or Connect
EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Ski Gear Discussion › Kastle mx88 sizing question
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Kastle mx88 sizing question

post #1 of 29
Thread Starter 
Hi! I have the opportunity to grab some Kastle mx88s for a great price. They are 188, I am 6'1, 190lbs, advanced skier. Are these too big or about right? My worry is that I am so very used to early rise and rocker that a full cambered 188 might be a lot to handle at first. My other skis are 110 and 116 underfoot, so these will be for the harder days and groomers. Right size? Good ski for my purposes? I'm in western Canada. Thanks!
post #2 of 29

Based on my limited experience, 188 would be a monster of ski.  I demoed 178's for a day at Jackson Hole a couple of years back.  I'm 5'10, was about 200 lbs. at the time, advanced skier.  178's were plenty of work and not much fun at foolin' around speeds.  Get'm up over about 30 mph and they kind of found their groove.  If that's your thing .......

post #3 of 29
Sounds good to me. Have fun and let 'er rip!
post #4 of 29

The 188 cm is the longest & stiffest in the MX88 line, made for the biggest, strongest skier on the hill.  Is that you?

post #5 of 29

Dang I can't imagine those things at 188.  

 

I'm 5'11" 145 lbs and I have a pair of MX 88's of 168cm length.  I have sometimes wondered if I should have gone longer with them, but other times (like when I'm screaming down a groomer with some dog legs) I realize that they are just fine.

post #6 of 29
Thread Starter 
Thanks for the feedback. I think I'm seeing more no than yes, interesting.
post #7 of 29
For the OP, the 188 is certainly skiable, but it will be a handfull for you in the bumps and tighter terrain.
post #8 of 29
Yes, yes, yes.
Be the lionslayer!
post #9 of 29

Good luck on 188's. There's a reason they're still around.

 

Having multiple pairs of ME88's my suggestion is ALWAYS go shorter, particularly is you're used to a full rockered ski.

post #10 of 29
I've always gone with the longest ski I can get. But I'm 250+
Edited by cbtbakkes - 10/30/15 at 9:04pm
post #11 of 29

I am 2" shorter and 20 lbs lighter and I have the 178, I am around an 8 ish level skier,and they seam perfect, If you are that level or better you will have a great pair of high speed rippers, I think they would be tons of work in the bumps and tree's

post #12 of 29

What you don't know can't hurt you. :devil:

post #13 of 29
Quote:
Originally Posted by SoftSnowGuy View Post
 

The 188 cm is the longest & stiffest in the MX88 line, made for the biggest, strongest skier on the hill.  Is that you?

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by markojp View Post

For the OP, the 188 is certainly skiable, but it will be a handfull for you in the bumps and tighter terrain.


Owned the 178's, am 6', 165, decent skier. Sweet ski with a long running length for its measured length, was a handful in bumps and trees, really a bit much for me back east. Cannot imagine the 188 for anyone smaller than a NFL linebacker who happens to be a Level III. 

post #14 of 29
6'; 215 pounds. Had the 178 and never felt that I needed more...Plenty edge hold and just the right lenght/flex for bumps and trees...
post #15 of 29
Go to Kastle's web site and check the ski sizer. That ski would be awesome for wide open spaces and very solid technique. On the other hand at the speeds that ski is capable of you get your weight stuck in the back while on edge it could be big trouble.

I'm a big Kastle fan. I have been on the current Kastle's the past 6 seasons and raced the original Kastle's in the 80's. I'm 6' 1 and 210. Seen lots of guys at the resorts way over their head cause the didn't have the ability to turn them. Coming from a rockered ski background there might be better choices from Kastle length wise. No issues with the ski just the length.

If you want to send a PM to Dawgcatching and get his opinion. He has a long history with Kastle's as well.

Good luck
post #16 of 29
Just a datapoint for you- I skied the MX88 in178 fir a few days, 198 lb, 6ft, decent skier. Subjectively felt a tad short but never unstable or lacking. I would have been out of my league on the 188. If they made a 183 and kept the same flex, that would have been just right after a big protein breakfast. As Snowfun said there is a reason they are still around for a good deal.
post #17 of 29
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sintesi View Post

If you want to send a PM to Dawgcatching and get his opinion. He has a long history with Kastle's as well.
 

 

One of the biggest Kästle dealers around, I think.  He knows his stuff.

post #18 of 29
Quote:
Originally Posted by lionlager View Post

Hi! I have the opportunity to grab some Kastle mx88s for a great price. They are 188, I am 6'1, 190lbs, advanced skier. Are these too big or about right? My worry is that I am so very used to early rise and rocker that a full cambered 188 might be a lot to handle at first. My other skis are 110 and 116 underfoot, so these will be for the harder days and groomers. Right size? Good ski for my purposes? I'm in western Canada. Thanks!


