or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Praxis 185cm Pow Ski - Page 2

post #31 of 54
Quote:
Originally Posted by Max_501 View Post
Except that I am talking about fat, with side cut and rocker (rather than camber) as a potentially interesting tool for pow and deep crud.
Find a way to hop on a Hell Bent or an EP Pro for a few days. These are rockered sidecut skis. The Hell Bents are incredibly versatile skis. As I noted before, I believe they are harbingers of a new generation of "all around" or "all mountain" skis. Given their pre-de-cambered nature they carve in ways you would not imagine such a wide ski could. Think serious RR tracks.

However, speaking just from my experience, I find them more challenging in really deep heavy snow than the Praxis or Pontoon. OTOH two of my kids do not find them an issue in that kind of snow - they rip them forward & backward. But they are substantially stronger skiers than average. And than I am. The one who has skied both Pontoons and Hell Bents did acknowledge that the Hell Bents do not pull off the weightless smear thing the Pontoons do.

Of course, as has been pointed out - it boils down to what you like...
post #32 of 54
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by spindrift View Post
Likewise you might find them interesting in soft heavy snow that'd be uber-catchy with a more traditional camber & stiffness.
They are great in funky snow, no doubt about that. I'm just not sure that the reverse sidecut for lift served skiing is better than a fat rockered design with sidecut.

Quote:
Originally Posted by spindrift View Post
I can't imagine a narrower conventional ski allowing the kind of deep snow angles something like a Praxis does (if you choose to lay them out that way).
The question isn't if a conventional narrow ski can match them but rather how a design like the K2 Hellbent with sidecut and rocker would compare. Is one or the other better for laying about big pow carves?
post #33 of 54
Quote:
Originally Posted by Max_501 View Post
Yeah, but what's more fun, a carvy turn or a slarvy turn?
I think both are highly amusing, each in its own way! Depends on what mood I'm in...$0.02
post #34 of 54
Thanks for your perspective on reverse sidecut / rockered skis, Max. Knowing where you come from, that's very interesting.
post #35 of 54
I don't think you got a succinct answer to this question:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Max_501 View Post
I understand what the rocker does. But why the reverse sidecut?
Among other benefits, it puts the greatest surface area underfoot and reduces swing weight.

But although you will find rockered/reverse camber skis with conventional sidecut, you will not find reverse sidecut skis with normal camber, for the reasons outlined in Shane McConkey's "Mental Floss": in order to decamber a cambered ski -- necessary in powder, if you want to avoid tip dive -- the midsection needs to be narrower than tip or tail.


Quote:
Originally Posted by philippeR View Post
Thanks for your perspective on reverse sidecut / rockered skis, Max. Knowing where you come from, that's very interesting.
Ditto. I think they might throw him out of The Teaching Method That Dare Not Speak Its Name.
post #36 of 54
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by alpinedad View Post
Ditto. I think they might throw him out of The Teaching Method That Dare Not Speak Its Name.
Hehe...thats funny. The surprise for me was that they turned so easily when they were tipped in deep snow. And of course they float so well you don't have to worry about getting the skis out of the snow for the next turn, just release and tip again. I guess thats the rocker doing its job. It really is amazing how easily they turn in heavy pow (haven't had them in nice light pow yet).
post #37 of 54
Quote:
Originally Posted by Max_501 View Post
Hehe...thats funny. The surprise for me was that they turned so easily when they were tipped in deep snow. And of course they float so well you don't have to worry about getting the skis out of the snow for the next turn, just release and tip again. I guess thats the rocker doing its job. It really is amazing how easily they turn in heavy pow (haven't had them in nice light pow yet).
My 195s are still sitting in my closet, brakes half bent (splayed out, but not yet bent back in). But that's exactly what I'd expect.

I'm not expecting them to dramatically improve the experience in beautiful fresh pow ... for the simple reason that I can't imagine what would make that better. But I don't think it's accidental that the epicenter of the reverse camber phenomenon is Tahoe -- the home of Sierra Cement. I'm looking to improve performance in crud and cut up snow.
post #38 of 54
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by alpinedad View Post
But I don't think it's accidental that the epicenter of the reverse camber phenomenon is Tahoe -- the home of Sierra Cement. I'm looking to improve performance in crud and cut up snow.
These skis absolutely rock in deep heavy cruddy snow. Another big advantage is that they do very well at slower speeds so you can run them in areas that a traditional skis would have a really tough time.
post #39 of 54
Quote:
Originally Posted by Max_501 View Post
(haven't had them in nice light pow yet).
I did today. At least what passes for "light pow" out here! A surprise convergence zone materialized last night with Stevens at ground zero. Ankle to thigh deep. Unbelievable fun. You couldn't pay me to go back to conventional shapes in soft snow.

If there's any sanity in the ski world, Keith should be flooded with incoming orders!

Oh - one useful observation - or maybe 2 - just for a change of pace...

Both the 185 and 195 have plenty of float. At 220 pounds I've skied both & neither felt inadequate to me. Another case where I'd pick a size based on "use". If you rip wide open places at high speeds, favor the big ones. If you play in trees and/or just putter about, go with the 185s unless you are way into the Clydesdale zone. If you are my size or bigger and are not a hardcore center mount type, mount in the back part of Keith's suggested range.
post #40 of 54
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by spindrift View Post
If you are my size or bigger and are not a hardcore center mount type, mount in the back part of Keith's suggested range.
I'm about 170lbs and I'm thinking I might move mine back to the end of the range (currently in the middle) on the 185s. I might give up some of the pivot ability but not a big deal for the way I ski.

BTW, for my size the 185s float just fine, even at very slow speeds. The float is just amazing.
post #41 of 54
Quote:
Originally Posted by spindrift View Post
Oh - one useful observation - or maybe 2 - just for a change of pace...

