or Connect
EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Member Gear Reviews › Comparison review: 2015 Kastle BMX 108 and 2016 BMX 105
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Comparison review: 2015 Kastle BMX 108 and 2016 BMX 105 - Page 2

post #31 of 59

@effortless  The 108 in 188 is a different beast. I commented on the 178 length being far more compliant and versatile. It not a carver by any means but the ski will drift extremely well and is quite easy in leftovers piled up bumps. 

post #32 of 59

Any perspective on how the BMX 105 will handle chopped-up, tracked-out powder versus the Soul 7 or Enforcer?  Skied some off-piste areas with Mikebike on Powder Mountain last March, he on his Soul 7's and me on my MX88s, and I suddenly developed a covet for a second pair of skis. 

post #33 of 59

That's a question that Dawg could address, or Phil. Have not skied the BMX105's or the Enforcer, but would bet a year's salary that they'll both be calmer in chopped up settled pow than the Soul 7. I have skied them, own the Super 7's, both have virtues that I love, but crushing crud is not on the list. 

post #34 of 59
Quote:
Originally Posted by kitchener View Post
 

Any perspective on how the BMX 105 will handle chopped-up, tracked-out powder versus the Soul 7 or Enforcer?  Skied some off-piste areas with Mikebike on Powder Mountain last March, he on his Soul 7's and me on my MX88s, and I suddenly developed a covet for a second pair of skis. 

 

Haven't skied the new Enforcer.  Did ski the BMX 105HP and Soul 7 more or less back to back in similar conditions which was a light covering of fresh which was being shralped pretty quickly.  Caveat I'm a big guy so the BMX isn't a muscle ski for me particularly.

 

The obvious answer of the 2 is that the BMX (in its HP layup) will truck more through chop, but you could probably get that from the specs.  The real question is how much and how set up is the chop.  Certainly in the conditions I tested (Copper early Feb) I'd have no qualms about taking a Soul 7 and while it feels a bit softer its also more playful in character by virtue of its shape.  Maybe if I was skiing the alps in late April then stuff gets set up differently and I'd appreciate the extra oomph of the BMX more.  

 

FWIW I'd call the BMX a gold medal ski, in its class it doesn't really have any faults other than if you prioritise out and out sillyness, there the Soul 7 , which I'd say is a Solid Silver might raise itself onto the podium,  

 

The true out and out versatile but bonkers ski winner in the category for me is the Whitedot Director Carbonlite.  It's a 188 ski that skis like a snowlerblade.  

post #35 of 59

fatbob, that's just the kind of feedback I was looking for!  Back-to-back impressions.  Phil had suggested the BMX 105 to me in its NON hp format -- I wonder if that hits a happy medium with your findings below?

 

Quote:

Originally Posted by fatbob View Post
 

 

The obvious answer of the 2 is that the BMX (in its HP layup) will truck more through chop, but you could probably get that from the specs.  The real question is how much and how set up is the chop.  Certainly in the conditions I tested (Copper early Feb) I'd have no qualms about taking a Soul 7 and while it feels a bit softer its also more playful in character by virtue of its shape.  

post #36 of 59

Yep could be. I just don't have a data point to compare (& like I said the HP didn't feel like a ski that needed muscling)  I'd go with Phil's view on the relative merits of the HP and regular for less heavy skiers.

post #37 of 59
Quote:
Originally Posted by effortless View Post

This ski doesn't turn on piste. The radius is enormous. For clarification my bindings are mounted as Kastle suggests and not back, which might make a difference. The BMX 108 can carve but the arc is so enormous that you might as well forget turning and just go straight WHEN RIDING IT ON PISTE
 

 

Well it does, just if you park and ride the sidecut it has a 32 metre radius.  So to get shorter radius turns you need to stivot/slarve the skis, which is pretty easy to do due to the lack of significant sidecut.  Also have the 188cm and mounted at 1+ cm so hard snow turn initiation is a fair bit easier.

post #38 of 59
Quote:
Originally Posted by Taxman View Post

Well it does, just if you park and ride the sidecut it has a 32 metre radius.  So to get shorter radius turns you need to stivot/slarve the skis, which is pretty easy to do due to the lack of significant sidecut.  Also have the 188cm and mounted at 1+ cm so hard snow turn initiation is a fair bit easier.

