Printable View
I haven't skied the Woo 2.0 but I did put a week or so on some 1.0s last year in the 196. I traveled West with the Woos mounted alpine and after spending a day or two on them in 2d snow I grabbed a more traditional ski. If all you're doing is skiing BC or soft snow you probably can't go wrong with the Woo but there were certainly a few times I wished I was on some XXLs. This year I grabbed a pair of 184 Freerides just to have a perfect travel ski.Quote:
Originally Posted by TeleThor
Telethor
Have you seen the Worth Humpbacks in Gear Swap (made by Praxis).
Don't know about weight, and tail may not be loose enough for you with 16 cm of tail splay, but it would seem like a good travel ski 109 mm underfoot
Yeah get some BCs. They're a much more fun ski on ski area packed snow. I've been skiing my wootest 2.0s in the BC and at the resort, but only at the resort on pow days. They're great for that but if I was going against every grain of my existence and going to a ski area on a day it hadn't snowed, even I would grab one of my other skis.Quote:
Originally Posted by TeleThor
I don't know if you've read all of mine and some other folks' blabbing about the intent of the wootest but it's a 'natural conditions' ski that is manageable on hard snow. Not awesome but 'pretty good'. That really is what it ended up being. You can arc huge (like really huge) turns on them all over your shins if you want but you'll have to be sliding them around for everything else. If you were into the way your lotus 138s handled packed snow and groomers then shit yeah, hit the wootest. I personally think you're crazy if that's the case but that's the ilk of this ski for sure. ;) It's just narrower.
TeleThor,
I know you're posting on the praxis thread but hear me out...this is what I was looking for last spring:
http://www.tetongravity.com/forums/s...13#post3569313
Pat sent me a PM said that is exactly what the 187 fat bro is, which was enough to sell me over the praxis BC (the sexy topsheet on the BRO helps too). I have not been disappointed with the bro one bit. Just some food for thought.
And praxis fans don't hate me, I love my pow boards I picked up earlier this winter and the yetis are on the top of my list for spring ski.
^^At TeleThor's size, it seems like he'd be better off with the 191 Fat than the 187 (unless he prefers a shorter ski). I'm sure splat can weigh in on the matter, but that's what I'd recommend. The 191s are pretty easy to ski.
kevino, one of these days we'll have to switch and see the differences.
haha very true, i'm not man enough for 191s though.
did you like that potential bushwack i sent you?
Thanks for all the input everyone. The Woos are tempting, but I think KW is right that the BCs would be a better all rounder for the occasions when I do hit the resort. Those Worth Humpbacks look like a good ski too. I'll mill it over a bit.
For the PM Gear fans that chimed in - love Splat's creations. As mentioned, had some Lhasas and still have my 188 Bros as kind of a daily driver-ish ski. They're a bit heavier than I like to haul around in the backcountry though. Problem is I don't live near mountains anymore (well, real mountains), so looking for a jack of all trades ski that leans towards soft snow. No real good reason, but I thought I'd give Praxis a shot this time around. Looking like some BCs are in my near future. Carbon Lhasas would be on the top of my list, but my wife was not a big fan when I suggested buying $1000+ skis.
Thanks again for the feedback.
Just to chime in, the big difference between the 191 Fat and the 187 Fat is the tail. The 187 Fat is a trad cut 179 Fat with 8 cm of slow rising tip added to allow it to surf up in pow. But where it really shines is on the hard stuff, making it one of our many pursuits for the elusive all around stick. The dif in the tails as opposed to the tips is that the 187 is 21 mm less that the tip on it and the 191 Lhasa Fat is 26 mm less wide. I recently heard all the big ski companies are finally headed in this direction.Quote:
Originally Posted by auvgeek
Lately, along with a host of new creations, we've rockered the 191 Lhasa Fats and 191 Lhasa now, based on the feedback from the rockered 196 Lhasa that the Whistler crew loves so much. But, hey, Keith is my bud and he's making killer stix. Pokey the Edgemaster and I recently were hanging with Keith and Kevin and the guys at the Praxis factory. We drank all their whiskey and we talked story about making skis. Pokey was so stoked because he said, as we were on the way home, "It's so cool to hang out with guys who are my peers, guys who get fiberglass sensitivity and have resin on them. I don't get to do that very often."
