown because of tip dive?

Just my .02 cents

---

^ On the money.

It is my humble opinion (adopted and paraphrased from a friend, likely to read this) that Kieth is a world class ski builder but a middling ski designer. And that he got lucky with a couple models like the GPO and Protest, as most folks seem to like those a lot.

The Rx was a bad experience for me personally, and it led me to be much more critical about ski geometry relative to mount/stance/technique/pressure and edge contact. I wish I could say that the rest of the lineup avoided these design issues but it doesn't appear so, at least on paper.

Praxis building other designs like the Lhasa Fat, Kusala, etc. is an attractive path.

Respect to the company. I hope they can continue to operate.

Other than the top-5 selling models, White label manufacturing seems like a good option for Keith. It could be hard when he’s not putting his name on the product but it’s regular orders and money up front for large batches. Let someone else assume the retail risk.

Then take that top-5 and really make them shine with designer top sheets, carbon upgrades and veneers.

If Keith listened to most of these suggestions, he'd be in worse shape than he is. 195cm - do you really think there are more than a handful of people who would buy them? What about the Supergoat? One run and done, right?


If 20 of you opened your wallets and went to Keith, I'm sure he would have built a long missile for you.

I'll bet most of the critics here weigh well North of 220 Lbs. Cut your beer consumption.

Stagnant development? Thank goodness the GPO remains unchanged. It's my favorite ski ever ... lucky design or not.

Read the debate about whether the Lhasa should have changed at all - people were on the fence. How old is that design? Change a seminal design just for the helluvit?

Agreed about ambiguous mount points.

I also agree that the +10/-10 was a mistake. These need to be a fully tested model rather than a "what the hell, let's try it" option. It should have been more like how Moment treats the Wildcat (two widths) or ON3P does the Woodsman & Wren.

Can you imagine a fleshed out GPO family in 96/106/116? It would make much more sense (less buyer confusion) than say, having a Pste Jib (even if the PJ were merely renamed) along with some random 106 ski in the lineup.

Topsheets & ON3P: Other than recent Billy Goats (since 15/16), the Steeples, and the plain top, their skis make me want to get out a can of Krylon. They make me want to puke. No accounting for taste, I suppose ;-)

Ski design competency - the real problem lies in the difficulty in demoing. No ski can be all things to all people, and several designs were intended to be niche skis.

Then there's the TGR Bro factor - ignoring some phenomenal skis.

For example, I picked up a pair of EXPs from @grinch last Spring - a completely ignored ski when discussions of Zero G 85s come up - amazing stability, maneuerability, and versatility in an 88mm ski.

Lastly (in honor of Alpy) ... Praxis Rx.

... Thom

I had tip dive on my 192 ProTests at recommended and at -1 when I skied them in an athletic stance. But initially I also had issues with my SuperGoats when I first got them. I solved the issues on my SuperGoats with a toe shim that flattened the ramp angle of the bindings to nearly zero. I think that a shim would have solved my issues with the ProTest as well but I sold them before I tried the toe shim.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kopi_Red

I had tip dive on my 192 ProTests at recommended and at -1 when I skied them in an athletic stance. But initially I also had issues with my SuperGoats when I first got them. I solved the issues on my SuperGoats with a toe shim that flattened the ramp angle of the bindings to nearly zero. I think that a shim would have solved my issues with the ProTest as well but I sold them before I tried the toe shim.

---

Protests were one of my regrets, but I seem to be in the minority. I'm OK with that.

People I respect tell me that it takes 4-5 days to master them, after which, an entirely new world opens up to you.

I don't have the patience (or number of epic powder days in a season) to do this. With limited inbounds powder days in a given year, I don't want to spend my time ski testing. If I logged 100 day seasons, it would be different.

... Thom

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by galibier_numero_un

Read the debate about whether the Lhasa should have changed at all. How old is that design? Change a seminal design just for the helluvit.

---

Sounds like you have a reading comprehension deficit.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jackattack

Sounds like you have a reading comprehension deficit.

---

Many debate whether the tail rocker should have been messed with. I ain't takin' sides, and it doesn't change the basic argument.

One guy who hasn’t even skied the new ones with tail rocker =/= many debates.

The tail rocker version is better


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jackattack

Sounds like you have a reading comprehension deficit.

---

No kidding. That slight change made that ski a much better ski. A couple who said not to mess with it sound as though they haven’t been on either version. Splats complaint is that he has issue initiating a turn, that has zero to do with the ever so tiny tail rocker that was added, and has his full input and final stamp of approval. Myself as well as others who i have spoke with that skied both iterations love the addition of tail rocker and have zero issue with turn initiation and carving. Mine still hip drag carve just like my other ones did. That’s impressive for a 117 underfoot ski that will also now pivot and slarve with ease.

