2018-19 Praxis Skis Info and Resource Thread

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Norseman

What is the weight of those?

---

I don't have a scale precise enough to make it a worthwhile exercise so I never bothered. They feel close enough to call it splitting hairs to my 192 4 flex enduro carbon veneer yetis. Both mounted with tectons. Main weight difference is basically in the skins, the protest ones are yuge. Very close to 2kg would be my guess.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by galibier_numero_un

This makes a lot of sense. My thinking has evolved along the lines of looking at total mass perspective, as opposed to density. IOW, if I like how a 2200g ski behaves, I might go heavier in a narrow width to achieve that weight, and with a lighter core as the ski gets wider in order to not exceed that weight.

Then again, no one ever accused me of being a-ever-guese.

This has me thinking about what I can sell to build my dream GPO.

I agree with @Iggy and others who commented about Keith deserving to raise his prices. Anyone who whines because of the deals they got 5 years ago is like the person who bitches about that musician they used to see at their local dive for the cost of a few beers and maybe $5.00 at the tip jar. Now the musician has made it big and they gripe about a $30 ticket.

Praxis, ON3P, Down and Moment (by reputation - I haven't skied Moments) are some of the best combination of value and quality out there.

'nuther thought ... I wonder how any mandated shutdown will impact production. Of course, from our perspective ski manufacturing is an essential business, but not everyone agrees with this ;-)

... Thom

---

I get this logic if weight is your main concern when deciding core types but that’s not how I decide what core I want in a specific ski, neither is the width of the ski, although I do understand that thinking as well (different strokes as usual). I totally base my core desires on how and what type of skiing I plan to do on that specific build and how I want that ski to perform in those conditions. I don’t have any Praxis that have the same build.

Edit to add: I’m not knocking on how anyone else uses the build options, more or less just stating how cool it is how different folks are able to use the options to build what they want, and throwing out my personal process.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by skuff

Ordered 187 MVP, Keith said they'll be ready by late summer. Stoked to get on the new sticks with the new tip shape, cleaned up taper and slightly longer/slower rocker lines.

Who wants to buy my old custom pair of 193 MVP?

---

Excited to hear how they work out, I’m really stoked on the changes as well.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by grinch

A buddy of mine would get a new bike every year. As long as it was red he was in the clear.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HAB

I'm inching towards a critical mass of skis where she can't keep track of all of them and I'm forever in the clear. The promised land.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by travel_to_ski

Having to work from home so you can’t hide new skis from your wife by shipping them to the work address is real life Corona problems.

---

lol I love this thread. my ZGTPs are yellow with a black cuff like my Fischer Carbon Travers were... they may have slipped by unnoticed... I just make sure only one is visible at a time.

Anyone know what year MVPs had Peacock graphic for stock build?

Attachment 323650

as I lack the expertise and 100 day seasons to join these nuanced custom debates, I think I fall in the "Easy" custom bucket. Would a 182 GPO in standard flex be a horrible idea for a 70/30 resort/bc soft snow machine with Shifts? Heavy i know but 'too heavy'? I never mind putting in extra effort. I learned 'stupid' by years of exclusive ss mtb distance racing....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by eskido

Excited to hear how they work out, I’m really stoked on the changes as well.

---

I'm thinking the new MVP shape will give the ski some additional soft snow capabilities.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Self Jupiter

Anyone know what year MVPs had Peacock graphic for stock build?

Attachment 323650

---

I'm guessing the peacock graphic was 12/13. Summer of 2013 was when I bought my custom MVP, and I thought the peacock graphic came out that fall?

Photo from Jim S here. https://www.tetongravity.com/forums/...axis-MVP/page3

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by chaka

as I lack the expertise and 100 day seasons to join these nuanced custom debates, I think I fall in the "Easy" custom bucket. Would a 182 GPO in standard flex be a horrible idea for a 70/30 resort/bc soft snow machine with Shifts? Heavy i know but 'too heavy'? I never mind putting in extra effort. I learned 'stupid' by years of exclusive ss mtb distance racing....

---

If you're good with the weight, that's an optimal 70/30 set up. Thinking about picking up something similar as a travel/only pack one ski ski

I miss my 192 4 flex gpo's dearly and am doing mental gymnastics to justify buying new ones. Some of the new top sheet choices alone might make it happen this year!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by eskido

I get this logic if weight is your main concern when deciding core types but that’s not how I decide what core I want in a specific ski, neither is the width of the ski, although I do understand that thinking as well (different strokes as usual). I totally base my core desires on how and what type of skiing I plan to do on that specific build and how I want that ski to perform in those conditions. I don’t have any Praxis that have the same build.