:cussing: Of course you did. Dammit man, I don't want to buy more skis, but that's the main thing I wish my 191 Fats had -- a deeper rocker profile.Quote:
Originally Posted by splat
/threadjack
OK, I have a serious hard on for this ski.
Current quiver is wailer 105 pure w/dyna and my all-time fave skis the 190 lotus 120 (hybrid) with alpine bindings.
Now I have been in Chamonix for the last couple of winters and this quiver is perfect for there, the 105 RIPS hard snow and is light for the touring we have in Cham-usually hard and steep. The 120 is perfect for the pow there as it will grip well on hard no fall entrances to the Glacier Ronde, and then rip the pow all the way down to the tunnel. And I LOVE the flat tail.
Now my first world quiver problem came in when I moved out here to Whistler.....whenever I am touring out here I seem to be in soft snow-the 105's are not great in soft due to me having an older vintage with FUCKING LOADS of camber.
I am sure you know where I am going with this eh, its seems I 'need' a soft snow touring ski. I actually have sollyfits on the 120's but I am skiing them resort most days and its gonna' get old changing bindings a couple of times a week so was thinking if I could just change the dynafits between the 2 touring skis it would be better.
Thoughts on the woo2 fitting into my quiver? Would be used for winter touring in the Whistler area, lots of soft snow of all kinds with a bias towards heavy. I want to be able to ski faster and more confidently than I can on the 105's where I am stuck to smaller old school turns when it gets deep. I want to be able to charge like on my 120's, making turns whatever shape, and wherever I want.
Me? 5.10 190lbs, pretty good skier (skied all life, 6 100day-ish seasons in a row now), tend to ski forward in my boots on edge (especially on hard snow) but also slide and slarve the 120's about in the tree's no problem, so I guess I can modify my technique depending on the situation quite well.
Previous skis I have liked.....Movement goliath (184 and 191), Praxis freeride 187, Armada ARG's (but not as much as my 120's)
Skis not liked......Movement Trust. I wanted to love that ski. But didn't. Too tight sidecut for the stiffness of the ski in soft snow, although it was great on hard snow.
Any discount codes floating about?
I lOVE the lack of side cut on the 120's
consider treewell's worth humpbacks (built by praxis)
same sidecut as 105 (27m vs 105's 29m), but with more tip rocker/taper and some tail rocker, and less camber.
http://www.tetongravity.com/forums/s...Inserts-Screws
They seem to be like the mtn freeride, but at 109 mm underfoot with a 29 m radius
worth humpback is a more traditional design compared to the woo, but might address some of the issues you've had with the 105 around whistler.
stokes: if you're going to keep the 105 for spring/harder snow touring then yeah. What you describe (especially the heavy snow part) is why the wootest got made. Sounds like you're on the right track IMO.
Yea, that's exactly what I thought Woo.
Shit.
So was out on my OG generation the wootest 1.0 187cm and knowticed somethings that might be interesting here in comparision with the wootest 2.0.
Info:
6'3"
190lb
mounted on the punch with dynafits cochise 120s with intuitions.
First of today was really fun cause we got after a little bit of everything. Location Fieberbrunn in Austria snow was very variable but there was good skiing to be had. Some of it was windfucked bare to the bones. Chalk some deeper pockets. Generally the snow was heavy but lots of fun.
The first time out on these I hated them they didnt do what I wanted them to do which is not really what all my other praxis skis are like. I had to think while I skiied them and that annoyed me so I went back into the workshop and marked out the widesest points on the shovel and tail and tool them to the sander and rounded the edges completely. This made a world of difference as has been stated many times in this thread. Now to be honest they will carve even on harder stuff you just have to be hauling ass and even more fun then that is the ease of short slashy turns in wind buff. Really fun and its scary how light they feel on your feet. I do have to admit though that I wish the rocker height was lower for thos sort of thing becuase the rebound point of inflection is really far back on the ski and if you keep on top of the ski its not an issue but if you dont it does get annoying.
