or Connect
EpicSki › Ski Equipment and Resorts  › Ski Gear › Alpine Skis › All-Mountain Skis › 2011 Kästle FX94 Chris Davenport Pro Ski

2011 Kästle FX94 Chris Davenport Pro Ski


Pros: Lightness, manueverability and absolute control.

Cons: Trainwreck waiting to happen on Sierra ice. Have to be able to justify price.

Logged 10 Lake Tahoe-days on Kastle FX94 Chris Davenports in cold powder, packed/groomed powder and slush.  Powder skiing is mindless and intuitive.  (Never been able to say that before!).  Skiing packed powder benefits with a little additional technique.  I love the lightweight, responsiveness and controlability.  You control the radius of every turn, regardless of pack or powder snow.  These skis make trees easy and fun.

Perhaps I have worn my wax off already, but slush was like a cable landing on an aircraft carrier.  Next, I detoured to a shadowy area lower on the mountain and found myself in an ice field for 100ft at about 40mph.  My life passed before my eyes.  Slush and ice not recommended.  So far crud performance is moderately good and better than expected.

Ski the tips.  I notice weight forward-and-back is more important than I'm used to, but that works as good training and a disciplinary reminder.  I'm 182 lbs/5'10" skiing on 176cm and I have debated myself if the length is appropriate.  I have not played with Marker Schizo adjustments at all.  

My older skis are Volkl P50 and AC-4, but now deem the FX94's as my GoTo favorites.  For purposes these skis were purchased, Total Satisfaction.
2011 Kästle FX94 Chris Davenport Pro Ski

Kastle FX94 176cm: a wider version of the FX84, basically the same construction, with 2 .3mm sheets of titanal. Also a backcountry-specific ski. About the same as the FX84 in terms of performance: light, lively, but not really great on ice or firmer conditions. Stability was about average, and it has the lightest on-snow feel I have ever experienced in an alpine ski. Would be incredible for ski-touring and lots of ascentionist-type skiing. The construction looks to be very durable, and anyone looking for the lightest high-performance ski out there will look hard at this model. It skis circles around equivalent Black Diamond backcountry models. I would love to grab a pair for AT use; the only think keeping me from doing so is probably the cost at this point. In terms of resort performance, I would put it mid-pack. The MX88 and 98 are superior of you are looking for a resort ski, but if you are going to have a crossover ski, the FX94 may be hard to beat.

Lengths166, 176, 186
Turn Radius18, 20, 22
ConstructionFiberglass-titanal sandwich wrap
Core Materialash-silverwood-poplar wood core
Binding IncludedNo
Recommended UseAll mountain
Recommended LevelAdvanced
Model Year2011
Binding System
Binding Type
Recommended Binding
Recommended use
Model Name/TypeMPNEAN/UPC


From Dawgcatching's 2011 Ski Reviews: Mid-Fat skis, 80-100mm Waists, 11/28/10


Kastle FX94: Kastle's “performance touring and mountaineering ski”. It has a thinner profile, 2 sheets of .3mm of titanium, wood core, and weighs around 120g per pair less than the MX98. Skied in 176cm, 20m radius.



These were tested over several days: conditions included lots of manmade snow, firm and rock-hard bumps, fast groomers, a few inches of new snow, steeps, icy chutes, some heavy new snow, and a fair amount of crud.  Since I only got a couple of runs on these skis, for the most part, I didn't do the 1-10 scale for these skis.  


About Me

5 foot 9, 155lbs, competent all-mountain skier, and could zipper-line double-black bumps for the first time in my life by early spring.  Probably ski 40-50 days per year.  I tend to enjoy big open, high speed bowls, bumps, trees, fast groomers.  My skiing speed is fast to full-on. Overall fitness is high, as I am on my road bike 15+ hours a week 9 months of the year, and race pro-level races as a Cat1. 



This ski is 94mm underfoot, which is a more useful backcountry width much of the time for most male skiers.  Adds a bit of weight over the FX84 and FX74, so it weight is a concern, you may want to look at those. The 94 is likely to give better descending performance in variable conditions, though.


It skis about the same as the 84, but with some added contact area and weight that gives it more heft and a grounded feel at speed. It seemed a bit superior to the 84 when hitting choppy snow, which one would expect.  Even so, it feels lighter on the snow than any MX series ski.  I would rate edgehold again a bit below the MX88, but close to that of the non-metal MX98.  The main difference is really the light and lively feel of the ski. It feels like it will do whatever the pilot wants, and isn’t locked into a straight-ahead feel as much as the MX series. It also feels quicker and a bit more turny than the 94mm waist and 20m radius would indicate. If I had to compare it to a ski, it would get close marks to the Fischer Watea 94: light on the snow, very lively, smearable, but with less of a power on edge feel than the beefier Mantra-style (wood core w/metal) ski.  If you like the Watea, you will really like the FX series.  This is going to rip as a backcountry ski as well. If the MX series is a Porsche 911, this ski is a little Porsche Cayman.



Pros: fairly light for a ski of this performance (it is matched by other lower profile skis, the Elan Apex is a bit lighter yet), performance is off the charts, great flex for an AT ski (not too stiff in the tip, but not a fluttery ski when pushed).

Cons: not as good of a resort ski for an expert as the MX series. Expensive.

EpicSki › Ski Equipment and Resorts  › Ski Gear › Alpine Skis › All-Mountain Skis › 2011 Kästle FX94 Chris Davenport Pro Ski