New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

2012 Kastle FX104

post #1 of 29
Thread Starter 

Title: Review: 2012 Kastle FX104

 

Product: Length/size Tested: 184

 

Environment of Conditions: 

Location of review: Sugar Bowl, Ca 

Runs Taken: 3 

Snow Conditions: Heavy Mank 

Demo or Purchase: Demo

 

Summery (inc. Strengths & Weaknesses): I skied this right after a BMX108, a very nimble ski, the FX104 is NOT nimble. Where some skis can ski shorter than their dimensions, the FX104 with a 26M TR skis like a much bigger ski than it is. Unlike the FX014's little brothers FX84 and 94 are finesse sskis, the 104 is a hulk of a ski. This ski is NOT for the meek. 

 

Tester Info:

Age: 47

Height/Weight: 5/10" 185lb

Average days on snow: 0-10, 11-25, 30+ (pick one)

Years Skiing: 0-5, 6-15, 15+ (pick one)

Aggressiveness: Conservative / Moderate / Aggressive / Competitor (pick one)

post #2 of 29

Wow, agree completely.

post #3 of 29
Did I see these at the Starthaus? I wanted to grab them and run. Also ski'd Sugarbowl today. Pretty heavy but always fun. Can you tell more of the bmx 108's in those conditions?
post #4 of 29
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by screwz View Post

Did I see these at the Starthaus? I wanted to grab them and run. Also ski'd Sugarbowl today. Pretty heavy but always fun. Can you tell more of the bmx 108's in those conditions?


Review HERE

post #5 of 29

Intresting skis,apparently. The review is a bit stub though.

 

How did the ski [i]ski[/i]?  What are the most similar skis (XXLs,im103s?) and how did they compare to them?

How was the overall feel? Etc.

 

2 lines might be enough to describe some last night stand,but for a ski review...nope,not enuff.

 

More!

post #6 of 29

http://www.epicski.com/forum/thread/102244/kastle-fx-104

 

This ski is awesome, strong and straight, sidecut skis longer than 26m,  They don't use the dual radius sidecut like they did on the original mx 98,  this ski stays in the fall line and does not hook across it, damp and stable.

 

 

post #7 of 29

[quote]This ski is awesome, strong and straight, sidecut skis longer than 26m, They don't use the dual radius sidecut like they did on the original mx 98, this ski stays in the fall line and does not hook across it, damp and stable. [/quote]

 

Dudes,try harder.

In the link,there was few lines of general whatnot there!

 

Moro like this: "The FX104s are fucking Railers! A lot like the old Stöckli SSs but with more of a lively feel. They chewed the crust and mank with ease, released the tail even in slow speeds and held their arc even when I hit the occasional icepatch. In breakable crust they were okay. The softish tip floated over the crust relatively well, but occasional hookiness could be found to the relatively tight sidecut. In packed pow the ski tracked true and you could not even notice the tracked out parts. Tips floated well and you could Really weight the tips. In the waist deep pow the stiffness of the ski started to show,though. You had to ride a bit more on the tails and could not go on the top of the skis like with fatter skis,like Kuros. But still, they FUCKING ruled!  No speedlimit whatsoever!  Regardless of their stiffness,they still have than lively "Kästle" feel in them and release in to short turns if necessary, even that it is not the skis forté.  In short,the skis are like neutered XXLs,but cost the double!"

 

Or something. 

 

Shit,you got to ski the sticks so bring out the info!

post #8 of 29

^^^^ Too wordy; be more concise.

 

 

rolleyes.gif

post #9 of 29

I saw this ski and was thinking "who the hell buys a 104mm ski with traditional camber these days?". When I think about it a bit more though, I could see this ski as a super high-quality version of the first gen Gotama. It'll be fun to try a pair.

post #10 of 29
Quote:
Originally Posted by Meathelmet View Post

[quote]This ski is awesome, strong and straight, sidecut skis longer than 26m, They don't use the dual radius sidecut like they did on the original mx 98, this ski stays in the fall line and does not hook across it, damp and stable. [/quote]

 

Dudes,try harder.