Edit to add: I’m not knocking on how anyone else uses the build options, more or less just stating how cool it is how different folks are able to use the options to build what they want, and throwing out my personal process.

---

I think we're basically on the same page.

I could have been more clear. I was trying to address the idea of someone who says they need some mass to bust through chop.

From this perspective, I'm thinkin' that (for example) 2200g with a 107 waist will be similar to a 2200g ski with a 116 waist.

Of course (keeping with this example), this is where your tailoring the layup comes into play, and you'd leave carbon out of the build and most definitely go with veneer (although, I can't visualize ever skipping veneer in any build).

Ya, ski geometry needs to be taken into account and that's a rabbit hole of its own (and I ain't no stinkin' ski designer).

I'm thinking this mass concept is a key part of @Iggy's design philosophy and why the Steeple 102s I recently picked up come in at a whopping 2100g in a 179!

Keith is a master at getting stability out of a lighter ski, which is not to take anything away from the goodness of ON3P.

... Thom

Add veneer on your gpo's and a cast, pinding, or new duke pt(if it ends up durable) for a similar weight at the same time more damp and durable

Sent from my SM-G950W using TGR Forums mobile app

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sruffian

If you're good with the weight, that's an optimal 70/30 set up.

---

^^^this^^^
I bought my Q’s with the exact same thought (#4 enduro/veneer) and they are definitely NOT too heavy to drag uphill, and if your going 70/30 I certainly wouldn’t dumb down the build for the up factor. Obviously you could add carbon to lighten it up as well but once again, 70/30, I wouldn’t. I would seriously consider spending the coin on the veneer though

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Self Jupiter

Anyone know what year MVPs had Peacock graphic for stock build?

Attachment 323650

---

I had a pair with that graphic in 2013/14.

Holy shit, just got my tax return today.. that was quick. Thanks AZ.

Current thought:
Freeride
4+ flex
heavy core
Torn: 184 vs 194, leaning 194 for longer radius
Torn: Veneer or no veneer, leaning no

Has anyone skied it in a 194? I've skied full camber 194s before that were surely way heavier than these would turn out to be and they did what I wanted them to do very well. 184 still seems short to me.

I don't see much discussion on The SKI? Is that the Praxis most like a fat GS ski? Is anyone skiing those and if so, what major manufacturers ski does it resemble. Enforcer 110? I really like my Mantra 102 (2200-ish grams) but thinking of a Praxis like that but lighter (sub 1950-ish) and helping support Praxis through the lean times. Is a UL with Carbon core the SKI a bad idea?

Grinch... you've skied with me... what Praxis would suit me and fits that bill. Very directional, don't care about playful.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by eskido

^^^this^^^
I bought my Q’s with the exact same thought (#4 enduro/veneer) and they are definitely NOT too heavy to drag uphill, and if your going 70/30 I certainly wouldn’t dumb down the build for the up factor. Obviously you could add carbon to lighten it up as well but once again, 70/30, I wouldn’t. I would seriously consider spending the coin on the veneer though

---

thanks folks. How long is this sale going to last? didn't see it mentioned on the site, not currently on their mailing list (I'll remedy that).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by singlecross

I don't see much discussion on The SKI? Is that the Praxis most like a fat GS ski? Is anyone skiing those and if so, what major manufacturers ski does it resemble. Enforcer 110? I really like my Mantra 102 (2200-ish grams) but thinking of a Praxis like that but lighter (sub 1950-ish) and helping support Praxis through the lean times. Is a UL with Carbon core the SKI a bad idea?

---

"The SKI" looks almost identical on paper to the 2015 Nordica Patron, and I absolutely love my Patrons.

Attachment 323684

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Norseman

What is the weight of those?

---

My 187 flex 3-4 (3+) carbon Protests - 2060 grams/ski. I think the 192 UL is similar if a touch lighter (~2000g) - a buddy tours on flex 4 192 ULs.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nickel

I've literally done every one of my touring days this year on 192 UL F4 veneer protests. This includes a 7 day and a 5 day hut trip and many 7k+ days. I grab them anytime I expect to find 10cm or more of ski pen. They are the absolute shit and I couldn't be happier. It will take something pretty special to make me want a different pow touring setup.

---

nickel, what do you have them mounted with? Thinking of putting an ultra-light binding on mine.

