I began my search for a pair of skis after new years when I was finally able to ski and a year and half of surgeries. I have snowboarded for the past 6 years, but skies up until then. Being off the snow for a while kinda made me want to get back on skis. I have done a lot of research and some demoing and it has led me to these skis. So far this season I have skied Stratton, VT 5 days, Jiminy Peak 3 and deveral small hills near my school for 3 as well. I have skied on, 171 Atomic race skis, 177 atomic theory, 168 kastle bmx 88, 168 blizzard mag 8.1, 171 volkl rtm 80 and 172 atomic metron. I am not going to pretend I know what I am talking about so pardon me if I mess anything up.
Here it is. I love to ski fast, hard and aggressive. I have apparently quickly learned how to make big gs carves and for some reason I now love digging in and getting deep into the turn. When I used to snow board I pretty much did it all in SUn valley Idaho. I would spend most of my time, when alone, in the bowls. And when I'm with family and such (they only like groomed) we only go on groomed. It is still the same now, but now that I am in college in upstate new york, I will do my skiing around here. My family owns a condo in sun valley so aprx. 25-30 days a year will still be spent there with winter and spring break. Point is, I have never skied in bottomless or really anything deeping than 1.5-2 ft deep powder. MEaning, I dont see the need for a strictly deep powder ski. I settled on 88 underfoot primarily because I do not want to sacrifice performancy on the groomers. I do love skiing whatever light snow I can find and I know you guys are gonna rail me for calling a foot deep "powder". But since I love that I wanted performance there as well.
I know I am also going to get rammed for look at the mx88 for my first pair of owned skis, but I seriously could not get away from it. Everything I read, everyone I talked to, I kept coming back to that ski. I consider my self an advanced skier, I can ski anything on the mountain. EXCEPT bumps, which I hate, so if a ski doesnt eprform well there, I would prefer it (as an excuse not to go). Call me not a real skier or not technical or whatever you want to call it, but I just do not enjoy bumps, at least at this point in my skiing career. I am 5'9" and 205 (atheltic build, I play football and track in college) so I am drawn towards a stiffer ski in the 170s.
Now to the skis. I was originally drawn to the mx88 in a 178 and upon finding it (dawgcatching) my father, who is going to be part owner of this ski (meaning he wants to pay for half of it for my past christmas/birthday present, we began the search then) for some reason is not comfortable with buying skis not in person. He wandered into a small shop oneday and the guy was telling him about the kendo and he for some reason got all excited about it. Since I can fin that ski for just about half of what the kastle is, would that be a good idea? You guys will probably tell me to go wider, but I like the idea of this 88 width and like the idea of these 2 skis. Once my dad told me he liked the kendo I looked more into it and from what I have read, I have found that is skis about the same. Both good at bi gs carves, blast through crud, can handle light snow with ease, except people seem to say that the kastle just does everything better. So is that right, is the kastle just like a better/more expensive kendo, considering they are the same width?