EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Member Gear Reviews › Review: Kastle BMX 108 188cm
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Review: Kastle BMX 108 188cm

post #1 of 22
Thread Starter 

Review:Kastle BMX 108 188cm

Skied 1 day at Beaver Creek on firm groomers, 1 day at Targhee in deep pow, soft tracked, and 1 day at Jackson on soft day after the storm tracked.

I am 5’10” 190 pounds. I ski everything well.

The first thing I noticed when skiing this on the groomers is how relatively large the turning radius is at 32m. This ski doesn’t engage across the fall line in a carved, locked turn unless you are up to a healthy speed. I immediately began to worry about the versatility, as this ski seemed like it really only had one speed. Edge grip was top notch, stability at the highest speeds was second to none. Matter of fact, I thought I was potentially going to sell them as they seemed like a wider LP which I already owned. I was originally uninspired. Really wanting to like them, and because I needed something 105-110 for soft snow days, I continued on.

Headed north to Jackson/Targhee as we weren’t getting any snow here, and the goods were setting up nicely in the Tetons. First day at Targhee was extremely low vis up top and knee deep pow op to bottom. As I slowly worked my way down the hill I was so excited that I hadn't sold them. The ski floated better than expected (not quite as good as my 189 hellbents, but not that much worse either). I also noticed how quick they pivoted! I don’t know if it is the hollowtech, or the seemingly light weight, but these skis are so quick edge to edge. As the visibility disappeared I headed over to the Sacajawea lift and skied tracked soft under the lift. Considering the lack of pitch, although not necessarily flat, I pushed the skis as hard as I could only making a few, big, sweeping turns through the chunder, and stability was just as much as the OG LP. But much more smooth, yet not quite as damp. Blown away.

Day 3 at Jackson. Started skiing soft tracked in Rendezvous bowl. Fast full throttle no problems. Down to skiers right of Bivouac. Quick as anything edge to edge. Fast hops turns or skidded slides. Next up was the alta chutes, tower chutes, dog face, bird in hand. This ski was so easy to ski in tight steeps, yet so stable and powerful coming out into the open chunder at the highest speeds. Also, set up bumps were so easy on these. But no ski is too much of a handful in the bumps at my bodyweight.

The only thing the ski lacks is the tighter turn radius I prefer on groomers. However, not why I bought this ski. Also, I could’ve gotten away with the 195 as easy as I have found the 188. Although for Vail/BC, I can’t really justify the length as I ski the bumps most of the time as I have gotten bored with how flat it is around here. This ski has exceeded my expectations, and am considering getting rid of everything else minus a rock ski as I don’t think I will use either the LP or Hellbent anymore.

Gear mentioned in this thread:

post #2 of 22

Nice to see another review on this ski and your experience echo's many of my own thoughts and experiences on this ski.

I agree the 32m side cut on groomers is a bit lethargic but the hold and stability are great and if you want you can make do any turn shape you want on firm snow.

Add some soft packed or freshies and its forgiving, stable, super fun and remarkably quick. Float is very good for it's width and it's got lots of power but its pretty easy to smear and shut down in trees and tight spots for a big relatively traditional ski. 

Not many downsides in my books and I am left scratching my head at most of the mag reviews like Ski Canada or Freeskier that think this  is a straight line charger needing a lot of work and or speed to make it work.  Maybe they all grabbed a size or two too long??

 

Similar skis owned - 2009 190 Katana (v. good ski), 2010 Gotama (OK, poor build quality) Elan Olympus -2nd fav ski in this width, more fun on groomers, great value, well made.

post #3 of 22

I think i have demo'd almost every brand, and Kastle skis are by far the most versatile. I just switched over two years ago from skinny's having broke or bent all the Rossi 4S I could find.

There is a trick to the kastle skis, by moving the binding back much further than normal, at least 2 in back where a ski shop mounts them you will find that the bmx will come alive on the groomers.

I tried a pair of BMX98 from a very good ski shop. The skis I demo'd were the owner's pair. First run couldnt do anything with them but haul ass straight down the fall line. I moved the binding ALL the way back and voila, they swiveled nicely, didn't hang up in the bumps and were great in very tight trees.

