or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Kastle MX78 or MX83?

post #1 of 16
Thread Starter 
Hey guys,

Firstly, just wanted to say how much I love epicski. It's an awesome forum full of great info.

Here's my decision problem. I'm 168cm tall and 135lbs. Currently ski on a 167cm Atomic D2 VC 75 but want a new pair. I heard that both the Kastle MX78 and MX83 are excellent and I'm deciding between 158cm in the 78 or 163cm in the 83. I would actually prefer the MX78 but would 158cm be too short? Especially after being used to my current 167cm skis?

I ski mostly groomers but do seek fresh powder every now and then.

Thanks in advance!
post #2 of 16

Hey Will

 

Have skied and owned both. Mx78 176 with kti plate and without. Now on 183 MX83 with K12ti flat. I'm 6'1" or 185cm level 7/8 and ski in PNW.My other skis are Head SL and Kastle BMX108 188.

MX line -  Fantastic skis can't go wrong with either! I would say for me I prefer the MX83 by a smidge and I find it livelier and a tad more forgiving than the MX78 even for me in the larger size. If you run your skis flat and are skiing off piste more the MX83 in 163 should have plenty of stability and be more fun and versatile than your Atomics or MX78. The MX78 is a tad better on hard snow and more of a rec race ski feel. But if this ski wont see much fresh snow or you have a wider ski then I say you should really be looking at the RX12. It has less float but I prefer it to the MX78 everywhere it's just more exciting to ski, has more edgehold, is more nimble and remarkable good in mixed conditions for a narrow ski. I'd own one in a heartbeat if I could justify it and my SL skis (I coach so the SL's are a requirement but I prefer the RX12's for my own skiing). Size wise with the RX12's 160cm. It's got a low tip and ton of edge for it's length, uber stable.

Hope that helps.

post #3 of 16
Thread Starter 
Hi Chris,

Thanks for your reply. I appreciate all the info and your suggestions.

Just to follow up, would you say that the MX78 (or indeed the MX line in general) skis longer than it is? I guess my terrain preference is still 85% on-piste so I think a 78mm width would be better than a 83mm. Or do you think there's not much difference between them?

Some people say that the MX83 is a good one-ski quiver but could you also say that it doesn't excel in any one specific category and you're better off getting the MX78 plus a wider ski (around 100mm)?

Thanks again,
Will
post #4 of 16

I ski the Mx 88 as my east coast groomer, and they rip, I also took the ski to Alta/ Snowbird and skied every condition on them, some work in bumps and deep crud. but overall a great ski. I would go with the MX83 

post #5 of 16

Will if you live anywhere that gets any snow on a regular basis my vote is MX83 in 163. If not or your on hard snow most of the time and like to go fast the MX78 in 168 will be hard to beat and is 1cm longer than your D2's. 

Again If I had a dream 2 ski quiver and like ripping firm groomers I'd start the quiver with an Kastle RX12 not an MX78/83.. and then add an FX94/FX104 etc. I skied the RX12 in a 176 at 185lbs and 6'1" and thought it perfect

Next year or even this spring the MX70 is back as well which is a slightly softer RX12, likely perfect at your weight (the RX12 at 168 might be a bit of a beast especially in bumps for you) Just to make life more complicated...

Hope that helps. CG

post #6 of 16

skied the 83, couldn't get on with it at all...felt too light at the front somehow.

post #7 of 16

The RX12 has a full ash core, one layer of 0.5mm titanal, another layer of 0.8mm titanal and phenol sidewalls.  It's a serious, race-derived ski. If you're expecting to spend any time at all off the hard snow you'd be better off with the MX78.

 

Between the MX78 and the MX83 it may come down to your preferred length rather than your preferred ski.  Dawgcatching has reviewed these extensively and, in Scott's opinion, the differing lengths change the character of Kastle's skis noticeably.  With 10cm increments people can get stuck between lengths, needing another ski in the range.  If you haven't done so already spend some time reading the reviews Dawg has posted (here's a hint - he likes the MX83 a lot).

