or Connect
EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Ski Gear Discussion › 2014/15 Volkl RTM 81 vs 2012/13 Kastle MX88
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

2014/15 Volkl RTM 81 vs 2012/13 Kastle MX88

post #1 of 24
Thread Starter 

My current ski is a 2015 Volkl RTM 81-171cm (yes the zero camber model) and I decided to buy used online a 2013 Kastle MX88 -168cm to compare.  Why - making a demo day is near impossible so I used some cash to purchase a used/demo Kastle model to get an idea. 

 

My Volkl has approximate 38 skiing days on it between last season and this season.

The Kastle usage is unknown, however the top surface of the skis are beat up pretty good, however the bases are in decent shape.

 

For the evaluation, my Volkl's were last tuned 5 skiing days ago, therefore when I unboxed the Kastle's I lightly tuned them (the Kastle's had enough wax on the bases I simply brushed it out, and I sharpened the edges to a point they were about the same sharpness compared to the Volkl, even though the Kastle's had more nicks in the edges.)

 

About me:  

185 lbs (84Kg), 5'10" (177cm),  level 7 skier (race the blues, ski the blacks recreational speed)

Played ice hockey for 30 years, retired.  Came back to skiing 3 years ago after a 25 year lapse (replaced ice hockey)

Still athletic, remain active - MTB in the spring/summer/fall.

Where do I ski: New Jersey, New York, & Pennsylvania - mostly NJ.  Ski conditions are ice, ice, ice, crud, and more ice.  Did I say ice?  Let's put it this way, ski conditions usually suck.

Ski 2-4 times a week.

 

When I returned to skiing, spent most of the season skiing on wet noodle rentals (160cm) relearned everything.

By the end of my return season I purchased 2013 Volkl RTM 77 (171cm).  Sold those skis after about 25 ski days because I noticed as I raced the blue trails or attempted the blacks the vibrations in the skis from being at speed were so great, I was loosing stability.  Replaced them with the Volkl RTM 81 (171cm) - all of my problems were solved.  I have no issues flexing the ski at speed, no issues rolling the skis edge to edge, I do notice these no-camber (full-rocker) skis can only be skied on their edges.

 

My only complaint is after a few hours I am beat tired.

 

So I took both skis tonight to the local mountain for a head-to-head comparison, ski conditions:  mountain blowing snow, had about 1/2 inch thick of fresh man made snow, underneath it was pure ice.

 

The Kastle was:

* felt almost half the weight on my legs compared to the Volkl

* significantly easier to initiate turns (and the Kastle is 88mm waist compared to the Volkl 81mm waist)

* slightly softer than the Volkl (is this due to age and usage of ski?)

* since it was easier to initiate turns and lighter weight on the legs, was more enjoyable experience

* stability at speed about the same

**** But had absolutely zero (none) edge hold when I hit an ice patch on the steep part of the mountain.

 

To confirm this I strapped on my Volkl and it had significant, more like leaps and bounds better edge grip on ice over the Kastle, but felt almost lifeless when skiing in the snow/powder.  Because of this I had to put away the Kastle skis that evening (safety) and spent the rest of the evening on my Volkl's.

 

Final thoughts:

The Kastles on snow/powder crush my Volkls in every aspect, except the Kastle's have beyond poor hold in icy conditions.  Is it the age of ski?  Is it because the Volkl's might be slightly sharper by having less nicks in the edges even though I ran a stone sharpener on the Kastle's edges before heading out?   I have included pictures of the bases for comparison.

 

 

post #2 of 24

Some tips:

 

Not a valid comparison yet because the skis probably have different tunes.  You'd need to assure both sets of skis have a good tune with the same edge angles (like base edge angles at 1 and side edge angles at least at 2).  It would also be a good idea to prep & wax the bases the same on both sets of skis.

 

A lot of shops de-tune the tips and tails on their demo and rental skis.  A de-tuned 168cm ski is not going to have optimum edge hold with a 5'10" 185lb rider on it.  That's because the de-tuning reduces the amount of ski edge you can get grip from.

 

When you buy a demo ski, you can't assume the tune & edge angles are what you expect (or are told).