I still don't know what it is because I tried this on other skis and they felt like shit because they were designed to ski centered.

If you have a DEMO binding, I would try this on the BMX series for the groomers and see if it helps.

 

Iggy

post #4 of 22
I just purchased the BMX 108's and spend 4 days falling in love with them in Jackson. Various snow conditions, powder, crud, hard pack and I could not believe how great they performed. Incredibly stable, super fast, damp as can be at speed, and so nimble edge to edge. I am on the 188's with Salomon STH 16's and agree on the mount point trick. The boys at Pepe S did it right and this ski is just unreal. I moved up from 178 to 188 and edge to edge it felt even smaller, yet skied super long at speed. Performed well in Four Pines after temps warmed up and snow became heavy. Ski's plowed through everything, and the 108 underfoot was plenty and I am 6'1, 235 lbs. All in all a great ski, and you do need to ski it centered. When in the backseat on these, you can sense the some hesitation.
post #5 of 22

Yes, this is a great ski!  Especially for us lighter skiers who don't need a super stiff ski, but want a powerful, stable ski that rips in a variety of turn shapes and snow conditions. I was just skiing a pair, along with the Blizzard Scout and Nordica Hellorado, and came away very impressed!  It just blasts crud at speed with ease, turns on dime with that soft tip, and holds a wicked GS arc.  Forgiving yet high performance, a really well balanced ride! 

post #6 of 22

At 5'10" and 155 lbs, I opted to demo these in the 178 length for one day at Jackson Hole a couple weeks ago.  Conditions were quite mixed, with some chopped up snow/crud, some powder here and there, groomers, etc.  I found the 178 to be ok on the groomers.  It wouldn't whip you back and forth across the fall line but it still held an edge ok.  And performance in bumps was mixed, which is what I would expect for a ski of this width.  In bumps that were soft and had some space they were ok.  Bumps that were bigger and tighter they were a lot of work.  However, neither of the above conditions is what I think this ski is really meant for.  Once off trail in the chooped up snow, crud and occassional powder stashes, the ski really came alive.  I found it just as easy to plow through things as I did to smear them.  The flex, although somewhat stiff, also felt somewhat easy too (not sure how they do that). I found I could ski these skis both somewhat relaxed or push them hard.  Either way they were a lot of fun in the right conditions. 

 

As for other skis of these dimensions, i.e. the 10X, it seems there's a lot of new models coming out next year, such as the Nordica Vagabond, Stockli 107, and so on.  The BMX108, which I don't think has been updated really for the past three years, has some tip rise, camber and fairly flat/regular tail.  It looks like this is what many of the skis coming out next year are also doing, though there is the obvious tweaking of all of these facets by each manufacturer (in that some have a little more rise then others, or a little less camber then others, or a little tail rocker and so on).  But basically, many of the models seem to be following the same overall designs.  I wonder though if Kastle has any plans for tweaking this ski next year or the year after?  But then again, it seems to work pretty good the way it is now.   

post #7 of 22
Quote:
Originally Posted by easternskr View Post


As for other skis of these dimensions, i.e. the 10X, it seems there's a lot of new models coming out next year, such as the Nordica Vagabond, Stockli 107, and so on.  The BMX108, which I don't think has been updated really for the past three years, has some tip rise, camber and fairly flat/regular tail.  It looks like this is what many of the skis coming out next year are also doing, though there is the obvious tweaking of all of these facets by each manufacturer (in that some have a little more rise then others, or a little less camber then others, or a little tail rocker and so on).  But basically, many of the models seem to be following the same overall designs.  I wonder though if Kastle has any plans for tweaking this ski next year or the year after?  But then again, it seems to work pretty good the way it is now.   

Good question: I wish I knew the answer. You are right; it is a versatile wide multi-condition ski, especially if you get a reasonable length, like something just a bit over head height.  That is always why I liked the BMX108: having camber underfoot and quite a bit of stiffness, it was exceptionally versatile.  Sounds like some other manufacturers are coming around to this as well: most of the around 105mm skis had a similar design.