 

For me, the MX line skis to the stated length.  No early rise, and just the slightest bit of lift at the tail; they don't feel short, and you can ski them a size up, but you do appreciate you're on a longer ski.

 

It's hard to go wrong either way.  And, as ever, the best way would be to demo both skis in a couple of sizes to get a real idea (assuming that's a possibility).

 

Best of luck.

post #8 of 16
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChrisCrash View Post
 

Will if you live anywhere that gets any snow on a regular basis my vote is MX83 in 163. If not or your on hard snow most of the time and like to go fast the MX78 in 168 will be hard to beat and is 1cm longer than your D2's. 

Again If I had a dream 2 ski quiver and like ripping firm groomers I'd start the quiver with an Kastle RX12 not an MX78/83.. and then add an FX94/FX104 etc. I skied the RX12 in a 176 at 185lbs and 6'1" and thought it perfect

Next year or even this spring the MX70 is back as well which is a slightly softer RX12, likely perfect at your weight (the RX12 at 168 might be a bit of a beast especially in bumps for you) Just to make life more complicated...

Hope that helps. CG

 

This is similar to my line of thinking.  The RX12 is very good, but a little more demanding off-piste. I am Ok with skiing firm skis off-piste, more work though.  The MX78 I used as my one-ski quiver in 2009-2010.  Surprisingly good in cut up snow, decent float for a skinny ski, good in bumps too.  Amazing on the groomers, really no equal in this width range.  Throw a stiff plate on it and it is close to the RX12. The RX12 being a step up in terms of grip and power, as it should be.  MX83 is going to have a bit more float, but more importantly, a tip that isn't quite as aggressive laterally, so it isn't quite the power carver the 78 is (still beats pretty much any other mid 80's all-mountain ride though) but will be more subtle at the top of the turn, more suited to varying snow.  Much of it comes down to length though. The MX78 176/178 has a measure of stability the MX83 doesn't have: the MX83 is quicker in that 173cm length and a bit more playful.  

post #9 of 16

Just get two...

Life is short.

post #10 of 16
Thread Starter 

Thank you, everyone, for your replies. All very helpful information, some of which will make my choice even harder but it's still good to know!

 

I also wanted to ask if you guys notice a difference when there's a width change of +5mm? And a length change of -9cm? I currently ski on a 167cm/78mm pair so if there's a massive difference in feel for a width or length change, that will affect my decision to go with the MX78 or 83.

 

Cheers,

Will

 

PS: Chris, I ski in Europe (Courchevel and Verbier) so snow conditions are mostly not too variable. Even after fresh snowfall, the pistes are groomed back to perfection in no time :-)

post #11 of 16

A 5mm difference in width will be noticeable if you're used to swapping and changing skis and/or you demo a lot of skis.  The flex and, by implication, the grip of the ski will have more of an impact under those circumstances (especially on a European piste) although there will be a very slight difference in how quickly the ski rolls from edge to edge.   A difference of 90mm in length will be noticeable for most skiers if they were to ski the two back to back.  If you're starting from an ideal point in the middle a 45mm change longer or shorter is manageable - it's just an inch or so at tip and tail and you quickly get used to it.  If you're stretching almost a full size to a longer ski - 80mm, 90mm or 100mm (in the case of Kastle) - it would take a bit more effort to get used to the ski. Depending on how confident you are on the longer ski it may not suit you at all, or you may become accustomed to it as you progress.  The question then is whether the longer ski is inhibiting or helping your progress.  Some people can't settle on a length at all with certain lines in the Kastle range finding one too short and another too long (or both too expensive).  

