EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Ski Gear Discussion › nordica steadfast vs kastle lx92 as 50/50 ski for whistler
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

nordica steadfast vs kastle lx92 as 50/50 ski for whistler

post #1 of 20
Thread Starter 

just wondering if anyone (dawg, philplug) has any experience with both side by side, using them, say at whistler as a 50/50 ski

ie how they are comparatively on groomers (i love to carve when needed to do so) as well as in crud or up to 12" or so of powder...also for trees (i'm not much into bumps)

 

i also realize a closer comparison would be in comparing the nordica steadfast to the kastle fx series (both created for side country)..but to be frank, aside from lightness, i'm not sure of the technical diffs of such (pros/cons.

 

nordica steadfast has a bit of front rocker, while kastle lx doesn't 

 

i'm intermediate/advanced, but no expert...out 30-55x per yr., weigh 180ish,

ski mostly with control/technique vs mach3 speed power or aggression...but sometimes mix it up and do both

 

cheers


Edited by canali - 3/28/12 at 3:45pm
post #2 of 20

Not sure about the LX 92, but I love my LX 82's  

I'm thinking that the LX92 would have a bit of versatility but may not quite as aggressive off piste as you may want.  Hoping someone with more knowledge chimes in. 

 

post #3 of 20

You say you're no expert, but love to carve.  I think you would love the Steadfast.  They rip the groomed, and the early rise adds significant forgiveness in the ungroomed.  I found them to be a little on the unexciting side in the ungroomed, but I'm in the minority there.

 

No personal experience on the Kastles, but you seldom hear anything bad about them.

post #4 of 20

I have no experience with any Kastle ski, but I bought a pair of Steadfasts this year and absolutely love them.  I am spending more and more time in the trees, bumps, steep chutes and powder when we have it and they have not let me down.  Hands down the best ski I've been on in the trees, very quick to turn.  And they do rip on the groomers.

post #5 of 20
Thread Starter 

thanks

 

what has me a bit stumped (and i  hope some gear specialists can chip in) is:

what makes the steadfast a 'sidecountry' ski vs an all mtn?...sure I get the lighter weight portion for backcountry trekking etc (and maybe even different bindings) but what else?.. .don't think i'm the only one who'd like to find out such a distinction, please    pros...cons?

post #6 of 20

Another vote for how good the Steadfasts are.  They may be part of the "sidcountry" collention but you find them under the "all mountain" tab on the Nordica website.  Good everywhere I've had them.

post #7 of 20
Quote:
Originally Posted by canali View Post

thanks

 

what has me a bit stumped (and i  hope some gear specialists can chip in) is:

what makes the steadfast a 'sidecountry' ski vs an all mtn?...sure I get the lighter weight portion for backcountry trekking etc (and maybe even different bindings) but what else?.. .don't think i'm the only one who'd like to find out such a distinction, please    pros...cons?


I think just lighter construction and flex.  No metal (almost sure).  Could be why I did not love them at 200 pounds, and a couple of lighter friends would darn near rather die than part with them.

 

To be clear, there was nothing I disliked about this ski.  Just found it a bit dull off-piste, and that is probably due to my size (and maybe 10% ability!).  Also, I suspect I may have enjoyed the 186 more than the 178.  I may just find out next season.

 

post #8 of 20
Quote:
Originally Posted by canali View Post

thanks

 

what has me a bit stumped (and i  hope some gear specialists can chip in) is:

what makes the steadfast a 'sidecountry' ski vs an all mtn?...sure I get the lighter weight portion for backcountry trekking etc (and maybe even different bindings) but what else?.. .don't think i'm the only one who'd like to find out such a distinction, please    pros...cons?


Who cares what they call it?  Nordica could call it a jumping ski or a GS race ski for all I care.  What counts is how it does what you want it to do.