 

I will say with confidence that there still isn't a better mid 100's ski for me out there. I have skied several in this range that are really good, nothing so far that bests the BMX108.  Having owned the 188, it is the ticket if I am skiing really fast, but for trees, the 178 is more fun.

post #8 of 22

I have the 2013/14 model of these skis, same length.  I'm 5' 9", 180lbs and skied approximately 40 days on these skis last season.  Mine are mounted with Fritschi Freeride Pro bindings and I use Scarpa Mobe AT boots.  I consider myself an high advanced to low expert skier.  I spend most of my ski days in trees and seek out the steeper lines at resorts, side country and some back country.

 

I've skied them on hard pack groomers, 30" powder, steep short chutes in trees, open glades in powder.  I am located in Colorado and mostly ski resorts along I-70, Abasin, Keystone, Vail and Beaver Creek.  Last season (2013/14) I also took these skis to Steamboat, Winter Park, Alta, Snowbird, and the Canyons in UT.  I demo'd the Kastle BMX 98 at Loveland Ski Area (CO) in November of 2012 and was blown away by their stability in crud and hardpack.  I was also blown away by their speed!  They flat out want to rip all the time.  I was sold on their performance immediately but decided I wanted a wider version to be more capable in deeper, softer snow.  I started hunting for the 108 width at a price I could stomach.  $1200 is far outside my financial bounds and frankly, I don't think any ski on the planet is truly "worth" that price, but that's another topic.  I found a deal on a brand new pair in the summer, in a mountain town ski shop for about $330.  That price, to me was a steal!  Prior to the BMX my primary skis were a set of 2011 Volkl Mantra's (184cm, 96mm under foot, full camber) and a pair of Salomon Czar's (182cm, 110 under foot, rocker front).  

 

Compared to the Mantra's the Kastle BMX seems stiffer to me.  There is no rocker in the BMX, it's a full camber ski so comparing it to the Salomon Czar's is not a fair comparison, but my Czar's were my deep pow ski.  What I found in switching between the Czar's and the BMX on various days depending on the snow conditions, was that I struggled to adjust my technique to accommodate the different stance and skiing style demanded by each ski.  My Czar's wound up staying home once I started skiing the BMX regularly.  The BMX is way faster than the Czar's no matter the conditions.  And while "speed" may not be of interest to everybody, a fast ski indicates low friction.  Low friction translates to less fatigue in the legs.  The more your skis glide, the less work your leg muscles are doing and thus, you can ski more easily and maybe longer for the day.  Compared to the 3 pairs of Mantra's I have been through and loved, the Kastle BMX takes performance up another level.  The Mantra is an all mountain ski that works well for and attracts a wide range of skiers.  The BMX is also an all mountain ski but I would NOT recommend it for the intermediate skier.  As I learned by experience, you get out of position on the BMX and it will send you on your ass.  You really, really do not want to get in the back seat on these boards.  With regard to that aspect, the BMX will make you a better skier.  It forces you to be on the front of the ski, in an aggressive stance and driving it all the time.  Once you get in that groove, you're golden and will be rewarded with exceptional performance.

 

As the review here states, the BMX has a longer radius than some other skis, mostly the softer ones.  That really hasn't been an issue for me at all, and I LOVE to rail it down a groomer back to the lift.  In fact, I hit 81mph on my BMX 108's last season at Vail on a groomer.  Some days the snow just isn't good outside the runs, so I destroy the corduroy until I get bored.  But where the BMX surprised me with its stiffness was dropping over 10-15 footers into fairly narrow alleys through the lodgepole pines here in Colorado.  Once the snow pack is deep enough that you're not hitting rocks & logs, the BMX really shows it's dexterity.  My confidence has jumped a couple levels since riding the BMX.  They turn great in tight, powder covered treed terrain.  My Powder Buddies and I have a term "Log Surfin'" for when the snow gets deep enough to cover large fallen logs, but there is a rise caused by the log.  We will ride the length of that log, wiggling side to side, then jumping off the ramp caused by the uprooted tree roots under the snow.  I thought the BMX would be too stiff to make log surfing as fun as it was on my Mantra's, but I was wrong.  They were even BETTER at it!  

