Kastle MX88

Anyone here actually ski these? Other than the HUGE price tag - whassup?

It's spelled Kastle with an umlaut over the a - but are there any umlauts here?

I skied them at Stratton last year. Nice product, simply they feel like a modern version of an old Kastle.

That said, without reference to the "old Kaestles", what about them?

Very solid and traditional feel. Nothing phased them coming down the slopes, they will do exactly what you expect them to do. I didn't push uber hard, but I doubt they have a speed limit.

The Kästles are solid, solid skis with definite "metallic", damp carving tool feel in my opinion. One opinion on the MX88 posted over here...some opinions on the MX78 here and here. Definitely expensive. Excellent quality, definitely a ski to be driven, not ridden. Likes a commander at the helm, but delivers superb grip and power through any surface changes. I talked to several different skiers trying these skis and they were all impressed. It seems the higher the skill level of the skier, the more they raved about it. The highest raves came from racers and ex-racers more than powderhound/freeriders who sometimes found the ski wanted to be more businesslike than festive...Try a pair if you can get on them. Feels like a racing ski retired into a more versatile all-mountain tool. I liked their damp feel. Some others do not.

I have experience with two pair of old Kästle skis.

The first is their RX National Team Super-G racing ski in a 208 cm length. I still like to take this out when I feel the need for speed. It has no speed limit that I could find. It was one of the first skis to come with a base bevel (0.5 degrees). The selling point was that with the metal off the base it would run faster. This ski had a rather stiff tail, but a soft-enough tip for day which made it easier to make quicker turns than you could with a downhill board. Not much shape, as per the times. It was very damp and massive with a few layers of steel, some special wood core and lots of rubber to dampen the vibrations. It was extremely stiff torsionally. You had absolutely no trouble getting forces down to the ground. It felt great at speed and I skied it just about everywhere at speed, but it felt like a pair of I-beams at less than 30 mph.

The second was a "special R" around 180 cm I think. that I picked up at a yard sale. It was dull when I got it, had 0 degree base bevel, which I left alone and I put a 2 or 3 degree side bevel on it (Can't remember). It was probably designed to be 0,0. It skied like a pair of steel springs off an old Chrysler, very demanding and unforgiving, but that is likely due to my tune. It railed beautiful turns at moderate and slow speeds. I didn't get it up to high speeds, but it was more lively than the super-g and I suspect had a lower speed limit. It also was very stiff torsionally.

What they had in common was a solid feel, and felt like a very strong powerful tool that you could use to get a lot of force to the ground and really blast out hard turns with. Great at inspiring confidence, if you knew how to ski, but not forgiving.

The reviews of the new ones seem to say they have the same performance level, but are forgiving as well. Hard to believe.

I tested them at Keystone!!

I absolutely loved this ski. It was in my top three skis of the test. The only reason I didnt become a dealer is the pricetag. The ski rips but I dont think it would sell in my market, when the good deal would still be more than some skis at regular price.

These do not appear to be anything like "game improvement" tools for someone of my weight, strength and skill. If I ever get a change to demo this line, I will, but I am not even slightly optimistic that they'll bring me happiness because I don't have the goods to bring THEM happiness.

The reviews I have read said they were suitable for a wide range of abilities. Expert Skiers gave them a 4 out of 5 for "relaxing" (read forgiving), except for the MX98 which apparently requires more skill.

That's what I saw on Keelty's site, Ghost, but it's not what I'm reading here and on the links referenced. I'll try them if I can, but I'm not expecting my perceptions will be the same as those marking their cards for Peter Keelty.

oboe, don't be deflating yourself: I've seen you ski better than someone who shouldn't venture outside the "g-imp tools only" quiver.

Besides, comments here tend to reinforce the fallacy that high-reaching performance envelopes cannot be wide enough to encompass mere mortal skills.

PS I didn't know bum from bump when I skied RX12s and still had oinkloads of fun.

I agree with Comprex. This ski has a huge performance window. Thus ski is kinda like a Porsche 996 (newer 911 series), it is a car you could drive around all day in traffic but also has a huge top end and can be driven at Mach speeds. If you are serious about these skis, they will be worth the investment (not that any ski is an investment, but you know what I mean).

Thanks for the remarks, Comprex. Bear in mind that you saw me skiing on hero snow of the finest kind doing nothing particularly challenging, and that the links provided by the above posters indicate that the Kastle MX88 is for ex-racers etc etc.

