2017 Praxis Skis Info and Resource Thread

[SupreChicken]

175 and under are 111, quite the nice pow size for the ladies me thinks

Beat me to it, but this ^^^^

I think that's the ski you seek for her. Choose length wisely. Size still matters.

[Banh Mi]

How much surfier are protests than C&D’s?


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

[jmars]

Oh, I missed that totally....thanks guys. She is a size queen....obvi why she married me....

Nail on the head, I appreciate all the money you guys help me spend!

[Tailwind]

Thanks for all of the reply’s!

The 168 wailers really seem to be inbetween the sizes of GPO. Very similar amounts of tail rocker but the GPO amount point is 5cm forward so most of the extra length goes to the tail and there is a lot more effective edge behind the tail.

GPO length : 173cm straight pull
Boot Center Forward : 93.5cm
Boot Center Forward to Tip Rocker : 43.5cm
Boot Center to Early tip Taper : 59.5cm
Effective Edge: 121cm


Wailer length : 166cm straight pull
Boot Center Forward To tip: 95cm
Boot Center to Tip Rocker: 54cm
Boot Center to Early Taper 65cm
Effective Edge: 114cm

I have similar measurements for the tail but the main point is that the majority of extra ski shows up in the tail. So visually the ski won’t look look giant when it’s on her feet... my main worry is that a 165 might not be long enough for cut up snow and big faces. She has 164cm devastators that I’m convinced are a size small...

I’ll need to confirm with her but I think we’ll roll the dice on the 175, do veneer and carbon enduro to save some weight and realize that they will occupy a unique Spot in the quiver.

[SchralphMacchio]

Huh? MVP has a 6 mm narrower tail than tip. RX has a 13 mm narrower tail than tip.

MVP has more taper and rocker, sure, but RX is more of a pintail. Unless I'm missing something...?

Now I'm debating the 187 MVP vs 184 RX in enduro+carbon w. veneer as a mid-winter touring ski, ideally a more-progressively mounted and very slightly looser replacement for my current 0G 108.

auvgeek, I think we actually agree - just having a semantics issue.

When I say "pintail," it's probably because I'm a recovering snowboarder and I'm not using the word the same way others do.

I wasn't thinking about the difference between the widest point of the fore and aft of the ski ... I didn't actually realize people called that pintail, because snowboard designers have actually always called that "taper" (before the elongated reverse sidecut sections became of favorable ski design and "taper" started referring to the length of that section).

I didn't otherwise know how to describe the actual look and shape of the tail itself ... I think we both agree that the MVP has an elongated section of reverse sidecut in the tail (which looks more pin-like than knob-like), plus a totally different tail rocker profile from the RX, which really should make it much looser and more drifty than the RX which should stay engaged and hooked up a lot more while pressured.

So it surprises me to hear both you and SupreChicken considering one vs. the other, when the feeling of the skis ought to be quite different?

I remember from the one day we skied together (you were on DPS RPCs I think, and your brother's forward pressure wasn't properly set up on his turntable ski bindings) that you were skiing pretty forward, in a style that seemed to favor the RX design. (That said, DPS also has really far back mounting points so not much choice there).

So then it comes down to just how much looser of a feel you want .from the Zero G ... the standard RX will be fatter but other than the turned up tail the overall geometry seems similar, vs a way looser and way more progressively mounted (and lighter weight) ski in the MVP.

Am I missing something?

FWIW, one of my best friends tours mid-winter in MVPs in Sierra snowpack, and he finds the ski super playful and versatile ... even on that 5' deep day we had last week.

[Banh Mi]

Im also considering MVPs and Rx for touring. Probably going to stick with Rx, just because I know it handles everything well already.


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

[SchralphMacchio]

I’ll need to confirm with her but I think we’ll roll the dice on the 175, do veneer and carbon enduro to save some weight and realize that they will occupy a unique Spot in the quiver.

You also might want to check about stock flex of 175 vs 182 and get guidance from Keith specific to your wife's weight/height/style before he does the build for good.

I'm somewhere between 130 to 135 lbs before gear and clothes, also 5' 8", and I'm glad I asked for a custom Flex 3 on my 182 GPO's. The long tail and more subtle camber-rocker transition, compared to my other 178-180 cm skis makes it feel like a lot more ski than my other pairs. The 182 feels right sized to me for AK-style haul-ass skiing in soft snow, but I haven't had enough days on them yet (only 2.5!) to dial in the really steep and/or tight slow-speed stuff yet, so I still haven't decided whether I should have gone 175 for my purposes of "anytime it's soft and I'm at a resort" skiing.

