or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Reducing the Quiver

post #1 of 17
Thread Starter 

At the start of autumn (down here) I counted up and we had thirteen pairs of skis between two of us (nine for myself).  That’s ridiculous for people in our situation.  I got myself organised and sold five pairs before our season kicked off.  Of course that just built up the fighting fund and I bought a pair of Kendos mid-season.  Five steps forward, one step back is acceptable progress I reckon.

 

My GF is now down to two pair: Kastle MX70s and Blizzard Bushwackers.  She’s sorted, she’s happy, job done.

 

For me I’m still looking to pare back the number of skis I actively use from season to season.  This year I took five pairs of skis to the snow, including four pair on this latest trip.

 

2011 Kastle MX78 (184cm).  I bought these in the US a few years ago.  They were on a rack - a very lightly used demo pair mounted with Marker Comp 16s.  I couldn’t walk past them, bought them straight away, and only worried about airline weight limits and shipping costs afterwards.  This is my reference ski for all conditions: an utterly brilliant, damp-yet-alive ski for local conditions.  It will take something pretty special to replace these in my ever-reducing quiver.

 

2014 Atomic Nomad Blackeye Ti (181cm).  I bought this pair as a lightly used (one week) ‘bargain basement’ purchase in February (mid summer).  They have a lighter feel on the snow and are more lively than the MX78s, but they’re also less ski, and they didn’t come close to encouraging me off my Kastles.  I never thought they would to be honest.  I was just playing around in the off season, and I knew I’d make money on the skis.  Result: good skis, but they were sold between ski trips.

 

2011 Head iSupershape (170cm).  This is my short turning SL-type ski.  They’re a great ski in that space, but they’re not quite enough ski for a guy of my size.  I really need the Head iSL RD, or something along those lines.  Even then I’d probably find myself in the same space.   I take them down to the snow every year, spend a single day on them making a lot of short turns, and always find myself wondering why I’m not on the MX78s.  Result: will be up for sale before next season.

 

2011 Kastle FX94 (186cm).  I bought these in very second hand condition before last season, mounted for a smaller boot with Salomon S914s.  They were a little bit frayed, with a good amount of surface rust on the edges, but the bases were in good shape and they had perhaps 80% of the original edge left.  After maybe three hours of work they were back in reasonable condition.  Last year I could crank the heels back just enough to fit my boot, leaving me around 6mm behind the recommended line.  That left me feeling very much in the back seat last year, so the jury was out.  For this season I remounted the toes forward 18mm leaving me about 12mm in front of the line.  Bingo!  They’re now fully dialled-in and I’m very happy with them.  Result: this is now my preferred wider ski.

 

2013 Volkl Kendo (184cm).  This was another opportunistic purchase; new skis mounted with 2015 Griffons.  The price was too good to overlook, so I snapped these up in case the remounted FX94s still didn’t click for me.  I’ve previously demoed the Kendo on three occasions (always in 177cm) covering both the fully cambered ski and the later version with early rise tip.  I consistently liked the ski, but it always came second to the MX88 for my taste.  I just prefer the more damp feel of the Kastle.  The seller said they were mounted for a 29.0 boot.  Turns out they weren’t … ah, the thrills and spills of online ski purchases.  I had the toes remounted forward about 20mm, deliberately choosing to mount myself 10mm in front of Volkl’s zero line to quicken up the longer ski.  They skied really well, being a lighter and more lively ski than either of the Kastles, but they felt (and sounded) a little ‘tinny’ in comparison with the FX94.  Result: these are going up for sale.

 

The end result will be a quiver of three: Kastle MX78, Kastle FX94 and my Supersport Allstar rock skis.  It’s hard to argue with that as an end result.

post #2 of 17

I'm sorry, I don't understand.  :confused Reduce the quiver? 


Edited by Philpug - 8/30/15 at 7:50pm
post #3 of 17

I think you are on the right track but I'd organize it differently...

 

I replaced my MX78's with an under $100 pair of 2004 GS skis (21.5M radius) that had been skied once.  I bought them as rock skis but fell in love.  A good tune up and they do everything the Kastles do but better IMHO.  I've never skied your Atomics but I wouldn't be surprised if you could replace these and the MX78's with one pair of old GS skis.

 

You are correct on the Heads, too much overlap.  You have plenty of medium-big turners, sell the i.Supershapes and buy a pair of i.SL RD's in 165.  They are enough different you wont regret having them.