Had me worried for a minute you were asking for Change for a Nickel?

Glad you found a new toy. This is an interesting tranformation to witness.
post #42 of 54
Quote:
Originally Posted by Max_501 View Post
Then you'd agree that you want the ski to bend into a nice arc while its in the pow?

BTW, my focus here is on lift served terrain rather than the big mountain lines that guys rip at 50mph+.
Gentle blue open terrain or trees, broken, rocks and technical lines? The speed is not the only intended benefit, it's ease and effeciency. You can't ski tight trees with huge sweeping turns or high angles; unless you like the taste of aspen. : You can ski pow in the open that way but as BW said, why limit yourself, I was just skiing Jhole in knee high fluff along the edge of a great run. I porpoised the whole run in turns no more than 2-3' wide, letting the tips rise completely out of the snow and back down again. it was just as much fun as making sweeping carvy turns. It's another skill for the tool kit.
post #43 of 54
Finndog said-I porpoised the whole run in turns no more than 2-3' wide, letting the tips rise completely out of the snow and back down again. it was just as much fun as making sweeping carvy turns.

Sounds like Max on that faithful day he converted.
I am about the same size as Max but by no means the same skier. I was on a 180cm 91mm waist ski. He floated at least 4" higher in the Snow. Not say'n it's just the gear.
post #44 of 54
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Finndog View Post
It's another skill for the tool kit.
Toolkits are so old school.

Take Slider as an example. He skis pretty much the same technique everywhere he goes and he absolutely rips in any condition we have at Bachelor (and that would be nearly everything).
post #45 of 54
another rocker convert... at least for the moment. I just bought a pontoon, and one for my wife. i go back an forth on if it's a good tool, but it kindof reminds me of after i first skied a ski 100mm plus under foot some 10+ years ago (wolf cold smoke). we had an absolute blast, but tried to justify it later, that it was cheating, not good skiing, whatever. bunk, good skiing is about good fun and enjoyable sensations. i like not having to be dead on the balance point and being able to surf over natural features.

i also have to admit, i sure like having choices in my skiing. if i skied everything w/ the same technique, not changing shapes, speeds, duration, intensity, rate and timing of movements, different blends of carve/drift, i don't think i would still be skiing. snow is so variable, terrain is so diverse, moods change... enjoy the variety, I say. to each his own.

cheers,
holiday
post #46 of 54
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Holiday View Post
i like not having to be dead on the balance point and being able to surf over natural features.
Surfing over natural features is a major plus of the fat rockered skis. I went right over wind drifts that would have swallowed me on a typical ski.
post #47 of 54
Thread Starter 
9" of light pow. I skied in fresh, chowder, trees, and the groomed runs.

First, reverse side cut rockered skis are not any fun on groomed runs (at all).

In the fresh they are fun as you are floating...true sense of 3 dimensions. In chowder they are fun because they keep you from bogging down and you can just blast right over everything. In the trees they are fun because you can ski at a slower pace and still float and they are so pivoty that they turn on a dime.

All that said, I miss the more carvey feeling of skiing pow that I'm used to. I'm thinking the K2 Hell Bent might be the right rockered pow ski for me. For those of you that enjoy a pivot entry, try to demo a pair of reverse sidecut rockered skis.
post #48 of 54

....

Quote:
Originally Posted by Max_501 View Post
Except that I am talking about fat, with side cut and rocker (rather than camber) as a potentially interesting tool for pow and deep crud.
The fat-wth-medium stiff shovels are terrific if you're doing anything outside of the resorts, particularly the mid-sized mountains with a few blowdown possibilities here & there. With enough cover they'll float you over lots of stuff that an 80mm ski would have you bailing asap...
$.01
post #49 of 54
Thread Starter 
Another report. Heavy PNW pow, knee to hip depth. Even with the Praxis this type of snow is plenty of work, but rather than bogging down like many other skiers and boarders I was in almost constant motion. The skis love deep stuff and do very well in the chowder. Alot of fun in these conditions.

They are a bear on the groomed and skier packed powder.
post #50 of 54
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Max_501 View Post
They are a bear on the groomed and skier packed powder.
Thinking a bit more about this. They suck on skier packed powder and groomers.

But man oh man, do they ever rock in deep heavy snow.
post #51 of 54
Quote:
Originally Posted by Max_501 View Post
Thinking a bit more about this. They suck on skier packed powder and groomers.

But man oh man, do they ever rock in deep heavy snow.
I beg to disagree - depending on your definition of skier packed powder. If you mean cutup & variable but mostly soft, I think they are great. No hooky unpredictability at all. The thing to remember is that they still are not regular carvers & you can not make them behave that way...

If you mean packed to glazed lumps, then no argument...
post #52 of 54
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by spindrift View Post
I beg to disagree - depending on your definition of skier packed powder. If you mean cutup & variable but mostly soft, I think they are great. No hooky unpredictability at all. The thing to remember is that they still are not regular carvers & you can not make them behave that way...
They rock at chowder (which I consider to be powder). But once a run is packed (ie. the skis don't sink into the snow at all), they suck.
post #53 of 54
Thread Starter 
Seriously deep (4.5') of very heavy powder today. Wow, these skis rock.
post #54 of 54
I finally got out on mine on Saturday. I concur. I was attacking lines so steep I can't imagine ever attempting them on other skis; taking speed into trees without fear; pivoting and spinning at will. They were even fine on what passed for groomers, although 4-6" fell during the day.

The only issue was that I lost my outside edge twice on the aforementioned groomers, but that was early; once I got the hang of it, the issues disappeared.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Member Gear Reviews