In the link,there was few lines of general whatnot there!

 

Moro like this: "The FX104s are fucking Railers! A lot like the old Stöckli SSs but with more of a lively feel. They chewed the crust and mank with ease, released the tail even in slow speeds and held their arc even when I hit the occasional icepatch. In breakable crust they were okay. The softish tip floated over the crust relatively well, but occasional hookiness could be found to the relatively tight sidecut. In packed pow the ski tracked true and you could not even notice the tracked out parts. Tips floated well and you could Really weight the tips. In the waist deep pow the stiffness of the ski started to show,though. You had to ride a bit more on the tails and could not go on the top of the skis like with fatter skis,like Kuros. But still, they FUCKING ruled!  No speedlimit whatsoever!  Regardless of their stiffness,they still have than lively "Kästle" feel in them and release in to short turns if necessary, even that it is not the skis forté.  In short,the skis are like neutered XXLs,but cost the double!"

 

Or something. 

 

Shit,you got to ski the sticks so bring out the info!


You forgot the words playful, slarvy and the phrase "superior straight line stability"

 

Not that any apply to this one.  Think marrying a Mantra with a mid generation Legend Pro, with a little more width.  Not as turny  as a Mantra, not as burly as an LP, but plenty awesome.

 

It skis more like a 28m turn radius.  Great for everyday ride in Jackson.  And great for spring corn, slush, slop too.

 

Yes it does rail groomers, and feels damp like any wood/metal laminate ski does.

 

No bells and whistles, just a good ski.

 

Plus- your review was about spot on,  except not hooky, ski bigger.

 

 

 

post #11 of 29

I got to ski these puppies (184) on Friday. What a great ski! I didn't find them to be hard to turn at all. You just have to stay in balance and keep them under you. If you try and stick them way out away from you they will just go down the hill. They short-turned just fine and would arc the big turns too. These were actually the first big skis without rocker I've skied in a couple of years and I can't say that I felt I was missing anything. I skied them on a hard groom with a few inches of fluff on it, in the bumps and in the trees. I also skied teh FX94 and the MX98. It's pretty hard to choose a bad ski out of these three. I think maybe my preference leans to the 94 because it's better in the bumps and if I want a bigger ski I'll just use my Katanas or S7s. If I was out west, the 104 would be the winner.

post #12 of 29

Can verify Epic put the 104's through some serious lines in the trees and made it look effortless. (Of course he could probably make it look effortless on 210 VR-17's, too.) But based on my experience with the FX94's, have a hunch as he sez, these might slay the sidebounds out west if you want something less surfy. 


Edited by beyond - 3/26/11 at 11:07pm
post #13 of 29
Quote:
Originally Posted by Meathelmet View Post

[quote]This ski is awesome, strong and straight, sidecut skis longer than 26m, They don't use the dual radius sidecut like they did on the original mx 98, this ski stays in the fall line and does not hook across it, damp and stable. [/quote]

 

Dudes,try harder.

In the link,there was few lines of general whatnot there!

 

Moro like this: "The FX104s are fucking Railers! A lot like the old Stöckli SSs but with more of a lively feel. They chewed the crust and mank with ease, released the tail even in slow speeds and held their arc even when I hit the occasional icepatch. In breakable crust they were okay. The softish tip floated over the crust relatively well, but occasional hookiness could be found to the relatively tight sidecut. In packed pow the ski tracked true and you could not even notice the tracked out parts. Tips floated well and you could Really weight the tips. In the waist deep pow the stiffness of the ski started to show,though. You had to ride a bit more on the tails and could not go on the top of the skis like with fatter skis,like Kuros. But still, they FUCKING ruled!  No speedlimit whatsoever!  Regardless of their stiffness,they still have than lively "Kästle" feel in them and release in to short turns if necessary, even that it is not the skis forté.  In short,the skis are like neutered XXLs,but cost the double!"

 

Or something. 

 

Shit,you got to ski the sticks so bring out the info!



HEy

Have you also tried the FX 94. What do you think about them??