I'll try the skis (as I have, indeed, tried the Porsche 911 many years ago - WOW!). If they're truly the best I've ever been on, there'll be a huge sell off followed by feelings of extreme guilt followed by getting them anyway.

Now, drive a new 996 comparing that to the old 911 and big time wow. Ferris Bueller said it about right.."If you have the means..I highly recommend them".

With a kid in college, I'll stay away from the 996 and just tool along in my Acura RSX-S. At least I can fold down the rear seat and put my skis (AND my Orbea Orca) in the back.

That way, maybe I can afford the Kästles (note the correct spelling, with an umlaut over the a).

I read the links posted here. The say the skis have high performance. So do Keelty's reviewers. Keelty's reviewers go on to say that they are relaxing (forgiving) and also work for "gaining technical skill" skiers. The links posted here do not say anything to contradict those further statements.

Congrats on the ä.

They're powerful skis, but not nearly as demanding (re: stiff, punishing for a lighter skier) as the Volkl Allstars, for example. They're solid and precise, but not "burly," if that make any sense. Interestingly, because all models have the same construction, they all feel very similar. Pick the waist width that suits where you like to ski (hardpack groomers, 50/50, more soft snow, etc.). Try them if you get the chance.

See?

http://www.exoticskis.com/forum/defa...x?g=posts&t=52

This guy is 49 years old, weighs 190 and has been skiing since he was a toddler. I'm soon to be 67 years old, weigh 155 after dinner, and have been trying not to be frustrated with this sport since I've been 50. Just because he likes them doesn't mean a skier of my weight, strenght and ability will like them.

This one is about the 78 - not the same as the 88, but still . . .

http://www.exoticskis.com/forum/defa...x?g=posts&t=73

"Not for the weak . . ." "What racers would want on their day off . . ."

Somehow, this just doesn't fit my personal profile.

I'd like to see reviews from people like me - lighter weight, old, not that strong, not that skilled, never raced and don't know how.

My boss skied them, he is about your size (and age) and really liked them. Both the 78 and 88.

For how many years has he been skiing? Has he ever raced? How would you rate his strength and skill?

I doubt he ever raced. He has been skiing for pretty much his whole life though. Solid 8 level.

IMHO, you have received much information here, now it is time for you to try them for yourself, grasshopper. IF you are serious about these skis, there is no question that the price point is high, you need to demo them for yourself before plunking down a 4 digit number for new skis. I am sure there will be a few demo days in Northern Vermont come December, if the snow is good. Only you can decide if they are the right ski for you.

There will be a lot to weigh here, plunk down 1100 for ONE pair of magnificent skis or 550/ea for two very good pair to add along with your Magfires and build a great quiver. But will you always be asking yourself...Should I have treated myself to the Kastle's? I will say, from what I know of you, Oboe, you have earned the right to not have to "settle" for less than you want.

Thanks for that, Phil - I definitely intend to demo. If I really, really like the 88, I'll sell off a slew of other skis, a new-in-box pair of boots, extra ski apparel, a brand new unused pair of high quality poles, and off course, my soul. Do bear in mind that a person my age who's been skiing pretty much his whole life has a leg up on a guy like me who started rather late.

If you look how many "billable hours" you have lamented over these skis, they would be paid for (twice).

Nice try, Phil, but I figure I've put in less than an hour, and my hourly rate is less than a thou. Hire me and find out for yourself ( heh heh )

Phil,

Which model do you think will be more fun for Eastern skiers who ski out west on vacations, the 78 or 88?
Keelty seems to lean to the 88 as a contender for ski of the year.
I am on the fence.

Are you trying to convince me or yourself that you have spent less than an hour thinking/dreaming about these.

88.

(Here go a few more parts of a billable hour) . . . The 88 is what interests me, and if it is as advertized and reviewed, it could be that elusive one pair quiver. I'm quivering just thinking about it. . .

Oboe,

After surfing for stuff on the Kastle MX 88 I found this old thread ... Did you get to try the 88s?  If so what did you think?  Did you ski it on Eastern hard stuff?  Did you buy?

 

I'm one of the people who filled out the cards for Keelty on this ski and I thought it was the best ski of the 23 tested.  The test was in deep Utah pow and groomed of same.  Ski it anyway you like and it worked great!  BTW 58 yrs old 5'11" 175.  Certainly not an former racer.

 

 

Welcome, NotsoOldguy.     Stick around?