 

Sharp edges don't assure you actually have the edge angles you expect.

post #3 of 24

I forgot to mention another tip:

 

A common problem when sharpening edges is to not remove the microscopic hanging burr that was created during the process.  A hanging burr will make the ski edge feel really sharp but the ski will actually perform like crap and usually have really bad grip on ice.

post #4 of 24
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by slopefossil View Post
 

I forgot to mention another tip:

 

A common problem when sharpening edges is to not remove the microscopic hanging burr that was created during the process.  A hanging burr will make the ski edge feel really sharp but the ski will actually perform like crap and usually have really bad grip on ice.

That is part of the 'tuning manual' - after sharpening to remove all burrs from the edges.  After this post I waxed both skis and sharpened them both as sharp as I could get them....but there is a problem, it looks like someone took the Kastles to the terrain park because the center of the skis (under the binding) the edges are all rounded and nicked badly.  I couldn't get that section 'sharp' or sharp enough to 'cut paper' despite 8 passes with the sharpening stone.  The rest of the Kastle ski with exception under the bindings will now break skin if not careful - my Volkl's are that sharp tip-to-tail.

 

Will report back the results after next run.

post #5 of 24

To very different skis.

 

You should not tune the edge after waxing. You do the edges before you wax, Do you know if the bases are flat on the MX88's ?

post #6 of 24
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Max Capacity View Post
 

To very different skis.

 

You should not tune the edge after waxing. You do the edges before you wax, Do you know if the bases are flat on the MX88's ?

I didn't, I always tune the edges first then wax.  In this case since the skis out-of-the-box had wax on them, I did a quick tune (ran the stone on the edges 3 times at 89 degrees - same as my Volkl) and took off considerable steel in the process. This resulted in the Kastle's being semi-sharp after that process, very similar to the Volkl sharpness having 5 days of skiing on them, but by no means razor sharp.  Once I did that I took the burrs off and brushed the existing wax cleaning it up and getting that shine. 

 

I had no issues with skis plowing though the snow, in fact they did a better job of that over my Volkls.... just had absolutely no..zip..zilch, none control over any type of icy condition.  I skidded right down the side of the mountain each time.  But if I was making contact with the snow, it was fine and out-edged the Volkl considerably. I had to stop skiing on them because it became a safety concern for me being unable to stop or control until I hit some snow.

 

Now I just butchered the rails with the stone and got them much more sharp but not sharp enough especially under the bindings where it appears these skis hit the terrain park a few times.  Hopefully this won't impact ice grip too much when carving.

 

This is all of a test for me to see if I'm going to leave Volkl for Kastle.  I'm not a big fan of moving parts on my skis (outside of bindings) - referring to the UVO.

post #7 of 24

Good to hear, next question, do you make sure the bases are flat before you tune ?

post #8 of 24
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Max Capacity View Post
 

Good to hear, next question, do you make sure the bases are flat before you tune ?

Step 1: scrape off any left over wax, if there are pockets of large section of wax I will lightly iron/heat up the bases before scraping.

Step 2: use my 12 inch file and file the bottom rails and base.

Step 3: use my side bevel and sharpen the rail - 89 degrees

Step 4: use a finishing stone by hand to take off the burrs created by step 2 & 3

Step 5: using a brush, thoroughly brush the ski base

Step 6: apply hot wax

Step 7: allow to cool at minimum 1 hour

Step 8: scrape

Step 9: brush (plastic, then copper, then fine)

post #9 of 24
Thread Starter 

Final evaluation of the skis, both skis were properly tuned as best I can.  Ski conditions this afternoon was sunny, outside temperature was 40 degrees F, snow base was over 24 inches deep and groomed (see picture below).

 

Volkl - Beyond outstanding edge hold, feel like in full control when speeding down the mountain.  Outside of pushing the skis to their maximum speed, if you ski them recreational they continue to feel lifeless and dead weight. These are racers or speed demons, nothing more.  Reminder I have approximately 40 skiing days on these skis.

 

Kastle - Continue to feel lighter on my feet.  Easier to initiate turns, great dampening, better quality of ride. However - edge hold is noticeably poor.  It did improve with further edge tuning, but by no means close to what the current Volkl has and by no means close to what the magazine reviews claim.  Because of the lack of edge hold, I ended taking them off because it was not confidence inspiring.  When I had these skis up-to speed they did dance more due to vibrations, but nothing that concerned me.  The faster I pushed them the softer they became.  The Volkl stiffness was much more consistent regardless of the speed.  Reminder I purchased these skis as a demo/rental, do not know the number of skiing days (wear and tear) they have in their short life, but the top code is abused, bases seem decent.