Anything that is soft was awesome and in terms of float I got the standard flex and because there is less surface area for a guy my weight and size I would go with the stiff versoin just cause when you really lay into the ski there is so much force going through the ski that if you like to push the ski can feel like it folds a little bit. For me I like this casue you explode out of a turn and are in the air when layiing the ski over.
The ski trasitions very well between different snow types and allows you to do the things you want regardless of what it runs into. Now this thing put a smile on my face all day but there are two things i knowticed because the rocker profile is higher then on an OG protest there are certain situations where the ski can get "scary". We found a really cool couloir and the snow was wet and sluffing heavily and this is where the wierdness came up. There was a choke in the middle where it got very narrow and while doing jump turns there was this moment of full on terror and the ski came into contact with the snow and it would hang up on the reverse parts of the tip and tail and not have any grip casue there is not edge grip at all. Then as my body weight came down the ski would flex and the sidecut part with edges would make contact and then bite really hard and becasue the ski was so flexed it wanted to carve which is not fun when its narrow and steep cause I was trying to lose speed and not gain speed. Now I know this is a small gripe when it comes to the overall performance of the ski but this is what I bought it to do or hough it would do. This is really strange cause on the 196 protest this is not a problem at all. I just can figure it out. One idea that came to mind was that the ski has more camber underfoot combined with the higher rocker profile gave the ski this wierd characteristic. Cause my protests are essentially flat under foot.
This started to get to me because now I lost all the confidence I had earlier in the morning now once again i was having to conciously think about what the ski would do. Even when I focused on making the turns as clean as possible the hang up bite trait was still there. I am curious as to know of other people experienced something similar and if by tapering the new 2.0 tip this was one of the issues that was resolved?
All in all still a great ski just faltered where I plan on using it.
Yes, yes, and yes. That's exactly why the newer version has both a tapered tip AND why the sidecut was moved forward. It's not just you. The run last year also ended up with a slightly 'more than intended' bit of rocker in the tip. I stored mine all summer in one of those old ski hangers that pinch your tips together and hung some weight on them. It did tone it down a bit but the tip is still squared off. Being so much narrower than something like the protest sinks the ski more in that thicker stuff and brought up some issues that just never happened on the protests (well, mainly just the one big one that you're describing). The fact that you're 6'3" and skiing the same size ski I do at 5'10" will really exaggerate what you're describing as well. The shorter length than your 196 protests are going to be as much a part of it as the shape and size to be honest.Quote:
Originally Posted by sqikunst
The changes made with the 2.0 work. Really well.
All of my other skis are 190+ and I could not be fucked to drag something that is that long up hill. The skins in Europe can be very long and to be honest I am happy with the length. These were some of the issues that came up in todays snow if it was softer I would not have had a problem but its just cool to see that the issues from the prototype have been ironed out. The ski is still very good and I had a blast today and the fact that it was in a ways designed through discussion makes the ski close to my heart. The thing is still good and the only timit got to me was in the couloir. Just for reference this was the feature being skiied it looks really mellow but the photo does not do it justice.
http://sphotos-e.ak.fbcdn.net/hphoto...80497610_n.jpg
The most important thing is that its blody light and in most places i will take this ski I am 120% happy with it and if i get on the ski on more occasions on that type of terrain I will become more comfotable with the bite trait. Its not a bad thing to have a ski that bites when its steep its just that short face of free fall terror that got to me.
I know I am 6'3" but a variable conditions touring ski just does not have to be super long and in many ways there were some really tight lines between shrubbs on windfucked snow that the ski really excelled. The thing will also still slarve. I only found one nice longer pocket and while the thing edges quicker then a protest its actually fun on groomers in the 187 because while it has a pronounced rocker for some reason the tip does not bounce all over the place and its super light so bouncing off shit and washing out turns is super fun. The ski buckling when hauling ass is less of a problem for me because I dont really drive the tips very hard. The powboard and protest taught me to stand very neutral. If the wootest 2.0 skis the same as the wootest 1.0 in all positive categories and gets rid of the issue I raised it is really the perfect soft snoe touring ski and should be praised on its uniqueness casue fuck me its light.
One thing I can say is once again the burlyness of Praxis skis have to be praised. These things can take a beating, I was skeptic of the coloured bases but they take a beating just like the black bases. While coloured bases are cool just in terms of reparing them black is always nice casue black p-tex is near invisible.
Get some clear p-tex. Works with every color, and it's easier to see if it "takes".Quote:
Originally Posted by sqikunst
I get this a lot but I hate white p-tex i have always felt that its not as "good" and feel quite sure that when solid is not as "hard" and black p-tex.
From exp. and white ptex is still easier to see then black!!
;)
To chime in so I don't feel misanthropically lonely, at 6'2" and 185 lbs the 187 Woo 2.0 is PERFECT for my b/c touring.
It's a good weight, easier to manipulate on kickturns (I don't even have to kick; just lean over a bit), and it's very quick in the tight trees where I spend a lot of time by choice or necessity (getting back to the road). I have opened them up a bit in a few bowls and there were great. I ski about 2/3-3/4 throttle out of bounds compared to full throttle inbounds.
I have no regrets and am nothing less than very very happy with this. I use the 196 Protest (and other Praxis) inbounds or the rare heli-line for much more reckless high speed adrenalin runs.
Yeah I can make fun of you tall guys skiing the 187s but if we ever go hiking you can then get the chance to make fun of me getting the tails out of my way on a skin switchback. :D
Any of you proud woo2 owners (or 1.0) in the Vail/eagle area?
I would love to trade some beer for some turns on these before I plunk down cash next season's praxis pre-sale.
I've got an upcoming family ski trip that way beginning of March.
Bsl is either 297 or 300, and can do dynafit or din.
I may be able to help you out. Check your PMs.Quote:
Originally Posted by flyman683
Some things to add about the wootest. First of still an amazing ski but today definately felt like i wished I was on some 188 protests. The wootest is great untill you have to air out of something into flat. I know i am still not over the whole dynafit thing to huck bigger shit but I was still going for it today and even when I landed center the ski just knifes into the snow and the ensuing back slap makes me feel like a gaper ;). Its not all the skis fault but there is a certain amount of float loss in a ski this skinny from tip to tail i.e it does not have any sidecut so the nose is really skinny and it just gets so deep in snow that when hitting pillows especially like today where it was just deep I was blind from top to bottom every time. Its alot more finicky when trying to slarve aswell. It will start to slave but then jack into a turn really hard. In all reality its more of getting used to the ski. Its not like a protest where the ski stance is wider IMO it likes to be skiied closer together and its the only way i have figured out how to get more float out of it. Still had soo much fun on it today and sadly I am not god like when skiing so when the terrain starts to get into biillygoat territory the lightness of the ski bucks me around a bit and dumping speed is not all that easy but its more rider fault then ski. It does definatly give a different feeling cause I am 6'3" and was getting the same deepness as someone who is 5'10" which was nice for a change.
Once again cant wait for summer when I have cash again to get more praxis skis.
I just got done skiing my woo/dyna setup on a week long hut trip in the Canadian Rockies and had same problems. We had fresh pow but it was pretty heavy, more like Tahoe snow, along with some wind effect. On the woos with the tapered tips I buried my tips a bunch of times. Whenever I pressured the tips I felt them dive. On my w112s I felt as though the fat tips would lift me right over that stuff. Or my skiing might suck, but everyone said it was survival skiing. I was beat too as it was at the end of a 7000 foot day in a 25000 foot week. The woos mounted at recommended for a 300 bsl and I was skiing a 297 boot. The woos did great when I skied them in good light deep pow and r less hooky than the w112s in crust. 186 woo 2, 185 lbs, 5'11".
Harpo: I know you've been in this area for a while so 'tahoe snow' should mean the same thing to both of us. When you say 'everyone said it was survival skiing' what do you mean? Were people on bigger boards still struggling? There have a been a few BC days where I've been out and some super heavy wet shlt is falling and it doesn't matter what ski you're on......it's not consolidated at all and even huge skis drag the tips. What was everyone else in your group riding and what were they dealing with?
I've only had the woo2s in this season's tahoe setup which went from hero snow that wants to slide on you, to 3ft dust on crust days, to rained on windblown shit, and corn. All of my gripes so far have had to do with tune. The only place I've had the tips sinking is in some of the super cold storms we had like back in october and over the last month. And even in those conditions I've had to sit centered on even bigger skis (like the protests).