 

post #9 of 20
Vote: nordica steadfast. Bought a pair beginning of 2011/2012 season and love em. Perfect for a one ski quiver as I must travel to places I ski at. That all being said I have never skied kastles personally although I have heard only good things. As I understand it you are correct as nordica markets it as a backcountry model mainly because of its weight but I also believe that it is a good off piste ski because of its ability to handle variable snow conditions from powder to crud. Me personally...I only ski resorts (Colorado and Utah) and like the steadfasts in trees and bowls. Handles great in narrow chutes too. Super great skis.
post #10 of 20

Hey Canali

Without question I'd head over to Fanatko and demo the LX92, maybe even the FX94 if you can. Your profile feedback suggest this could be a great ski for you. Check Dawgcatching's write up on them as well from his store website it's by far the most comprehensive of any I have found.

http://www.dawgcatching.com/skis/kastle/2013-kastle-lx92.html 

I have bought a few ski's he has positively reviewed and his feedback has been spot on. 

I skied the LX82 in 180, awesome, super fun suitable for an intermediate advanced skier.Tried the LX92 similar ease with more float and much better in new snow. I skied the 174 and for me Level 7, 190lbs 6'1" was great but I would opt for the 184 for more float, stability. The LX skis are fun and easy to ski but still high performance. 

For reference my other skis are Kastle MX78 (ski that peaked my interest in Kastle) and BMX 108. Soon adding LX92 or FX94. 

post #11 of 20
Thread Starter 

thanks chris crash..i already have the kastle mx78....love 'em, now that i better know how to handle them

(be a better skier, more assertive and in the end, just make 'em my bitches)

 

as per the kastle fx94 and lx92 I was considering those ..that is until I came across

a pair of nordica steadfasts for a great deal at the end of last season.

...again once i got familiar with them I now love 'em and feel like a rock star when on them.

...just lock and load, baby...they rail....sure i haven't tried them in all conditions, but so far a big thumbs up.

 

i just need to shed 40 lb to better enjoy their float in off piste...man i'm a fat f..k this season eek.gif

 

the blizzard bonnies (just picked up, slightly used) i'll try for first time this coming wk.

...fingers crossed...

 

ski.gifOtt+Wedeln.gif

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by ChrisCrash View Post

Hey Canali

Without question I'd head over to Fanatko and demo the LX92, maybe even the FX94 if you can. Your profile feedback suggest this could be a great ski for you. Check Dawgcatching's write up on them as well from his store website it's by far the most comprehensive of any I have found.

http://www.dawgcatching.com/skis/kastle/2013-kastle-lx92.html 

I have bought a few ski's he has positively reviewed and his feedback has been spot on. 

I skied the LX82 in 180, awesome, super fun suitable for an intermediate advanced skier.Tried the LX92 similar ease with more float and much better in new snow. I skied the 174 and for me Level 7, 190lbs 6'1" was great but I would opt for the 184 for more float, stability. The LX skis are fun and easy to ski but still high performance. 

For reference my other skis are Kastle MX78 (ski that peaked my interest in Kastle) and BMX 108. Soon adding LX92 or FX94. 


Edited by canali - 1/22/13 at 7:16pm
post #12 of 20

The LX82 is the most fun ski I have ever rode in Michigan.  I am not real heavy, weigh 165, and absolutely love the LX82.  It almost turns itself.  I use it on groomers because that is all we have in Michigan for the most part.  I just bought the MX78 yesterday and picked it up today after they mounted it.  I am going to go tomorrow and bring both my Kastles.  I also have the Line MPO, Line SFB, Line influence 105 and Prophet 100 so I guess I am a Line and Kastle guy. smile.gif  I love my Lines as well but they are more for my outwest trips but I will say they all perform really well on hardpack.  I was actually really shocked how great the Opus's did on Michigan hardpack even at 118 underfoot.  Never skiied the LX92 but I did own the Steadfast last year and didn't like it at all.  It didn't seem to hold an edge for me.  I ended up trading it in this year for a Bonafide which I didn't care for either and sold it as well and bought the Sir Francis Bacon.  But to be fair to the Steadfast I think I bought the wrong ski.  My smallest ski is my Prophets and LX82's which are both 172 but they are both full camber.  All my rocker tip and tail skis are 178 and above.  The Opus is 178, the Influence 105 is 179 and the SFB is 184.  I bought the Steadfast in 170 and I just think that with the early rise tip I just didn't get the edge grip I am used to.  I bet if I would have bought the next size up I would have had a different opinion of the ski.  Unfortunately my only experience is in the 170 and I didn't care for the ski at all in that size.  I can tell you if the LX82 is any indication of what the MX78 is going to ski like I'll be esctatic.  The adjectives I can use with the LX82 is smooth and it makes soft snow feel like skiing through butter.  I know it sounds stupid but I can't come up with any other comparision.  It almost feels like it is skiing itself.  Love that ski.