Or just ski it (the 108) fast enough to bend it into the turn shape you want like Lorraine smile.gif

post #39 of 59

Damn I wish it would snow so we can get some more hands-on feedback on the new BMX.

 

I see at Scott's / Dawgcatching's  site, that he has the BMX105 (non-HP ) up as a purchase option, and he states the 181 as his "perfect" length for him.

I am Scott's H/W but not at his skill level.

I keep thinking I want the 189 non-HP  as the wide-end of my 2-ski travel quiver -> 189 for perhaps increased float if called upon, and non-HP in case the HP is too burly.

I am currently rocking the FX94 176 and it is money.

I also have some new flat MX83 173 here, waiting to see if I am going to keep 'em as I re-think my skis.

Gameplan is MX83 173, sell the FX94, and get BMX105 ... 181 or 189 ?

( ... and I feel I might have seller's remorse parting with the FX94 )

 

~ Andy

post #40 of 59

Those 105s look nice, don't they!  

 

BTW, as an alternative, there's a pair of Stockli Stormrider 107 demos on Ebay right now -- probably get them under $400 and they look to be in pretty good shape.  Might be a way to have your cake and eat it too with regards to the FX's -- sell the pair that you like least come ski season.  From chatting with Dawg and with Phil, you could almost flip a coin between the two premium crud busters.

 

(edit):  DOH!  Spoke too soon -- they just sold...  for $399.  Does illustrate the interesting variable with the SR107s:  they've been out a year longer so you might find some deals on them   Still, those 105$ are tempting!


Edited by kitchener - 10/27/15 at 6:56pm
post #41 of 59
post #42 of 59
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by kitchener View Post
 

Those 105s look nice, don't they!  

 

BTW, as an alternative, there's a pair of Stockli Stormrider 107 demos on Ebay right now -- probably get them under $400 and they look to be in pretty good shape.  Might be a way to have your cake and eat it too with regards to the FX's -- sell the pair that you like least come ski season.  From chatting with Dawg and with Phil, you could almost flip a coin between the two premium crud busters.

 

(edit):  DOH!  Spoke too soon -- they just sold...  for $399.  Does illustrate the interesting variable with the SR107s:  they've been out a year longer so you might find some deals on them   Still, those 105$ are tempting!

 

FYI, the SR107 is new for 2016. Last year's model is still a great ski though.  But it isn't apples to apples when comparing the current model or the previous model to the 105. 

post #43 of 59
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by ARL67 View Post
 

Damn I wish it would snow so we can get some more hands-on feedback on the new BMX.

 

I see at Scott's / Dawgcatching's  site, that he has the BMX105 (non-HP ) up as a purchase option, and he states the 181 as his "perfect" length for him.

I am Scott's H/W but not at his skill level.

I keep thinking I want the 189 non-HP  as the wide-end of my 2-ski travel quiver -> 189 for perhaps increased float if called upon, and non-HP in case the HP is too burly.

I am currently rocking the FX94 176 and it is money.

I also have some new flat MX83 173 here, waiting to see if I am going to keep 'em as I re-think my skis.

Gameplan is MX83 173, sell the FX94, and get BMX105 ... 181 or 189 ?

( ... and I feel I might have seller's remorse parting with the FX94 )

 

~ Andy

 

FYI, we are running a pre-season sale.  Give us a call. 

 

We actually do have the HP and non-HP skis in stock. The non-HP would be for less aggressive skiers, or those skiing tight spaces; those touring and want to save weight.  HP for more aggressive skiers, higher wide-open Western type conditions, those who can load the ski more effectively.  Although the HP is very easy, it is still an expert-level ski, and the non-HP is just as good, more suitable to those who aren't skiing on the faster side of things.  

