or Connect
EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Member Gear Reviews › 2014 Kastle FX94 video review
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

2014 Kastle FX94 video review - Page 2

post #31 of 113
Thicker metal sheet, tip rocker, and no hollow tip this year. Chris says thicker metal sheet and no tail hollow tip contributed to a lower cost thus making it more accessible. I wish they had kept the tail tip.

http://youtu.be/qPrMNDIQxfk
post #32 of 113

Got to ski mine in 8-12" of dense, cold powder last weekend.

They were great for first tracks which lasts about 30 minutes at a Midwest resort.

And, they were uncanny in the cut up snow for the next two hours.

Once I got to trust them, I was slarving them through anything in front of me without any drama.

I bought these things based on Dawg and other Epic Reviews and all I can say is....

Thanks, and Right On!

post #33 of 113
I've got a pair of 2011/12 FX 94's--a great all around GT ski that can carve too. I probably won't like the new ones as much especially if they are less of a carver than before.
post #34 of 113

Yeah, the 176 is perfect. no issues, its plenty stable and that length in bumped out stuff; especially steeper bumps is flickable. I am skiing it +5mm. 

post #35 of 113
Quote:
Originally Posted by nochaser View Post

I've got a pair of 2011/12 FX 94's--a great all around GT ski that can carve too. I probably won't like the new ones as much especially if they are less of a carver than before.

 

 

Its not a carving ski, you want the mx88 then.  

post #36 of 113
Quote:
Originally Posted by nochaser View Post

Thicker metal sheet, tip rocker, and no hollow tip this year. Chris says thicker metal sheet and no tail hollow tip contributed to a lower cost thus making it more accessible. I wish they had kept the tail tip.

http://youtu.be/qPrMNDIQxfk

 

 

they do have the hollow tip, not in the tail; you won't mis it.  the slight rockered tip just planes up a little easier making it even better in crud,broken and fresh . the added metal is perfect making it more of the MX feel but still plenty lively.  its an off piste tool.  Its an amazing ski  

post #37 of 113

My experience is limited but they seem to carve just fine on anything but pretty hard stuff.

I'm amazed how I can ski them like carvers if I don't look down.

They are not my RX's but they are a lot better carvers than many would expect.

I hate it when equipment gets better because then I need new stuff...but, these things are really good.

post #38 of 113
Good suggestion there. My understanding from reviews and specs, the MX has thicker metal sheets than the FX, so they are more stiff, damp and stable; and initiate turns faster as it has compound radii. I'd like to demo the MX someday, in both 83 and 88.
post #39 of 113

yep, the fx's have 20% less metal.  the mx83 is another exceptional ski.  

post #40 of 113
...or maybe I'd rather demo 100mm+ BMX skis rather. I don't see that big a void to fill between my FX94 and other 6 pairs of SL/GS skis.
post #41 of 113
Quote:
Originally Posted by nochaser View Post

Good suggestion there. My understanding from reviews and specs, the MX has thicker metal sheets than the FX, so they are more stiff, damp and stable; and initiate turns faster as it has compound radii. I'd like to demo the MX someday, in both 83 and 88.

...and a very different tail design.
post #42 of 113
Yeah, the rear end is important...

BTW, no skis with 70-80's width in my quiver. Looking at my quiver like that, the void seems quite big actually.
post #43 of 113
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by nochaser View Post

Yeah, the rear end is important...

BTW, no skis with 70-80's width in my quiver. Looking at my quiver like that, the void seems quite big actually.

 

Do you need something off-piste oriented; narrower or wider?  The FX84 may give you a narrower off-piste type of ski, and you can go wider with a soft snow ski over 100mm to compliment things (maybe FX104/BMX108).  

 

I find that skiing a carver on firm snow and bumps is OK, but not so hot off-piste. The MX83 gives you a measure of versatility while still being 85-90% of the carving ability and power of a detuned race carver.  The FX84 won't be the carver the MX series will, but is even more at home off-piste; it may be a good compliment to what you have, whereas the MX is trending toward something wider and more versatile, but similar, to what you have.  

 

If you step up to the mid 90's width, you will still find an FX94 super versatile.  I am picky when it comes to my skis, and this is one of the few skis I can say I would own as my only ski if it came to that: it would work day in, day out, in every condition.  Not the best carver, but pretty decent. Not the best deeper snow ski, but plenty manageable. 

 

With that said, an FX84/BMX108 combo, in conjunction with a true race carver, covers more bases.  I ran an MX88/BMX108 combo a few years back and it covered any reasonable condition I faced (in what was a big snow year).  

 

Don't overlook the MX88. It is exceptionally versatile.  I posted a review video recently, it shows me skiing some pretty crappy rime-ice crust over soft snow, and the MX88 just cruised that hooky snow as well as any ski I have ever been on.  The FX94 and MX88 are very similar; the main difference being flex and a different tip design, but they have the same abilities.   I still can't say for 100% certainty which I prefer for my everyday ski: the MX88 or FX94.  The 88 has a bit more top end (longer ski, a touch stiffer) and the FX94 is more nimble in bumps/trees. 

post #44 of 113
Quote:
Originally Posted by dawgcatching View Post

Do you need something off-piste oriented; narrower or wider?