By extrapolation, I wonder if a 175 GPO will feel awesome to your wife on big face skiing (they swallow cut up snow as if it's untracked by the way) but maybe too much for "any given day" kind of skiing.

[auvgeek]

auvgeek, I think we actually agree - just having a semantics issue.

When I say "pintail," it's probably because I'm a recovering snowboarder and I'm not using the word the same way others do.

I wasn't thinking about the difference between the widest point of the fore and aft of the ski ... I didn't actually realize people called that pintail, because snowboard designers have actually always called that "taper" (before the elongated reverse sidecut sections became of favorable ski design and "taper" started referring to the length of that section).

I didn't otherwise know how to describe the actual look and shape of the tail itself ... I think we both agree that the MVP has an elongated section of reverse sidecut in the tail (which looks more pin-like than knob-like), plus a totally different tail rocker profile from the RX, which really should make it much looser and more drifty than the RX which should stay engaged and hooked up a lot more while pressured.

Sounds like we agree. Just terminology of pintail vs taper.

So it surprises me to hear both you and SupreChicken considering one vs. the other, when the feeling of the skis ought to be quite different?

I remember from the one day we skied together (you were on DPS RPCs I think, and your brother's forward pressure wasn't properly set up on his turntable ski bindings) that you were skiing pretty forward, in a style that seemed to favor the RX design. (That said, DPS also has really far back mounting points so not much choice there).

So then it comes down to just how much looser of a feel you want .from the Zero G ... the standard RX will be fatter but other than the turned up tail the overall geometry seems similar, vs a way looser and way more progressively mounted (and lighter weight) ski in the MVP.

Am I missing something?

No you're not missing anything. I totally realize they'll be different in the ways you mention. Though perhaps we disagree slightly on the extent to which they're different...which is hard because neither of us have skied them. I really wish I could demo both back to back. Regardless, either the MVP and the RX will be much closer to the Jeffrey than the 0G 108 is. The 0G 108 has very little rocker and the mount is -11.1, the RX is -8, MVP is -6, Jeffrey is -4.25.

Most of the debate is deciding which would be the best balance for touring -- holding an edge hard snow vs planing well in soft snow vs not hooking up in funky snow. I like the shape of the skinny RX, but 1) I'm leery of paying money to be a product tester of a -10mm design and 2) I'm concerned about the overall taper/pin tail on firm snow. I haven't traditionally like the way a pintailed ski handles on steep, firm snow. The tip seems to hook up and the tail washes out.

Edited out the stuff about sizing cuz it's a wash.

[SupreChicken]

How much surfier are protests than C&D’s?


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

I'll let you know once the new C&D drops. 196 protests were pretty fun, but a lot of work. They skied me more than I skied them.

[SchralphMacchio]

kick turns on icy skintracks with a 187 MVP. That's a lot of tail.

Yoga and robust powder baskets. Problem solved

[auvgeek]

Yoga and robust powder baskets. Problem solved

Yeah, I meant to edit that out before posting. It's a minor concern compared to the rest of the shape.

[Norseman]

Sounds like we agree. Just terminology of pintail vs taper.

No you're not missing anything. I totally realize they'll be different in the ways you mention. Though perhaps we disagree slightly on the extent to which they're different...which is hard because neither of us have skied them. I really wish I could demo both back to back. Regardless, either the MVP and the RX will be much closer to the Jeffrey than the 0G 108 is. The 0G 108 has very little rocker and the mount is -11.1, the RX is -8, MVP is -6, Jeffrey is -4.25.

Most of the debate is deciding which would be the best balance for touring -- holding an edge hard snow vs planing well in soft snow vs not hooking up in funky snow. I like the shape of the skinny RX, but 1) I'm leery of paying money to be a product tester of a -10mm design and 2) I'd really prefer if it was available in 187x110 instead of 189/184 x 106. Nitpicky for sure, but sizing is always a consideration. The 187x109 MVP is just a better size for me. However, I'm also concerned about kick turns on icy skintracks with a 187 MVP. That's a lot of tail.

