The Official Great Pacific Octopus Thread

I only notice the asym when they're leaning up against the wall at home. It's pretty subtle in the shovel, and more pronounced in the tail, so they don't look weird on your feet, at least to me.

As far as on-snow behavior, I find them to be very easy/intuitive to ski, and can't say I changed my ski style to suit them, I just click in and ski as usual. I have mine set up as a touring ski (my only AT setup) and find them to be fun, capable and predictable in a wide range of snow conditions. They're quick edge to edge and feel narrower than 108mm underfoot on firm snow, but I find the float to be more than adequate for my size and powder skiing style.

The snow feel/feedback from the heavy core/veneer layup is awesome too. Smooth and powerful, but with some nice liveliness too.

Good info. I forgot to ask: what didn't you like about the MVP or how would you describe it and the skinny Q back to back?

Those are the two skis I am most tempted to try and build an enduro/veneer touring ski around 1800g. So appreciate the feedback on your experience.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by galibier_numero_un

If those screaming bears were ULs, I'd be seriously weakening.

It's probably just a website glitch, but I don't see a UL option for GPOs at the moment. I can't get a flex 3/UL/Veneer GPO out of my head.

... Thom

---

Thom I think that would be bomb at your height / weight. I'm 185 and a pair of 187 ul flex 3 gpo's were a tad too soft for me in the bc (also skiing tahoe). Fun af for tree skiing but not what I had hoped for in big, open terrain. Was used to 192 map 4's inbounds and to this day when i look down from the top of a hairy line in the bc, i wish i was on a bigass 192 gpo. Just don't wanna lug one up there

Looking to scoop up a pair for my shifts and do some slack touring on them but mostly inbounds... currently own 187 MVP and Protest both flex 4... should I grab the same set up for the GPO or should I bump it up to the 192 and go flex 3?


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

iMHO I wouldn’t flex down due to longer length, just go with what length you want and keep the flex you dig, you can thank me later.

Agreed, stock (4) flex is money.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by steveski

Agreed, stock (4) flex is money.

---

Ok I feel ya on the flex 4... will the 187 GPO feel like the 187 MVP or Protest? Trying to figure out if the 192 is worth it... kick turns may be a pain...


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ALFONSO618

Ok I feel ya on the flex 4... will the 187 GPO feel like the 187 MVP or Protest? Trying to figure out if the 192 is worth it... kick turns may be a pain...


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

---

I ski 187 Protests.

I've had both 187 and 182 GPOs. I've settled on 182s for everything. If I skied more open terrain inbounds I'd go for 187 but I'm in the trees more than not. I think terrain you ski on a regular basis and terrain you like to ski will help you decide!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by steveski

I ski 187 Protests.

I've had both 187 and 182 GPOs. I've settled on 182s for everything. If I skied more open terrain inbounds I'd go for 187 but I'm in the trees more than not. I think terrain you ski on a regular basis and terrain you like to ski will help you decide!

---

Ok great I think the 187 will be sufficient for what I’m looking for... plus I’m only getting older and slower... maybe the 187 is a safer future move...


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SchralphMacchio

I’m gonna replace it with a softer-flexing more forgiving 180 cm / 116ish waist ski that I intend to use as a soft snow resort ski. Thinking Rossi Super 7 or Armada Tracer 118. I see in reviews the Tracer 108 has pretty soft tips and shovels, so the 118 might be worth a shot. I think a custom 180 +1 BC, Flex 2 might also do it for me, but I’ll have to see where the custom pricing ends up.

---

178 Bodacious should be on your short list

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sruffian

Thom I think that would be bomb at your height / weight. I'm 185 and a pair of 187 ul flex 3 gpo's were a tad too soft for me in the bc (also skiing tahoe). Fun af for tree skiing but not what I had hoped for in big, open terrain. Was used to 192 map 4's inbounds and to this day when i look down from the top of a hairy line in the bc, i wish i was on a bigass 192 gpo. Just don't wanna lug one up there

---

If I didn't already have a MAP / Carbon /#4 / Nylon top GPO in 182 and Enduro / Veneer / #4 (also 182), those Screaming Bears would be a consideration.

I'm toying with the idea of getting down to an 1800-ish gram ski in this width, however. If Down came out with a 182 in the CD114L, I'd be all over that as well. Both this and the GPO work for me.

I love a 187 in wide open spaces, but always regret having one where I mostly find myself - in tight trees ;-)

I sold my veneer 187s to get the veneer 182s (mounted with Vipecs, 'coz I'm not sure how I'll use 'em). They give up very little top end (for me) and return a lot of maneuverability.