With that said, an FX84/BMX108 combo, in conjunction with a true race carver, covers more bases.  

Don't overlook the MX88.

I'd love a pair big fat light floaty lively powder skis that I could totally own and easily toss around on deep snow days. Having said that, we need snow here in CA at least in order to demo some.

Very insightful comment there! My existing GS/SL skis plus fully cambered FX84s plus legit powder skis are pretty much what I have concluded to be one of my ideal combinations...I really like my '11/12 fully cambered FX94 but I find myself using them more on-piste than off-. I just wish they had a tad more of carver characteristics without losing that liveliness. For that, I think I'll really like the old FX84. I would love to try them slightly longer than my current FX94s.

I'm so very intrigued by all the great reviews on the MX78 and 83--probably more than the 88s--but with 6 pairs of full-on and cheater race skis, deep down I really don't have much appetite towards fat stiff skies to own. Of course, I reserve the right to change my mind later after I try them.
post #45 of 113
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by nochaser View Post


I'd love a pair big fat light floaty lively powder skis that I could totally own and easily toss around on deep snow days. Having said that, we need snow here in CA at least in order to demo some.

Very insightful comment there! My existing GS/SL skis plus fully cambered FX84s plus legit powder skis are pretty much what I have concluded to be one of my ideal combinations...I really like my '11/12 fully cambered FX94 but I find myself using them more on-piste than off-. I just wish they had a tad more of carver characteristics without losing that liveliness. For that, I think I'll really like the old FX84. I would love to try them slightly longer than my current FX94s.

I'm so very intrigued by all the great reviews on the MX78 and 83--probably more than the 88s--but with 6 pairs of full-on and cheater race skis, deep down I really don't have much appetite towards fat stiff skies to own. Of course, I reserve the right to change my mind later after I try them.

I think the new generation of FX skis carves just as well, if not better, than the old FX.  A bit more metal and flatter tail offset any vagueness introduced by the early rise tip (which is pretty low early rise, you barely notice it).  I can load and release the FX a little better than the old model on groomers.  

post #46 of 113
I'm confused.

In the 2013 Kästle review (http://www.epicski.com/t/114618/kastle-2013-ski-line-overview-and-reviews), the comment was "3) solid carver. [but] Not up there with the MX88..."

In the OP on this thread, "As a carver, it really isn't great."

Based on the above, I deduced that the new FX94 is less of a carver than the old. I guess I'll have to experience it for myself some day...

As you can see, I'm a fan of your gear reviews, guy! ;-)
post #47 of 113
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by nochaser View Post

I'm confused.

In the 2013 Kästle review (http://www.epicski.com/t/114618/kastle-2013-ski-line-overview-and-reviews), the comment was "3) solid carver. [but] Not up there with the MX88..."

In the OP on this thread, "As a carver, it really isn't great."

Based on the above, I deduced that the new FX94 is less of a carver than the old. I guess I'll have to experience it for myself some day...

As you can see, I'm a fan of your gear reviews, guy! ;-)

 

When I wrote the 2013 preview, I had yet to ski the new FX.  I would say it is maybe a 6/10 on firm snow for energy.  Old FX94 was a 5/10, and the MX88 is an 8/10.

post #48 of 113

Dawg, would you say the FX84 is better at carving than the FX94?  1--what quality of a ski would you say constitutes a good carving ski, e.g., good edge-hold?  2--what construction materials and methods contribute to that quality?  Please explain.

post #49 of 113
Quote:
Originally Posted by nochaser View Post
 

Dawg, would you say the FX84 is better at carving than the FX94?  1--what quality of a ski would you say constitutes a good carving ski, e.g., good edge-hold?  2--what construction materials and methods contribute to that quality?  Please explain.

 

And don't forget to use a #2 pencil.

post #50 of 113

"A fool can ask more questions in an hour than a wise man can answer in his lifetime."

Confucius

post #51 of 113

"A man may talk like a wise man, yet act like a fool."

Proverb

post #52 of 113

"It is better to be silent and thought a fool, than to speak and remove all doubt."

Lincoln.

 

"It is better, if you are President, to stay home and watch cable than go to the theatre."

D1

post #53 of 113

Really want to know about the mechanics of carving?

Here it is...

http://e-collection.library.ethz.ch/eserv/eth:28070/eth-28070-02.pdf

 

An example...some data that is very interesting.

post #54 of 113

Excellent thread and agree with many points regarding the MX 88 and the FX 94. I own both ski's and would say that I have a very difficult time choosing one for the typical East Coast (Southern VT) conditions.  If I had to own 1 ski I could certainly choose between these two and be very happy. The FX is a more fun, more playful ski on the same day that the MX is more serious and more inclined to rail GS turns from top to bottom at high speed. My simple formula is any new snow or soft snow and it's the FX, for a typical groomer day it's the MX 88. Hope that helps someone a little. 

post #55 of 113

Any comments on the new FX94 vs any of Blizzard's offerings ?