 

The issues I faced  with the Kastle:

* is it because they are toughly worn and abused?

* reached their service life?

 

I performed this little experiment because at some point I will be making a ski purchase either at the end of this season or next and I am not a fan of moving parts on my skis outside of the bindings - making reference to the UVO.  A new Volkl RTM 86 UVO or new Kastle MX88 - that is the real ending question?

 

 

post #10 of 24

Thanks!  I'd like to corroborate your findings a bit, first off.  

 

I've read carefully some years of reviews and comments on the MX 88, have demoed it myself this year ('15/16 ~178 version; out west, little ice), and have also demoed the no camber RTM 81, in ~179 (me ~150, 5'10").  Both were on old snow Colorado days, groomers, bumps and off piste.  The RTM I got to try in a little powder here and there also, but also pretty hard old snow, some ice patches.

 

On the Kastle MX 88:

Your reactions I find consistent with what I've read about the MX 88.  On Eastern true ice many have commented it sucks.  On a bit of ice out west, the 88's great edgehold can cover for its ice weakness.  A Western skier might never notice this problem.  I didn't.

 

Further, the 88 works in bumps, but there are better skis for that, including the RTM 81 (some debate this; but to me the FX 84, for instance, the FX 95 HP and the LX 92, were all hands down better in bumps - just to stay within the Kastle family for comparisons).  

 

In my demo, I found the MX 88 to be a star at edge grip and carve on groomers, hugged the slope as if it were a pen on paper, with surprising ease and softness of flex as it did it.  But to me, for this sort of thing, there are many skis I'd prefer, including a race ski, my 178 Atomic Crimson 88s, my 179 Stockli XXL 80s, etc.

 

On the Volkl RTM 81 (no camber):

I demoed the ~179 and found it to have very good edge hold for CO conditions, including patches of ice; but had no idea it had such good Eastern edge hold.  

It was a wonderful, playful (lively) ski for me, at that length, at my weight.  It was very good in bumps, had a wonderful smear on demand, was even poppy in the bumps - so much so I began to go for airs with it, something I almost never do.  (I'm a directional skier, not a new schooler, mostly.)  

And it excelled on groomers, no speed limit I noticed.   

 

I think you are much heavier than me, on a shorter ski, hence, the lack of life you experience (but perhaps also some of the ski's super grip on ice).

So, have you experimented with a longer version of the ski? I'd guess at your weight you might experiment with both the next two longer lengths, for edge grip versus liveliness (and maybe also for stability, which apparently hasn't been a problem).

 

Anyway, thanks for the comparison, take care!


Edited by ski otter - 1/15/16 at 3:06pm
post #11 of 24

OP: for your H/W should you be skiing 1 size longer ?

--- > a 171cm RTM and a 168cm MX88 seem rather short to me 

I'd only consider those lengths for a true front-side-only ski

 

I'm 175cm 175 lbs and just re-acquired the previous generation/topsheet MX88 178cm.

I owned this ski previously in that length and found it a bit long for me ( an MX88 in 175-176 would be ideal for me )

... but I need a ski ASAP for an upcoming trip and luckily found it locally yesterday. 

I'm no ski star, but I would not even consider the MX88 at 168cm ... I don't like short skis.

Many have complained about Kastle's very large 10cm size gappings.

 

- Andy

post #12 of 24

If you don't like the MX88's try the Volkl Kendo. It might open your eye's to a great ski with edge hold.

post #13 of 24
Quote:
Originally Posted by ARL67 View Post
 

OP: for your H/W should you be skiing 1 size longer ?

--- > a 171cm RTM and a 168cm MX88 seem rather short to me 

I'd only consider those lengths for a true front-side-only ski

 

I'm 175cm 175 lbs and just re-acquired the previous generation/topsheet MX88 178cm.

I owned this ski previously in that length and found it a bit long for me ( an MX88 in 175-176 would be ideal for me )

... but I need a ski ASAP for an upcoming trip and luckily found it locally yesterday. 

I'm no ski star, but I would not even consider the MX88 at 168cm ... I don't like short skis.

Many have complained about Kastle's very large 10cm size gappings.

 

- Andy

Maybe a reason for the the OP's ski length is that a lot of Back East skiers prefer shorter, quicker turns on ice, and shorter skis to make those turns.  In addition, Back East the hills are shorter and the spaces are often tighter, and thus the shorter lengths/turns preference also.  

post #14 of 24
A 168cm ski is too short for your weight in a GS sidecut ski, which is why you're having problems with edge grip. Get that ski in a 178-180cm size and you will find its more to your liking I bet.