 

In UT last Feb (2014) we hit Alta and Snowbird on a 12" freshy day.  UT didn't have their normal bounty of snow last season.  When we were there the base was only about 85", but still not bad.  In my opinion, they need 100" base minimum to make most of the steep stuff without wrecking your bases on rocks sticking through.  Still, I was able to put the BMX's through some steep, narrow chutes through rock formations, and in the trees.  Honestly, this is where I felt the skis had more ability than I did!  I skied some longer steeper lines than can be readily found at Colorado resorts, and the BMX just ate it up.  One alley I came upon had a few people bunching up at the top of it, nervous about dropping in, and there were a couple guys in it that were kinda floundering.  It was fairly narrow, barely wide enough for one person to squeeze through at one point.  I dropped in, passed the people at the top, quick edge to edge short turns for about 50 ft, then the narrow hour glass section and I wiggled the BMX's through it like they'd been there before and knew the way.  I was grinning ear to ear!  I couldn't believe how easy the skis made that section.  Gave me a lot of confidence to try more technical stuff.  

 

Since then, I've been a lot more willing to try more technical lines in and out of bounds.  I skied the Beaver's outside of Arapahoe Basin (CO).  The BMX's laughed at that stuff!  They handled so friggin' well I thought I had trained horses on my feet.  Got to the bottom, threw on the skins, and climbed out of the valley up to the road to thumb it back to the Abasin parking lot.  A couple good bro's in a pickup stopped to pick me up.  I got in the back seat still grinning ear to ear.  One of the guys says "How you like those Kastle's?".  I said "Just look at my grin and that line up there.  What does that tell ya?".

 

Bottom line:

 

Price: Way too expensive in my opinion, but that's for any ski at that price ($1200 list).  Ridiculous.  If the world revolved around me, I'd price these at about $800 retail. If you can get these skis new for $500 or so, that's a very fair deal in my opinion.  And now that there are more on the market, and more models of the revived Kastle brand, you should be able to find them at or near that price if you're diligent.

 

Performance: Top notch.  There's a reason why guys like Chris Davenport have been riding these (other than he's co-owner of the company!).  I don't see many of these skis in lift lines and my guess is that the BMX is a demanding ski.  If you're not improving and perfecting your technique, the BMX will smack you around until you do.

Target conditions/terrain: I think these are best suited for the 6+ inch powder days in steep double-diamond terrain.  They do great on the "runs" in resorts, but like a Porsche 911, they want to GO FAST and HARD!

 

Recommended skier type: Advanced to Expert.  I just don't think intermediates are going to be able to stay on top and in front of these all day long and will hate them.  I've started to see the BMX 108 in ski films and magazine photos of guys doing big mountain skiing on them.  THAT is what they were designed for.  I may never get to that level, but I can dream.  :-)

 

I think the ski is heavy.  Somebody else here said they are light.  Compared to my Mantra's, they are heavy.  The hollowtech design marketing says that is to make them lighter.  I believe that's lighter than they'd be without the thin covered "holes" in the ski, not lighter than other skis in the category.  The upside of that is your legs will get beefier muscles from riding them!  I would definitely recommend the Kastle BMX to any skier that is or plans to be seeking out the steep lines in the resort edges or side country.  I think they are a bit heavy for what most people want in the back country, but for me they are fine there also on single day trips.  They wouldn't be my choice for multi day trips due only to their weight.  Also, I apparently like my skis a bit long.  The 188cm suits me fine.  Most of my Mantra's were 184, but I let a Volkl sales guy talk me into 177's once and hated them.  Gave up way too much in performance even though that doesn't seem like a big difference in length.  I would like the BMX in a 182/184 but the next size down was 178cm and I just won't go that short again.

 

I have heard that a rockered design will be hitting the BMX possibly next season, but I don't know how accurate that info is.  It doesn't make sense to me since Kastle now has the XX model with full rocker and isn't selling well so far.  The BMX is not intended for the demographic that wants a full rockered ski, and that would make the BMX a different animal altogether anyway.  A graphics change would be all it needs to refresh it.  It does it's job to perfection.

post #9 of 22

@PowderBud  If you put a decent binding on your BMX 108 you would notice a quantum leap in performance.  I had had two pairs of skis with Fritsch Freeride + bindings and thought the skis were meh until I put decent bindings on them (Dukes on Stockli Stormrider XXL and Dynafit TLT Vertical on G3 Barons). With a more connected binding I liked those skis much more.  I have the BMX 108 and love it but use it only as an alpine ski (Vist 614 bindings); if I didn't already have a pair of DPS Wailer 105 Pure with Dynafit bindings for AT duty I could be tempted to put an AT binding on the BMX (if that ever occurred a Marker Tour 12).  Try a more connected binding and you will be even more blown away.

