The Official Great Pacific Octopus Thread

[undertow2]

How do you know the GPO is a 7 flex?

Sent from my SGH-I747M using TGR Forums

He ordered it that way...

[shafty85]

He ordered it that way...

So when you order, you can order more specific than med-stiff ie. you can order med-stiff and specify you want an 8?

Sent from my SGH-I747M using TGR Forums

[undertow2]

Some that have ordered have not wanted to go with the med/stiff and Keith recommended going medium +, which is stiffer than med, but not as stiff as med/stiff and has been referred to as a 7 rating...

[98brg2d]

Yes, exactly right. Keith said you could order it as 7, med+ or med/stiff-. I ordered it that way because I wanted the shape as my largest quiver ski for deep powder and the flex for tight trees, not as a stiff crud buster. I am surprised by how similar the hand flex is to the automatic since that is the ski that I was most likely to buy other than the GPO. I was expecting the tail to be stiffer but it hand flexes quite soft (as you can see from my comparisons). I would think most people who tend to ski any non-noodle ski in the 100-mm width range as their daily driver will be surprised. I never really thought of any of my skis as very stiff, actually the opposite, but by comparison to the GPO they are stiff.

[shafty85]

[QUOTE=SupreChicken;4025687]

So the DPS RPC is stiffer than the med - stiff GPOS? Is that the pure 3 construction? Anyone else able to comment on this?

The above is true.
That pure 3 RPC (only one available last year, right?) is stiff as a board. The med-stiff gpos are a touch softer than I would like...but they snap and pop nicely. If i did it again, i would go stiff. car analogy: The wrx is a zippy car with a suspension that is nice and lively. Fun to drive. The sti is so stiff that you feel every little bump. But the car is more powerful and responsive. That's actually a perfect analogy for the comparison of the two skis, IMO.

RPC is stiffer and less forgiving. But a little more lively, slightly higher speed limit. A little less float and a little better on firm snow.

Med-stiff GPO is easier in bumps and
Tight spaces, better in untracked deep. Slarvier. More apt at making different size turns.

Both will rage if you ask. The RPC is not so good at not raging.

Overdue, but helpful?

Great analogy, IMO. I demoed the pure3 RPCs and loved them - I didn't find them that stiff, but that's probably a reflection of my lack of ability rather than a reflection of the skis. Unfortunately I'm in no position to buy them this year due to the old bank account being, well, empty love the customization of praxis, though, and can't wait to try them.

Sent from my SGH-I747M using TGR Forums

[Bird Blaster]

Well. I mounted -2. Heading to las Lenas in less than 2 weeks to test them

[nickwm21]

All this -2 talk makes me nervous. I loved mine at the line but maybe I'll like em more back at -2

sent from the future using my mind powers

[DeathVan]

Well. I mounted -2. Heading to las Lenas in less than 2 weeks to test them

BB
How tall and heavy are you and what's your bsl?

[Bird Blaster]

BB
How tall and heavy are you and what's your bsl?

6'2", 185 and 326mm

[DeathVan]

6'2", 185 and 326mm

Thanks Bird

192 Carbon GPO's are en route
I went through a mess of holes dialing in my 196 Protests

I look forward to hearing your take on the -2

[Bird Blaster]

Thanks Bird

192 Carbon GPO's are en route
I went through a mess of holes dialing in my 196 Protests

I look forward to hearing your take on the -2

Yeah no worries. I tried to base it compared to my 196ren and RP112. The -2 looked right, but we will see

[Dry]

By the time my GPOs showed up the skiing wasn't WorthAS locally so I have held off mounting. Partly because I am still undecided. Spent some serious time comparing Rossi Soul 7 and the new 7 Series and DPS 112/RPC in like sizes to see where they were mounted. And then listened to and read everyone's magic formulas.

Keith/Praxis is spot on by the numbers and the most often quoted formula . But neither Rossi or DPS is any where close on similar/like skis. And Ross makes the least sense of all adding tail to one ski size and tip to the other...pray you want to ski the middle size was my thought after looking and running a tape..

Or it simply doesn't matter where you mount Me? Still looking @ -3 on mine.

[sandflea]

I've got 190 112RP's mounted +1.5 which are perfect for me, my 192 GPO's are mounted about -.75 and are just right. My bsl is 301, I'm 6'1" and 175lbs. I've always liked my mount about -1 from what Keith recommends on all skis except for the Concepts, which I like at recommended.

[hoarhey]

sandflea, what bindings are you running on your 190 112rp's?