If you prefer short quicker turns you need a bigger sidecut, not a shorter ski. Skiing a GS short just means it will be unstable for the turns the skis sidecut was designed for.
Edited by clink83 - 1/15/16 at 6:32pm
post #15 of 24
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by ski otter View Post
 

Maybe a reason for the the OP's ski length is that a lot of Back East skiers prefer shorter, quicker turns on ice, and shorter skis to make those turns.  In addition, Back East the hills are shorter and the spaces are often tighter, and thus the shorter lengths/turns preference also.  

 

Ah yes - ski length, that was a challenge for me as I was tossing back and forth in the store trying to figure out what length to purchase 171cm or 177cm on the Volkl.

* The slopes in my area are not very long

* On the weekends you are skiing shoulder-to-shoulder with the person next to you because it is so crowded

* If you visit the local mountains weekday morning, the boarders are usually out believing they and they alone own the mountain (I have been physically ran over more than once by them because they don't pay attention)

 

Based on those three bullets, long arcing turns are not happening.

 

The sales person in the store asked me one simple question after sizing me up:  are you skiing east or west coast.  When I answered east, more specifically NJ, NY, PA he handed me the 171cm size.

 

The only time I have a chance to enjoy the mountain and really crank up the speed is at night - night time skiing when most people feel it is too cold outside.  The downside is more than half the trails do not have lights and are closed as a result limiting me to only a few trails to ski.  The other downside is during the day, the sun melts the top layer of snow, and that refreezes when the sun goes down.  By 6:30pm the entire mountain is a pure sheet of ice - I was fearing for my life on the Kaslte's complete lack of edge grip, it was that bad under those conditions and based on 'ski otter' response (thank you), it sounds like the MX88 is not really designed for those conditions.

 

The reason why I purchased the Kastle MX88 in 168cm was because I emailed the company and to my delight they responded to my inquiry stating the MX88 in 168cm contacts the snow equivalent to the rocker Volkl RTM 81 in 171cm.   If it wasn't for that email response, I would have purchased the 178cm lenght - again I was looking for a consistent comparison and it didn't work out.

 

I know the RTM line works under these conditions, just not a fan of UVO (moving parts).  Some recommendations came in for the Kendo.  Are Kastle's really out or just the MX line or I simply need a longer ski length?

post #16 of 24
I am a happy MX88 owner, but agree with you they leave something to be desired in terms of edge hold in very icy eastern conditions. I have found speed makes that worse or at least makes me more nervous about it. Some people here seem to think I'm nuts.

I wouldn't describe them as being as bad as you seem to even in hard ice, but haven't skied the volkls to compare and my MX88s were new in 2011. next time I'm skiing out east I'll probably demo a cheater GS to see if it's much better.
post #17 of 24
Quote:
Originally Posted by ikolbyi View Post
 

 

Ah yes - ski length, that was a challenge for me as I was tossing back and forth in the store trying to figure out what length to purchase 171cm or 177cm on the Volkl.

.....

 

I know the RTM line works under these conditions, just not a fan of UVO (moving parts).  Some recommendations came in for the Kendo.  Are Kastle's really out or just the MX line or I simply need a longer ski length?

 

On length for short turns, it partly depends on the ski and its design/purpose.  A cheater Slalom ski, for instance, is designed to be a standout on ice, and to have short turn radius synched with shorter ski length  (r 11 to at most r 14 for cheater skis; length ~153 to ~167 max).   

The conditions you describe can favor such a short radius ski, as long as you want lots of short turns.    

 

 @clink83  is right that skis designed to be cheater gs-like  (usually ~r16 to ~r22) - both the MX88 and the RTM 81, for example - are not going to work optimally for the tall and large especially in shorter lengths.  

 

At the same time, there are much better ice-hold skis in this turn radius range than the MX 88, according to many reports and comments on this website.  I suspect that for your ice needs, the MX 88 is out, optimally.  Kastles with better edge grip may be the RX 12 (a frontside charger) and the MX 78, not sure.  Both have better edge grip, just not sure how much.  Past Epic reviews of both skis might tell.  