Has anyone had an UL core without carbon? Debating on that for an UL GPO. It's only about 3 oz different so not too concerned about weight. Mainly wondering if it will make any noticeable difference in deflection and ski feel in variable or firm/refrozen conditions.

It's probably nitpicking at that point, but I am aiming for as damp/stable of a build as I can get for around 8lbs.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by east or bust

Has anyone skied it in a 194? I've skied full camber 194s before that were surely way heavier than these would turn out to be and they did what I wanted them to do very well. 184 still seems short to me.

---

I had a pair of 174cm Freerides as a daily driver in Tahoe. I usually go for a 179-181cm for dd use and the 174cm FRDs were every bit as stable and smooth as those longer skis. Skis much longer than length would suggest - but in a good way.

That said, when I fully recovered from a double meniscus tear and my speeds regularly broke 50+ I've gone to longer skis so I guess it depends on how hard you push them. But overall they are very composed and smooth skis even sizing down

I’ve owned:

GPOs Enduro/Nylon. Good all around ski, found on ice, harder chop, deflected more than I’d like and were Harsher than I liked.

Enduro/Nylon Concepts: Vibed more with this layup on this ski vs GPO, but I never got it out in very icy conditions, always soft snow. Great PNW ski.

BCs Enduro/Carbon/Veneer: did not like them as an all mountain resort ski. Found the carbon made them to reactive and harsh in hardpack and icy conditions. My brother (who owns the skis) loves them though. He also weighs 40lbs less than me.

Heavy/Veneer Piste Jibs: Perfect layup. Powerful, responsive, damp, good energy. Doesn’t get deflected easily and isn’t heavy.

Heavy/Carbon/Veneer Qs: Also a Perfect layup for this ski. Super damp, doesn’t get deflected, but veneer and Carbon make it energetic. Not very heavy comparatively to other skis like BG (lighter than BG).

Enduro/Veneer Praxis Lhasa Fats: love love this ski. Pulled them out more than the protests or Kartel 116s I had during Tahoe’s monster season last year. Light, surfy, energetic, damp. Shape helps it cut through chop. Occasionally deflected, if I wanted to use this day or two after the storm I’d think heavy/Carbon/veneer would be better.

Enduro/Carbon/Nylon Protests. Great in powder, liked the Carbon there a lot more than BCs. Did not like them at all on bumpy run outs, kinda painful.

Enduro/Veneer Protests. Love these, perfect layup for the ski in resort. Damper and less harsh on groomers. Still plenty of energy in powder.

Enduro/Nylon Powderboards: Great resort layup for this ski. Not meant for variable or icy conditions. Carbon and veneer would probably be dope on the ski too.


Keith definitely prefers lighter skis it seems, overall. Same with Tabke considering he used a UL ski for comp. I’d say that’s partially why he doesn’t recommend heavy core in skis over 110mm waist.

IMO, for a lot of guys who like to charge and enjoy ON3Ps beefy, damp, heavy layup - you’d also really like the praxis heavy core in wider skis. A Heavy/Veneer/Carbon praxis ski is a little lighter and less damp still than an ON3P standard layup ski.

Personally, my core choices would be:

All Mountain/Hard Snow Resort: Heavy/Veneer or Heavy/Nylon

All Mountain, powder, variable and day after storm oriented Resort Ski (i.e Q, GPO, MVP, FRS): Heavy/Carbon/Veneer

Resort Powder Ski, day of storm (Q, Lhasa, Definitely Protest and Powderboard): Enduro/Veneer

I don’t tour but if I did, I’d probably be on Enduro/Carbon/Veneer MVPs or Concepts



Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by singlecross

I don't see much discussion on The SKI? Is that the Praxis most like a fat GS ski? Is anyone skiing those and if so, what major manufacturers ski does it resemble. Enforcer 110? I really like my Mantra 102 (2200-ish grams) but thinking of a Praxis like that but lighter (sub 1950-ish) and helping support Praxis through the lean times. Is a UL with Carbon core the SKI a bad idea?

Grinch... you've skied with me... what Praxis would suit me and fits that bill. Very directional, don't care about playful.