 

MX83 as the frontside and not much new snow ski is a great choice.  I had the best day of the season, 12" of heavy (for A-basin) new snow (pretty sun-baked, mid 30's day in early Feb) on the MX83. Totally destroyed the conditions; I felt sorry for all of those people out there on their big powder boards getting beat up mid-day in set up bumps.  It will surprise you with it's versatility.  

 

I personally would go with a 181 in the non-HP, but you could manage a 189 non-HP. Might be a bit planky however.  That is a try before you buy situation I think.  189 is a lot of ski and perhaps not as responsive as you are hoping for. 

post #44 of 59
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by kitchener View Post
 

Any perspective on how the BMX 105 will handle chopped-up, tracked-out powder versus the Soul 7 or Enforcer?  Skied some off-piste areas with Mikebike on Powder Mountain last March, he on his Soul 7's and me on my MX88s, and I suddenly developed a covet for a second pair of skis. 

 

BMX105 HP is as good a ski as I have ever had in chop (at this width).  It tracks exceptionally well for what it is, funky conditions really separates it from the pack in this category. That is why I loved it so much: easy to ski and nimble, yet a real powerhouse when called upon to be one. Usually skis are one or the other, not both. 

post #45 of 59
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Taxman View Post
 

 

Well it does, just if you park and ride the sidecut it has a 32 metre radius.  So to get shorter radius turns you need to stivot/slarve the skis, which is pretty easy to do due to the lack of significant sidecut.  Also have the 188cm and mounted at 1+ cm so hard snow turn initiation is a fair bit easier.

 

Agreed.  Just bend it up. Comes around decently for sure.  I had a Stockli Stormrider XXXL at the time (88mm underfoot, 24m radius) and the 188cm 108 actually was a tighter radius ski.  It needs input to come around quickly; it will bend up in the tip however. 

post #46 of 59


In your review of these skis, was the one you tested the 2016 BMX 105 HP or the BMX 105 (no HP)?  I am considering these skis for an all around in bounds ski with a bias towards powder and crud but that can handle bumps and the rest of the mountain as well.  It seems like the HP version but I am not sure

post #47 of 59
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by lees View Post
 


In your review of these skis, was the one you tested the 2016 BMX 105 HP or the BMX 105 (no HP)?  I am considering these skis for an all around in bounds ski with a bias towards powder and crud but that can handle bumps and the rest of the mountain as well.  It seems like the HP version but I am not sure

 

Hi,

 

I reviewed the HP version. The non-HP is great if you live in a place where you are skiing tighter trees and steeper bumps; if you can open it up, go for the HP. 

post #48 of 59
Quote:
Originally Posted by Taxman View Post
 

 

Well it does, just if you park and ride the sidecut it has a 32 metre radius.  So to get shorter radius turns you need to stivot/slarve the skis, which is pretty easy to do due to the lack of significant sidecut.  Also have the 188cm and mounted at 1+ cm so hard snow turn initiation is a fair bit easier.

My experience on this ski echo's Taxmans. Park and ride really was not at the top of the design priorities for this skis and that is A-Ok by me but you can make it do whatever turn shape you want if you apply other techniques or have soft snow or speed to bend it.  I also went +1 on the binding position for quicker initiation and more forgiving performance in tight spots as that traditional tail demands a certain amount of respect ;) 

post #49 of 59

Assuming an expert skier who is getting on in years (55) that prefers trees and chutes to charging at areas such as Alta, JH and Steamboat, and who has recently come into a "get yourself some new skis" gift card from wifey, looking to replace some TSTs and thinking it might finally be the time to experience what $1k+ feels like, could I get a comparison between the SR107 and the BMX105 (non HP)? Thanks.

post #50 of 59

55 getting on in years :eek  Where is your self respect man, that is only half baked.  You are just hitting yur prime.

post #51 of 59

I've skied the BMX 108 as a soft snow, crud, and powder ski for two seasons and have now had a couple weeks on the new BMX 105 HP (181 cm). I'd say the 105 HP is pretty much a perfect all-around soft snow and mixed snow ski. If I expect to ski bottomless powder, I'll take a fatter ski (that's why Kastle makes the 115). But in the 20-40 cm powder we've had recently, along with deep chopped up stuff and semi-soft bumps of all sizes and shapes, the 105 HP is perfect.