As far as praxis and the comments above, i sort of echo some of the points. The Protest is/was the only ski that really grabbed my eye, that was several years ago and now i cannot see them NOT in my quiver, own 188’s and 192’s. Clicked for me the first run. Made me look at the mountain very differently and ski a little differently which i really dig and has progressed into my other skis, except for skis that demand old school tip driving technique.

Probably there's a problem with the sales model when you have mount points and factory razor sharp tunes designed for pro comp skiers vs. us pedestrians who want shit to work out of the box.

Also agree on +/-10mm comments and family/series branding within your lineup vs. asking your customers to pick and choose every ski design option they want.

I think most of us really just need to be able to pick custom topsheets and flex stiffness when it comes to preseason pre-sales.

Too many choices hurts the consumer and the manufacturer because then you have a supply chain complexity and factory assembly cell materials queing problem. I think even the available core/layup choices should just be constrained by the model of ski, which then allows the personality (and therefore brand identity) of each model to be more consistent from user to user. More layup and veneer type options also means as a manufacturer you are more cash-out before you've even shipped products because you're buying more options of materials than consolidating around common materials for all of your various product platforms.

The other custom stuff (material type of veneer, +/- 10mm, whatever else you can dream of, razor sharp vs. standard detune) is really just a "power user" interface that shouldn't even be on each of the ski ordering pages, probably just an email template form somewhere else, and charge a boatload more for it because if makes your business model way more complex.

Also, I for one happen to believe in veneer, and I believe it's a Praxis differentiator. Consider making it a part of your brand identity and just don't sell nylon topsheet skis. Sure it costs more, but the skis ski better and it maintains the fanboi love of everyone in lift lines explaining to other people why Praxis skis are "so much better" than Rossi/Head/Volkl/K2/whatever. You'll probably lose a few sales to Moment and ON3P if you drop nylon, but you also zero in on "your customers" and further dig into your brand identity. If you can extract an appropriate premium for it, it may help with margins since you'll have less material variability.

My $0.03.

I'm also just spitballing, I have never put my own $$ and life on the line for a business of passion that I also need to pay the bills. Nor have I ever built skis. I did work in business and manufacturing, but also I found myself a sugar momma to pay the bills. So, I say all of this with mad respect for what Keith has done!!!

I wasn't tallying votes with respect to the classic vs. new Lhasa discussion.

My comment (perhaps not clearly written) was intended to make the point that you don't throw out a design because it's old. Of course you revisit it.

It sounds as if you guys nailed it with the change, but it could have just as easily been a Wootest 1.0. The fact that @splat and Keith had heavy involvement (and interest) put the odds in your favor however.

... Thom

Ah, gotcha.

I'm still digging my MVPs. Mounted 1cm behind the line and detuned like a sum-bitch. Carve, skid, slarve... whatever, they do it all.

Really want to try the ProTest but I can't justify owning those while living far, far away from any real skiing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by galibier_numero_un

If Keith listened to most of these suggestions, he'd be in worse shape than he is. 195cm - do you really think there are more than a handful of people who would buy them? What about the Supergoat? One run and done, right?


If 20 of you opened your wallets and went to Keith, I'm sure he would have built a long missile for you.

I'll bet most of the critics here weigh well North of 220 Lbs. Cut your beer consumption.

Stagnant development? Thank goodness the GPO remains unchanged. It's my favorite ski ever ... lucky design or not.

Read the debate about whether the Lhasa should have changed at all - people were on the fence. How old is that design? Change a seminal design just for the helluvit?

Agreed about ambiguous mount points.

I also agree that the +10/-10 was a mistake. These need to be a fully tested model rather than a "what the hell, let's try it" option. It should have been more like how Moment treats the Wildcat (two widths) or ON3P does the Woodsman & Wren.

Can you imagine a fleshed out GPO family in 96/106/116? It would make much more sense (less buyer confusion) than say, having a Pste Jib (even if the PJ were merely renamed) along with some random 106 ski in the lineup.

Topsheets & ON3P: Other than recent Billy Goats (since 15/16), the Steeples, and the plain top, their skis make me want to get out a can of Krylon. They make me want to puke. No accounting for taste, I suppose ;-)

Ski design competency - the real problem lies in the difficulty in demoing. No ski can be all things to all people, and several designs were intended to be niche skis.

Then there's the TGR Bro factor - ignoring some phenomenal skis.

For example, I picked up a pair of EXPs from @grinch last Spring - a completely ignored ski when discussions of Zero G 85s come up - amazing stability, maneuerability, and versatility in an 88mm ski.

Lastly (in honor of Alpy) ... Praxis Rx.

... Thom

---

Felt a sting there, Thom? Nobody is immune to brand loyalty.

I'm 180, by the way, in case you feel like buying me underwear for Valentine's Day. You're coming to Alpy, right?