Remembering this for the chance that I catch you slinging shit at someone for gettin picky on 2cm...😁

[auvgeek]

Remembering this for the chance that I catch you slinging shit at someone for gettin picky on 2cm...��

Yeah, I hear you. There are plus and minuses to either design, but the size certainly plays a factor, is all I'm saying. And to be honest, I don't care as much inbounds as I do for touring.

[nickel]

Remembering this for the chance that I catch you slinging shit at someone for gettin picky on 2cm...😁

1cm
a -10 RX would either be a 183 or a 188 because the -10 takes ten mm off the length as well. factoring in that Keith measures unpressed materials, that 188 is a 187 or even a 186.5

I get the goldilocks thing but my goodness does some over thinking happen around here.

[Banh Mi]

The spring sale brings on so much overthinking!

Good news is for Rx buyers, it is such a balanced ski. No surprises, read the dimensions chart online, and it skis exactly like that. I knew right when I saw the measurements, that it was going to be super predictable. Heavy core Rx are great resort skis. One of the few skis I could actually have as a 1-ski-quiver and not ever say, “I brought out the wrong ski today.” Even for ice or deep snow. It just works. I haven’t skied the Enduro core Rx, but have hand fiddled. I’m hoping the MAP core excels for touring. I am new to touring myself.

Just the right amount of rocker, just the right amount of taper, slightly forward mount point, perfect width and edge hold to do anything and everything. Praxis Rx.

The skinny quixotes I ordered last year were in no way bad. Not at all. In fact, they were really good skis. I just ordered mine too short. I am almost 6’3”, 215 lbs, and had the 187, which measured just under 185cm IIRC. Too short for a daily driver for me. I bet I would get along with the 193cm so much better. I also prefer to leave the asymmetrical sidecut for powder skis. 108mm is more of a daily driver for me, to be used even on ice. Although I bet if I used them more, I’d figure out the asym on hardpack.

It didn’t feel like a science experiment though. I knew the second I got off the lift and made a few turns on my first run, that the skinny Q’s were great skis, and well tuned, and they could be daily drivers for someone lighter than me. For someone who get’s along with asymmetrical sidecut on firm. Praxis makes some badass skis, and they have a great design squad. I wouldn’t hesitate to go fatter or skinnier on a design again, as long as it made sense for me. Like a skinny Rx, Skinny GPO, Skinny Q in 194, etc. I think a skinny GPO sounds great, since you all talk about how good it is on firm snow.


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

[auvgeek]

1cm
a -10 RX would either be a 183 or a 188 because the -10 takes ten mm off the length as well. factoring in that Keith measures unpressed materials, that 188 is a 187 or even a 186.5

I get the goldilocks thing but my goodness does some over thinking happen around here.

I had forgotten a 1 cm reduction in length accompanies the reduction in width. I was already factoring the standard Praxis 1.X reduction in length. The 185 0G 108 measures 182.5 and I wanted something slightly longer.

Thanks to both of you for calling me out. Just really tired today and not thinking straight. Basically, I was just trying to talk myself out of product testing a skinny RX. The skinny RX is still probably the best, just wish I could ski it and the 187 MVP before committing. I basically want a slightly longer 0G 108 that releases a bit easier in the tail and floats a bit better.

Thanks flowing alpy for chiming in about their differences.

[nickel]

I think the -10RX, -10 freeride both sound pretty straitforward in terms of what to expect out of it. This year I wanted to cover the extreme ends of the spectrum but next year I may look for the middleground ski and I think a -10RX would be a strong contender.

[slowroastin]

Love them, thanks again main. I Previously owned 184s at -1, so I went -.75 on these and they felt very familiar, just bigger and faster and heavier. They’re quite maneuverable and damp, at the expense of some rebound in the turn.

I face it, they absurdly overlap with The 193 MVPs I’ve got, but those at least have a frame binding on them for differentiating purposes. MVP is a little more springy / less damp but equally loose. I find both skis will carve and slarve, ski from center for quick turns or get on the shovels and bend them into carves. The Dev may plow and slither thru chop/ mostly soft variable crud better, but the MVP is quite damp and good at that too. I can ski both faster and still feel like I’m having fun than I could with 184 Head Monster 108s, so I sold those. I prefer to try and ski what the mountain gives me to make turns vs dedicated radius arcs.