 

 

post #14 of 29

That's nice to hear, because I have bought a Kästle FX 94 as my everyday ski and I have a Rossi Super S 7, when its dumping. I have bought the Super Rossis last year and the are cool skiis.

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by epic View Post

I got to ski these puppies (184) on Friday. What a great ski! I didn't find them to be hard to turn at all. You just have to stay in balance and keep them under you. If you try and stick them way out away from you they will just go down the hill. They short-turned just fine and would arc the big turns too. These were actually the first big skis without rocker I've skied in a couple of years and I can't say that I felt I was missing anything. I skied them on a hard groom with a few inches of fluff on it, in the bumps and in the trees. I also skied teh FX94 and the MX98. It's pretty hard to choose a bad ski out of these three. I think maybe my preference leans to the 94 because it's better in the bumps and if I want a bigger ski I'll just use my Katanas or S7s. If I was out west, the 104 would be the winner.



 

post #15 of 29
Quote:
Originally Posted by prenzn View Post



Quote:
Originally Posted by Meathelmet View Post

[quote]This ski is awesome, strong and straight, sidecut skis longer than 26m, They don't use the dual radius sidecut like they did on the original mx 98, this ski stays in the fall line and does not hook across it, damp and stable. [/quote]

Dudes,try harder.

In the link,there was few lines of general whatnot there!

Moro like this: "The FX104s are fucking Railers! A lot like the old Stöckli SSs but with more of a lively feel. They chewed the crust and mank with ease, released the tail even in slow speeds and held their arc even when I hit the occasional icepatch. In breakable crust they were okay. The softish tip floated over the crust relatively well, but occasional hookiness could be found to the relatively tight sidecut. In packed pow the ski tracked true and you could not even notice the tracked out parts. Tips floated well and you could Really weight the tips. In the waist deep pow the stiffness of the ski started to show,though. You had to ride a bit more on the tails and could not go on the top of the skis like with fatter skis,like Kuros. But still, they FUCKING ruled! No speedlimit whatsoever! Regardless of their stiffness,they still have than lively "Kästle" feel in them and release in to short turns if necessary, even that it is not the skis forté. In short,the skis are like neutered XXLs,but cost the double!"

Or something.

Shit,you got to ski the sticks so bring out the info!



HEy

Have you also tried the FX 94. What do you think about them??


Dude....
I made that review without even skiing the sticks, just to point out how inadequate phils review was...
post #16 of 29
Quote:
Originally Posted by Meathelmet View Post



Quote:
Originally Posted by prenzn View Post



Quote:
Originally Posted by Meathelmet View Post

[quote]This ski is awesome, strong and straight, sidecut skis longer than 26m, They don't use the dual radius sidecut like they did on the original mx 98, this ski stays in the fall line and does not hook across it, damp and stable. [/quote]

 

Dudes,try harder.

In the link,there was few lines of general whatnot there!

 

Moro like this: "The FX104s are fucking Railers! A lot like the old Stöckli SSs but with more of a lively feel. They chewed the crust and mank with ease, released the tail even in slow speeds and held their arc even when I hit the occasional icepatch. In breakable crust they were okay. The softish tip floated over the crust relatively well, but occasional hookiness could be found to the relatively tight sidecut. In packed pow the ski tracked true and you could not even notice the tracked out parts. Tips floated well and you could Really weight the tips. In the waist deep pow the stiffness of the ski started to show,though. You had to ride a bit more on the tails and could not go on the top of the skis like with fatter skis,like Kuros. But still, they FUCKING ruled! No speedlimit whatsoever! Regardless of their stiffness,they still have than lively "Kästle" feel in them and release in to short turns if necessary, even that it is not the skis forté. In short,the skis are like neutered XXLs,but cost the double!"

 

Or something.

 

Shit,you got to ski the sticks so bring out the info!



HEy

Have you also tried the FX 94. What do you think about them??

 

 




Dude....
I made that review without even skiing the sticks, just to point out how inadequate phils review was...