The 182 (nylon tops) are my "real" touring ski (mounted with Helio 200s).

Idle thoughts, but if cash frees up, a UL/veneer / flex 3 will certainly be on my short list (Colorado and generally continental/intermountain snow). I've only skied in maritime snow a total of 3 days in this life.

... Thom

I need some TGR help here... spotted some GPOs with the Sierra Nevada topsheet... guys clearly not a skier and I asked for a tip to tape pull and he’s saying it’s 72.5”.... is that the 187 or the 182 ? He had em advertised as 192.... anyone have a thought? Maybe GPO had another measurement near 185 back in the day? Thanks guys


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

Almost sure that's the 187.

Assuming he knows how to measure, it sounds like they're 187s. A 187 should measure in the 185 to 185.5 range (maybe 73" plus a little).

... Thom

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by galibier_numero_un

Assuming he knows how to measure, it sounds like they're 187s. A 187 should measure in the 185 to 185.5 range (maybe 73" plus a little).

... Thom

---

That was my thought because 182s can’t grow... figured it was a poorly measured 187... def ain’t no 192cm


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

Just tried to measure mine that are supposed to be 187s (Craigslist find but the seller seemed like he knew what he was talking about). A little hard to get an accurate measurement without removing the bindings but 72.5 actually looks pretty close.

Sent from my Pixel XL using TGR Forums mobile app

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by fleaches

Just tried to measure mine that are supposed to be 187s (Craigslist find but the seller seemed like he knew what he was talking about). A little hard to get an accurate measurement without removing the bindings but 72.5 actually looks pretty close.

Sent from my Pixel XL using TGR Forums mobile app

---

You’re the man I appreciate the help


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by galibier_numero_un

I'm toying with the idea of getting down to an 1800-ish gram ski in this width, however. If Down came out with a 182 in the CD114L, I'd be all over that as well. Both this and the GPO work for me.

... Thom

---

Word. I bought a pair of cd114's for touring - they were heavier than I'd hoped so never mounted them but that shape is FIRE. The 114L piques my curiosity if it flexes anywhere near as stiff and damp as the regular cd114. The open terrain / trees tradeoff is real in touring skis. Was enjoying my bmt 122's for that til I blew up the a kingpin toe that came with them

This is maybe more of a praxis question than a gpo specific question, but has anyone found their nylon topsheets chip especially easily? Maybe it's because of the carbon layer? I feel like every time my skis touch, a big strip peels off. All my other skis have been a lot more durable in this regard.

I don't really care that much--the skis are a little beat up anyways--but I'm looking for something to do to keep busy at home. Try beveling the edges a bit with a file? Paint some g flex on the corner? Any thoughts? Thanks!



Sent from my Pixel XL using TGR Forums mobile app

What year? Older praxis had some slight top sheet chipping issues. I fixed that with my dremel along the edges to round/smooth them with a grinding stone or sanding drum attachment.

Newer ones come from the factory with the top sheet edges beveled a bit I believe


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Muggydude

What year? Older praxis had some slight top sheet chipping issues. I fixed that with my dremel along the edges to round/smooth them with a grinding stone or sanding drum attachment.

Newer ones come from the factory with the top sheet edges beveled a bit I believe


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

---

Year unknown but definitely on the older side. Don't see any bevel at the top edge so maybe I'll do that, thanks!

Sent from my Pixel XL using TGR Forums mobile app

Bumping the GPO thread because... well, just because..!

Re-read much of this nugget of a thread prior to drilling this score from Keith's sale, 192 GPO. Agree somewhat with other comments about the skull graphics, but still kinda like the cartoon touch with bold contours, def not a turnoff for me!

Ended up with boot center at 87 cm straight pull from tail, which is pretty much half an inch behind the dot. Had a box of gold/black Wardens laying around from a previous Euro sale, they got the nod for this mount.

As stated in another thread, I'm really curious to A-B-ing these with my Fat +1 BC's, which is virtually the same length, same core material, same flex, and similar dimensions albeit the GPO's slightly narrower tails. One thing I found interesting is the core profile and how it's thinning towards the tail rocker turn-point, where the GPO's are a little more gradual/slender, as is the rocker start, i.e. more gradual on the GPO (comparison in last pic, GPO top, BC bottom)

What that will translate to on/in snow is TBD. I have thoughts concerning for instance tail-slishy-slashynessability. Will be interesting for sure to find out in real life. What do you think?

Attachment 471686

Attachment 471687

Attachment 471688

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by waxoff

What do you think?

Attachment 471686

---

I think that’s a sick pillow line…



Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

Did you weigh them before mounting @waxoff?