Got to ski my FX94 176cm yesterday, and happy to say they lived up to my expectations.
If they offered the FX94 ski slightly longer at say 180-182cm, I would probably have bought that, but I don't think I'd go for the 186's.
I know it has been lamented the 10cm length gaps in Kastle's offerings.
Anecdotes from yesterday:
My ski this year on my local groomer is the MX78 178cm, so I started out with 5-6 runs to get warmed up and a baseline.
Swapped out for the FX94 and was immediately impressed with the edge grip, and how easy it was to turn this ski.
They actually had better edge grip than my MX78 which just highlighted that my MX78 were in dire need of a tune, which indeed they are.
I really liked the tail on the FX94 -> it could bite & hold, give energy if called upon, or could release nicely too.
On some steep icier parts, if I overcooked a turn, I got the occasional double skid-hop -> that's just my bad/lazy skill.
My MX78 would not have skid-hopped.
I don't ski super fast either -> I'm not the first to the bottom, not the last, more mid-pack when it comes to the need for speed.
So with those observations, methinks, why do I need even my MX78 anymore for my local groomer ? ( I would never travel with it )
The FX94 in fresh-tune-state seemed to offer 85-90% of what I need, FOR HOW I SKI, at my local groomer hill.
Which probably means the slightly narrower FX84 would be absolute money for a ski in the east ! ( as I think Dawg mentioned elsewhere )
As I look for a travel-ski to new destinations, one of my big priorities is nimbleness -> to ski well in a variety of mixed conditions, to quickly react to surprises on the slope, or to react to other people/traffic/stupidity. I think the FX94 ticks all those boxes.
Edited by ARL67 - 4/3/14 at 5:31am