Wide (for hard groomers) and Long....  Kastle lists the turning radius as 22.5m.   Great for the movie "Better off dead" where the advice at the top of K12 was:

   "Go that way.   Really fast.   If something gets in your way,  turn".    (Or not) 

post #19 of 29
As someone who is 6'4", 245lbs, I would not ski them any shorter. I probably qualify for the biggest, best skier on the hill. I own a pair of 184 MX78's and they work well for me as a carving ski. They are definitely not too long for me or too short. For you, if you like and are used to longer skis, they will be fine. If you typically ski shorter skis, you probably would be better off on the 178's. Kastle's have light tips (hollowcore) and they come around nicely, so longer is fine if you are using your edges. In softer snow, it maybe different, I haven't experienced it yet. Dawg is an expert on Kastle's, but he is a smaller guy and has no experience for someone my size at least. I guess very few people do. I have talked to him a lot and he is very helpful. He has another person in his shop, Kevin, who is slightly bigger than you and he skis the longer lenghtes (the MX88 in 188 cm) and really likes them. The 188 cm would be too long for a tight tree ski, but good for a open terrain cruiser or higher speed groomer ski. I have read they are softer than the MX78's mostly, but sometimes they are described as stiffer. If they are stiffer, then you are probably a bit light for them. I think they are the softest of the MX line, but someone like Dawg would know that for sure.
post #20 of 29

I think (having owned both) that the 88's are a touch flexier overall than the 78's, but the pattern was different; 78's mainly felt stiffer in the middle. Close call. The MX88 188 length is a good length for you; I owned the 178's, am 165 lbs, they were great in open terrain, quick but a bit planky in trees or bumps. You could ski and enjoy 178's, but I suspect they'd have a speed limit. Not sure I think 10 cm is going to be such a big deal in the trees of western Canada. Back in Quebec, maybe. 

post #21 of 29

That is why I choosed the 178 over the 188 mx-88... Bumps and trees in Tremblant...

And as I recall too, my mx78 were stiffer than my mx88 but I had a plate on my mx78 so...The 78 had definitly more edge grip and was more fun to carve...

post #22 of 29

Beyond and Mogsie,

 

It seems you both owned MX78's and 88's. Have the 78's gone out of favor and the 88's are the  better ski, or is the 88 just a good mid-fat width to go with narrow and wider skis in a quiver so it has become more popular? I will say my 78's aren't good in mashed potato snow (too narrow and grabby) but I have 101mm wide skis for that kind of snow. I bought them as a softer, all mountain version of my race skis for all mountain terrain (mix of groomers, trees, and bumps) and they seem perfect for that use in the East.

post #23 of 29

Well first just look at ski reviews for on-piste skis and online ski retailer and you will see a lot more all mountain skis in the 84+ cm waist than real frontside skis... The mx78 is now an in between ski... If it is compared with other frontside all-mountain skis, it will lack floatation and soft snow skill and also will have a smaller sweet spot... Also, the 80+ skis as improved a lot in term of torsion rigidity so a ski like the amphibio 88, the Brahma or Motive 86 ( to name a few) do have real nice edge hold and carving capacities even on harder conditions...

 

And then, if the mx78 is compared to real frontside skis like a lot of detuned sl and gs skis or cross over skis, these skis are very powerful and may better compare to the rx12... 

So the mx78 is a class on his own... I think it is the only high level ski in the 75-79 mm range (there may be the Latigo but I never tried it so)... All the other skis of that width are usually more intermediaire level skis I think...It may be the only ski that offer such compromised between high performance and polyvalence...

post #24 of 29

I'm 6'4" and over 100kgs when on a pair of skis (factor in boots and gear etc.). I would like the MX88 in a 182-184cm length (like my 78s). Since they don't make that ski I would opt for the 178 over the 188. I could ski the 188, but the 178 is plenty of ski for how I use it.

post #25 of 29

Long time bump. Just bought a new MX88 in 188 as a great buying opportunity came up yesterday.  Wasn't really debating between 178 and 188 but seeing as the 188 weighs in at 2200+ grams each it is relatively heavy compared to other 188 length skis.

 

So for the OP, did you go with the 178?  How have you liked it?

 

I'm 6'4" and 225+, grew up skiing A Basin 5-10 times a year and Midwest spots another 10+ days a year.  Consider myself an expert.  

 

Reading this thread makes me think I could be at a 178 or a 188, however haven't had luck with other skis being shorter than 180.  Anyone here own the MX88 in 188?  

 

Started a thread last year regarding the El Capo at 191 which I had bought new.  As it turned out a ski was defective and was given full refund after skiing in Vail for a week.  People warned me then it's a big ski.  They were right.  It was great in the open on Vail back bowls and in other areas, but not the ski of choice in any trees/glades or moguls. I believe each El Capo ski is around 2550 grams, HUGE, so 300 grams more than the MX88.

 

Anyhow, I now have the MX88 in 188 being shipped to me.  Hope they work out!

post #26 of 29
That's the right size. You'll love them!
post #27 of 29

I have a MX78 in 184 cm and they feel short if anything. I am the same size as you and I would buy the 188 size.

post #28 of 29
I have skied the MX 88 in the 178 cm length and it had to be about the most stable ski I ever skied I'm only 170 lbs though. Very stout ski IMHO. Great bigger turn ripper, but not real versatile for me.
post #29 of 29

I have ridden all of the MX lines in their longest sizes and loved pretty much every one of those skis in their intended conditions. I ski Big Sky, 6'1", 180lbs. 

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 mx88 sizing question