 

I'm 6'4" and 210lbs.  I demoed the 176 MX78 three times and loved it for zooming the grooming.  When I visited the States a couple of years back I found a pristine demo pair in 184, thought about it for maybe six seconds, and bought them.  I'm a bit better skier now than I was when I originally demoed the 176, but I'm happy with the longer ski.  No doubt I could have been happy with the 176, but at my size it would have been a turny groomer ski.  That's what really excited me on that first run; turny, smooth and stable, but still providing good feel for the snow.  Overall I think I'm happier with the 20m radius and more GS feel of the 184.  I have other skis now for days when I want to rip some slalom turns.  Before I bought the Kastles I would have put my ideal length for this type of ski at about 180cm, so I was in the middle there.  The 176 was a tad short and the 184 a tad long.   [edit - the 176 to 184 gap of the MX78 is the only 8cm gap I've yet seen from Kastle ... curious]

 

The real questions are how do you fit with your 167 Atomics, and how do you prefer to ski?  That Atomic D2 VC is a pretty different animal.  My friend demoed them a few years back over the course of a week.  The Vario Cut (I called them the "Camel Toe") was a totally different approach.  I recall the tips were relatively soft and the flex / side cut would shorten up remarkably as you left the hard snow and ploughed into something softer. They'd suddenly just turn harder without any added effort.  Took some getting used to.

 

I think any of the skis you're looking at would work for you - the 158 MX78, the 163 MX83 or even the 168 MX78 - and it will come down to whether you prefer to throw in a lot of turns (shorter MX78), hoon down the slopes GS-style (longer MX78) or do a bit of both and occasionally dive off piste or into the bumps (MX83).  There's a lot of overlap between those three skis and you can hardly go wrong choosing between them.  Do try hard to demo them to make sure you love your final choice.  And, once you demo the MX series, you'd better have your credit card handy.  They're that good.  

 

Best of luck.


Edited by sinbad7 - 2/24/14 at 3:26am
post #12 of 16
Thread Starter 

Hi Sinbad7,

 

Thanks so much for your detailed response - I really appreciate it. I agree with you on the width/length differences, although in my case I'd be downsizing ski lengths (not upsizing). Do you think that going 9cm shorter would be easier than 9cm longer, or would both take time to get accustomed to?

 

Another point of consideration is whether changing to a shorter ski would make me a "worse" skier. I'm an Advanced Intermediate and would definitely like to push up my level so I can tackle tougher terrain. My current 167cm Atomics are just below my head height but I feel they are too long. So does this mean that shortening by 9cm would not be a huge deal?

 

Lastly, on a random note, you don't happen to be a Cherry and Whites fan, do you? If you have no clue what I'm talking about, never mind haha.

 

Thanks again for all your helpful info,

Will

post #13 of 16

Ok, now we're getting there.  The 168s would only have worked if you were entirely comfy with your Atomics.  At 135lbs it was a stretch.  Forget the 168s.

 

Between the others it will come down to how much time you expect to spend off piste.  The MX83 is a little more forgiving, the MX78 is a slightly sharper tool on the groomers.  Either one will work for you.

 

The 158 MX78 will be about eyebrow height (maybe a little less with boots on) and that's just right.  In your original post you said you'd prefer the MX78.  158cm is not too short.  The MX78 leaps into pole position.

 

You also said "I ski mostly groomers but do seek fresh powder every now and then."  If you expect to be spending 25% or more of your time off piste the MX83 should come into consideration.  Otherwise go for the MX78.

 

Good luck.

post #14 of 16

Have you considered the LX series?  at your weight could it be an option?

post #15 of 16

Will I know Courchevel well and have skied their twice for a week at a time. Your a lucky man!

Last time was last March at the end of the month. What a season! Never seen snow pack like that in Europe! Highlights were a bluebird touring trip to Petite Mount Blanc and then skiing the Grand Couloir for the first time with a meter of new snow with 10m visibility. That was some scary Sxxt!

That trip I rented the MX83 in 183 for the majority of the stay and had everything from firm gromers to 15-20cm of mixed density new with pretty crusty stuff underneath. My wife at 160cm and 120lbs took out the MX83 in 153cm. We both feel in love with this ski! We were staying at 1850 and I know Jean Blanc Sports rents Kastle I believe they had the RX12, LX82, 92 MX83, 88. I would head their and then test out the skis and see what you think. I suspect skiing where you are the MX78/83 as a one ski option is money. I also skied teh LX92 in a 184 and liked it but prefer the MX, it had better snow feel and was more powerful in crud without being to demanding. 