 

Chuck

post #13 of 20
Quote:
Originally Posted by procos View Post

The LX82 is the most fun ski I have ever rode in Michigan.  I am not real heavy, weigh 165, and absolutely love the LX82.  It almost turns itself.  I use it on groomers because that is all we have in Michigan for the most part.  I just bought the MX78 yesterday and picked it up today after they mounted it.  I am going to go tomorrow and bring both my Kastles.  I also have the Line MPO, Line SFB, Line influence 105 and Prophet 100 so I guess I am a Line and Kastle guy. smile.gif  I love my Lines as well but they are more for my outwest trips but I will say they all perform really well on hardpack.  I was actually really shocked how great the Opus's did on Michigan hardpack even at 118 underfoot.  Never skiied the LX92 but I did own the Steadfast last year and didn't like it at all.  It didn't seem to hold an edge for me.  I ended up trading it in this year for a Bonafide which I didn't care for either and sold it as well and bought the Sir Francis Bacon.  But to be fair to the Steadfast I think I bought the wrong ski.  My smallest ski is my Prophets and LX82's which are both 172 but they are both full camber.  All my rocker tip and tail skis are 178 and above.  The Opus is 178, the Influence 105 is 179 and the SFB is 184.  I bought the Steadfast in 170 and I just think that with the early rise tip I just didn't get the edge grip I am used to.  I bet if I would have bought the next size up I would have had a different opinion of the ski.  Unfortunately my only experience is in the 170 and I didn't care for the ski at all in that size.  I can tell you if the LX82 is any indication of what the MX78 is going to ski like I'll be esctatic.  The adjectives I can use with the LX82 is smooth and it makes soft snow feel like skiing through butter.  I know it sounds stupid but I can't come up with any other comparision.  It almost feels like it is skiing itself.  Love that ski.

 

Chuck

MX78...I think I recommended those in one of your other threads.  Enjoy, you will.

post #14 of 20
Thread Starter 

so do you have both the lx82 and mx78...?

 

Quote:

Originally Posted by procos View Post

The LX82 is the most fun ski I have ever rode in Michigan.  I am not real heavy, weigh 165, and absolutely love the LX82.  It almost turns itself.  I use it on groomers because that is all we have in Michigan for the most part.  I just bought the MX78 yesterday and picked it up today after they mounted it.  I am going to go tomorrow and bring both my Kastles.  I also have the Line MPO, Line SFB, Line influence 105 and Prophet 100 so I guess I am a Line and Kastle guy. smile.gif  I love my Lines as well but they are more for my outwest trips but I will say they all perform really well on hardpack.  I was actually really shocked how great the Opus's did on Michigan hardpack even at 118 underfoot.  Never skiied the LX92 but I did own the Steadfast last year and didn't like it at all.  It didn't seem to hold an edge for me.  I ended up trading it in this year for a Bonafide which I didn't care for either and sold it as well and bought the Sir Francis Bacon.  But to be fair to the Steadfast I think I bought the wrong ski.  My smallest ski is my Prophets and LX82's which are both 172 but they are both full camber.  All my rocker tip and tail skis are 178 and above.  The Opus is 178, the Influence 105 is 179 and the SFB is 184.  I bought the Steadfast in 170 and I just think that with the early rise tip I just didn't get the edge grip I am used to.  I bet if I would have bought the next size up I would have had a different opinion of the ski.  Unfortunately my only experience is in the 170 and I didn't care for the ski at all in that size.  I can tell you if the LX82 is any indication of what the MX78 is going to ski like I'll be esctatic.  The adjectives I can use with the LX82 is smooth and it makes soft snow feel like skiing through butter.  I know it sounds stupid but I can't come up with any other comparision.  It almost feels like it is skiing itself.  Love that ski.