 

The 108 is an excellent crud ski and a good powder ski. If you do a bit of foot steering and use your big toe or the ball of the foot to pressure the widest point of the shovel, it turns quickly for a ski with its long turn radius. It's reasonably agile in trees. But basically it's a ski that prefers to stay close to the fall line and arc long turns on a wide open slope — and the 108's awesome stability makes it exciting to ski it that way.  

 

In many conditions, the differences between the 108 and the new 105 HP are subtle. The 105 HP is a bit livelier, a bit more responsive. The 108 is maybe a bit more solid in smashing through deep chop; with more early rise, the 105 HP tends to ride a little higher in chop rather than muscling its way through. (The 105 HP is remarkably light for a ski with metal in it.) Both perform well, the 108 being slightly more stable, the 105 HP more responsive and turny.

 

In steep and deep conditions with tight trees, though, the added rocker, deeper sidecut, and shorter turn radius make the 105 HP far superior to the 108. The 105 is more nimble, agile, immediately responsive. The 108 could be planky at times. On the 105 HP, I ski tight, steep lines that I used to hesitate to take on the 108. You can dive into gaps confident that the ski will turn exactly as needed to make it around the next tree. From a balanced, stacked stance, you can easily drive the 105 HP into any arc you choose, as if carving a groomer. The combination of float, stiffness, turniness, and ease of edging and releasing is impressive. I expect this will be my main soft snow ski for a long time.

post #52 of 59

Why Oh Why do you HAVE to say such great things about the 105 HP  ! ?   :D

I was lusting after that ski when it was announced, but the slow/late start to our east coast season put the brakes on my purchase.

I am always in pursuit of the 1-ski to take on a ski trip, rather than 2.

 

My ski pals and I just booked a trip to Germany/Austria this week and I was going to get jump off the Kastle bandwagon, and pickup Black Crows Altris ( also 108mm ) at a German ski shop.   On my annual ski trip to Europe, I have seen the "emergence/rise" in popularity of Black Crows ( dudes from Chamonix ) , same with WhiteDot ( UK ),  which both now seem to have some North American distribution.

 

Your comments are exactly what I am looking for to stay on the Kastle bandwagon -> so many skis, so little time !

 

~ Andy

post #53 of 59

A follow-up to previous comments on the BMX 105hp. After skiing it in ideal soft-snow conditions for about two weeks, yesterday I had it out in heavy, set-up chop and crud, moguls encrusted with hardened lumps, pretty much the full range of deep, mixed conditions (excluding ice and thin, wind-scoured surfaces). In these conditions, I'd have preferred to ski the BMX 108 or, even better, the MX 98. The 105hp is a bit softer in the shovels than the 108, perhaps a bit less torsionally rigid. It doesn't power its way through deep, tough crud with the same ease. This isn't to say that the 105hp didn't handle the conditions well enough: there wasn't anything I needed from it that it didn't do. But I'd have been more confident and assertive on the 108. Just a bit of confirmation as to the differences between the 105hp and 108: the 105hp shines in soft conditions and tight trees, and it's easier to carve; the 108 remains the more stable, powerful tool for tough, variable conditions. (Less sure now of whether to sell my 108s.)

post #54 of 59

CJSailor: 

Have you had any time on the Volkl 100Eight ?

I was eyeing that up in the store yesterday and it gave off "good vibes" , and some good reviews too at other sites.

post #55 of 59

Haven't skied the Volkl 100Eight, no. I did ski the BMX 105hp back to back with the Wailer 112, which I use as a touring ski. The Wailer obviously has more float and is fun in wide-open, deep powder. But for where I most often ski -- steep, tight trees in powder -- I find the 105hp gives more control and I ski with better discipline.

post #56 of 59

Just sold my BMX108 last night to a very keen Kiwi who's moved to Vancouver and wants to get into more off piste and powder skiing. I definitely shed a tear. There we no deal breaking bad habits the 108's had that I couldn't live with but with an MX98 in my quiver that I find incredibly capable in boot deep snow and chop and more exciting and precise I decided it was time to add something different and more deep/ soft snow specific. I bought a BMX 115 and after a day on them was willing to part with the 108's

 

Since were discussing the new and old BMX lines I figured some feedback on the BMX 115 193cm wouldn't land on deaf ears.