 

I'd guess that as long as you are skiing fairly smooth, non-bump slopes, that a cheater or recreational slalom ski or a "tweener" cheater sl/gs ski (r14 to 17) might work best.  From my own (limited) racing experience, and from owning such racing skis in the past and now, that the edge hold on such recreational race skis is night and day better than any of the Kastles (except perhaps the RX 12) and any of the RTMs, even though in more average conditions out West longer versions of both these sets of skis are great to me.   

 

As I stated in an earlier post, a longer RTM would probably flex better for your weight, and be much more lively - as the ski was for me.  If it got much more lively, as I suspect, and still had great edge hold, would this solve your new ski problems?

(Only a demo test would tell you how good the edge hold would be.)

 

On the Kendo:

Pros: Solves your ice problems.  This ski rocks, short turns, in "normal" Easter conditions has excellent edge hold, and is fun. Versatile compared to a race ski.  If you stay active, great ride - relatively speaking, at least.  

 

Cons: The Kendo has a relatively stiff tip and tail, handles race ski-like almost, but has two problems, to me.  

1. That stiff tail jets out of turns - great on smooth slopes, lots of work and control required in bumps; fun but there are better, for lots of bumps.

2. The particular metal design, at least of the older models, creates a bone-jarring ride when skied flat, on uneven runouts and uneven terrain, less than actively.   I personally experience this as lack of dampness, and for me it gets old fast, especially in bumps.  

 

The Volkl cheater race and true race skis do not have this "lack of dampness."  Nor do most recreational race skis.   

post #18 of 24

^^^ great comments above

Also FWIW , the latest "2016 Kendo" is an updated design said to be more versatile than previous, yet still great on groomers.

There are reviews at Epic and at BlisterGear.

 

http://www.epicski.com/a/skiessentials-2016-volkl-kendo-review

 

http://blistergearreview.com/gear-reviews/2015-2016-volkl-kendo

post #19 of 24
Thread Starter 

Thank you for the feedback.  So it sounds like I can try the Kastle's MX88 in 178cm but that may not be the correct solution.  Sounds like the Volkl Kendo in that length may be a better solution.

 

I'll see if I can purchase a used one to experiment on.  In the mean time, I have listed the Kastle's on eBay: 

http://www.ebay.com/itm/111876993413?ssPageName=STRK:MESELX:IT&_trksid=p3984.m1555.l2649

post #20 of 24
Thread Starter 

Skiiing conditions this weekend:  yes can we say ice with a sprinkle of snow.  (photographed on the side of the mountain)

 

 


Edited by ikolbyi - 1/17/16 at 4:46pm
post #21 of 24
Thread Starter 

I purchased a 1 degree base file and 'went to town' on the Kastle in hopes to sharpen those edges up even more to see if that makes any difference.  I took off so much base in order to level it out and sharpen the sides that I couldn't clean the file off with a wire brush.  Now I'm looking to replace my file, on the plus side the bases and edges are much improved.

 

How did they perform now?  Only slightly better.  The Kastle's are definitely more "fun" and energetic but they have poor edge grip, once again I was forced to take them off and go back to my tried and true Volkl's.   The Kastle in 168cm also do feel 'short', that was another factor about them that bothered me, but that is not Kastle's product  fault, more like purchaser error.  As stated earlier I only went with the 168cm length because Kastle claimed the 168cm was equivalent to my existing Volkl's 171cm....but the Volkls feel much longer on edge, more than 3 cm longer.  Perception only?

 

This past weekend my area received 25 inches of snow, I struggled skiing those conditions in my Volkl's largely because I sunk into the snow - width too narrow?  I had to muscle every turn and ski less in the forward position.

 

And this folks conclude my little experiment.  What it is telling me is perhaps I should consider the Volkl Kendo in 177cm

post #22 of 24
Thread Starter 

So I purchased from ARL67 the 2014 Kastle MX88 in 178cm, first I would like to tip my hat in recognition to the excellent packaging of the skis for shipping.  Here is what I learned:

 

Of the 3 skis (2014 Volkl RTM 81 in 171cm; 2012 Kastle MX88 in 168cm; 2014 Kastle MX88 in 178cm)

*  The 178cm is the right ski length for me.  (I am 177cm tall, 185lbs/84kg heavy)  Felt more stable on them.

* The Volkl has leaps and bound better ice grip over both Kastle skis, however the Kastle in 178cm did do slightly better than the 168cm.