 

And re rocker, AFAIK the BMX 108 has early rise and a flat tail, so not quite traditional camber. The early rise helps the tip release in unconsolidated snow making turn initiation a breeze, but still lets them rip mach schnell super G turns at warp speed on groomers.

post #10 of 22
Quote:
Originally Posted by Taxman View Post
 

@PowderBud  If you put a decent binding on your BMX 108 you would notice a quantum leap in performance.  I had had two pairs of skis with Fritsch Freeride + bindings and thought the skis were meh until I put decent bindings on them (Dukes on Stockli Stormrider XXL and Dynafit TLT Vertical on G3 Barons). With a more connected binding I liked those skis much more.  I have the BMX 108 and love it but use it only as an alpine ski (Vist 614 bindings); if I didn't already have a pair of DPS Wailer 105 Pure with Dynafit bindings for AT duty I could be tempted to put an AT binding on the BMX (if that ever occurred a Marker Tour 12).  Try a more connected binding and you will be even more blown away.

 

And re rocker, AFAIK the BMX 108 has early rise and a flat tail, so not quite traditional camber. The early rise helps the tip release in unconsolidated snow making turn initiation a breeze, but still lets them rip mach schnell super G turns at warp speed on groomers.

 

this correct.  2013 bmx108 does have tip rocker. The tail is more like a twin, Kastle call is a a "powder tail"
  

FWIW- http://www.kaestle-ski.com/en/products/bmx/bmx108-1968/

post #11 of 22

Taxman, thanks for your constructive criticism and attempted education.  I reread my long winded review and just as I thought, I never said I wasn't completely satisfied with the BMX 108's.  I tried to point out some deficiencies because NO product is ever perfect to everyone.  I tried to write an objective review with some different points than the originator of this post wrote.  Not that his points were invalid or incorrect, they're just his views of the ski.  I love these skis, might be the best performing skis I've ever had for their intended type of use.

 

You know, I've heard a lot of comments that the Fritschi has all sorts of issues and that binding X is so much better.  Believe me, I have done exhaustive research and this is the 5th pair of Fritschi bindings I've I owned.  First, I've experienced NONE of the issues others like to tell me Fritschi's have.  I appreciate you enjoying listing all your equipment for us to read, but I feel "if it ain't broke, don't fix it".  The FF Pro works great for me and I love them.  Marker Duke?  How many tons do those things weigh?  Can you adjust a heel riser on the fly with your ski pole and without stepping out of the binding?  Dynafit eh?  Very light, yes.  Strong? "Meh" to use your description.  I'm not willing to fork over $500 or $600 to HOPE they won't break at the worst time.  One of the guys I ski with demo'd a pair of those last season.  They broke very early in the day.  He got another demo rental for free, took out the second set the next weekend.  They didn't "break" but had issues all day, including holding him in in the most demanding situations.  That may not be your, or everybody's experience, (I don't think they'd be selling if they all had issues like that) but like I said, I'm not risking my $500 on "maybe".  Marker Tour F12?  Take a look at some online reviews of that binding.  It's pretty easy to find a lot of skiers had issues with those breaking and Marker not taking care of the customers.  I'm not going to be the guinea pig on that one either.

