or Connect
EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Ski Gear Discussion › Kastle MX78 length question
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Kastle MX78 length question

post #1 of 6
Thread Starter 
Hi guys!

Wonder if you can help. I'm in the market for a narrower ski to add to my quiver and have pretty much pinned it down to the MX78 as I can get a pair at a decent discount. My one question is re length (as there's no way I can demo).

Stats - female, 54kg (120lbs) 170cm (5'6"). Skied quite a bit as a child but then had a long break until 3 years ago. Should be better than I am by now but would put myself in the high advanced category (can get down anything on piste, off piste with varying degrees if grace). Skiing mainly in NZ at the moment where hardpack, dust on crust, re-frozen gunk and boilerplate are pretty common.

My initial thoughts were the 160 but given my weight I'm wondering if the 152 would be better (looking at 2012 models). I'm reasonably fit but don't want something that *needs* to be driven aggressively all the time. I currently ski the Icelantic pilgrim in a 151 (90mm) and while I love it in the softer snow, I feel the need for something more front-side and hard snow specific.

I'm more of a short, technical turn person than a 'blast down at Mach 2' person so would be willing to forego some stability at speed for ease of handling and manoeuvrability.

Hopefully that helps but if any other info would be useful please let me know!

Many thanks indeed in advance :-)
post #2 of 6
152 seems short for someone five six. Icelantics seem to be sized weird, so I wouldn't use that as a firm reference point. My two cents. Not a pro.
post #3 of 6
Quote:
Originally Posted by trundlebunny View Post

Stats - female, 54kg (120lbs) 170cm (5'6"). Skied quite a bit as a child but then had a long break until 3 years ago. Should be better than I am by now but would put myself in the high advanced category

That said, I would think the 160 is the call and maybe a few lessons so your totally comfortable craving them on most anything.  But the 152 is only 3 inches shorter (chin high) and could certainly work for you. Some people like a ski as tall as them (me) and others prefer one chin high.  Could you try the two sizes to see which you prefer?

post #4 of 6
Stay with the 160.
post #5 of 6
Thread Starter 
Excellent, thanks guys - 160 it is then! Will report back :-)
post #6 of 6
enjoy !....once you get them, ride them assertively, staying centred
(don't get in the backseat or they'll fly from under you)...they'll help up your game
if you're patient.

skis like the mx78 make you smile BIG TIME when it's a hardpack day
or only with a 1/2 dozen cm of fresh snow on the ground with freshly groomed corduroy )
and all the powder skiers are unhappy. enjoy those grippy breadcarvers!
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 › Kastle MX78 length question