Set-up, weight, length (my stats 185cm tall, 85kg, 6'1" 185lbs, level 8 skier) -  I had them mounted with the standard Attack K13 on the line. Doing a tape pull on the length they were ~less than 1 cm under the stated length (unlike the BMX 108 188 that was 185.5) They are reasonably light for what they are but ~200g/ski more than the 108's, the 185's ~ 100g more. I noticed a slight increase in swing weight on the hill and on the chair. Never an issue the larger surface area and length took some adjusting to.

 

Initial on hill impressions: I only have one day on them so far but it was one of the best Whistler days I have ever had with fresh tracks for the first half of the day with light to moderate density snow varying from boot to knee deep. Mix of steeps, tree's open bowls and some groomers. Skiing solo and fast I logged about 25,000ft vert so more than most folks get at a demo. I'll submit a more detailed review after a few more days on em but here are a few comments.

Stability wise they feel like a high 180's to 190cm ski and the limited reviews are correct, this is a pretty unflappable ski. I was skiing faster on these than I would on the 108's everywhere with the possible exception of really compacted, high density crud where I found they got knocked around a bit if you weren't on em. In softer groomers and crud they just dominated.

New shape - funny that they remind me of the MX98's for 3 reasons First  they turn the whole mountain into a race course and are supremely confident.  Second the refined consistent flex and rebound energy I love from the MX98. Third they have a similar turn radius. That said you do feel the benefit of the rocker with quick turning initiation and looseness in soft snow and trees. Sure they like to run but I had no problems making very short turns in deep and compact snow at med to slow speeds. Even at 193 they are more manageable in tight spaces than the BMX108's or MX98's and my impressions are the rockered softer tail and even flex is a big part of this. The float is excellent as one would expect and they don't lack for pop as I found myself looking for airs and popping off features far more than I have in years. 

Groomers - very good for a wide ski. Solid bite, nice engagement, GS turns roll your ankles and easy as pie, shorter turns put a bit more energy and fwd pressure and again easy and pretty agile even in a 193. Less need to steer or stivot these with the new shape than the previous design.

Initial summary - Glad the initial reviews and feedback from Kastle Athletes and design team was spot on about this ski as it's the first ski I've bought in years without a demo. If you were scared off or not a fan of the old BMX design you might want to reconsider or at least demo a pair soon before this year's run is sold out. Length wise I would have been fine on the 185cm and don't think you need to size up too much due to the rocker unless you ski fast or more open terrain.  Other details - Finish and new semi cap and topsheet looks fantastic, new textured topsheet sheds snow very well, base finish and prep was excellent. Dig the retro orange/coral colour window, text and sidewalls.

post #57 of 59
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChrisCrash View Post
 

Just sold my BMX108 last night to a very keen Kiwi who's moved to Vancouver and wants to get into more off piste and powder skiing. I definitely shed a tear. There we no deal breaking bad habits the 108's had that I couldn't live with but with an MX98 in my quiver that I find incredibly capable in boot deep snow and chop and more exciting and precise I decided it was time to add something different and more deep/ soft snow specific. I bought a BMX 115 and after a day on them was willing to part with the 108's

 

Since were discussing the new and old BMX lines I figured some feedback on the BMX 115 193cm wouldn't land on deaf ears.

Set-up, weight, length (my stats 185cm tall, 85kg, 6'1" 185lbs, level 8 skier) -  I had them mounted with the standard Attack K13 on the line. Doing a tape pull on the length they were ~less than 1 cm under the stated length (unlike the BMX 108 188 that was 185.5) They are reasonably light for what they are but ~200g/ski more than the 108's, the 185's ~ 100g more. I noticed a slight increase in swing weight on the hill and on the chair. Never an issue the larger surface area and length took some adjusting to.