 

I must admit, I'm an idiot.  I can't figure out these acronyms that so many commenters make up on the fly, or that come from their little social groups.  WTF is "AFAIK"?  Please educate me here.  I know the marketing says "early rise" on the BMX, but put them together and squeeze the camber in the middle until the skis are flush together.  How much "early rise" do you see?  Anything that actually would have any effect? Really??  For all intents and purposes, they are full traditional camber.  Flat tail?  I had to go look at mine just to make sure I wasn't hallucinating.  Sure enough, the tail is slightly turned up.  Yes, they sit "flat" on the snow when you stand on them, but the turn at the end is still there.  Maybe you have a different BMX 108 than I have?  Same situation, different ski: the Mantra's are sold as being "rockered" in the front.  Squeeze them together and take a look.  Very, very little "rocker" if you can call it that.  There are certain phrases that help products sell because a certain demographic wants to hear those words.  It's "marketing" more than factual sometimes.  I've only been skiing 25 years, but I do understand what "early rise" is intended to do.  If that helps a rider feel something is happening and that in turn helps them ski better, then cool.  Thanks for your comments though, and I'm glad you and so many others are jaded on the Fritschi FF Pro bindings.  That has allowed me to buy them at unbelievably discounted prices!  As soon as I have one fail me, or hold me back in critical situations, I'll look into other options.  So far though, they're batting a 1000 with me!

post #12 of 22

The ski at the link you provided looks to be the current, 2014/15 model.  Don't know if Kastle states changes in design since then, but I hadn't seen any changes from the first model year to the ones I have, other than very slight changes in the graphics.

post #13 of 22
Quote:
Originally Posted by PowderBud View Post
 

In fact, I hit 81mph on my BMX 108's last season at Vail on a groomer.

 

The average speed on a WC downhill course is in the high 40's to middle 50's, and the highest speeds attained for short stretches are typically around 85. Highest segment speeds on the fastest venues usually are a few ticks over 90. The FIS record for top speed on a certified WC DH is 96.6 mph by Klaus Kroell on the Lauberhorn. So you must be pleased you're keeping up with those guys on your BMX's on Vail groomers. ;) 


Edited by beyond - 1/12/15 at 9:33pm
post #14 of 22

Well "Beyond", yes I am.  And that was really the reason I was shooting for 80 mph.  I wanted to see what those DH racers feel like, if only for a few seconds.  The difference, however is they are changing direction, going around gates and over rises etc.  Where I did it was about a 200 yard stretch on a steep groomed section with a friend being my lookout for other skiers, and nobody on the run.  It was early in the morning before it got crowded, and on a week day.  I can also say that I have no interest in trying to go faster.  Also, you didn't mention the World Record for speed skiing.  I believe it's somewhere around 156.8 mph.  Imagine going that fast only a 1/2 inch off the surface and with virtually no protection around you, as in a car for example.  Gives me chills just thinking about it!

post #15 of 22

@PowderBud ,  no criticism or attempted education intended.... as was no dick waving intended by the listing of gear. Just pointing out that my opinion was formed through a process of trying gear and finding what worked well (for me) and what didn't work so well (YMMV)....  which can be an expensive exercise when getting into alpine touring skiing but at first not either having the confidence nor being willing to commit to new boots etc to go down the tech (pin) binding route to uphill Nirvana  (six years of different gear and many $$$ wasted).  The Freerides are a fine binding and a few of my friends still use them but there are some better better out there now. If I had an issue with them it was due to high stack height (you are a long way above the ski) and not as laterally stiff as newer frame bindings (from Marker and Salomon) and certainly not as laterally still as tech (pin) bindings.  That all results in less power transmission from leg/foot movements through the boot to the ski.  Until you experience that difference you may well be skeptical, but sometimes small difference can have a big impact on the way we ski.

 

For an excellent comparison of AT gear weights and functionality go have a look through Lou Dawson's Wild Snow website here....  https://www.wildsnow.com/  

 

As for common acronyms AFIK = as far as i know and YMMV = your mileage may vary.

post #16 of 22

@Taxman I got a good laugh at your "no dick waving" comment!  Ok, ok, I'll put my sarcasm on the shelf also.  Clearly I misinterpreted your tone.  Thanks for the reply, laugh, and more importantly the clarification.  For the life of me, I could not come anywhere close to the definition of "AFIK".  Never heard that one.  And I work in an acronym infested industry!  Never would have figured out YMMV either, so thanks for that.  