He man

Sorry I misread that. I sied the FX 94 and I liked them.I was prety surprised how good they are on hard pack.

post #17 of 29

Phil's and Dawg's initial feedback on these ski's almost made me pass on skiing these. But Epic's comments stuck in my head and I know Dawg after skiing the 174's has come around on this ski. So I demo'd a pair to see what the deal was and to experience the FX feel (I already own an MX78 and have skied most of the Kastle line up).

 

WOW this is a wicked ski. Serious yes, a hulk - maybe if your not on the right size, it skis long, nimble - on hard groomed? Not so much, but any 3 dimensional snow it's darn quick for a 104 waist. I'd agree with Epic it carves well but if the snow is hard and you try and really lay it over they just go straight. It's super stable at speed but has more energy and feedback than an MX series ski so if it's crusty and irregular it takes work and you can get tossed around but edge hold is damn impressive. Really though, your not picking a 104 waisted ski for hardpack skiing.

 

Echoing Epic and Dawg's recent comments again-  out west side bounds and soft pack to boot deep I think this would be a killer ski for out west. Especially if your a heaver skier, like to charge or have a race background. Very high performance ski worth a demo in my mind, no question!

post #18 of 29

Good to see this thread bumped. Have not skied the 104, but own the 94's, agree with the general hypothesis that they grow on you. That said, IMO they're the most demanding Kastle line, in the sense that they won't dive into or out of turns with a flick, give a lot of snow feedback, demand your focus a bit more than say MX's, significantly more than BMX's. Not a bad thing at all, just what it is. Still feel like their proper mission is AT, assuming you ski down stuff that requires more than just surfing and smearing, and don't spend all day going up steep gradients to get there. I'd assume the 104 is more so. But if it's anything like my 94's, shouldn't want to go straight on hardpack. Should carve around really nicely, in fact.

post #19 of 29

I was ripping around on the FX94 today in 176cm.  6-12 inches of blower pow over frozen hardpack, lots of wind features.  Tree skiing on this was a dream.  It handled bumps later in the day like a champ, and had no real speed limit. Not the most float; I felt early that I could have used more ski, but once it got skied off just a little, it was the perfect width.  Powerful, smooth, easy to ski, easy to change direction.  Rewards good skiing, very positive feedback! 

post #20 of 29

Beyond these def are different than anything else they make. That I can tell already and they are exciting to ski. Are they the right ski for me? Not sure yet. I would love to have tried these in some fresh snow.  Dawg I'm envious of your recent FX94 experience, it is exactly what I need to fill in rest of the FX104 puzzle. I am going to try and ski these in some new snow and on a mountain where I can really experience them in varied conditions, like Whistler. Also want to see how taxing they are over my other skis. Should have a chance to demo the FX94's fairly soon as well. 

 

Dawg how do you think the FX104's would have fared the same day? 

 

post #21 of 29
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChrisCrash View Post

Beyond these def are different than anything else they make. That I can tell already and they are exciting to ski. Are they the right ski for me? Not sure yet. I would love to have tried these in some fresh snow.  Dawg I'm envious of your recent FX94 experience, it is exactly what I need to fill in rest of the FX104 puzzle. I am going to try and ski these in some new snow and on a mountain where I can really experience them in varied conditions, like Whistler. Also want to see how taxing they are over my other skis. Should have a chance to demo the FX94's fairly soon as well. 

 

Dawg how do you think the FX104's would have fared the same day? 

 



Aside from the length issue (me needing a high 170's length), the FX104 would have absolutely been the right ski for this day.  They are so quick and powerful for a 104mm waisted ski, with just a hint of forgiveness and flex in the tail, that I am sure they would handle tree skiing as well, the new snow better (I just needed that little bit more float in the deeper stuff) and still rip in the bumps.  I have said before that my go-to wider everyday soft snow ski would be an FX104, if they made it in 179cm or so.  Kevin loves the 184cm; he says they are more responsive and quicker than his BMX108's, much better in bumps and mixed conditions, but with close to the same amount of float.  The only downside really is (for some people) is that they are slightly less forgiving, but for stronger skiers, it is a big advantage to have that somewhat substantial tail that allows a good skier to work the ski and really get something out of it.  

post #22 of 29

Dawg appreciate the feedback from both yours and Kevin's experience. Just what I was hoping to hear. I too am impressed by this skis quickness especially considering it's lack of early rise. This could be an exciting mid quiver ski for me, especially if I have something wider and softer for deeper days.