Rider weight isn't as important as where the pressure gets applied. Folks are figuring that out with sensitivities to ramp, mount point, etc as they relate to sidecut and flex. Praxis have more fwd mount points than some guys prefer.

Praxis Rx... baha, my favorite joke here now. Perfect example. That shape is like ten years old and has been far eclipsed. Bob repped it so consistently here that a bunch of folks went and bought some, including me! Trad camber, 32m radius, tip rocker only... sounded pretty ok as a big mountain ski! But the mount point puts you wayy too far forward on the effective edge, forcing you to steer from the heels and ass.

Some guys really jive with that; Tabke has a more neutral stance, which certainly affected his design input for the Rx, Q, etc. But it also perhaps explains why skiers with traditional backgrounds, racers, shin drivers, aren't keeping (all) their Praxis.

Cult classics excepted, as they build their own following out of performance rather than bandwaggoning. How many here have kept their Protests but sold their BC, Yeti, Piste Jib?

But I'm just an armchair dentiste

I have wootest and will see about those as well. But they look sweet

Overall less models and Marie focused approach may help. I’m sure Keith knows what sells and it ain’t 196 protest.

Maybe partner with local distributors like Tahoe mag ski shop. But then they get a cut.

I hope they can stay viable and if not I’m hoarding the protest.


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

A philosophical point regarding incremental product changes ...

Manufacturers are in a rough position, and live on a continuum between two extremes:

• the market driven organizations that change product frequently (if only the cosmetics, but sometimes the design) in order to work the buying public into a lather.
• the engineering driven organizations who make changes (sometimes incremental) and frequently don't even blow their horns about it.

In the old days, I would have characterized Canon cameras in the first category and Nikon in the latter.

Somewhere in the middle lies a happy medium (commercial viability vs. not alienating your customer).

At one extreme, folks get pissed when they bought the latest and greatest, only to discover that their pride and joy is obsolete two weeks after purchase. At the other extreme, they wonder if you're actually working on improvement.

Remember Pat's comments about grinding off 2mm of edge from the Lhasa tail? I wonder if he incorporated a change in production without mentioning it ... that sort of thing.

Back to our regularly scheduled programming ...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Norseman

Felt a sting there, Thom? Nobody is immune to brand loyalty.

I'm 180, by the way, in case you feel like buying me underwear for Valentine's Day. You're coming to Alpy, right?

Rider weight isn't as important as where the pressure gets applied. Folks are figuring that out with sensitivities to ramp, mount point, etc as they relate to sidecut and flex. Praxis have more fwd mount points than some guys prefer.

Praxis Rx... baha, my favorite joke here now. Perfect example. That shape is like ten years old and has been far eclipsed. Bob repped it so consistently here that a bunch of folks went and bought some, including me! Trad camber, 32m radius, tip rocker only... sounded pretty ok as a big mountain ski! But the mount point puts you wayy too far forward on the effective edge, forcing you to steer from the heels and ass.

Some guys really jive with that; Tabke has a more neutral stance, which certainly affected his design input for the Rx, Q, etc. But it also perhaps explains why skiers with traditional backgrounds, racers, shin drivers, aren't keeping (all) their Praxis.

Cult classics excepted, as they build their own following out of performance rather than bandwaggoning. How many here have kept their Protests but sold their BC, Yeti, Piste Jib?

But I'm just an armchair dentiste

---

You're downright dainty at 180. I don't get to the PNW much at all these days (let alone travel much), but WY/MT is a possibility this Winter. It's closer to me and doesn't rain as much there ;-)

Agreed about many of Keith's skis having Tabke's stance bias (something I don't get on with), but GPOs seem to accept going back 1.5cm without getting wonky. My main point wasn't to defend old designs so much as to comment that they may still have relevance (or provide a departure point for ongoing development). Yeah, sometimes you're best off by wiping the slate clean.

Basing a ski purchase on comments from folks on this forum (many of whom we've never skied with) is risky proposition (doh!), with the end result being a lot of skis on Gear Swap. I don't look at that as so much an indictment of the brand as an observation about the business model (capitalization to fund a demo fleet).

