The Official Great Pacific Octopus Thread

[adrenalated]

Anybody who's skied both a ON3P Billygoat and the GPO (adrenalated, Suprechicken, auvgeak, XavierD) care to weigh in on whether or not the BG will address my dislikes of the GPO mentioned above? I think I prefer a more center-mounted ski like the GPO (EHP, Renegade, Line SFB) but have a racing background and can definitely appreciate something that needs to be driven from the tip (Mantra, Cochise). Is the BG the solution? It gets so much hype around these parts I'm having trouble holding off any longer...

Agree with SC also... I'm not sure the BG slarves better than the GPO (it's at least equal though) but it absolutely will address everything else you didn't like about the GPO.

What's your BSL? You're welcome to ski my 186s if you can fit in a FKS mounted for 295mm, or Wilderness Exchange has a 186 demo, or PM Powtron for a demo pair...

Edit to add now that I'm typing on a computer rather than a phone:
I think the BG strikes a nice balance between being a traditional, tip driving ski and a more playful, center mounted ski. Kinda like the EHP in that regard. The recommended mount is at -8cm, so not too centered, not too aft. It certainly doesn't require any where near the forward, driving stance that something like a Cochise or Mantra does. In soft snow, you can ski it pretty centered. It can be driven hard through the tip if you want, but you don't have to. On firm snow, as mentioned elsewhere, it does require just a little bit of tip pressure to keep the reverse sidecut in the tip from misbehaving.

Compared to the EHP, I'd say it rewards a similar stance, floats a bit better, is a bit less slarvy (maybe, been awhile since I skied an EHP), and is similarly stable in soft chop. On hard snow the BG is WAY better IMO, but I also hated the EHP on hard snow. I have not skied Renegades or SFBs unfortunately.

[NakedShorts]

First day first impressions ( not the mountain or conditions these were made for)
"These things rule I don't think I need a different ski ever"
"What the fuck were those guys at blister talking about"
"I'm going to buy these again"
"These things truck"
"They fly 40ft of every fucking little hit"
I'm a big aggressive skier. 192 mounted -1. Standard layup.
Big smile. Will do a better write up after appropriate conditions. $ though.

[Shu Shu]

So finally got around to putting this together.
In Brief, the GPO is a silly easy ski, and for me covers everything from east coast bushwalking to big open bowls I tried to put a little bit of everything in here. At a 160 lbs the medium+ 187 carbon was always more than enough ski both in flex and length. Short turns, huge turns, bumps pow crud it's all good. Yes they are incredibly poppy, which can take you by surprise from time to time, but I feel it just keeps me on my game. 2:00-2:40 probably one of the best runs I've ever skied, right on the edge for me.

[grinch]

glad you both are digging them, confirming I'm not completely out to lunch. nice vid as well shushu. chargin thru some nice looking conditions. trees look like out east but that bowl skiing can't be or can it?
anyway been spending more time on my gpo's to see if I could come up with blisters comments. I guess I can kind of see some of it if edges are sharp tip to tail especially if you get in the backseat. in the backseat they are a handful especially with full edge. full edge they like to be driven 24/7, no relaxing. I think a lot of jibbers kind of ski from the back a bit so maybe that might be the issue. I was under the impression a tester would tune to suit .
I detuned mine quite a bit to just past the taper tip and tail and continued with a slight detune further back almost to the end of tip/tail rocker. there's always been those people that swear by "edge tip to tail" and I've never subscribed to that. even race slalom skis now have some early rise for easier initiation. it would seem like a waist of design with the taper and rocker on the gpo's to not detune and possibly even more than a waist of design and possibly border line unpredictable when edging and transitioning thru the taper or rocker to the sidecut. I find with this detuning I can break them loose at will, they don't get deflected in chop/corn/funk and that gives me the confidence to push them down the fall line. they kind of remind me of the first generation all mt or combi ski with modern width and tech(rocker/taper). I used to ski "Dynamic" skis a lot. mostly the gs but also had sl's I'd ski occasionally then they came out with the "combi". combi was somewhere between the gs and sl. closer to the gs, it had the stability of the gs but had some pop from the sl. combi was super versatile and the gpo reminds me of those just waaaay better everywhere

[Slow 'n Steady]

First day on my GPOs today. Mostly snow plowed green circles with my 2y/o, but broke away to rally a few groomers of corn. Was surprised how much pop these had. Had an absolute blast laying high speed trenches. Felt way more solid than I thought they would and easy to make any kind of turn shape. I can't wait to get these out in real snow, I think they may be perfect for me. 192, std layup, 0.5cm forward, detuned past the taper.

[Island Bay]

Thanks for some good reviews.