---

Have heard much on "the ski". Radius in the teens isnt really my jam so i havent gave it much thought. Are you looking for a touring ski? Any resort use for it? Id only consider ul/c if it was a dedicated touring ski. Not sure how much the ul saves(maybe 1/3lb). Carbon saves 1/4lb and veneer saves 1/4lb. Heavy hitter core adds about 1/3lb. Good thing about the veneer is it saves that weight but it also adds dampness where the carbon takes it away but its more poppy at the expense of deflection. Veneer adds durability too , especially with the clear coat epoxy Thom used. I really like the feel of the skis ive had with veneer.
Im guessing youd want some stiffness in the tail without a ton of rocker. Definitely more edging than throwing them sideways. Maybe a skinny rx or Q flex 3+/4-/4 or for a smaller radius a bc or fat yeti. Add your choice of core for the usage. Those all have a bit of a raised tail but not much. Nice tip rocker on the bc and yeti. A little less on the rx. None of the praxis skis have a ton of splay. Rocker profiles are generally low and just vary in length. Other than the Q the mount points are probably where youd want them. 1 or 1.5 back on the Q but you know where youd want to be

Sent from my SM-G950W using TGR Forums mobile app

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Muggydude

I’ve owned:

GPOs Enduro/Nylon. Good all around ski, found on ice, harder chop, deflected more than I’d like and were Harsher than I liked.

Enduro/Nylon Concepts: Vibed more with this layup on this ski vs GPO, but I never got it out in very icy conditions, always soft snow. Great PNW ski.

BCs Enduro/Carbon/Veneer: did not like them as an all mountain resort ski. Found the carbon made them to reactive and harsh in hardpack and icy conditions. My brother (who owns the skis) loves them though. He also weighs 40lbs less than me.

Heavy/Veneer Piste Jibs: Perfect layup. Powerful, responsive, damp, good energy. Doesn’t get deflected easily and isn’t heavy.

Heavy/Carbon/Veneer Qs: Also a Perfect layup for this ski. Super damp, doesn’t get deflected, but veneer and Carbon make it energetic. Not very heavy comparatively to other skis like BG (lighter than BG).

Enduro/Veneer Praxis Lhasa Fats: love love this ski. Pulled them out more than the protests or Kartel 116s I had during Tahoe’s monster season last year. Light, surfy, energetic, damp. Shape helps it cut through chop. Occasionally deflected, if I wanted to use this day or two after the storm I’d think heavy/Carbon/veneer would be better.

Enduro/Carbon/Nylon Protests. Great in powder, liked the Carbon there a lot more than BCs. Did not like them at all on bumpy run outs, kinda painful.

Enduro/Veneer Protests. Love these, perfect layup for the ski in resort. Damper and less harsh on groomers. Still plenty of energy in powder.

Enduro/Nylon Powderboards: Great resort layup for this ski. Not meant for variable or icy conditions. Carbon and veneer would probably be dope on the ski too.


Keith definitely prefers lighter skis it seems, overall. Same with Tabke considering he used a UL ski for comp. I’d say that’s partially why he doesn’t recommend heavy core in skis over 110mm waist.

IMO, for a lot of guys who like to charge and enjoy ON3Ps beefy, damp, heavy layup - you’d also really like the praxis heavy core in wider skis. A Heavy/Veneer/Carbon praxis ski is a little lighter and less damp still than an ON3P standard layup ski.

Personally, my core choices would be:

All Mountain/Hard Snow Resort: Heavy/Veneer or Heavy/Nylon

All Mountain, powder, variable and day after storm oriented Resort Ski (i.e Q, GPO, MVP, FRS): Heavy/Carbon/Veneer

Resort Powder Ski, day of storm (Q, Lhasa, Definitely Protest and Powderboard): Enduro/Veneer

I don’t tour but if I did, I’d probably be on Enduro/Carbon/Veneer MVPs or Concepts



Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

---

Thats great. Fully agree

Sent from my SM-G950W using TGR Forums mobile app

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by meter-man

My 187 flex 3-4 (3+) carbon Protests - 2060 grams/ski. I think the 192 UL is similar if a touch lighter (~2000g) - a buddy tours on flex 4 192 ULs.



nickel, what do you have them mounted with? Thinking of putting an ultra-light binding on mine.

---

I've got mine mounted with tectons on the line. I go back and forth considering putting a light binding like the atk fr14 or r12 but I'm very happy with them. The benefits I derive from it make the choice a difficult one.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mr_pretzel

I would not add carbon to a HH. Makes the ski less damp and more demanding without being stable. Ask keith for a 4+ and HH for a inbounds charger.

Edit: I have owned both HH and HH + carbon + veneer, the HH alone with nylon is miles ahead better for a resort ski

---

+1 for heavy core and 4 flex for a burly resort setup. I have this (with nylon) in a Quixote and it’s a steamroller.

Anyone ski the 9D?

Two characters doesn’t work in the search bar.


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums