Printable View
just for what its worth, you want to find the center between the wide-point-of-the-tip and the wide-point-of-the-tail and figure out how different the midsole is behind the center-of-the-sidecut to actually compare the mount lines of different skis.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dane1
if memory serves, the RPC midsole is approx -7cm behind the center-of-the-sidecut. the GPO is (i believe) -4 or -5cm.
Thanks Marshal. So say the GPO is -5cm. Where would YOU mount to duplicate a RPC mounted +1 from your suggested?
But for the life of me while having both ski here on the floor and trying to measure I simply don't see any different on side cut wide points let alone 2 or 3cm. Not doubting you just missing it I guess by my numbers and view of the skis.
yeah man, no way you can just eyeball the sidecut. there is a lot of subtly going on there.
my suggestion:
1. find a flat surface
2. hold the ski 90deg to it, so the wide points of the tip and tail touch the flat surface
3. slide a piece of paper from the outside toward the midsole and mark where the paper hits resistance for both the tip and tail
4. measure the distance between these buddies
5. mark the mid-point of them
6. measure how far back the midsole line is relative to the mid-point-of-sidecut.
pretty sure the RPC is -7cm. i can measure if you really need. if you like the RPC at -6cm (aka +1), and the GPO midsole is in fact -4cm (i think, but not 100% sure at all), then -2cm would be equivalent.
sure, the overall length might be different relative to midsole, this controls how the ski planes and pivots in deep snow. more pivot and drift, more forward. more directional/fall line, further back relative to overall length.
this stuff is not be meaningful in shallow snow when the tip and tail are up and out of the snow, and you are skiing the sidecut of the ski
GPO is -7. I am at -2 from that. The GPO is completely different than the RPC.
At -2 the GPO is more fall line charger and directional. Very stable, not super quick in the trees due to 192 and mount point but still fairly quick. I was at 0 on RP112. So maybe you only want -2 on GPO. Minus 3 is far back, but if you like more traditional mount then it may work.
lay it on the floor, put boot on. Lay on table put boot on. Move around, think, think some more. Fact is no matter what you do you will wonder what the other mount point might yield :fmicon:
Your -7cm number refers to chord center, correct?
yes...Quote:
Originally Posted by marshalolson
Haven't yet but will do as you've suggested with both the RPC and GPO.
Hi Dane,
The numbers in the spreadsheet I sent you (that was you correct?) used the published numbers from Praxis that are the numbers for splay length albeit for the 187 not the 182 or 192. I used different names in the sheet that I think are more indicative of how they are meaningful - length to tip contact (or something like that, I don't have the sheet in front of me), simply switch this number with the measurement that Marshall is suggesting, then take all the same measurements for the DPS and enter them as well. Let me know if you need any help on where to enter the measurements.
Measureded and marked as suggested.
Attachment 140643
Suggested midsole location marked with a thin blue tape line. Widest part of tip and tail on the side cut is marked by the inside of the wide tape line. Hauscaran and GPO have very similar wide points on the ski. And similar suggested midsole location points. Hauscaran is a 196. GPO a 192.
Hauscaran has a lot less rocker tip and tail rocker than the GPO and even less rocker front and back compared to the RPC. The Hauscaran is not what I consider a playful ski in a 196. Almost no tail rocker and 1/2 the tip rocker or less than a GPO. The RPC is a playful ski by that comparison.
GPO and Huascaran have very similar wide points and very similar suggested midsole points. GPO is 1cm forward on the Dynafit mid point if the wide points are lined up. Similar amounts of camber under foot but a lot more rocker front and back on the GPO compared to the Dynafit.
This hurts my brain.
Thanks for taking the photos. I'm going from 184cm RP to the 187 GPO and really don't know where to mount. Probably -2 or -3. It's so different from the RP - just hard to wrap my brain around.
telling ya, man. go off the sidecut, not the chord center.
+1 from midsole on an RP is in essence -2 from midsole on the GPO, relative to sidecut.
Cool. So If I went +0 on my RPs (which I did) and -3 on GPOs I'll be at the same spot relative to sidecut, with a bit less tip and much more tail. Sounds pretty good.Quote:
Originally Posted by marshalolson
Thanks :)
Going to have some beta on -2 shortly. I ended up only bring GPO to Chile with me.
More to come but so far 2 days on the GPO and I am hooked. This might be the best ski I have ever been on thus far. I may only ski them this winter.
Edit: -2 mount
BB
Is this at -2? Wondering if -2 is the spot for big mountain charging?
Stoked to hear that. I have the 187s with the Hybrid layup.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bird Blaster
Wow bird blaster says GPO is Better than renegade. Wow They are impressive and I am -2 as well. Crush vertical at long resorts
I have to put together more info when I get back but it is so much more versatile than the Ren. The Ren is a sweet powder tool but GPO is awesome on everything.Quote:
Originally Posted by whyturn
OK now, stop talking nasty and teasing us. Time to fess up to the goods in detail :)Quote:
Originally Posted by Bird Blaster
Pictures will help your credibility some now!
Ok, finally getting a chance to sit down in front of the computer.
The GPO was awesome.
/end review
Days Skied: 9
Location: Portillo and Las Lenas
Me: 6'2"; 185lbs w/out gear.
Conditions: VERY VERY mixed. Days with complete boiler plate, spring corn, mashed potatoes, slush, dust on crust, <2-4" fresh pow (more PNW pow than blower), sastrug etc....
Skis: 192 carbon/glass hybrid med-stiff GPO with Atomic Tracker 16 (guardians)
Mount: this has been debated and much talked about on numerous pages of this thread. I spent a long time thinking about where I should mount these skis. I compared to RP112's, Rens and Bonafides. I always liked the shape of the RP112, which I think the GPO is most like from those 3 skis. I mounted my Rens around 2cm from the recommended and I always appreciated not being so "forward" on the ski and felt like I had LOTS of tail left. I took that strategy with me to the GPO. The suggested mount point seemed very forward to me. I like having some ski in front of my as I am a very directional skier. I debated on -1, -2 and -3 and I ended up choosing -2cm. I really liked this ski here, it gave me lots of ski up front and still a lot of tail (which is great because this is what I hated MOST about the RP112). I think I would be equally happy with -3cm and am actually considering mounting another pair at -3cm. Maybe I will go -2.5cm ;)
Thoughts on the shape and prep-work: I LOVE LOVE LOVE the shape of this ski. It is the ski I think I have always wanted. The rocker profile is sick, the tip splay is pleasant and elongated. It is not too abrupt like the RP112, and it is a little more aggressive then the Ren. There is a small amount of camber underfoot, but it seemed like it was less than the advertised 3mm (maybe it is 3mm base-to-base?). The tail is very nice, a subtle rocker, flat and relatively stiff - a solid rear. To prepare the ski I only gummied the tips and tails from the contact point. I didn't have any problems with tip catch.
My overall impression of this ski is WOW! This ski is going to develop a cult like following. I found them comfortable in almost every condition that I encountered. On boiler plate I felt like there was plenty of edge hold and that I could even lay down a bit of a carve, as the snow softened then the GPO could really put some trenches down. I really tried to drive it from the tongue and I felt the ski responded very well to input. For a ski at 116mm underfoot I was VERY VERY happy. The tip flap was pretty minimal compared to something like the RP112 and probably on-par with the Renegade.
Testing the GPO in more spring-type snow including fresh corn the GPO really shined. It easily floated over a fresh-corn blanket, they carve and shmear with EASE. I could really start to get a feel for driving this ski and I was just DREAMING of untouched pow boot, ankle or hip deep. I am pretty confident the GPO would blast these conditions without a second thought.
When things got a little more turned up and turned to crud I didn't even stop to think about it. I had so much confidence in the GPO that I just went through and over everything. I didn't find that this ski was deflected by anything, I really really trusted it. I would NEVER have felt this way on the RP112. The renegade gave me similar confidence. The GPO gets the nod in these conditions because they just felt more stable in general. Nothing against the Ren, but it is really geared more towards pow.
PNW Pow / Wet Pow: We had 2 days of more dense pow, which was ~2-4". The GPO floated very nice in these conditions, effortless really, and went through everything. To be honest I didn't even think about the ski in these conditions, they just felt right.
Airs: I didn't get a chance to take anything huge; maybe 5' max. Nothing crazy, but they are a sweet platform. Very stable landing and the tails are always ready to support you if needed. You don't have to worry about washing-out.
In general, the GPO just felt comfortable under my feet. I think its the perfect all-mountain charger and a skier can handle virtually every condition with confidence on them. I initially bought the GPO because it sounded kinda cool, Tabke was railing on it and WHYTURN had them on pre-order. I have always tended to agree with his assessment of skis when he describes them on TGR (haven't met in person). Now that I have been on the GPO it has me re-thinking and re-tooling my quiver. The GPO is going to play a major role. Blizzard Brahmas will be the go-to hardpack ski and Rens will remain for deep days and generalized powder charging. The GPO will do absolutely everything else.
Anything that I would change? Probably not, I did think awhile about wishing I had a "stiff" not a "medium/stiff". I ended up ordering a second pair, and I went with med/stiff again - no regrets.
I hope everyone enjoys their GPO's and are as stoked about them as I am!!!
I've been waiting for this. Thanks! I'm anxiously awaiting snow to try mine. I like most am also up in the air on mounting. 192s med/stiff carbon/hybrid. I'm 5' 10" and 160lbs. -2, -1, 0??? I guess I'll just keep putting it off and rereading reviews until there is snow on the ground and I need them mounted. Great review. Super stoked to be on these this season!
What is your plan for the 2nd pair?
Reading back in this thread, it looks like you owned the bibby too? How do the two compare?
Quote:
Originally Posted by wwwllw
2nd pair are probably going to get SI&I plates. WHen they arrive this pair will probably go on the market.
I didn't have enough time on the Bibby to give it a good comparison.
Nice review, thank you.
Just so I am clear. You mounted mid-sole mark of your boot @ -2cm back from the dimple?
correct - mid-sole of boot is at -2cm of the dimpleQuote:
Originally Posted by Dane1
you talked about maybe going -3... it seems like you were learnings torwards -3 at the end of your review. also are your renegades 87 or 88 from tail?
Always measure from the tip, not the tail. Just an FYI.Quote:
Originally Posted by JJChit
definitely. but I thought the renegades were measured from tail?Quote:
Originally Posted by shafty85
Great review thanks. I'm throwing some schizos on mine so I'll keep everyone updated on how I feel they preform for me at the different mid sole positions.
Don't know about the rens specifically, sorry. Would be odd if one ski went against the norm, but what do I know? :confused:Quote:
Originally Posted by JJChit
I'm interested in why the RPC seems to be the ski of choice to compare these to?
bblaster- why the second pair, same construction and flex as first? what a dirty ski ho you are!
i would likely be interested when you put 1st on the market
Thanks for the review!! I've been scoping these since last year and my stoke grows every time I hear/read something new about them. Hope to make them my go-to ride this winter if I can swing getting new skis.
Let me know if/when they do hit the market, I'd be interested!Quote:
Originally Posted by Bird Blaster
Please do. I was so excited to ski mine I just mounted them on the line without thinking twice.... They ski amazing there but still interested in a -2 mount....Quote:
Originally Posted by racesla
I'm really torn as to where to mount mine. I'm starting to think -1.5 would be best (187). I pressure the tongues a bit but usually I'd say I ski pretty centered, and I don't want to sacrifice too much maneuverability, but I definitely don't want any tip dive. hopefully a few more people chime in before I have to mount em in about a month.
They're pretty similar in shape. They're really damn close to the automatic in shape AND rocker profile, but I think alot more people have skied the RPC. My automatics and my new medium+ 187 GPOs are very similar skis in every respect, the flex is almost identical, though a bit rounder on the GPO. the only place they really differ is the tail. the GPOs have about 1/3 of the rocker and the taper is way less abrupt (overall, the sidecut on the GPO is very smooth, whereas it seems more abrupt on the autos, if that makes sense). The tail on the GPO looks alot more substantial, even if it flexes pretty much the same.Quote:
Originally Posted by XavierD
So it is a Billy Goat?
I've read through this thread now, and come to realize I have no reason to get a pair of GPOs since I have apparently been skiing on it for the last few seasons.
I suggest you buy a pair and let us know if they are that similar or if they differ - for the good of the community, you know. :fmicon:Quote:
Originally Posted by XavierD
I had the first gen billy goats a couple seasons ago and I really hated them, they didn't seem to do anything well for me. Whenever I was going fast in untracked my tails would sink in so much and I could never get far enough forward, it felt really awkward. I wish I had the first gens around still to compare and see how they were different other than dimensions. I remember them being heavy as fuck, don't remember how they flexed. I've heard the newer billygoats ski way differently and are a huge improvement.
I was skeptical when I demoed the autos last year because they were almost identical in dimension, but I ended up loving them and bought a pair. Still love the autos but they are a bit too turny when charging in fresh, and the tail isn't always supportive enough, it seems like the GPOs wouldn't have those issues. I'm sure the newer billygoats wouldn't either, but I got a smokin deal on the GPOs, not to mention the topsheets are way more rad...
First Gen BGs were very different from the current offering.
I guess I was just expecting more people to compare this to the BG, than the Auto (has metal) and RPC (pure carbon)
Current 186 BG:
186 BG: 142-116-126, 28m Radius, 140 cm effective edge, 2380 or 2160 g per ski
187 GPO: 140-116-128, 24m Radius, 133 cm effective edge, 2250 g per ski
I see how they are different on paper, however these seem to be the two closest comparisons, maybe the 190 Squad 7. RPC just seems very different, more shape, greater rocker profile, lighter construction.
I have 13/14 carbon mid/stiff GPO 187cm and 12/13 BG 186cm both awaiting bindings. I'll be happy to compare them once I get some snow time. However, my initial impressions are they are similar, but different skis.Quote:
Originally Posted by XavierD
GPO is noticeably lighter with the carbon layup. Tip rocker profile is very similar, as is positive camber. Tail rocker starts at the same point on both skis, but the GPO has less rise. BG has RES, GPO has noticeably more sidecut (visually). Recommended mount (and narrowest point) on GPO is more forward (but not by much). GPO is softer in the tip and tail; underfoot flex is similar.
My speculation is that the BG will charge harder and be more damp, and the GPO will be quicker and more nimble. The BG will hook less in funky snow. Both will have excellent float, but the GPO will be more manageable at slow speeds and the BG more stable going mach loony. Both will be very very enjoyable skis.
Thanks for the insight. Looking forward to hearing more.Quote:
Originally Posted by adrenalated