Interestingly enough my good friend tried my MX83's in 183 two days ago in similar mixed conditions here in Vancouver and his ski is the D2 in a 182 and 82mm underfoot. He's roughly the same height and weight. He much preferred the MX83's to the D2's, found they initiated better, were easier to ski and much lighter (I don't have a plate on my MX83's vs the D2 which have a plate and system binding). He likes the D2's but likely bought 1 size too long and they are work and work him if he doesn't ski them with focus. I'd bet he'd swap me in 2 seconds if I offered and was wondering if he should sell them...so it's not just me that thinks your on the right track :D

post #16 of 16
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by SportyandMisty View Post
 

Have you considered the LX series?  at your weight could it be an option?

Yeah, I did consider them but I think the MX series will suit my skiing style better. Thanks for the suggestion.

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by ChrisCrash View Post
 

Will I know Courchevel well and have skied their twice for a week at a time. Your a lucky man!

Last time was last March at the end of the month. What a season! Never seen snow pack like that in Europe! Highlights were a bluebird touring trip to Petite Mount Blanc and then skiing the Grand Couloir for the first time with a meter of new snow with 10m visibility. That was some scary Sxxt!

That trip I rented the MX83 in 183 for the majority of the stay and had everything from firm gromers to 15-20cm of mixed density new with pretty crusty stuff underneath. My wife at 160cm and 120lbs took out the MX83 in 153cm. We both feel in love with this ski! We were staying at 1850 and I know Jean Blanc Sports rents Kastle I believe they had the RX12, LX82, 92 MX83, 88. I would head their and then test out the skis and see what you think. I suspect skiing where you are the MX78/83 as a one ski option is money. I also skied teh LX92 in a 184 and liked it but prefer the MX, it had better snow feel and was more powerful in crud without being to demanding. 

Interestingly enough my good friend tried my MX83's in 183 two days ago in similar mixed conditions here in Vancouver and his ski is the D2 in a 182 and 82mm underfoot. He's roughly the same height and weight. He much preferred the MX83's to the D2's, found they initiated better, were easier to ski and much lighter (I don't have a plate on my MX83's vs the D2 which have a plate and system binding). He likes the D2's but likely bought 1 size too long and they are work and work him if he doesn't ski them with focus. I'd bet he'd swap me in 2 seconds if I offered and was wondering if he should sell them...so it's not just me that thinks your on the right track :D

 

Hi Chris, yes Courchevel is indeed very special. Been alternating between there and Verbier for almost 10 years now and I love them both. Check out Verbier next time you're in Europe - it has a more challenging/interesting terrain than Courchevel (great off-piste skiing) and has a slightly less pretentious après-ski atmosphere than 1850. It's less expensive too, by a smidge.

 

Like your friend, my D2's also gave me trouble. It was like trying to tame a wild beast - crazy acceleration and really punished backseat skiing. As I'm more of a laid-back skier, it was a bit too much. I know the MX78 is not exactly forgiving, but I hope they'll be easier to handle. I'll demo both the 78 and 83.

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by sinbad7 View Post
 

Ok, now we're getting there.  The 168s would only have worked if you were entirely comfy with your Atomics.  At 135lbs it was a stretch.  Forget the 168s.

 

Between the others it will come down to how much time you expect to spend off piste.  The MX83 is a little more forgiving, the MX78 is a slightly sharper tool on the groomers.  Either one will work for you.

 

The 158 MX78 will be about eyebrow height (maybe a little less with boots on) and that's just right.  In your original post you said you'd prefer the MX78.  158cm is not too short.  The MX78 leaps into pole position.

 

You also said "I ski mostly groomers but do seek fresh powder every now and then."  If you expect to be spending 25% or more of your time off piste the MX83 should come into consideration.  Otherwise go for the MX78.

 

Good luck.

 

Thanks, yeah I'll demo both the 78 and 83, but as you say I think the 78 will win the day.

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Ski Gear Discussion