A sizing question: At 6'1 x 170, I would normally go straight for the 187. The thing is, I'm looking for a surfy touring ski for when my 187 Protests are too wide, and I thought the 182 might just do. Am I kidding myself?

I'm no mad charger/hucker, just like to go fast and smooth. Protests feel almost like a bionic extension, I love them that much. And yep, Wootest 2.0 would fit the bill, but they are now only for custom order and might be too hard/expensive for me to get hold of (shipping to NZ and assorted taxes/fees).

Thanks a lot for your help :-)

[neck beard]

A sizing question: At 6'1 x 170, I would normally go straight for the 187. The thing is, I'm looking for a surfy touring ski for when my 187 Protests are too wide, and I thought the 182 might just do. Am I kidding myself?

187... but in CCR.

I find my 182 CCR to be as surfy playful as I could want for when it is not deep enough for the Protest or PB. In fact, I still ski the CCR when it is deep (lighter and easier for touring than the Protest). My 182 CCRs are so surfy that I have wondered if 187s would be better, especially with a centered mount, therefore giving more tip.

If I could improve upon the GPO CCR, then I doubt I'd need another ski except on big deep days, and spring. In a hypothetical search for that perfection, I always wonder what would make the CCR better? What will CCRv2.0 look like?

[Island Bay]

Cheers D.
I just had a look at your GPO CCR pics in the other Praxis thread, and I really like what I saw.

I'm glad I did a lot of touring on my Protests; it never felt hard/heavy, but the snow was soft and we weren't caning it. Still though, 1500m vert including lots of 40cm trailbreaking seemed ok. Lighter boards might just feel like cheating now :-)

BTW, I checked out some Salomon Rocker2 108s with Guardians in our hotel ski room, and I nearly had a hernia. So heavy compared to my Protests with Radical STs.

Edit: Do you ski your BCs in spring, or do you feel the need to go even narrower?

[neck beard]

I can't stand heavy 'backcountry' skis with frame bindings. Useless mass in soft snow.

You are right that Protests are not that heavy, but for me they torque the ankle due to width on hard surface climbs. And they take more effort to control on shitty snow due to large base surface area and light touring boots on really skinny feet and ankles. Plus much more snow builds on the top sheets. Plus they flop much more going fast on hard surfaces (not often I'm doing that, and TBH my protest are too soft anyway, getting replaced with stiffer UL model next season).

The GPO CCR is just such a functionally versatile ski. By comparison, it far exceeds the [OG] Wailer 112 for versatility, yet remains as easy to ski and 85% as floaty in the tips, 100% as floaty through the full base surface area, and 89% as carvy underfoot. And they destroy the Wailers for pure smooooooth straight line stability on 3D mountain/alpine snow, sometimes feeling flawless. Destroy the Wailer for big fast powder arcs and pow carves down the fall line. Way more slarvy and pivoty in trees, almost too much. Amazing tree ski. Destroy the Wailers for landing small pops and drops to pow through the trees - no wheelie at all, just ski through the landing into a balanced turn and then over another little air between two hardwood trees without even knowing you landed the first drop (talking <6' here). The only thing I sometimes miss is camber energy for small/medium radius repetitive ski instructor turns in shitty 3D. It is also taking me a while to always ski balanced and centered on the mount (technically weak skier+heavy pack). I want to knee-push/chase the tips more, not because it is better to ski that way, but because it keeps me further from my dreaded heels. And I like the feeling of pushing downhill. I also don't feel very capable and dynamic on them in heavy manky deep soft snow. But that might just be the skier, not the ski.

I'm skiing 182 UL models. 172cm tall, 71kg with a pack on. Tech bindings and touring boots. Skinny legs. Former snowboarder. Had about 45 days on them, all but one was touring, all powder and soft snow days, some ending with a 4km run out through intermediate/beginner resort groomers (they carve)

I am not saying the GPO CCR is the best ski possible at all, there may well be better in the class. If someone can recommend me a similar width ski from any maker that is better than the GPO CCR, comes from Praxis kind of people, weighs the same and isn't a ridiculous price.... I still doubt I'd leave Praxis for them. G3 Emperor seems to be the closest in terms of weight+rocker profile+sidecut?

That turned into a review. I'm not good at writing reviews.

ps - which ever cooter said GPO's don't float..... was right? Oh noes....


pps, I don't do variations on 360's.

Edit to add photos from that other thread. GPO vs GPO CCR pics



The rocker goes much further into the middle of the ski that the photos indicate. It is a true CCR, not a long flat section. I'm not very good at rocker photos:


CCR




CCR sitting on top of a normal GPO. Tip.


CCR sitting on top of a normal GPO. Tail. Blurry.

[pureantigravity]

I'll take one of those.

[grinch]

X2 on the 187 island bay. At 5"7' 160 my 182 ul's are spot on for touring. Occasionally at the ski hill I wish my glass 182's were 187's
If that was a review NB it sums it up pretty well especially the width/performance/weight/price/durability/praxis service comparison. They kind of punch above weight in most if not in all those categories. Ul cores have made some great options for touring

[SupreChicken]

Neck beard, grinch, can't say thank you enough for all the insight.

I always see my friends on CCR skis just struggle on the skin track. The 187 hoji mounted at recommended comes to mind.

Do you have that experience touring with the CCR?

Also, I love the on snow feel of the carbon layup. So much that i would consider taking the extra 1/2 lb up to not take the risk with the UL...

Any deflection issues with the UL?

[grinch]

Mine aren't ccr. They look awesome though. Deflection with ul's feels the same as carbons. More than glass and less damp than glass.The only ski I'd consider for the hill with carbon and/or ul would be protest just because they seem deflection proof I think

[wwwllw]

First day on my GPOs today. Mostly snow plowed green circles with my 2y/o, but broke away to rally a few groomers of corn. Was surprised how much pop these had. Had an absolute blast laying high speed trenches. Felt way more solid than I thought they would and easy to make any kind of turn shape. I can't wait to get these out in real snow, I think they may be perfect for me. 192, std layup, 0.5cm forward, detuned past the taper.

Glad your enjoying them. FYI they are carbon layup.

[neck beard]

Chicken, I don't ski any snow conditions to judge deflection, so can't comment. CCR in the skin track is about 45 days - no issue for me at all, but a few caveats: I don't use or set steep skin tracks and don't do high angle kick turns, so I rely much less on raw traction. My skin tracks are almost always in some kind of soft snow on this ski, so the full skin gets usually gets pressure contact with snow. And I have a fair bit of experience in the skin track and tend not to slip much anyway through technique. I think on harder snow steep skin tracks the chance of less traction is pretty real with a CCR profile.

I've been up some hard wind scoured alpine terrain on PowderBoards... and that sucked. They are not mountain tools. By comparison, CCR GPO's can pass as mountain tools with some minor compromise.

I reckon if Praxis tweaked the CCR GPO in shape and profile, v2.0 model... then they have a new ski model on their hands. Not just a CCR variant of the GPO.

[Slow 'n Steady]

Glad your enjoying them. FYI they are carbon layup.

So that's why they are so light. Had them out this morning for more 2D rallying and some family circle laps. I have to say, they seem damp compared to other carbon skis I've ridden. Loved them even more today than yesterday. Maybe it's a praxis thing? These are my first praxis boards, though I might be a convert. Will have them out in some real mountains next weekend, can't wait. Thanks again wwwllw!!

[North]

For starters, just go ahead and buy a pair of billy goats. I immediately thought I should have pulled the trigger sooner once I started skiing my pair.

If you think you like a more center mounted ski, but also want to be able to tip drive and charge through variable snow, I would give the 13/14 caylor or new 122 Jeffrey a serious look. They are not quite as slarvy as the BG due to the lack of RES in the tip, but they float really well and are a little easier to manage in tight spaces due to the longer tail rocker. There is a bit of a stability sacrifice vs the BG, but I haven't noticed it at my size (6'0" 165 lbs). I can ski the caylor at 40-50 mph on soft groomers and not feel at all squirrly or unstable underfoot. They bust through chop and crud just as well as the 191 BG IMO.

I love both skis, but the Billy's are looser in fresh and float like a champ... If I am traveling and conditions will be variable the GPO is the one I pack...

Agree with SC also... I'm not sure the BG slarves better than the GPO (it's at least equal though) but it absolutely will address everything else you didn't like about the GPO.

Compared to the EHP, I'd say it rewards a similar stance, floats a bit better, is a bit less slarvy (maybe, been awhile since I skied an EHP), and is similarly stable in soft chop. On hard snow the BG is WAY better IMO, but I also hated the EHP on hard snow. I have not skied Renegades or SFBs unfortunately.

Thanks guys. Awesome feedback as always!

And thanks for the EHP comparison, adrenalated; I agree that the EHP is unhappy on hardback. It's the primary reason I've been looking for a replacement. Something that is at least 80% as slarvy as the EHP in the soft, with improved hardback manners would be perfect. Sounds like the BG might strike a nice balance....

I'm a 297mm BSL so I may take you up on your offer for a few test laps, or ask PowTron, or buy. Whatever the avenue, I've definitely gotta try a pair now.

[cooks]

I've got a couple season on a pair of standard layup 191 BGs and a 186 tour. I'm not sure what layup GPO I skied, I know it was a carbon, gonna guess medium or med +. Adrenalated can clear this up. Most of the main points seemed to already be mentioned, but after one lap on the GPO today, figured I'd toss out my thoughts:

I don't know what your intended purpose is for the ski, but if it involves any substantial amount of resort skiing, I would steer away from the tour or carbon layup of either ski. Both get knocked around a bit much in inconsistent snow.

As far as a shape vs shape comparison, the GPO requires a more centered stance. Driving the tips hard went... poorly to say the least. The BG prefers a more traditional style. The ski responds very well in soft snow to a fairly strong amount of tip pressure, but will still do what you ask of it as long as you're at least weighting your forefoot slightly and not full on tailgunning everywhere. It just isn't as "fun" and doesn't feel as planted or stable in any sort of variable snow. Both will slarve just fine, although I felt the GPO needed to be very neutrally weighted to do this while the BG still requires some degree of tip pressure, probably a little less as things get smoother and deeper as suprechicken mentioned.

I didn't get the GPO into any substantial amount of chop or hardpack, so I can't really offer any real comparisons here. I will say the BG has totally adequate hardpack manners, light years better than the EHP.

Based on all you're saying you want out of a ski, I think you'd love a BG. I'd certainly agree that it would fix all the things you don't like about the GPO.

[adrenalated]

I'm not sure what layup GPO I skied, I know it was a carbon, gonna guess medium or med +. Adrenalated can clear this up.

MAP Carbon, med/stiff, mounted -2cm from recommended.

[auvgeek]

They bust through chop and crud just as well as the 191 BG IMO.

Another point of view: compared to the 191 BG, the 186 Jeffrey (110) just doesn't compare in (soft) chop and crud. Not even close. Both of my pairs are woodgrain/stiffer than stock, so it's a fair comparison. If you really want to charge through chop/crud at mach speeds, I would definitely ski the Caylor/Jeffrey before blowing $$$ on them. The tips and tail are quite a bit softer than underfoot, which makes for kind of an odd sensation at high speeds in soft chop, IMO. The BG is still my favorite soft chop ski of all time. The BG just charges over everything like it's smooth.

[shroom]

^ I remember talking to you about that midway through my first run on the 13/14 191 caylor. after figuring them out i did not think they gave up anything to the BG aside from that starve in soft snow, and we're quite a bit better heading back to the chair. my opinions seem to be somewhat unique, though.

[auvgeek]

Fair enough. I've put some more time on my Jeffreys, and my opinion remains unchanged. On that note, it'd be interesting for me to ski a pair of Rens again.

[kidwoo]

You are right that Protests are not that heavy, but for me they torque the ankle due to width on hard surface climbs.

Hi!

Me again!

[neck beard]

Me again!

I know, I know. You never left my mind. But midget redheads seldom do...

Recently I've been experimenting with stance, trying to pin down exactly how the CCR GPO likes to be skied. Each run I modified my stance slightly for a few turns and you can really feel the ski change in response, and you go from obviously bad skiing to skiing ok with small mods. All in untouched soft snow with a variety of textures and depths:

- doesn't like shin pressure towards the tips. Hates heel riding, but easy to end up there.
- likes pressure downwards on the arches, but not the heel. Doesn't like straight ankles at all (but what ski does?) Responds very noticeably to an almost exaggerated lifting of the toes off the foot bed to bend the ankle in the boot, whilst pushing knees down. Basically, it likes a downward compressed stance with shin pressure pushing downwards and only a little forwards, toes pulling upwards, particularly when transitioning between turns.

...pure smooooooth straight line stability on 3D mountain/alpine snow, sometimes feeling flawless. Destroy the Wailer for big fast powder arcs and pow carves down the fall line.

In the last week I found instances where my CCR GPO were not as flawless and smooth as they sometimes are in 3D. Sometimes they squirell and feel pivoty during fast-ish long turns.

Probably like most fully rockered skis, it sometimes feels like the sweet spot is just too small. See my above comments on micro stance management.

I'm on 182's.... perhaps a longer CCR ski would lengthen the sweet spot? Perhaps a longer turn radius on a CCR shape would smooth it out?

Can anyone suggest a forgiving, large sweetspot, highly versatile, light, off-piste powder ski alternative to compare to. With similar width?

.and 89% as carvy underfoot [as the Wailer 112]

On really hard groomers I'd revise this to 60%... not that I care about carve value. I'd guess that most skis this width with some side cut can carve well enough for the short times it is required. Unlike skis over 125mm.

[SupreChicken]

Can anyone suggest a forgiving, large sweetspot, highly versatile, light, off-piste powder ski alternative to compare to. With similar width?


.

IMO, the problem is the CCR. Your balance issues are the exact experience I had with the renegade.

Mustache GPO
MVP
Bibby
Billy goat (for forgiving, go 186)
Jeffrey 114 or 122 for a bit more playful.
Lhasa fat or governor for a bit more business.

Definitely others out there. Those are the ones I would consider.