 

I game 2013 MX78 178cm for my local groomers and am VERY happy with them.

I also recently had 2013 MX88 in 178cm but found them a bit too much/work for me, so sold them.

( maybe MX88 168cm would be a better fit for me -> 5'9" 175 lbs )

I also have 2011 LX92 174cm for a couple years a really enjoyed them, but want something more damp / crud busting in that width.

 

Basically I'm looking for my ultimate travel-ski for Europe or out West.

Something quite good on groomers, nimble if called upon, yet can bust through chopped up pow without too much struggle.

 

Sounds like the FX94 176cm could be the ticket, or MX88 in 168cm ?

How does FX94 compare to Bonafide or Brahma ?

EDIT: I used the search function and found some good comparisons already. FX94 would be my choice for my needs.
http://www.epicski.com/t/110156/bonafide-vs-fx-94

 

- Andy


Edited by ARL67 - 2/19/14 at 7:03pm
post #56 of 113
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by ARL67 View Post
 

Any comments on the new FX94 vs any of Blizzard's offerings ?

 

I game 2013 MX78 178cm for my local groomers and am VERY happy with them.

I also recently had 2013 MX88 in 178cm but found them a bit too much/work for me, so sold them.

( maybe MX88 168cm would be a better fit for me -> 5'9" 175 lbs )

I also have 2011 LX92 174cm for a couple years a really enjoyed them, but want something more damp / crud busting in that width.

 

Basically I'm looking for my ultimate travel-ski for Europe or out West.

Something quite good on groomers, nimble if called upon, yet can bust through chopped up pow without too much struggle.

 

Sounds like the FX94 176cm could be the ticket, or MX88 in 168cm ?

How does FX94 compare to Bonafide or Brahma ?

EDIT: I used the search function and found some good comparisons already. FX94 would be my choice for my needs.
http://www.epicski.com/t/110156/bonafide-vs-fx-94
 

 

- Andy

 

 

 

Hi,

 

As it turns out, I have skied all of these the past few days in mixed snow conditions.  Everything from heavy wet new snow, to set up crud, to nice fresh crud, knee-deep new light snow, and smooth velvety windpack. 

 

The FX94 has the most agility of anything in the group.  2nd best snow feel. The MX88 has the most stability and best snow feel; mid level agility.  The Brahma and Bonafide feel similar; very stable, powerful, more locked into a radius. The other skis I was on: Head Rock n' Roll (no longer available): not quite as stable as the MX88, but very nimble and easy to ski; Elan Olympus Mons: kind of like a wider Rock n' Roll, quick for it's width, easy, not as damp; Blizzard Scout: a bit beefy for the tracked out snow, really came alive in new snow; Blizzard Kabookie: kind of a blend of the nimble feel of the FX94 with the Brahma's snow feel. 

post #57 of 113

On my mx88 and on my 2012 fx84, I ski 5 mm in front of the line... Now the fx serie has rocker, should I still be 5 mm ahead or will the rocker affect the position? I want to install adrenalin touring binding so...

post #58 of 113
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by mogsie View Post
 

On my mx88 and on my 2012 fx84, I ski 5 mm in front of the line... Now the fx serie has rocker, should I still be 5 mm ahead or will the rocker affect the position? I want to install adrenalin touring binding so...

The mount point was probably adjusted rearward to compensate for the new early rise on that ski, so you should be OK to stick with 5mm forward if you are comfortable there.  

post #59 of 113
Quote:
Originally Posted by dakine View Post
 

Really want to know about the mechanics of carving?

Here it is...

http://e-collection.library.ethz.ch/eserv/eth:28070/eth-28070-02.pdf

 

An example...some data that is very interesting.

:ahijack: I'd like to get back to this for a second. I'm intrigued by the right/left differences, which look to be significant at 0 and then again at about 1.6-1.7 secs. (Not clear but assume vert lines are confidence intervals for the one racer, several trials.) I take this to mean that since most skiers are right leg dominant, that edge on the racer is decelerating harder at mid-turn. Less clear why it has less deceleration at start. Question is, do we want a harder deceleration, eg both legs looking like the right, or a softer, eg, both legs looking like the left?  Also interesting that edges show a more gradual deceleration to mid-turn, then more abrupt acceleration past that. Shift in COM? Or is this guy weird compared to other skiers?

post #60 of 113
Quote:
Originally Posted by dawgcatching View Post
 

The mount point was probably adjusted rearward to compensate for the new early rise on that ski, so you should be OK to stick with 5mm forward if you are comfortable there.  

Makes sense! Thanks!

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Member Gear Reviews
EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Member Gear Reviews › 2014 Kastle FX94 video review