I'm on the line with dynafit verticals and titan boots at 5'8" 170 lbs.

With the ramp angle of boots/binding, they are ok for backcountry, but for any resort skiing on firmer steeps, they feel a bit back, and I would like them farther forward.

I will likely put demo bindings on my 182 gpo's (or just put marker tour 12's at -2).

I am regretting +1 mount of 177 protests with dynafits.

I skied the 187 protest at +1 cm and am thinking I'll play with 0 cm there, which
might be the limit of the demo jesters I have on those skis.

Thinking I'd like 0 or -1 cm on the shorter length.

Seems like mount point is more crucial for me on shorter skis (easy for me to be more forward than I'd like).

Forgive the ramble...

[sandflea]

I've got Marker Tour F12's on the RP's, I went +2 and almost sold them...for me, 1.25-1.5 is the sweetspot. I ski pretty neutral stance nowadays though. For reference my AKJJ's, I'm on recommended.

[Dry]

Difference between the suggested RPC and GPO mount point is something likesix (6) full cm IIRC, FROM MEMORY (190cm : 192cm)

Not at home or I would be able to tell you exactly what the difference is.

The GPO being that much more of a forward mount. I know why Keith has marked them were they are. And what some will be doing with this ski and how it will be skied.

I want a neutral set up ski, I also want one that feels pretty traditional under foot. I mounted my 192 RPC at +1cm and really like just how playful that ski is. Hoping for something similar from the GPO.

Very curious to see what the Bird thinks while he is in SA.

[abraham]

Very curious to see what the Bird thinks while he is in SA.

Me too. Have 192 med-stiff+ but won't ski them till December. Intend to get a decent mix of open snowbird terrain and tight Stevens pillow stuff. I haven't had time to compare with my other skis yet. But they feel a bit softer than intended and further forward as well. Im considering dynafits on them but probably want to tour on a shorter, different pair of skis.

[shafty85]

Difference between the suggested RPC and GPO mount point is something likesix (6) full cm IIRC.

The GPO being that much more of a forward mount. I know why Keith has marked them were they are.

I mounted my 192 RPC at +1cm and really like just how playful that ski is. Hoping for something similar from the GPO.

Very curious to see what the Bird thinks while he is in SA.

Why is it he chose such a forward mount?

I loved the mount location of the pure3 RPCs. Are you thinking/hoping the GPO will perform similarly at the recommended mount location or further back?

Really looking forward to Bird's review.

Sent from a mobile telephone (how crazy is that?!?)

[shafty85]

Me too. Have 192 med-stiff+ but they feel a bit softer than intended and further forward as well.

I agree. By handflex, they are much softer than I anticipated.

But these are my first pair of praxis, the construction looks top notch and the price is great, so I'm stoked to spend time on them. I've never read a poor review of Keith's skis.

Sent from a mobile telephone (how crazy is that?!?)

[Dry]

I have 112s and RPCs. Love the RPC and not so much the 112s.

Was thinking the GPO might just be "just right" everything considered.

Med Stiff flex is a little softer than expected. But I am good with the flex. My thought is it might make the ski even more fun and more playful.

Both the GPO and the RPC are 192cm.

The GPOs suggested mount point is a full 6.2 cm forward of the suggested mid point on the RPC. I talked with Keith a little about that and my thought of going back 3cm. He was OK with it.

My guess from that conversation is the forward mount suggestion..and Keith was clear to me it was only a "suggestion" is a modern mount for those wanting to ski the board switch on occasion. Somthing I will never be doing. And by a mid cord measure it is "right". I am +1cm on the suggested for the RPC and couldn't be happier. Which is why I am really hestitant to mount such an awesome ski so far forward. The GPO has a lot more tail and less rocker than the RPC to start with. Go 6mm forward and you have a LOT of ski back there on the GPO.

The yellow ski is my custom pair of GPOs.
The grey ski is the RPC.


192 in both ski lined up for a suggested mount point comparison which is the left hand edge of the blue tape.



Skis lined up at suggested mount point showing the additional tail allocated to the GPO @ that mount.



Same lineup showing how"short" the tip is using the Praxis mount

[marshalolson]

Difference between the suggested RPC and GPO mount point is something likesix (6) full cm IIRC, FROM MEMORY (190cm : 192cm)

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.

if memory serves, the RPC midsole is approx -7cm behind the center-of-the-sidecut. the GPO is (i believe) -4 or -5cm.

[Dry]

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.

[marshalolson]

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

[whyturn]

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

[marshalolson]

Your -7cm number refers to chord center, correct?