You’re comparison to the MVP has me intrigued in them. The Dev’s were just too substantial for me as an all day - all mountain ski. I do miss the monster truckness they have but that weight was a lot to lay over at high speeds, and I hate wasting runs going back to the car to switch out.

I have been eyeing up a pair of RX’s for a long time but the MVP’s seem like they would fit my style better.


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

[slowroastin]

I must be in the minority - carbon is awesome. I have the 184 Rx in enduro with carbon, #4, and maple ambrosia and now have one day on the 182 9Ds, heavy with carbon, birch veneer, and #4 (mounted -1 from the dimple).

First impressions of 9D: it has been a long time since I’ve ridden skis this skinny, but the conditions were perfect for them and they were a fuckin’ blast.

Conditions = hadn’t snowed since Tuesday, stayed cold so snow was firm but pleasantly dry (very few icy spots). There had been a few crazy windy days (Thurs. and Fri) — Taku winds if you’ve been to SE AK. Groomers and bumps were very fun and easy; wind scoured areas were very variable and challenging.

Handflexing, the 9Ds are fairly stiff. Skiing, I found them quick to turn, super easy to ride, hold an edge exceptionally well, and very stable, esp. for their size. IOW, they carved well and handled our mini bumps well. For skinny skis, I’m not a fan of substantial rocker, esp. with a lot of tip/tail height. Seems to me that for the conditions one would want a 90 mm, you’d sacrifice a lot with rocker and gain a little.

I’m 5’10”, 190 lb, with 3 rugrats in elementary school, I spend most of my time coaxing and chasing them, and a pinch of time touring for turns. I would definitely tour with the 9Ds through the spring. I also tend to prefer skis (or mount locations) in the -7 to -10 range.

I would also love to compare them to 9D8s with the identical core/veneer/stiffness, someday . . .

Any chance you could post a picture of the 9D’s camber/rocker?


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

[steveski]

bevergeusegreen

This is gold.

[detrusor]

Thanks Meter, the crud busting of the 192 weighs in b/c I'm sure there will be some of that. Either the 187 or 192 for me will be inserted for alpine and tech.

Japan is probably happening for us next season which is why I'm looking to figure out builds for the old lady and I.

192 GPO was damn near perfect for japan imo


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

[jorion]

Neckbeard guides in Japan all winter and I believe tours everyday on a CCR GPO. Watching him ski his GPOs for four days pushed me over the edge into buying a pair. If I make it back next year they’ll be going with me for touring. I’d probably take my billy goats too unless I found a cheap pair of protests before that.

[Muggydude]

If anyone is looking for a pair of 192 GPOs hit me up. Brother is selling his pair. Great shape, 4 flex, Enduro, stock nylon GPO topsheet. Will let go for cheap

[CascadeLuke]

Thx for the input.

I would imagine the 194 Q would be a bit much in the tight steeps of the PNW. I'm in California, so we have much more open and less constricted shots. I'm curious why you prefer the 192 Protest over the 194 Q. Better in pow? Just as versatile? No upside to the Q? I have Protests, but was thinking that the Q might be more of a big mountain slayer. Nah?

I'm trying not to be down on Qs. Giving them a pass for me being in between sizes (or maybe 188 would be the ticket).
I did not have protest, while Q. But was A / B ing -- Billy Goats and Q's for a couple months and BGs won. Then bought ProTest to complement BG better. I'm really happy on them. Its a quiver ski and one that's very at home in PNW. Shredded 8-10" mixed to hot pow today toggling between the Pros and BG... so fun

I'd say the Q skis its legth, no shorter

Also I'm surprised nobody has brought it up but Tabke kinda bifted it and seemed to be a little off step on the Q's this yr
They were wonky in compressed packed wet snow or undulating icy areas. Strained my knees a couple times bad

Edit: my experince~ Protest > Q > BG in un-tracked // BG > Q in cut-up

[wwwllw]

Edit: my experince~ Protest > Q > BG in un-tracked // BG > Q in cut-up

This is surprising to me. Everything I read makes it sound like the BGs are the the shit/near protest in untracked. I love the Qs in untracked and everywhere really. Keep thinking I’m missing out and need BGs but posts like this help me just want to be happy and enjoy my Qs. Soon they’ll be supplemented with protests.