 

Chuck

post #15 of 20

Yes I own both the MX78 and the LX82.  Both are last years models that I bought new in the wrapper this year from my local shop.  I got each pair for $849 with Kastle K12 bindings.  I couldn't pass up the price on these.

post #16 of 20
Thread Starter 

a few questions of intereste, if you don't mind

 

just wondering why both pairs when they overlap ?

 

if you only had to keep one pair, which one?

 

just like the line 105 vs the 108 sfb which one to keep if only one

 

and why?

Quote:
Originally Posted by procos View Post

Yes I own both the MX78 and the LX82.  Both are last years models that I bought new in the wrapper this year from my local shop.  I got each pair for $849 with Kastle K12 bindings.  I couldn't pass up the price on these.

post #17 of 20
Quote:
Originally Posted by canali View Post

just wondering why both pairs when they overlap ?

 

The MX78's are alot stiffer than the LX82's.  Same size underfoot but a different style of ski.  I absolutely love the LX82's and figured since I got the MX78's with bindings for $849 if I didn't love them I'd probably be able to sell them and not lose any money.  I am a gear head anyways and feel you can never own too many skis.

post #18 of 20
Thread Starter 

what of your line 105 and 108 sfb...same question please

Quote:
Originally Posted by procos View Post

 

The MX78's are alot stiffer than the LX82's.  Same size underfoot but a different style of ski.  I absolutely love the LX82's and figured since I got the MX78's with bindings for $849 if I didn't love them I'd probably be able to sell them and not lose any money.  I am a gear head anyways and feel you can never own too many skis.

post #19 of 20
Quote:
Originally Posted by canali View Post

a few questions of intereste, if you don't mind

 

just wondering why both pairs when they overlap ?

 

if you only had to keep one pair, which one?

 

just like the line 105 vs the 108 sfb which one to keep if only one

 

and why?

 

I skied the MX78's today for the first time and thought they were absolutely killer.  I love these skis.  Completely stable and they turn almost as fast and nimble as my LX82's.  I just love both pair of Kastle's.  We haven't had any bumps here in Michigan but I am thinking for bump skiing I'll prefer the LX's and for straight up charging groomers I prefer the MX's.  However I guess if I could only have one it would be the MX's. 

 

As for the Line ski's both the Influence and SFB's are great skis.  The Influence are much more damp and not nearly as playful.  I have more fun on the SFB's but the speed limit is much higher on the Influences.  I guess if I had to pick only one it would be the SFB's.  I find that it is easier to make a playful ski charge than it is to make a charger ski playful if that makes any sense.

 

Hope this helped.

post #20 of 20
Thread Starter 

good to hear it...thanks....and yes the mx78 flippin' rip man once you get to know them

...'tis like a taut but still very driveable and fun sportscar that (at least to me only being an intermediate...perhaps a bit more)

nudges one to ski better, to up their game.

 

enjoy your skis!

Quote:
Originally Posted by procos View Post

 

I skied the MX78's today for the first time and thought they were absolutely killer.  I love these skis.  Completely stable and they turn almost as fast and nimble as my LX82's.  I just love both pair of Kastle's.  We haven't had any bumps here in Michigan but I am thinking for bump skiing I'll prefer the LX's and for straight up charging groomers I prefer the MX's.  However I guess if I could only have one it would be the MX's. 

 

As for the Line ski's both the Influence and SFB's are great skis.  The Influence are much more damp and not nearly as playful.  I have more fun on the SFB's but the speed limit is much higher on the Influences.  I guess if I had to pick only one it would be the SFB's.  I find that it is easier to make a playful ski charge than it is to make a charger ski playful if that makes any sense.

 

Hope this helped.

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Ski Gear Discussion
EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Ski Gear Discussion › nordica steadfast vs kastle lx92 as 50/50 ski for whistler