 

You also hit the nail on the head regarding trying various AT equipment.  The prices have skyrocketed as AT has become more popular.  The Mfr's may very well price me right out of the genre when my current gear needs replacing.  I'll check out the web site you listed.  When I bought my boots, the Tech compatibility was actually another reason why I liked the boots I have.  I planned to at least demo some in case I decided I may want to go that route.  I mentioned the reliability issue already that one of my ski buddies encountered when he tried them.  I also spoke to a guy who had them a few weeks ago up at a resort.  He had problems with the holes in his boots wearing out from the friction of the pin movement when skinning.  It wore out those holes much faster than the boot wore and he was having to choose between going away from Tech bindings, or replacing his boots more often than he should need to.  That issue is non existent with the non Tech design bindings.  And with the FF Pro, the toe slip actually slides side-to-side further reducing friction between the boot and the binding release function.  I know Marker and others have this feature as well though.

 

The lateral stiffness complaint is the one I've heard the most for years.  Yet every time I've challenged one of those folks to show me any play in my binding/boot system, they've failed.  All skis have lateral flex in them, and most, especially the very wide and soft skis which many guys seem to prefer, have so much lateral flexing that the tiny bit in my bindings (if that actually exists) is nowhere near noticeable.  If lateral stability were of any major concern to top level skiers, I don't think they'd be riding those fat floppy noodles (K2 Obsethed for example) that many of them seem to like.  Now, on a ski like the BMX torsional stiffness was important when I was shopping.  The ski is so stiff that again, I just don't think I'd notice a difference if I were on a Tech binding or one of the others you and I are well aware of.  

 

Also, thanks for the explanation on the height issue.  Someone else just told me the same thing a couple weeks ago, that the Fritschi is too high off the ski.  I compared them to my alpine bindings, one Salomon, one Marker.  Both are very, very close to the same height if not identical.  Personally, I don't think the height issue (on my bindings) is enough to be concerned about but your explanation is credible.  And I remember when the platform was all the rage in alpine bindings.  Unfortunately, I'm old enough to have seen many "trends" in ski equipment come and go and come again.  And that's just in the last 20 years!  Some have valid benefits, some are designed more for creating a new wave of equipment sales.  You just can't trust a ski salesman like you used to.

 

Good conversation.  And thanks for the reply.  I apologize for thinking you were just waving your dick around.  Ha!  That one still cracks me up!  I will demo some skis with Dynafit bindings on them at some point, but I just can't imagine the difference in performance can possibly be enough to pry $600 out of my pocket.  Other than the weight, the trade offs just seem too much for my taste.  

 

SGEW  (Ski Good or Eat Wood)

post #17 of 22
Quote:
Originally Posted by PowderBud View Post
 

Well "Beyond", yes I am.  And that was really the reason I was shooting for 80 mph.  I wanted to see what those DH racers feel like, if only for a few seconds.  The difference, however is they are changing direction, going around gates and over rises etc.  Where I did it was about a 200 yard stretch on a steep groomed section with a friend being my lookout for other skiers, and nobody on the run.  It was early in the morning before it got crowded, and on a week day.  I can also say that I have no interest in trying to go faster.  Also, you didn't mention the World Record for speed skiing.  I believe it's somewhere around 156.8 mph.  Imagine going that fast only a 1/2 inch off the surface and with virtually no protection around you, as in a car for example.  Gives me chills just thinking about it!


Sorry, but I just don't believe the speed. Before your chills, think about this: The speed skiing records you're talking about are achieved on closed 1 km courses that are very steep and smooth, on 240 cm skis, with special suits. So even if you had the gear, Vail doesn't have the terrain. What we're talking about really at Vail are the runs designed for WC downhills. So the downhill data are more relevant.

 

Only they're not, because WC DH courses are injected, and the groomers you would have been on, even if a section of the downhill, are not. At best, in the am you'd have nice corduroy, which is slow. Then there are the skis. The WC DH speeds are accomplished on WC downhill skis that are waaaay stiffer than the BMX's and they are 218 cm by FIS mandate, with a 45 m radius. As you prolly know, longer skis run faster.

 

In any case, I've skied the BMX 188, and at my 165 lbs, wouldn't trust its nice rockered front end and 30-something radius at even the speeds my GS skis reach. You're a lot heavier. 