 

So you'll have:

 

Old GS skis

New SL skis

FX94's

Rock skis

and likely some swag left over

post #4 of 17
Quote:
Originally Posted by Philpug View Post
 

I'm sorry, I don't understand.  :confused Reduce the quiver? 


Step away from this thread.  We don't need that kind of negativity in our life. ;)

post #5 of 17
Quote:
Originally Posted by Trekchick View Post
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Philpug View Post
 

I'm sorry, I don't understand.  :confused Reduce the quiver? 


Step away from this thread.  We don't need that kind of negativity in our life. ;)

I say we lock the thread, its bad for the moral of the forum. 

post #6 of 17
Quote:
Originally Posted by Philpug View Post

I say we lock the thread, its bad for the moral of the forum. 

I question the morals of some people here. There is the morale issue as well.
post #7 of 17
Thread Starter 

By the time you have more skis than real estate in (or on) the car you have a dilemma.  Selling a few skis seemed a more sensible option than buying a larger car.

 

I'll keep fiddling around with other pairs of skis (to keep up morale) but only at the margin.

post #8 of 17
Quote:
Originally Posted by skier31 View Post
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Philpug View Post

I say we lock the thread, its bad for the moral of the forum. 

I question the morals of some people here. There is the morale issue as well.


You should come hang out with us when we're in Colorado next time.  :D

 

@sinbad7 ,  It would be a tough call for me between keeping the MX78 and Head Supershape.  Between the Kendo and FX94, hands down, the FX94.  

 

Are there any in that quiver that speak to you? 

post #9 of 17
Quote:
Originally Posted by sinbad7 View Post
 

By the time you have more skis than real estate in (or on) the car you have a dilemma.  Selling a few skis seemed a more sensible option than buying a larger car.

 

 

You are being plain ridiculous. There is no sense in being sensible. :rolleyes 

post #10 of 17
Quote:
Originally Posted by KingGrump View Post
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by sinbad7 View Post
 

By the time you have more skis than real estate in (or on) the car you have a dilemma.  Selling a few skis seemed a more sensible option than buying a larger car.

 

 

You are being plain ridiculous. There is no sense in being sensible. :rolleyes 


Right??  That just means he needs a bigger car. :D

post #11 of 17
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Trekchick View Post

 

 

It would be a tough call for me between keeping the MX78 and Head Supershape.  Between the Kendo and FX94, hands down, the FX94.  

 

Are there any in that quiver that speak to you? 

 

Correct, the FX94 won that particular battle easily (once I got myself properly placed on the ski) - more easily than I expected.  But a 94 waist is too wide as a daily driver in our freeze / thaw cycle.  The MX78 is on the money in that space.  That's my ski.

 

An older, narrower radius, GS ski is a viable option and I'll keep my eyes open.  Mind you, with a 20m radius the MX78 is pretty good in that space as well [edit - the Supershape at 12.1 metres is a different animal altogether].

 

I do have to keep looking around.  I have a few pairs of bindings on the shelf waiting for skis to match.  Maybe thinning the herd is just going to leave gaps to be filled.  I'll end up with more ski bags than skis, for instance. 


Edited by sinbad7 - 8/31/15 at 8:19pm
post #12 of 17
Quote:

Originally Posted by sinbad7 View Post

 

I do have to keep looking around.  I have a few pairs of bindings on the shelf waiting for skis to match.  Maybe thinning the herd is just going to leave gaps to be filled.  I'll end up with more ski bags than skis, for instance. 

 

One mustn't be wasteful. :D

post #13 of 17

@sinbad7, I am not sure we can be friends any more. Sorry, you need help. 

post #14 of 17

N + 1. That is all

post #15 of 17
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Philpug View Post
 

@sinbad7, I am not sure we can be friends any more. Sorry, you need help. 

 

 

Harsh, but fair.

 

:cool

post #16 of 17
Quote:
Originally Posted by sinbad7 View Post
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Philpug View Post
 

@sinbad7, I am not sure we can be friends any more. Sorry, you need help. 

 

 

Harsh, but fair.

 

:cool

Circle of trust:  O  you: *  

post #17 of 17
Quote:
Originally Posted by Taxman View Post
 

N + 1. That is all

 

S - 1 is also an acceptable calculation. 

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