EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Ski Gear Discussion › I Love My 94 mm Kastles and 66 mm Volkls... Help Me Split the Difference
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

I Love My 94 mm Kastles and 66 mm Volkls... Help Me Split the Difference - Page 2

post #31 of 41

At the rate the OP keeps loosing weight we're going to have to recommend a Junior ski...:)

 

Yeah I guess at your weight the FA 84 edt evo even at 168 will not do your short turns. I can bend it into short turns, but I've got like 60 pounds on you.

The MX? Geez, you should probably demo that too in two lengths. Might that be too stiff?

How does the stiffness of the 163 MX83 compare to the 173? Sometimes the shorter ones are like boards.  Too stiff. (I'm thinking of at least 1 Volkl)

 

Hey, what about the Stockli [Tina] Maze SC?  I'm sure it's not available anywhere except in Switzerland probably. Ok, Slovenia too. Perfect! Nothing like unobtanium to get things moving.

 

The Rally is looking better and better but honestly I'm somewhat at a loss in this weight category. I accede to Sierra Jim and  qcanoe.

post #32 of 41

I'm 150lbs, and can ski almost all runs in Tahoe (e.g. Chute 75 at Squaw is fine, but not those crazy lines off Palisades), and I ski 80% ungroomed (i.e. in the morning on a non-powder day, ski groomed runs for speed runs, then stay mostly in moguls). 

I have Fischer Motive 84 168cm as the non-powder half of my two quiver setup, and it seems to fit the bill mostly - reasonably turny, energetic, good carving and good mogul. I can easily hit 40-50mph on groomed runs carving, and I've never felt like ski can't handle such speed - the ski is light but stable with lots of pop. I suspect it can handle 60mph and beyond just fine, though I certainly don't have legs to withstand the pressure to carve at such speed, so I can't tell for sure.

 

However, it's not *very* stiff - it's reasonably stiff, but not overly so, which is why it's good in moguls. Also, that little softness helps it handle up to 7-8" of powder, and maybe up to a foot. But beyond that, I start to nose dive if I make a slight mistake (double ejection is a possibility).

 

Essentially, unless there's a foot or more of snow, Motive 84 can handle. Beyond that, I use my big powder sticks with rocker.

I second SierraJim's recommendation to do a demo though - I've made a mistake of buying a pair of my powder skis without demo, and I'm still stuck with it even though I'm not quite 100% satisfied (it handles its primary reason - powder - fine, and I got it at good discount so I'm keeping it, but everything else is meh or disappointing). Next upgrade when I wear out my Motive 84 (skied more than 100 days now), I'm definitely going to demo extensively.

post #33 of 41
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tog View Post
 

At the rate the OP keeps loosing weight we're going to have to recommend a Junior ski...:)

 

Yeah I guess at your weight the FA 84 edt evo even at 168 will not do your short turns. I can bend it into short turns, but I've got like 60 pounds on you.

The MX? Geez, you should probably demo that too in two lengths. Might that be too stiff?

How does the stiffness of the 163 MX83 compare to the 173? Sometimes the shorter ones are like boards.  Too stiff. (I'm thinking of at least 1 Volkl)

 

Hey, what about the Stockli [Tina] Maze SC?  I'm sure it's not available anywhere except in Switzerland probably. Ok, Slovenia too. Perfect! Nothing like unobtanium to get things moving.

 

The Rally is looking better and better but honestly I'm somewhat at a loss in this weight category. I accede to Sierra Jim and  qcanoe.

 

Very good question on the relative stiffness of the shorter skis. Often manufacturers will "forget" to graduate core thickness etc. according to length and their shorter skis end like planks. However, Kastle does not have this issue.

 

I'm not a light skier by any means but I ski on enough women's skis each year to have a relative feel for softer skis. However gcanoe is a lighter skier and his comments are quite appropriate in that regard.

 

SJ

post #34 of 41
Quote:
Originally Posted by hirustler View Post
 

Excellent info, thanks. Glad you replied Dawgcatching, your approach seems similar to mine based on your reviews.  Wondering whether MX83 should be 163 or 173; thinking 163 for my size. Same question for the Titans, 163 or 170?

 

Hoping for one more Demo day next week, but can only demo Head, Elan or Blizzard.  May buy an untried ski in the right circumstance.

 

Hmmmm, why not the MX78 in 168cm?  Seems like it would be a superb choice.  The MX83 might be a touch long; the MX78 is going to ski 4cm shorter, a bit more active feeling tip, otherwise pretty much the same (except for being 5mm narrower).  The MX78 and MX83 are pretty much interchangeable, it comes down to which length works better for you.

 

170cm Titan, but it isn't as high performance as the Mx78. Nice ski though, I like it, but when I moved back from the Titan and Rally I was skiing in 177 to the MX78 in 176, there was a big step up in top end, and the MX78 was as forgiving as well.  It may come down to price, but not considering price, the MX78 is what I would choose.  The Rally and Titan both felt like more mellow skis for advanced skiers, but not aggressive skiers; they were lacking in the top end. Fun though; I personally like a bit more ski, which is the MX78.

 

With Blizzard; I have been skiing the Power 800s.  Not quite as versatile in junk snow and bumps as the MX78, but a touch more fun on groomers. It has more energy at the tail, skis like a 15m ski in 174cm.  It is a hell of a fun carver, and pretty decent off-piste for a hard snow ski.  If I was trying to split the difference between a full-on carver and an all-mountain feel, I would lean toward the MX78.  I would get the Power 800s for a groomer ski though, it is a bit more fun!  Likes firm snow.

post #35 of 41
Thread Starter 

I have found the Kastle MX 83 in 163 cm and the MX 78 in 168 cm.  Both at reasonable spring prices.  No way to demo.  I would like to ski them next winter, but no way I'll buy them in the Fall for twice the money.  I trust Kastle and think I can probably buy without a demo.  Decent resale value if I get the wrong size?

 

The radius is 15.5 on the MX 83 and 16 on the MX 78.

 

So for a 140 lb strong skier looking for a groomer ripper, good for shorter turns, serviceable in crud and shallow powder, no need for big time ice grip, to complement the Volkl Speedwall SL and the Kastle FX 94: which one?

 

I'm leaning towards the MX83.  The MX 78 seems too close to the Volkls.  Only hesitation is the 163 cm length of the MX83, i.e. too short?  Hoping someone will point out that they "ski long."  I certainly don't think my other 160 and 166 cms skis feel short.

 

Thanks for putting up with my crazy obsession/over braining of such a mundane decision.  Of course that's the beauty of Epicski… other people like me here.  The advice is extremely helpful.

post #36 of 41
Thread Starter 

Upate: just pulled the trigger on the 163 cm MX83 with bindings for $699 free shipping.  Figured they'd be gone when I got back from skiing today. Thanks for all your help.  

post #37 of 41
Quote:
Originally Posted by JimH View Post
 

IMHO the two Head Supershapes are too close to your Volkl SLs.  I have the Motive 88 from a couple of years ago and it fits your requirements very well.  I would give the Motive 86 serious consideration.

 

I'd have to disagree with this. They're very different creatures, particularly the Titan. 

post #38 of 41
Quote:
Originally Posted by hirustler View Post
 

Upate: just pulled the trigger on the 163 cm MX83 with bindings for $699 free shipping.  Figured they'd be gone when I got back from skiing today. Thanks for all your help.  

 

Good choice! Enjoy!

post #39 of 41
Make sure you demo the Head Supershape speed.
Quote:
Originally Posted by hirustler View Post

About me: 47 years old, 44 years on skis, 30-40 days a year, 145 lbs.  Raced a fair amount until I was 22.  My kids race.  I ski pretty fast, though at my weight I'm probably more of a "finesse" skier.  I prefer short turns.  I love every imaginable condition except dust on Eastern ice.  Spending less time in the bumps as I age.  I ski 85% New England (Berkshire East, Killington, Stratton) and 15% West (Alta, Powder Mtn., Aspen/Snowmass).

I ski Volkl Racetiger Speedwall SLs (160 cm) most days in the East, and love them.  Out west I ski Kastle FX94s (166 cm), and love 'em.  Perfect for Utah.  I also ski the Kastles in New England when it snows or gets slushy.  The problem is (I know, high class problem) that most soft Eastern days, and most Colorado days, I feel I could get a lot more out of an 80something ski.  The FX94 stinks on hardpack (for me at least), and the Volkls trench and hang up in spring snow or powder that exceeds 3".  Last year in Snowmass the conditions were quite firm, and the Kastles were a chore.  Didn't have the Volkls.

The dream ski would be 80-85 mm and have a 14-16 m radius.  Give it 90% of Volkl SL's hard snow/carving characteristics and 60% of the Kastle 's soft snow qualities.  If I had to choose, I'd probably pick a ski biased towards hard snow and carving over powder/crud performance.  I tend to like energetic and turny but stiff skis over damp and super stable skis.

I guess I really want a Volkl Speedwall SL that could hold it's own in crud and powder, up to a point. I could always rent beyond that point.  For me this is a one ski Colorado quiver, barring the occasional big dump. Maybe a quicker FX94 with better edge hold would work too.


Skis I've demoed:

Blizzard Magnum 8.0 Ti (165 cm):  Liked them OK but they felt a little sluggish, less high end potential than my Speedwalls.  Couldn't get the same edge angles or rebound etc I get from the SL skis.  They were OK in powder until 6" or so.  Didn't hold steep ice nearly as well as the Volkls.  In retrospect they felt kind of dead after switching back to my trusty Volkls.  Though they were easier to ski in the sense that they seemed to consume less of my energy.  Jack of all trades, master of none.

Head Rev Pro 85 (170 cm): Didn't like 'em.  Too soft, less stable, less edge hold, less energy.  Only got to ski them on nice groomed corduroy.  They may be great in pow/crud, but their groomer characteristics eliminate them from consideration.

Kastle MX 88 (168 cm):  Skied them at Alta, liked them a lot, but found them to be a little too damp, unwieldy, and "unturny" for me.  I think my weight and ski style just isn't well suited to these skis.  Liked the FX94s more.

Volkl AC 50: Skied these long ago and hated them.  Couldn't bend them under 45 mph.


Skis I'm considering but haven't tried:  Kastle MX83, Kastle FX 84, Head Titan, Head Rally.

I know I'm asking for a lot here, but I did find what I was looking for in the skinny and wide categories.  I may just buy one since it's spring, deals are good, and no chance to demo.  That's how I ended up with the FX94s. Any thoughts on these skis for me? Other suggestions?  Lengths?

Thanks!
post #40 of 41
Quote:
Originally Posted by hirustler View Post
 

Upate: just pulled the trigger on the 163 cm MX83 with bindings for $699 free shipping.  Figured they'd be gone when I got back from skiing today. Thanks for all your help.  


I think you will enjoy them.

post #41 of 41
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tog View Post
 

You should try one. Not sure if you can demo it. The 168 does all sorts of turn shapes. Too short for uber maching though. Get's scary quickly. That thing goes.

 

What's that Volkl Code bright green ski? Looked decent.

You have to decide if you want camber or not. Personally I'd rather put the flat Volkl  "carvers" in the wood chipper.

That "hurt" tog!

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 › I Love My 94 mm Kastles and 66 mm Volkls... Help Me Split the Difference