2017 Praxis Skis Info and Resource Thread

[nickel]

What do you mean, stack codes?

[markcjr]

Thanks PNW

Sent from my VS987 using TGR Forums mobile app

[PNW_Skier206]

What do you mean, stack codes?

As in use multiple codes. So you can do the 50% and the 15% on the same pair of skis.


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

[sruffian]

I can say that the BC tip is very wide and hard to sink - the progressive and soft flex up there keeps the tip pretty high in the snow, and also I’m a really light skier. But I had a couple moments this weekend when the tips hooked up underneath variabilities in layer density in super deep snow and I went over the bars. I think Saturday was the first time I ever toured in 150cm of pow.

FWIW this weekend my 190cm lotus 120's from like 2008 were sinking. 5 feet of pow is 5 feet of pow.

Surprisingly, no tip dive on 192 gpo's mounted on the line inbounds. And good god those things are fun once all that's left is resort chop. I've had tip dive issues on that mount point before in 1 to 2 feet, guess I'm getting used to them

[3PinGrin]

Am I just missing something, I can't find the weight estimator for the custom builds? It is supposed to be at the top of the product page.....

[nickel]

I think they got rid of it. Between cores/flexes/veneers/+or-10 it was probably getting very close to impossible to have an automated weight estimator.

[dschane]

Am I just missing something, I can't find the weight estimator for the custom builds? It is supposed to be at the top of the product page.....

I haven't since that estimator for a year or so. I think it may have gotten less reliable with the veneers, core make up, stiffness, and carbon, so he nixed it. Speculation though.

ETA: what nickel said.

[3PinGrin]

I haven't since that estimator for a year or so. I think it may have gotten less reliable with the veneers, core make up, stiffness, and carbon, so he nixed it. Speculation though.

ETA: what nickel said.

I can see how it would have become a bit complex with all the options available. Thanks to you and nickel for input!

[Shu Shu]

I can see how it would have become a bit complex with all the options available. Thanks to you and nickel for input!

Take this with a huge grain of salt but I think the general consensus was to take the standard edition enduro weight and then estimate .5 lbs reduction per pair with the add of carbon or veneer, and add .5 lbs with switch from enduro to heavy cores.

I don't even have a good scale so I can't validate this.

[MTN_BIKER]

Bought my first pair of Praxis skis during the custom sale last year. 187 GPO, enduro w/carbon, wood veneer and #4 flex. For reference, I'm 5'11 165 lbs and mounted on the dimple.

I have about 12 days on them, all powder ranging from sierra cement to full on blower and couldn't be happier. I was a bit concerned about all the tip dive discussions going on but haven't had an issue. I just click in and ski them!

[Muggydude]

Take this with a huge grain of salt but I think the general consensus was to take the standard edition enduro weight and then estimate .5 lbs reduction per pair with the add of carbon or veneer, and add .5 lbs with switch from enduro to heavy cores.

I don't even have a good scale so I can't validate this.

I think the veneer and carbon take off closer to .3-.4 lbs each. Heavy adds closer to 1 lb for 115mm longer skis

[Shu Shu]

I think the veneer and carbon take off closer to .3-.4 lbs each. Heavy adds closer to 1 lb for 115mm longer skis

Thanks Muggy i knew you either you or Thom would have more accurate estimates.

[3PinGrin]

I think the veneer and carbon take off closer to .3-.4 lbs each. Heavy adds closer to 1 lb for 115mm longer skis

Thanks Muggydude, very helpful!

[galibier_numero_un]

This Fall, when transitioning my GPOs to Vipecs, I weighed them, along with my soon to be mounted Q's.

15/16 GPO (182, Enduro (MAP) --> Carbon--> Nylon top sheet--> flex #4): 4065 gms (8.9 Lbs.)
17/18 Q's (182, Enduro--> Carbon --> Veneer top sheet --> flex #4): 3897 gms (8.6 Lbs.)

Not a perfect comparison, but we're looking at .3 or so pounds for substituting veneer in a 116-118mm width ski of that length.

... Thom

[3PinGrin]

This Fall, when transitioning my GPOs to Vipecs, I weighed them, along with my soon to be mounted Q's.

15/16 GPO (182, Enduro (MAP) --> Carbon--> Nylon top sheet--> flex #4): 4065 gms (8.9 Lbs.)
17/18 Q's (182, Enduro--> Carbon --> Veneer top sheet --> flex #4): 3897 gms (8.6 Lbs.)

Not a perfect comparison, but we're looking at .3 or so pounds for substituting veneer in a 116-118mm width ski of that length.

... Thom

Thanks Thom!

[nickel]

this is useful stuff. do you or does anyone else have a similar comparison from enduro/map to UL?

[grinch]

this is useful stuff. do you or does anyone else have a similar comparison from enduro/map to UL?

I think results may vary as my non carbon non veneer enduro 182 gpo was lighter than Thom’s same gpo that had carbon. That being said my stock 182 gpo was 8.6 and my ul was 8.1. Both were flex 4(med stiff) non veneers

[nickel]

how interesting. sample size is pretty small but if Thom's numbers and your numbers match up there's only .2 of a lb in the ul core? otherwise no more than .5lb per pair out of UL+C

[grinch]

Ya I guess. I was always under the impression the ul’s always came with carbon as well. I might be mistaken, maybe it’s possible to get ul without carbon. My ul’s had carbon and the map(enduro) didn’t . As a dedeicated touring rig I had no problem with my ul/c gpo with rad 1.0. I miss that ski. The problem arose trying to use it on the hill (skackcoyntry days). It really got kicked around on the hill. I’d like to have both those gpo’s with veneer and tectons but I have to draw the line somewhere. If I have to pick one it’d be the stock gpo with veneer no carbon. Still plenty light and capable everywhere but that’s my use for them atm

[jorion]

I just picked up a stock (enduro plus veneer) 187 GPO and the weight was 8 lbs, 15 oz. That was light enough for me to get that vs a custom with carbon for touring.

[galibier_numero_un]

From the size of the variance we're observing, it makes sense that Keith nixed the weight estimator.

I'll bet he made some year to year production changes (perhaps even in the same year) based on testing & user feedback - as opposed what we're observing being sample to sample variation.

So basically, we return to the key question(s): how does Enduro, carbon, veneer, etc. suit my requirements. It's somewhat liberating - not quibbling over a 100 gram or so variance.

BTW, I'm finally getting my Q's out in their intended environment and falling in love with them. More on that in the Quixote thread.

... Thom

[nickel]

I agree about it being a bit liberating. It also leads me to believe the stated difference in dampness between an UL and an enduro might be somewhat overstated. I have a hard time imagining that .5lbs (or .2/.3 if comparing to enduro+carbon) actually makes a ski so much less damp.

None of this really helps me decide whether my yeti should be enduro, enduro+Carbon, or UL... deciding is hard.

[Muggydude]

My understanding is the UL is a pretty harsh ride in anything but nice homogeneous snow. I have no experience with the UL however. If I was getting a touring rig I'd definitely go Enduro/Carbon/Veneer if I could. Quite lightweight, but still damp and a nice ride when things get dicey

[nickel]

That's kind of what my thinking is starting to lean towards. Touring protest stays UL+Veneer in a 4 (or 4+ if Keith will goldilocks it for me) with a yeti in a #4 Enduro+Carbon+Veneer since it's going to see a wide variety of conditions. I'm really not even sure I should put Carbon in the yeti to be honest.

[nickel]

Those of you who've done goldilocks flex, e-mail to keith or note in the "skier preferences" to ask for this?