I got the impression that the Rx was more in the Freeride family, ant the pair of Freerides (heavy core) I picked up a few years ago whipped my ass in tight spaces. Because of this, I stayed away from it. If only I could have demoed. I'm batting 50% on my Praxis choices :eek:

... Thom

Praxis is the shit, period. Keith gives real skiers every option they could possibly imagine. If people want a ski that fits a large generic skier group that’ll work for most folks most of the time, then yeah they’re obviously not for you. If you know what you really like and what really works for you as far as build construction, shape, and a huge amount of custom options, then they are. In my personal opinion you will not find a better built ski anywhere. I fully understand there are some indie companies that make phenomenally built skis with outstanding designs and I have, and still do own some of their skis and have nothing but great things to say about them. Praxis fits what I believe is a huge market space that really doesn’t understand what they can deliver. I truly think that most skiers don’t understand what Praxis can offer and once they do they’ll get it for life. I’ve personally sold (not affiliated in any way) skiers on every level the right skis for them and they are fans for life, you will not find a better built ski anywhere. Not talking shit about any other companies but Keith’s shit is just better built and if you actually know what you want a ski to do, there is no better option in the industry, if you want a ski that works for 90% of skiers than yeah, tons of better options for you. I think it’s a damn shame more skiers don’t support such an amazing company with such an amazing product. Take the time to discuss with him what you want and you’ll most likely be fully sold on what you get. No, I guess it’s not for everyone, but if you have any idea of what you really want a ski to do, Keith has one for you

Thom, I agree with your point re. demo fleet and exposure. And, sadly, I'd wager that most folks still have a general ignorance for custom skibuilding, even on this forum. Sure, a phone call is easy and you can learn a lot and get something sick built for not a lot of money, but folks are lazy and there's a knowledge barrier to be humbled by. Who does that when you can just hit "buy"???

I ain't tryin to paint the brand as bogus by any means. Undoubtedly he builds with great skill.

The Wootest is a cool ski that really draws me in. No way i would buy without a try first. Looks like the ultimate pow tour rig.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Norseman

Thom, I agree with your point re. demo fleet and exposure. And, sadly, I'd wager that most folks still have a general ignorance for custom skibuilding, even on this forum. Sure, a phone call is easy and you can learn a lot and get something sick built for not a lot of money, but folks are lazy and there's a knowledge barrier to be humbled by. Who does that when you can just hit "buy"???

I ain't tryin to paint the brand as bogus by any means. Undoubtedly he builds with great skill.

---

I think custom is hard in general. Some people want custom topsheets and bases, just look at this and the on3p threads. And there's nothing wrong with that if they can get the process down to where that customization doesn't add much to the cost.
Other people want a custom ski and know what they want down to a ton of detail. See the Lhasa rocker discussions. But those changes are harder and can't get distributed except in group buys. Every now and then we see someone who buys a +/-10mm version and appears to stick with them. But a decent number of those skis seem to go up for sale after a bit. Maybe that's because the design didn't work at that width, maybe it's because the purchasers are ski whores and are constantly on the chase for something better.

Custom flexes are great, but without being on the ski first it's hard to know if the change is good, it's definitely a gamble. And flex profile is so important but hard to convey. The friflyt guys tried, maybe they have kept it up but it was hard to go from the numbers to "that's the feeling I like" and edge hold is a different problem entirely.

I used to nerd out on ski numbers, and play around in that ski cad program trying to understand what I liked, what other people liked, and what else could be fun to try. But I never figured out how to think about mount location very well for example. For my gpos I went with the board consensus of -1 or -1.5(?) And never felt like I needed to change it. But I'm sure someone else would feel the need to move it elsewhere depending on how they ski.

I've probably looked at buying custom praxis three times in the last 5 years and never pulled the trigger. There's a lot to consider, I wasn't sure what the gain would be, and in some ways the most appealing option was a low profile topsheet with minimal branding.

Huh, guess I've got lots of half formed thoughts about custom skis. Might make an interesting thread on it's own.

The touring skis are perfection in their category. Veneer , ul , carbon is a pretty amazing blend and all are purpose built. Really liked my exp, yeti and bc. Mount point is bang on. Praxis has that ability. Also i want a wootest.
Gpo is probably my fave ski ever. Id love to see a standard gpo(with veneer) and a 106 gpo(also veneer)
Piste jib 99 and 109 and maybe stagger the sizing if they both cant go in 5cm increments
Protest 118 and 128
Ditch the rest.
Everything that wasnt a touring model i mounted back 1cm, pj, gpo, concept (protests -1.5 so im guessing wootests as well). Im ok with doing that but ive watched too many people not consider this and give up on amazing skis. I think if the mount points were more standard theyd sell better. Generally if you mount forward , you know you know you mount forward and have no problem doing that. Also, i love the veneers, theyre win win win win. Light , damp, durable and bitchin. Construction on praxis is second to none. Crazy how well theyre built. My gpo's probably have 300+ days on them and no core shots, full edge and still factory camber and powerful as ever. Freaky how good they still are. Im not keen on the new piste jib graphic but i love that ski(at -1) and im still buying some. Im a tell erryone its fuscia god dammit
Also Keith is one hell of a solid dude. I think people that conduct business like that should be rewarded. I cant imagine not having some praxis. Im not into buying bic pen chinese skis

Sent from my SM-G950W using TGR Forums mobile app