 

Then we have the actual speeds in the downhill. The 90-100 mph cited are on very steep, very slick, very straight sections that run for a lot more than 200 yards, and the racers typically are doing 60 mph when they begin to speed up. So you can't claim that they turn and you didn't. 

 

What it comes down to is that a buddy used his GPS as you whizzed by - suggest some threads here on GPS or radar reliability - and lo and behold, 80! Which was probably a real 65, still as fast as most sections of a downhill course, and something to be pleased about. Until you put some thought into what kind of imbecile would try to hit a max straight line speed on an open recreational slope relying on a friend's quick survey of civilian traffic. Wonder how pleased you'd be if you hit and killed a kid darting out of the side, or impaled an intermediate on the same run your buddy missed seeing and both of you ended up in a wheel chair. :nono:

 

Or since you refer to your age, maybe it all really is about dick waving...

post #18 of 22

Well I thought we were having a fun discussion, but I see you just want to lob insults and criticism over something you weren't even present for but have convinced yourself that you know all there is to know about it.  Enjoy your little world my friend.  Good day.

post #19 of 22

PLease do not drag me into the above conversation.  

 

Just a note, the 178 BMX 108, is a different ski: it is torsionally stiff but has a very "mortal" flex pattern; at the very top, is a softish tip quickly stiffening down the shovel. The tail flex is is pretty much the same as my patrons. There's a nice amount of tip rocker; low splay, extending 360cm's (IIRC) ending with a twin-like truned up tail.  Skis very smooth with the classic Kastle feel.  More of a tactical ski, not overly playful but not that demanding.  Nice swing weight. A good crud buster and setup snow ski. 

post #20 of 22

I promise, I won't drag you into that one.  

 

You have the Patron's eh?  I have been looking at those for a couple seasons now, but haven't pulled the trigger.  Mostly due to my own financial limitations, but I keep thinking if I buy a "powder only" ski, that would be the one.  I'm sure they ski great in deep pow, but how limiting do they feel when you have to take the runs back to the lift, assuming you do that?  What about crusty days, how do they handle in those conditions?  I didn't realize they were that stiff in the tail.  I think I'd like that.  Thanks for the info on the 178's also.

post #21 of 22
Quote:
Originally Posted by PowderBud View Post
 

I promise, I won't drag you into that one.  

 

You have the Patron's eh?  I have been looking at those for a couple seasons now, but haven't pulled the trigger.  Mostly due to my own financial limitations, but I keep thinking if I buy a "powder only" ski, that would be the one.  I'm sure they ski great in deep pow, but how limiting do they feel when you have to take the runs back to the lift, assuming you do that?  What about crusty days, how do they handle in those conditions?  I didn't realize they were that stiff in the tail.  I think I'd like that.  Thanks for the info on the 178's also.

 

Any one who skis at a resort will have to be on a groomed run at some point and frankly, I love to rip on some Soft carpeted groomers on Patrons.  The Patron is a 113mm wide ski that doesn't know it.  The 185 has a 18.5m TR and it shines on the soft groomed and piled snow as well as powder days. It's really not intended as a powder only ski and it could easily be considered a western soft snow all mountain ski by many.  Its very nimble and compliant in the soft bumps. Regarding the tail, you need to flex a 178 BMX first; I think you find its not nearly as beastly as the 188.  If I were to ski on a day of heavy snow or piled set-up snow, I would grab the 178 BMX 108 though. I am very impressed with that ski. I think its got a bad rep as being a monster or demanding ski due to the reviewers testing the 188 which really is a different ski.  

post #22 of 22
Finn you nailed the bad rap comment re the 188 lenght. Lots of folks that have reviewed that ski were on the wrong size or between sizes so they went up like with other rocker designs. Trouble is the bmx has a lot more effective edge than most other skis in the category and requires a decent pilot with some weight. Id say much under 170 and the 188 is pure charger. At over 200 its gets really accessible. If a number of mags and sites had reviewed the 178 instead (or if they made a 183) we'd be seeing a lot more of these on the hill!
Glad to see folks still reviewing this ski on epic
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Member Gear Reviews

Gear mentioned in this thread:

EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Member Gear Reviews › Review: Kastle BMX 108 188cm