* The harder/faster I pushed the Kastle, the softer the ski became (both of them).  Didn't experience this with the Volkl.

* Easier to initiate turns in the 178cm Kastle vs the 171cm Volkl.

* 178cm Kastle feels lighter on my feet than Volkl, therefore able to role ski edge-to-edge quicker despite the Kastle being 88mm wide vs Volkl in 81mm width.

-- All skis tuned by me, 1 degree base, 89 degrees sides.  Same hot wax applied to the bases.

 

For me the winner is.... nobody.

There are features of the Volkl I adore that the Kastle do not have, and vice-versa.

 

I love without question the ice grip the Volkl possesses, very confidence inspiring and its greatest feature, the ability to just carve into that mountain

The Kastle due to it's longer length I feel more stable when charging down the mountain and the wider width keeps me on top of the loose snow better

The Kastle makes turns with little effort, at times with the Volkl I have to muscle my turns, but that extra stiffness in the Volkl is appreciated when skiing hard whereas the Kastle softens up

After 4 hours of skiing on my Volkl's I'm exhausted.  I don't have this issue on the Kastle's

 

So which should be my ski going forward?  Volkl Kendo or should I entertain the 2016 RTM 86 despite my reservation with UVO (moving parts)?  

 

These are the snow conditions this evening:

 

 

 

Just to recap about me:  3rd season skiing again after a 25 year laps, been skiing about 20-28 days per season.  East coast only skier and ski about 60% of the time at night (6:30-9pm).  Snow conditions almost always suck as a result.  I consider myself an advanced skier (not expert), race the blues, ski the blacks average speed with confidence, double black diamonds I ski very cautiously and slow.  With more practice comes more confidence, the more I push myself on those blacks and double blacks the better I am becoming.  My son will be inheriting the RTM 81's next season so no loss on those skis, I put about 45 skiing days on the RTM 81 between last season and this season - the skis still have plenty of life left in them.  He is presently using the 2012 Volkl RTM 75 and loves them, but he is hitting his growth spurt and soon will outgrow the length. Possibly by next season, definitely by the season after that. He races the blacks - better/more aggressive skier than me and loves to ski between the trees so he is starting to outgrow the softer RTM 75 - even does jumps. 


Edited by ikolbyi - 2/17/16 at 8:01pm
post #23 of 24
Quote:
Originally Posted by ikolbyi View Post
 

I purchased a 1 degree base file and 'went to town' on the Kastle in hopes to sharpen those edges up even more to see if that makes any difference.  I took off so much base in order to level it out and sharpen the sides that I couldn't clean the file off with a wire brush.  Now I'm looking to replace my file, on the plus side the bases and edges are much improved.

 

How did they perform now?  Only slightly better.  The Kastle's are definitely more "fun" and energetic but they have poor edge grip, once again I was forced to take them off and go back to my tried and true Volkl's.   The Kastle in 168cm also do feel 'short', that was another factor about them that bothered me, but that is not Kastle's product  fault, more like purchaser error.  As stated earlier I only went with the 168cm length because Kastle claimed the 168cm was equivalent to my existing Volkl's 171cm....but the Volkls feel much longer on edge, more than 3 cm longer.  Perception only?

 

This past weekend my area received 25 inches of snow, I struggled skiing those conditions in my Volkl's largely because I sunk into the snow - width too narrow?  I had to muscle every turn and ski less in the forward position.

 

And this folks conclude my little experiment.  What it is telling me is perhaps I should consider the Volkl Kendo in 177cm

ikolbyi,

 

Have you considered a stone grind for the ski?  It sounds like your base bevel may be extending into the ptex base.  I suspect the performance of that ski will improve dramatically.  Do you ski at Wachusett Mountain or Nashoba?  if so, you shouldn't be overpowering them on those slopes.  It has to be the tune.  Pete

post #24 of 24
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by peterk123 View Post
 

ikolbyi,

 

Have you considered a stone grind for the ski?  It sounds like your base bevel may be extending into the ptex base.  I suspect the performance of that ski will improve dramatically.  Do you ski at Wachusett Mountain or Nashoba?  if so, you shouldn't be overpowering them on those slopes.  It has to be the tune.  Pete

The 168cm Kastle in poor shape I sold.  The replacement in 178cm were in significantly better overall condition, and only performed slightly better edge on ice grip.

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 › 2014/15 Volkl RTM 81 vs 2012/13 Kastle MX88