Two of my buddies should be demoing these and a BMX108 this weekend and are stronger skiers than I am. Looking fwd to their feedback/reaction. 

post #23 of 29

Well after some back and forth I bought a pair of BMX 108 in 188 rather than a FX104. Decided that based on where and what I ski it would make the better part of a

2 ski quiver than the FX104.  Did catch myself thinking about the FX104 a few times skiing the BMX108 today, mostly on groomers where I think I prefer it's tighter, more predictable single radius sidecut. Off piste and in soft stuff the BMX shines, is damper and is some what less demanding to ski.

Figured if I bought an FX104 I'd still want a more pow focused ski and that isn't viable for the time being although an FX104 and XX West would have made for a fun combo.

 

 

 

post #24 of 29

A very reliable ski that skis in a very predictable manner.  The floatation is perhaps a little worse than simmal siced rockered skis.  I really like this ski for tree-skiing and crud blasting.  On hardpack I can see ski it comfortably, but prefer something else.

 

In the video below, most of the skiing was done with FX104 (and some Movement Bond).

http://youtu.be/p4d9Boir5Gg

 

post #25 of 29

Yesterday at Crystal MTN WA we had powder in the morning then rain and hardpack groomers the rest of the day. I used to have the older Gotamas with the full camber but the bindings ripped out and Volkl sent me the new ones with the early rise. The conditions yesterday had me wishing for my old Gotamas. The new ones are easier to turn in the trees but they dont reward proper skiing like the old ones did and they thoroughly suck on hardpack. I got home and started researching any 104-110 wide full camber skis and only came up with the FX104 - Id love to try it. Does anyone know any other ones out there?

 

We rarely get 2 great powder days in a row - conditions change fast out here. You need a ski that can ski pow in the morning, crud and potentially groomers when thats all thats left. I have other skis but would like one that has me covered and can still go fast and hold a nice high speed arc on the groomers.

 

tx

post #26 of 29

This is the ski for you. It felt just like my old Gotamas but better. If you want them without rocker.... get them now.

post #27 of 29
Quote:
Originally Posted by rileseven View Post

Yesterday at Crystal MTN WA we had powder in the morning then rain and hardpack groomers the rest of the day. I used to have the older Gotamas with the full camber but the bindings ripped out and Volkl sent me the new ones with the early rise. The conditions yesterday had me wishing for my old Gotamas. The new ones are easier to turn in the trees but they dont reward proper skiing like the old ones did and they thoroughly suck on hardpack. I got home and started researching any 104-110 wide full camber skis and only came up with the FX104 - Id love to try it. Does anyone know any other ones out there?

 

We rarely get 2 great powder days in a row - conditions change fast out here. You need a ski that can ski pow in the morning, crud and potentially groomers when thats all thats left. I have other skis but would like one that has me covered and can still go fast and hold a nice high speed arc on the groomers.

 

tx


The FX104 is like a Mantra/Gotama hybrid upgrade. Sweet float, easier to ski in bumps than the mantra, more refined and smoother, bigger sweet spot.  There aren't many full cambered wide big-mountain skis around anymore, but these ski as well as anything on the market. 

post #28 of 29

I switched boots this year from Bogadicous to lange rs 130 - and the new boots made a huge difference skiing the FX104....much more than for any of my other skis.  The more relaxed forward flex makes the whole setup feel a lot more nimble.

post #29 of 29

for some reason, I have not been on this ski but its a width I am eying up.  from the rumor mill, I understand it may be changing a bit next season.  My biggest concern is the length. from skiing the old 98 in the 174, it was too short,  but I am concerned the 184 is too long. 

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Member Gear Reviews