 

Initial on hill impressions: I only have one day on them so far but it was one of the best Whistler days I have ever had with fresh tracks for the first half of the day with light to moderate density snow varying from boot to knee deep. Mix of steeps, tree's open bowls and some groomers. Skiing solo and fast I logged about 25,000ft vert so more than most folks get at a demo. I'll submit a more detailed review after a few more days on em but here are a few comments.

Stability wise they feel like a high 180's to 190cm ski and the limited reviews are correct, this is a pretty unflappable ski. I was skiing faster on these than I would on the 108's everywhere with the possible exception of really compacted, high density crud where I found they got knocked around a bit if you weren't on em. In softer groomers and crud they just dominated.

New shape - funny that they remind me of the MX98's for 3 reasons First  they turn the whole mountain into a race course and are supremely confident.  Second the refined consistent flex and rebound energy I love from the MX98. Third they have a similar turn radius. That said you do feel the benefit of the rocker with quick turning initiation and looseness in soft snow and trees. Sure they like to run but I had no problems making very short turns in deep and compact snow at med to slow speeds. Even at 193 they are more manageable in tight spaces than the BMX108's or MX98's and my impressions are the rockered softer tail and even flex is a big part of this. The float is excellent as one would expect and they don't lack for pop as I found myself looking for airs and popping off features far more than I have in years. 

Groomers - very good for a wide ski. Solid bite, nice engagement, GS turns roll your ankles and easy as pie, shorter turns put a bit more energy and fwd pressure and again easy and pretty agile even in a 193. Less need to steer or stivot these with the new shape than the previous design.

Initial summary - Glad the initial reviews and feedback from Kastle Athletes and design team was spot on about this ski as it's the first ski I've bought in years without a demo. If you were scared off or not a fan of the old BMX design you might want to reconsider or at least demo a pair soon before this year's run is sold out. Length wise I would have been fine on the 185cm and don't think you need to size up too much due to the rocker unless you ski fast or more open terrain.  Other details - Finish and new semi cap and topsheet looks fantastic, new textured topsheet sheds snow very well, base finish and prep was excellent. Dig the retro orange/coral colour window, text and sidewalls.

 

Sweet, that's great to hear!  The BMX115 has me very intrigued now: that length of 185cm seems right in my wheelhouse, and I LOVE the flex of the non HP version. Strong, but not a ski that puts you on your heels like some "strong" skis.  I bet that could be a sick wider day/all mountain ski; as versatile as the 105 is, I expect the 115 would be just as much so, given it's intended purpose. 

post #58 of 59
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by CJSailor View Post
 

A follow-up to previous comments on the BMX 105hp. After skiing it in ideal soft-snow conditions for about two weeks, yesterday I had it out in heavy, set-up chop and crud, moguls encrusted with hardened lumps, pretty much the full range of deep, mixed conditions (excluding ice and thin, wind-scoured surfaces). In these conditions, I'd have preferred to ski the BMX 108 or, even better, the MX 98. The 105hp is a bit softer in the shovels than the 108, perhaps a bit less torsionally rigid. It doesn't power its way through deep, tough crud with the same ease. This isn't to say that the 105hp didn't handle the conditions well enough: there wasn't anything I needed from it that it didn't do. But I'd have been more confident and assertive on the 108. Just a bit of confirmation as to the differences between the 105hp and 108: the 105hp shines in soft conditions and tight trees, and it's easier to carve; the 108 remains the more stable, powerful tool for tough, variable conditions. (Less sure now of whether to sell my 108s.)

 

Having skied the 108 in 188cm for some time, I always thought the same: it is such a stable tool and perfect in the right conditions.  The 105 seems like the more versatile ride, but not quite the power of the old model.  Thinking the 115 replaces the old 108 somewhat, and the 105 is a new ski, if not replacing the old BMX98.

post #59 of 59
Hello, I also skied the BMX 105hp and the Stockli 107 in the bumps. Check out my reviews on "Yellow Gentian Ski Reviews". Craig Vail, Colorado tester.
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 › Comparison review: 2015 Kastle BMX 108 and 2016 BMX 105